The EU’s budget is unmanageable

On EUobserver today, Open Europe spells out in some more detail what we consider to be wrong with the EU’s budget and how it should be reformed. The piece is a response to Commissioner Siim Kallas’ article on the same site a few days ago. We argue,

The fundamental problem of waste and mismanagement involving EU money lies primarily with the budget itself…Mismanagement and waste in the EU budget are two sides of the same coin. They both stem from the size, complexity and irrational nature of the EU budget. Both receive their thrust from the blurred line between spending and accountability, owing to the set-up of the EU’s budget programmes. And both can be radically reduced by simplifying the budget, cutting down on the spending and by repatriating a large chunk of regional spending and the CAP to member states.

As we argue in the piece, for a start, reform of the EU budget should involve:

fully repatriating regional policy to the member states except those with a GDP of less than 90% the EU average (which would target the funds on the poorer member states where the money actually can have a real impact); repatriating all parts of the rural development programme which are not related to promoting the environment (as the environment is inherently a cross-border issue); and establishing a better link between performance and receipt of subsidies.

We also pick up on Commissioner Kallas’ insight that: “One cannot reasonably expect an EU official from an office in the Commission’s headquarters in Brussels to know what best fits the needs of a small town in the West Midlands - this is for the local authorities to say.”

We fully agree. So why then are regional spending and rural development a matter for Brussels in the first place?

Britain’s renewable energy targets are ‘physically impossible’, says study

The Institution of Mechanical Engineers’ ‘battle plan’ for climate change includes geo-engineering and nuclear power

Alok Jha, green technology correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 12 November 2009 18.38 GMT
It will be physically impossible for the UK to meet its renewable energy targets in both the short and long term, according to a group of engineering experts.
In a new study, they called for the government to adopt a “war-time” mentality in their approach to dealing with climate change and consider experimental approaches such as artificial trees that soak up carbon dioxide to buy the time needed to build the required level of low-carbon infrastructure in the UK.
The engineers, from the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE), said the government should invest in geo-engineering technologies that would either bounce sunlight back into space or soak up CO2 in the atmosphere. Some of the more exotic ideas include launching orbiting mirrors in space or seeding artificial clouds over the oceans, but the report advocates more research on artificial trees; growing algae on the side of buildings to make renewable fuel; and painting the roofs of buildings white to reflect sunlight.
The government has committed to cutting the country’s carbon emissions by 34% by 2020 and 80% by 2050, both relative to 1990 levels. To achieve this, ministers have outlined plans to build thousands of wind turbines by 2020 and, this week, gave the go-ahead for 10 new nuclear power stations, with the first coming on line in 2018.
But, according to the engineers, building the massive amounts of low-carbon infrastructure in time to meet the government’s targets will be impossible. “Current predictions are that we will be unable to service the current plans for offshore windfarms by 2013 because we won’t have the construction vessels to do it and, by 2018, we’ll run out of manufacturing capacity,” said Tim Fox, lead author of the report and head of environment and climate change at the IMechE.
In a report published tomorrow, the engineers instead outlined a “battle plan” for tackling global warming, which includes adapting to rising temperatures and investing in geo-engineering technologies, as well as current plans to invest in green energy technologies. “The institution believes it’s time to go to war on climate change – the climate is about to attack us and it’s time for us to fight back,” said Fox.
He said that, even if the UK could cut its energy demand in half by 2050 through efficiency improvements, the country still needs 16 new nuclear power plants between now and 2030, and an additional 4 by 2050. Around 27,000 wind turbines would need to be built by 2030 and an additional 13,000 by 2050. That would be in addition to ramping up solar power, waste and biomass plants and developing a smart electricity grid and advanced energy-storage technologies.
To work out how this would be built, the IMechE assembled a team of engineers, economists and civil servants. “For the UK, if we want to decarbonise at the rate necessary for the climate change act between now and 2050, assuming a 2.5% annual increase in GDP, it will take a decarbonisation rate of 5% per annum to achieve that,” said Fox. The best the UK has ever achieved was during the 1990s in the “dash for gas”, when the UK was commercially-driven to change from coal-fired power stations to gas-fired power stations. Back then, the UK decarbonised at a rate 2.3% a year. Since then, the best has been around 1.3% a year.
“The ability to undertake the size of the task needed to meet the 80% target is not possible within a modern industrialised democracy,” said Fox.
Kevin Anderson, head of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, welcomed the IMechE’s proposals. “We are now in a situation of mitigation emergency and we do not have the luxury of the timeframes we had at Kyoto to bring about the changes necessary. In the wealthier parts of the world, we have a handful of years to turn our rising emissions around and bring them down at incredibly rapid rate. The UK has demonstrated a lead with the climate change act but this has not been accompanied by policies with teeth or a coherent strategy or roadmap.”
A spokesperson for the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) said the report was too negative. “The Institute of Mechanical Engineer’s can’t do, won’t do attitude is sending out a defeatist message ahead of the crucial climate change talks in Copenhagen. The truth is that if we act now we can not only beat climate change but gain from the green benefits that will flow in terms of jobs and investment from going low carbon.”
But Fox said that the government’s assumptions were based on an unrealistic idea of the number of engineers available. “We’re competing on an international stage and, if you look at the scale of engineering challenge worldwide, we’re going to compete in the marketplace for the manufacturing of the wind turbines and the specialist vessels that are needed for their construction.”
To manage the future response to climate change, the engineers proposed that the mitigation, adaptation and geo-engineering should be brought together in a beefed-up version of Decc. “It should bring together all the climate change activities from across all government departments into one new department called the Department for Energy and Climate Security. That department would be charged with appropriate powers to bring together all the necessary actions that are currently not being brought to bear on climate change,” said Fox.

