Furrball: Yeah. That thought occurred to me just after posting actually. Don't think it's an issue that's gonna be solved even by EADDers somehow![]()
I would tend to agree, Monsta. The problem with that seems to be that a fair number of the NI population don't agree and are more keen on being British than the British are. You'd think situations like that would have made it clear to all countries that interfering with other countries like that doesn't generally end well. But apparently that hasn't been made obvious enough. Especially when those countries sit atop oilfields![]()
... I had no idea of any violence going on in Belfast...
I've not been full-on watching the news to be fair but it's big enough to be reported a bit more
Give N.I back to Ireland... Simple as..
I don't have a fucking clue why Britain "has ownership" over it anymore anyway. Tis pointless...
![]()
Liquid cocaine in smuggler's rum killed taxi driver, court hears
Manslaughter trial told teaspoonful of drug mixture could kill from bottle passed on innocently as thanks for a free ride
A taxi driver died after unwittingly drinking pure liquid cocaine from a rum bottle given to him as a gift, a court heard today.
Lascell Malcolm, 63, was given the bottle of Bounty Rum by a friend, Antoinette Corlis, after declining payment for a lift home after her Caribbean holiday. She had been given the bottle by a friend, Michael Lawrence, who was carrying it to the UK from St Lucia for acquaintance Martin Newman.
Only Newman, 50, knew there was 246g (8.7oz) of pure cocaine dissolved into the alcohol. He had given two bottles to Lawrence before flying to Gatwick airport, claiming his baggage was overweight. He intended to retrieve the bottles upon arrival, but was detained by Customs officers.
Lawrence left for a connecting flight to his home in Switzerland, giving one of the bottles to Corlis.
Oliver Glasgow, prosecuting, told Croydon crown court, south London: "Corlis, unaware of the dangers posed by the defendant's bottle of rum, decided to give it to Lascell Malcolm as a thank you for his trouble. It was gratefully received.
"Corlis was only to realise the full import of what she had done when she tried to contact Lascell Malcolm over the following days."
Malcolm, a father-of-two from Haringey, north London, had drunk a shot of the rum with a pint of Guinness, hours after Corlis gave him the bottle on 25 May last year. At 4am the next day, he called emergency services telling them he could not walk and had a headache.
He was discharged from hospital but later collapsed and died after a heart attack brought on by cocaine poisoning.
The link to the cocaine-laced rum emerged when two friends, visiting Malcolm's house to pay their respects, found the bottle and decided to make a toast. Charles Roach and Trevor Tugman spat out the foul-tasting liquid but were taken to hospital after suffering seizures.
Glasgow told the jury: "Subsequent analysis of the contents of the bottle established that 246 grams of cocaine had been dissolved into the rum, which resulted in a mixture of such toxicity that a teaspoonful could kill anyone who consumed it.
"Had the alcohol and cocaine been separated, the potential wholesale profit that could have resulted from the sale of the cocaine is in the order of £10,000 and the estimated street value of the drugs is around £15,000."
He told the court Newman, born in St Lucia, had a duty of care to anyone who came into contact with the bottles.
Mr Glasgow said of Mr Malcolm's death: "Whilst thisWhile Malcolm's death "could never have been the intention of the defendant, the risk he ran in importing cocaine in such a manner would have been obvious - once the bottle was passed into the hands of someone who knew nothing of its true contents there was the very real danger that anyone could chose to drink it."
Two other passengers on the Virgin Atlantic flight, Samantha Edwards and Anthony Fessal, had also been tricked into smuggling bottles by Newman, it transpired. Neither knew the true contents.
Newman was arrested on 3 June last year and denied drug smuggling. Instead, he claimed Fessal had asked him to carry alcohol back to the UK for him and that he had refused.
Glasgow said Newman claims "he is the victim of an elaborate conspiracy designed to frame him".
On his regular trips to St Lucia, he had repeatedly claimed to be an immigration official, even saying he was conducting an investigation into the smuggling of liquid cocaine.
He repeated the claim last May when he was stopped by Customs officers on the island. They found $6,000 (£3,920) in his luggage, which he said was spending money for his holiday.
Suspicions had previously been raised by Customs officer John Pultie, who told the court he had made background checks into Newman's claim to work in immigration.