Carbon Trust - the big questions: the best way forward?

Sir John Parker, chairman of Anglo American and National Grid, tackles some of the burning issues regarding carbon reduction at home and abroad.

Andrew CavePublished: 3:26PM GMT 12 Nov 2009
If you were Ed Miliband, what further measures would you take to encourage businesses to act on carbon reduction now?
The Government needs to press Copenhagen for a strong signal on the carbon price and to ensure that the European trading system for carbon really is effective, because that is vital.

Secondly, I would be pressing for targets to be set globally per country to achieve the reductions that will keep our temperature increase between now and 2050 at no more than two degrees. Those targets will clearly vary by country, but there has got to be a route map. It has taken some time but, conceptually, we now know what has to be done. We need to ensure that planning processes, the carbon price and regulation are really aligned with those objectives.
Do you think the recession is having a positive or negative impact on business efforts to cut carbon?
I think the recession has inevitably forced many companies to manage their businesses for cash. Investments were slashed in the shockwaves of autumn 2008, some order books went into freefall and there was great uncertainty in the market about the ability of companies to raise finance. The bond market had dried up and the banks, for a period, were not lending — even to well-rated corporates.
Inevitably, that has taken the focus off investments in energy savings in some companies. But others who are a bit more muscular, financially speaking, were able to continue investing in energy saving and examining the merits of carbon capture and storage.
Are there any areas where you would welcome greater government action?
An important thing we have lobbied for is to simplify the planning around decisions on vital infrastructure. This is in place now and it must be kept in place regardless of which party is in power next time around.
We need to get new power stations built and reinforce distribution to the right places. We need to connect up the new streams of renewable energy production and also have to deal with the coal-fired power stations: that is where the introduction of carbon capture and storage is going to be vital for the coal industry. Coal is very much part of our commodity production at Anglo American. We want to play our part in ensuring that we come up with the right technology.
In the UK, carbon capture and storage will be vital to maintaining a sizeable coal burn. If you look at China and India, their demand for thermal coal is going to be quite significant, but their contribution to carbon reduction will only be achieved if we can technically solve the capture and storage issue.
The Government has set aside money to create pilots in carbon capture and storage and that has been a very good move. You have to keep moving: you need bigger nuclear power stations and efforts to achieve a clean-coal society.
What does the low-carbon economy mean to you, personally? What is your own vision of a low-carbon world?
We have done a lot of modelling for the UK government on how a low-carbon society would look from a power company point of view. For example, the introduction of electric cars between now and 2050 will have an important impact in helping achieve the 80pc reduction, but charging them will have a huge impact on power requirements — so what will that look like? We’re a society where you can’t just charge up at night.
One has also got to look at trying to model the implications for electricity transmission and distribution networks. There will be a change in the electricity production mix. At present, the UK gets about 30pc of its power from coal, just under 20pc from nuclear energy, 45pc from gas and just 5pc from renewables. That mix will change, but the lead time to get the new nuclear is on stream and the Government has made important decisions that I don’t think the market itself would have come up with.
If you had one message to fellow business leaders on building a lowcarbon business, what would it be?
Start with energy efficiency; I think it’s that simple. There’s a danger that you can get too esoteric about this. If you take the mine-head power stations that we have at Anglo American, they capture methane which would otherwise escape - but we’re also capturing a free fuel to create the power. So, it’s sustainability and energy, it’s energy efficiency, and it’s reduction of carbon capture. It’s a lovely three-way hit, but it’s driven by energy sustainability in its wider sense.

Surf’s up for Cornwall’s Wave hub

Work to begin next week on undersea socket for Cornwall’s pioneering marine energy test centre. From BusinessGreen.com, part of the Guardian Environment Network

The PowerBuoy wave energy converter, which is to be used as part of the Wave Hub project, which will see a giant national grid-connected socket built on the seabed off the coast of Cornwall. Construction on the £42m Wave Hub project off the coast of Cornwall is to start next week with the goal of having the flagship facility up and running by the end of next year.
The Wave Hub, which will be based 10 miles off the north coast of Cornwall, will feature a large grid-connected “socket” on the seabed that will allow up to four different marine energy devices to connect to it at any one time. As a result, marine energy companies will be able to field-test devices for a number of years without the need to gain additional planning consent.
The Hub will be connected by an undersea cable to a new electricity sub-station on the site of a former power station.
Work on the sub-station will start in January and is expected to take six months to complete. The Wave Hub device will then be deployed and the sub-sea cable laid next summer, when the device is expected to become operational.
The announcement comes as the Wave Hub project announced that it has appointed Guy Lavender - formely a director for the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games - as general manager for the project.
Stephen Peacock, executive director of enterprise and innovation at the South West Regional Development Agency, said he hopes the device will put the area at the forefront of marine energy development in the UK. “Our aim is to create an entirely new low carbon industry in the South West and hundreds of quality jobs, ” he said.
The Wave Hub is being funded with £12.5m from the South West RDA, £20m from the European Regional Development Fund Convergence Programme and £9.5m from the UK government.
The South West development authority expect investment in local marine energy programmes to reach £100m over the next two years.
The Wave Hub project has been widely praised by the marine energy industry and three developers have already secured access to the berths – Fred Olsen Limited, Ocean Power Technologies and Orecon - with a number of developers reported to be in talks about using the fourth berth.
However, the latest stage of the project comes as industry group the BWEA last week warned that the government is failing to adequately support the sector and recommended greater funding is needed to help developers get from the concept stage to full commercial scale generators.
• This article was shared by our content partner BusinessGreen.com, part of the Guardian Environment Network