Newman, of Romford, Essex, denies manslaughter and importing Class A drugs.The hearing continues.
Arab guilty of rape after consensual sex with Jew
A man has been sentenced to 18 months in prison after telling a woman that he was also Jewish
A Palestinian man has been convicted of rape after having consensual sex with a woman who had believed him to be a fellow Jew.
Sabbar Kashur, 30, was sentenced to 18 months in prison on Monday after the court ruled that he was guilty of rape by deception. According to the complaint filed by the woman with the Jerusalem district court, the two met in downtown Jerusalem in September 2008 where Kashur, an Arab from East Jerusalem, introduced himself as a Jewish bachelor seeking a serious relationship. The two then had consensual sex in a nearby building before Kashur left.
When she later found out that he was not Jewish but an Arab, she filed a criminal complaint for rape and indecent assault.
Although Kashur was initially charged with rape and indecent assault, this was changed to a charge of rape by deception as part of a plea bargain arrangement.
Handing down the verdict, Tzvi Segal, one of three judges on the case, acknowledged that sex had been consensual but said that although not "a classical rape by force," the woman would not have consented if she had not believed Kashur was Jewish.
The sex therefore was obtained under false pretences, the judges said. "If she hadn't thought the accused was a Jewish bachelor interested in a serious romantic relationship, she would not have cooperated," they added.
The court ruled that Kashur should receive a jail term and rejected the option of a six-month community service order. He was said to be seeking to appeal.
Segal said: "The court is obliged to protect the public interest from sophisticated, smooth-tongued criminals who can deceive innocent victims at an unbearable price – the sanctity of their bodies and souls. When the very basis of trust between human beings drops, especially when the matters at hand are so intimate, sensitive and fateful, the court is required to stand firmly at the side of the victims – actual and potential – to protect their wellbeing. Otherwise, they will be used, manipulated and misled, while paying only a tolerable and symbolic price."
Gideon Levy, a liberal Israeli commentator, was quoted as saying: "I would like to raise only one question with the judge. What if this guy had been a Jew who pretended to be a Muslim and had sex with a Muslim woman?
"Would he have been convicted of rape? The answer is: of course not."
Arabs constitute about 20% of Israel's population, but relationships between Jews and Arabs are rare. There are few mixed neighbourhoods or towns, and Arabs suffer routine discrimination.
Israeli MPs are considering a law requiring prospective Israeli citizens to declare loyalty to Israel as a "Jewish, democratic state". Many Arabs would balk at swearing allegiance to a state which they see as explicitly excluding or marginalising them.
Dan Meridor, a deputy prime minister in Binyamin Netanyahu's government, is opposed to the proposal. "Why does every bill need the word 'Jewish' in it – to show the Arab citizens that it doesn't belong to them? Then we're all shocked when they radicalise their stance.
"The majority doesn't need to remind the minority that it is in fact a minority all the time," he added.
LinkyAn evil atmosphere is forming around geoengineering
IN 1892 Edvard Munch witnessed a blood-red sunset over Oslo, Norway. Shaken by it, he wrote in his diary that he felt "a great, unending scream piercing through nature". The incident inspired him to create his most famous painting, The Scream.
The striking sunset was probably caused by the eruption of Krakatoa, which sent a massive plume of ash and gas into the upper atmosphere, turning sunsets red around the globe and cooling the Earth by more than a degree.
Now a powerful group of scientists, venture capitalists and conservative think tanks is coalescing around the idea of reproducing this cooling effect by injecting sulphur dioxide into the stratosphere to counter climate change. Despite the enormity of what is being proposed - nothing less than seizing control of the climate - the public has been almost entirely excluded from the planning.
Up to now, governments have been reluctant to talk about geoengineering. The reason is simple: apart from its unknown side effects, it would weaken resolve to reduce emissions.
But it may soon prove an irresistible fix. This form of geoengineering is extremely attractive because its costs are estimated to be trivial compared to those of cutting carbon. It also gets powerful lobbies off governments' backs, gives the green light to burning more coal, avoids the need to raise petrol taxes, permits yet more unrestrained growth and is no threat to consumer lifestyles.