Siemens CEO Says Asia Leads in ‘Green’ Investments

By PATRICK BARTA
Asian countries, backed by giant economic-stimulus packages, are leading the world in investments in “green” technologies, the chief executive of Siemens AG said in Singapore Thursday.
Siemens CEO Peter Loescher said in an interview on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit that countries such as China have moved more quickly than the U.S. to spend their stimulus packages, and are increasingly doing so on high-tech, low-pollution technologies such as high-speed trains.
“If you ask us where we sell the most advanced technologies” now, he said, “it’s Asia and China.” China’s economic rebound and spending programs are turning out to be “stronger than one would have anticipated,” he said.
The company also released the results of a study it sponsored suggesting the latest economic crisis may ultimately stimulate greater spending on green technologies. According to the study, based on a poll of academics, government employees and others in more than 40 countries, more than half of the respondents said they thought the crisis would aid their country’s progress toward sustainable development, in some cases by encouraging spending on technologies that reduce energy consumption and pollution.
Some analysts have questioned whether spending from stimulus packages will generate as much long-term demand as expected for fuel-saving and other green technologies. Some countries, including the U.S., but also some Asian nations such as Thailand, have run into bureaucratic and other delays in implementing their spending plans.
With billions of dollars of money unused and signs of asset bubbles emerging in some parts of the world, some economists have suggested governments should begin reining in stimulus efforts and perhaps leave some expenditures unfinished, or risk crowding out private sector investment and whipping up inflation.
But Mr. Loescher said that Siemens, whose high-tech motors, power systems and other products make it a beneficiary of many stimulus packages, is sticking to earlier estimates of the windfall it could receive from government spending. He said the company is expecting about €15 billion ($22.5 billion) in orders for Siemens equipment from stimulus packages by 2012.
“I’m still very encouraged by how they’re being rolled out globally,” he said, though he added, “I’ve not heard anyone talking about additional programs” of stimulus spending.
Siemens announced earlier this week that the company generated €23 billion in revenue from products in its so-called “environmental portfolio” in fiscal 2009, an increase of 11% from the year before, despite the global recession. The portfolio of products includes wind power systems, gas turbines, energy-efficient lighting and other products.
Siemens has highlighted a number of energy-efficient projects it is collaborating with Chinese officials on, including a 1,400-kilometer power distribution “superhighway” that will transport 5,000 megawatts of power from the country’s interior to its coastal cities, and building automation systems in Shanghai that Siemens said will cut energy costs and reduce annual carbon dioxide emissions.
Mr. Loescher said he continues to believe the global economy will achieve a sustainable recovery. It “will definitely come back,” he said. “The question is how fast it will get back to levels of 2007 and 2008.”
Write to Patrick Barta at patrick.barta@wsj.com

Australia to Invest $50 Million More in Joint Fund

By SUNIL RAGHU
NEW DELHI — Australia will invest an additional $50 million in an Australia-India strategic research fund, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said Thursday, underscoring the country’s initiative to collaborate to combat climate change issues.
The fund will be spent over a five-year period from the fiscal year that began April 1, Mr. Rudd said while speaking at Tata Energy Research Institute.
The investment toward the joint research initiative seeks to support more applied research and greater participation of industry partners to help address some of the climate change challenges, according to an Australian government statement.
“Climate change is a fundamental change to us all,” Mr. Rudd said. “There is a need for a collaboration, unprecedented in human history.”
Australia has already invested $20 million in the Australia-India Strategic Research Fund — its largest bilateral research fund — since 2006 to enable Australian scientists engage in collaborative research with Indian counterparts.
Australia will also invest $1 million in a joint solar cooling research project and an additional $20 million in dryland farming research, according to the statement.
The solar cooling project aims to develop a zero emissions cooling system targeted at remote rural communities in non-electrified areas and the fund allotted toward dryland farming will be staggered over five years.
“Of course there is a group of people who deny the reality of climate change. They are the enemies of us all,” Mr. Rudd said.
Write to Sunil Raghu at Sunil.Raghu@dowjones.com

New Zealand was a friend to Middle Earth, but it’s no friend of the earth

Lord of the Rings country trades on its natural beauty, but emissions have risen 22% since it signed up to Kyoto

Fred Pearce
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 12 November 2009 10.28 GMT
As the world prepares for the Copenhagen climate negotiations next month, it is worth checking out the greenwash that has followed the promises made 12 years ago when the Kyoto protocol was signed.
A surprising number of countries have succeeded in raising their emissions from 1990 levels despite signing up to reduce them. They include a bundle of countries in the European Union, which collectively agreed to let some nations increase their emissions while others (mainly Britain and Germany) cut theirs. Step forward Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Greece — all with emissions up by more than a quarter.
Then there are the US and Australia, which both reneged on the protocol after signing it. And Canada, which never reneged but still has emissions up by a quarter (worse than the US) and shows no sign of contrition or of being called to account by the other signatories.
But my prize for the most shameless two fingers to the global community goes to New Zealand, a country that sells itself round the world as “clean and green”.
New Zealand secured a generous Kyoto target, which simply required it not to increase its emissions between 1990 and 2010. But the latest UN statistics show its emissions of greenhouse gases up by 22%, or a whopping 39% if you look at emissions from fuel burning alone.
Some countries with big emissions growth started from a low figure in 1990. Arguably, they were playing catchup. There is no such excuse for New Zealand. Its emissions started high and went higher.
They are today 60% higher than those of Britain, per head of population. Among industrialised nations, they are only exceeded by Canada, the US, Australia and Luxembourg. In recent years a lot of Brits have headed for Christchurch and Wellington in the hope of a green life in a country where they filmed the Lord of the Rings. But it’s a green mirage.
To rub our noses in it, last year New Zealand signed up to the UN’s Climate Neutral Network, a list of nations that are “laying out strategies to become carbon neutral“.
But if you read the small print of what New Zealand has actually promised, it is a measly 50% in emissions by 2050 – something even the US can trump.
Where do all these emissions come from? New Zealand turns out to be mining ever more filthy brown coal to burn in its power stations. It has the world’s third highest rate of car ownership. And, with more cows than people, the country’s increasingly intensive agricultural sector is responsible for approaching half the greenhouse gas emissions.
You might expect the UN Environment Programme to throw New Zealand off its list of countries supposedly pledged to head for climate neutrality. Sadly no. These steely guardians of the environment meekly say that the network “will not be policed… nor will UNEP verify claims“.
Indeed, it seems to go to great lengths to deny reality. Check the UNEP website and you will find an excruciating hagiography about a “climate neutral journey to Middle Earth“, in which everything from the local wines to air conditioning and Air New Zealand get the greenwash treatment.
After extolling the country’s green credentials, it asks: “Have you landed in a dreamland?” Well, UNEP’s reporter certainly has. He cheers New Zealand’s “global leadership in tackling climate change“, when the country’s minister in charge of climate negotiations, Tim Groser, has been busy reassuring his compatriots that “we would not try to be ‘leaders’ in climate change.”
This is not just political spin. It is also commercial greenwash. New Zealand trades on its greenness to promote its two big industries: tourism and dairy exports. Groser says his country’s access to American markets for its produce is based on its positive environmental image. The government’s national marketing strategy is underpinned by a survey showing that tourism would be reduced by 68% if the country lost its prized “clean, green image”, and even international purchases of its dairy products could halve.
The trouble is, on the climate change front at least, that green image increasingly defies reality.

Activists, Family Demand Justice in Death of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah

Activists, family demand justice in death of imam slain by FBI

By Ashahed M. Muhammad -Assistant Editor-
Nov 10, 2009 - 8:53:27 AM

Filled with emotion, Omar Regan, Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah’s 34-year-old son, spoke at a demonstration in front of the McNamara Federal Building in Detroit on Nov. 5. Another of the imam’s sons, Jamil Carswell looked on

DETROIT, Mich. (FinalCall.com) - Activists continue to demand answers in the death of Imam Luqman Ameen Abdullah, the 53-year-old leader of Detroit’s Masjid Al-Haqq gunned down by the FBI under suspicious circumstances.