No government is yet willing to lend support to geoengineering, but the day when a major nation backs it cannot be far off. It is even possible that a single nation suffering the effects of climate disruption may decide to act alone.
Indeed, Russia has already begun testing. Yuri Izrael, a scientist who is both a global-warming sceptic and a senior adviser to Prime Minister Putin, has tested the effects of aerosol spraying from a helicopter. He now plans a large-scale trial.
Izrael is the latest in a long line of scientists who have advocated planetary engineering. Two of the earliest and most aggressive were Edward Teller and Lowell Wood. Teller, who died in 2003, is often described as the "father of the hydrogen bomb" and was the inspiration for Dr Strangelove, the eponymous mad scientist of Stanley Kubrick's 1964 film. Wood was one of the Pentagon's foremost weaponeers, which led his critics to dub him "Dr Evil". He led Ronald Reagan's ill-fated Star Wars project.
Wood and Teller began promoting aerosol spraying in 1998. Reflecting the dominant opinion of the 1950s, they saw it as our duty to exert supremacy over nature. Both have long been associated with conservative think tanks that deny the existence of human-induced global warming.
A number of right-wing think tanks actively denying climate change are also promoting geoengineering, an irony that seems to escape them.
Of course, geoengineering protects their funders in the fossil fuel industries because it can be a substitute for carbon reductions and justify delay, but a deeper explanation lies in beliefs about the relationship of humans to the natural world.
While emissions reductions are an admission that industrial society has harmed nature, engineering the climate would be confirmation of our mastery over it, final proof that human ingenuity will always triumph.
Wood believes that climate engineering is inevitable. In a statement that could serve as Earth's epitaph, he declared: "We've engineered every other environment we live in, why not the planet?"
Advocates of geoengineering also court the super-rich. Wood is doubtful that governments can reach a consensus, but he sees no need for that, instead speculating about going ahead with support from a billionaire. "As far as I can determine, there is no law that prohibits doing something like this". He is right.
Perhaps the billionaire he has in mind is Bill Gates, who has been funding geoengineering research for three years. Gates is also an investor in a firm named Intellectual Ventures that is promoting a scheme called StratoShield, which would pump sulphur dioxide into the upper atmosphere through a hose held aloft by blimps.
Richard Branson has also set up his own "war room" to do battle with global warming using "market-driven solutions", including geoengineering.
The Carbon War Room website promotes a paper co-authored by Lee Lane of the American Enterprise Institute, well known for its climate scepticism. It argues that the benefits of geoengineering vastly outweigh the costs. The authors worry that ethical objections from environmental groups may block deployment, before noting with relief that "in reality, important economies remain largely beyond the influence of environmental advocacy groups".
Geoengineering is not something we should enter into lightly or without proper public consultation. If we resort to it, then the concentration of carbon dioxide will continue to rise. It would then become impossible to call a halt to sulphur injections, even for a year or two, without an immediate jump in temperature.
It's estimated that if whoever controls the scheme decided to stop, the greenhouse gases that would have built up could cause warming to rebound at a rate 10 to 20 times that of the recent past - a phenomenon referred to, apparently without irony, as the "termination problem". Once we start engineering the atmosphere we could be trapped, forever dependent on sulphur injections. More than a painting, The Scream would become a prophecy.
Some more scary news now:
Fuck that.I don't see a problem with that. There are all sorts of potential technological solutions to climate change that fall under the heading of 'geoengineering' that could do a lot of good.
You can consider polution to be unplanned geoengineering anyway so why not actually take control of the process?
Sure it might be better to convince everyone in china they don't need electricity, or that they should wait until we get Solar power cheap enough to work for everyone or fussion power working at all or whatever, but realistically they like having electric lights etc and they want them now. I know of no way to convince them otherwise likely to work. Therefore 'greenhouse gas' emmissions are likely to get worse not better over the next 20 years or so.
Given that, surely geoengineering could actually end up saving the planet?
Even if we produced no pollution at all and lived in perfect harmony with the planet, the climate still varies naturally over time by enough to eventually cause problems with global warming or cooling that would affect us - just look at previous ice ages etc. Geoengineering is an idea who's time has come and it is inevitable it will be used to control our environment for the benefit of mankind.