Despite cold whipping winds, a spirited demonstration demanding an independent investigation into the shooting was held on Nov. 5 at the McNamara Federal Building. Supporters said the man described in the FBI’s 43-page affidavit, and portrayed by the mainstream media as something of a Muslim mafia don, was not the man they knew and loved.

Filled with emotion, Omar Regan, Imam Abdullah’s 34-year-old son, challenged the media to tell the truth about his father and challenged law enforcement to reflect on their own humanity.

“It’s not right for them to set up traps and try to assassinate our character. It’s not right for them to say my father, my brother and all of their friends were a danger to their community. They’re not in the community! The community loves us!” shouted the young man who lived with Imam Jamil al-Amin for several years as a teenager. “There are people in the community now sad because of the loss of my father wondering if people are still going to be there to feed them, to give them clothes to take care of them. If they want to know about my father, go inside of the community and ask the community who he was!”

Some in the crowd began to shed tears listening to his heartfelt words.

“The man has 13 children and none of us have a criminal record!” said Mr. Regan. “I want to say to the people, even the ones who are holding the badges and holding the guns, why don’t you do your research and stop looking at it is as just a job? Find out—if you truly have a heart—and stop trying to just earn a check and learn how to be decent human beings! That’s what I learned from my father! How to care about people!”

Members of the Michigan Emergency Committee Against War and Injustice and the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality spearheaded the rally to show support for Detroit’s Islamic community.

The groups said the community has come under siege from federal and local law enforcement officials.

Members of the Nation of Islam were in attendance as well as Muslims from a variety of mosques in the Detroit metropolitan area and surrounding suburbs.

A broad-based coalition of activists have protested Imam Abdullah’s death, including members of the Detroit Green Party, and many Christian pastors and organizations.

As the speakers addressed the crowd during rush hour, people drove by, honked their horns in support, and waved at those gathered.

Sandra Hines, an activist with the Michigan Emergency Committee Against War and Injustice and the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality, spoke at the demonstration.

“It appears as if this whole incident that took place was entrapment by the FBI and it almost makes you feel that they may possibly be some kind of front group against people of color,” said Ms. Hines.

“They have not cracked down on these right wing groups,” said Abayomi Azikiwe, editor of the Pan African News Wire. “They have even shown up at events were the president was—armed. If we would have shown up someplace when Bush was president—armed—we would have been shot on sight,” Mr. Azikiwe added.

“We think people outside of the Muslim community have to take a stand on this. The Muslim community has been under fire since 9-11,” Mr. Azikiwe said. He called on President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to “stop the murderous policies against Muslims in this country.”

Neo-COINTELPRO underway

In an exclusive interview with The Final Call at the Michigan office of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Imam Dawud Walid, the group’s area director, and Ron Scott, head of the Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality both expressed concern of what they believe to be a “neo-COINTELPRO” directed at organizations with Black Nationalist and Islamic leanings.

COINTELPRO was a covert operation employed by federal and local law enforcement to disrupt and destroy Black and progressive organizations during the civil rights and Black Power movements.

Mr. Scott said Black men labeled as “radicals” mixed with Islam are an “obvious target” and another primary issue is funding for law enforcement.

The multi-jurisdictional task forces of the FBI and ATF, along with a number of agencies, want funding from the Justice Dept., so there is motivation to keep the threat level high, he said.

“The more threat they have, the more money they get, the more they are able to continue this, in addition to the fact of the actual bias,” said Mr. Scott. “There has always been a Black scare coming out with the COINTELPRO program of which I was a victim of, along with many others,” added Mr. Scott, a former Black Panther active with the organization in the 1960s.

Increased scrutiny of Islamic charities such as the Holy Land Foundation in Richardson, Texas, has had a “chilling effect” on American Muslim organizations nationwide, said Imam Walid. This “was only the first step” in a growing focus on charitable, humanitarian and service oriented groups with members who practice Islam, he continued.

Calling the use of agent provocateurs “a national policy issue,” Imam Walid criticized the use paid informants inside mosques, intimidation by law enforcement and selective outrage by politicians.

In the final days of the Bush administration, former attorney general Michael Mukasey introduced controversial new FBI guidelines related to an initial threat assessment, he observed. Under the new guidelines, race and religion can be used as primary factors to begin an initial assessment without any real proof that anything is planned or whether any terrorism connections are present.

A June 2009 study by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) titled “Blocking Faith, Freezing Charity,” found the U.S. government’s efforts—which many activists call harassment—unfair and ineffective while “seriously undermining American Muslims’ protected constitutional liberties and violating their fundamental human rights to freedom of religion, freedom of association, and freedom from discrimination.”

The religious leaders of the Council of Islamic Organizations of Michigan released a statement Nov. 6 decrying the use of informants and agent provocateurs sent into mosques on “fishing expeditions.”

Questions about government investigation of imam’s shooting

As a standard procedure, the FBI dispatched a Shooting Incident Review Team following the fatal encounter with Imam Abdullah. The results of the review will be forwarded to the Justice Dept. Many activists say the FBI’s nefarious dealing with Black people and organizations brings no confidence the agency can fairly investigate itself and the actions of field agents.

Dearborn police are involved in the investigation, which also troubles Mr. Scott. “The Dearborn Police Department has a horrendous and vicious history of racism and Islamophobia,” he said.

In the FBI’s 43-page affidavit attached to the criminal complaint, Imam Abdullah is described as “a highly placed leader of a nationwide radical fundamentalist Sunni group consisting primarily of African-Americans, some of whom converted to Islam while they were serving sentences in various prisons across the United States. Their primary mission is to establish a separate, sovereign Islamic state ‘The Ummah’ within the borders of the United States governed by Shariah law.”

Stemming from a federal investigation of the group which began in 2007, the FBI said Imam Abdullah and the other defendants are charged with running an interstate crime ring that received and sold stolen goods, engaged in mail and insurance fraud, illegally possessed firearms and body armor and tampered with motor vehicle identification numbers.

Andrew G. Arena, special agent in charge of Detroit’s FBI office, has consistently said his agents acted appropriately on Oct. 28 when, according to the FBI, during a raid on a warehouse just outside of Detroit, Imam Abdullah refused to surrender. An FBI dog was dispatched to go after him and, according to FBI, after Imam Abdullah shot the dog, they fired, killing him.

The narrative delivered by the FBI is widely disputed.

Members of Masjid Al-Haqq said Imam Abdullah surrendered along with the others, and only fired on the FBI dog after the dog was specifically sent to attack him. Family members were told Imam Abdullah was handcuffed after being shot and left bleeding and dying, while the wounded FBI dog was taken via medical helicopter to a treatment center. Family members ask why officials chose not to take Imam Abdullah to the hospital after being shot, when they argue, the only reason to handcuff him would be if he were alive after being wounded.

Official autopsy results have not yet been released, which adds to the uncertainty, and necessitates an independent investigation, said activists.

Hodari Abdul-Ali, a radio host and chair of the Social Justice Task Force for the Muslim Alliance in North America, served with Imam Abdullah on the Majlis ash-Shura, the governing body which sets policy for the organization. He told The Final Call everyone should speak out against injustice, otherwise they might be the next victims.

“The FBI and all of these right wing racist hate-mongers with microphones are just stirring up this anti-Islamic fervor around the country and this is something that all right-minded people need to speak out against,” said Mr. Abdul-Ali. “I think of that statement Angela Davis made back in the day, ‘If they come for me in the morning, they’ll come for you at night.’”

Imam Walid said after the initial report of the Oct. 28 shooting appeared in the media, he contacted many publications directly, protesting some headlines, challenging news reports and telling journalists not to simply “regurgitate the government line.”

When asked by The Final Call why it appeared as if the preliminary information about the shooting was so sensationalistic and inaccurate, he attributed the problem to “lazy reporting.”

“With so much left unknown in the developing case, MPAC is warning government agencies and media outlets of the alarming exploitation of this isolated incident that is stigmatizing Muslim American communities around the country,” said the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, in a statement.

“This imam was for the Yemeni community, for the Black community, for the Latino community. We know him as a person who feeds the hungry, opens his home, opens his mosque, he would give you the coat off his body for you to be warm,” said Ibrahim Aljahim, president of the Detroit-based Arab American Outreach.

“This was a set up by the government. We have to wake up and realize it. He was getting stronger and stronger and they didn’t want that,” said Mr. Aljahim. Many strong leaders, such as Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam, are also feared and targeted, added Mr. Aljahim.

Mr. Scott agreed. “It is a very dangerous situation and it is being pushed via propaganda. And it is either allowed to be done, or planned, so that any potential unification of Islam whether it is between Arabs and African Americans, or unification of younger and older African Americans, and unification of any group of people who are in favor of progressive movement, that is what they are concerned about,” said Mr. Scott. “That is why I believe they are beginning to start a new movement and Muslims are an obvious target and African-American Muslims are a specific target.”

We need energy entrepreneurs to fill the power void

The approval of new nuclear sites is good news for Britain’s energy supply, says Jo Butlin, but the Government should do more to harness the power of smaller, independent projects.

Published: 8:14AM GMT 12 Nov 2009

This week’s announcement to approve ten sites for nuclear power stations is a welcome long-term measure for our energy supply. However, we should not rely on this alone to meet our long-term low-carbon targets. For that we will need true diversity and decentralisation of supply and ownership.
The recent reports from Ofgem and the Committee on Climate Change provided stark evidence that our reliance on a small handful of utilities has failed to meet our current low-carbon targets. There is no evidence to suggest that the same handful of suppliers will do any better in the future.
If we are serious about meeting our energy and climate targets we need to make sure that the market is fully opened up to support the legions of independent project developers, or energy entrepreneurs, who can seize this opportunity and help fill the void.
The main problems with relying only on utilities to build the low-carbon solutions of the future are related to size, speed, cost and diversity.
In the case of renewables, utility companies are only really interested in investing in or developing projects of a particular size to achieve an economy of scale. These are very slow to get off the ground, take a long time for any decision to be reached within the organisation, and then a long time again to get through planning, and ordering the necessary equipment, etc. Large projects also carry a significant financial risk which, especially during a recession, even the most solid of utilities tend to be unwilling to carry.
Without a much higher price placed on carbon emissions or increased renewable subsidies, utilities argue they cannot make the investment necessary to meet renewable targets. We are already seeing large utilities deferring or even cancelling projects for this reason.
By contrast, the independent developers are mostly focused on smaller projects, with lower financial risks, which are quicker to get through planning and buy the necessary equipment for. Each project may be smaller in output, but with a far higher number of potential developers, the aggregate results can plug a vital gap in our energy supplies – and do so far quicker than any company could build a nuclear power station.
This brings us to the final point about the independent sector: diversity. Over the past year alone we have signed contracts linking power purchasers with developers covering wind, anaerobic digestion on agricultural sites, energy from waste, and small hydro, as well as corporate developers building on-site renewable generation.
Each one of these project developers acts as an entrepreneur or small business outfit, generating not just electricity, but income and jobs too. They are a multiplier in the wider economy, helping to address two of the crises of our current age: recession and climate change.
This decentralised model has the potential to grow exponentially if the UK corporate sector is also given the right incentives and motivation to invest in their own generation capacity. While the government talks of providing these incentives, in reality policy and approach are still focused on the large utilities and centralised solutions, as the nuclear announcement shows. Many UK companies want to invest in their own generation assets, but it has to make economic sense.
Larger utilities have dictated and monopolised the debate over energy policy for too long. No single company, developer or sector can tackle this energy gap alone. It will take a variety of solutions, including nuclear, from a variety of outlets, delivered simultaneously.
However, to accelerate the decentralisation and decarbonisation of our energy supply, we will have to accelerate the decentralisation of ownership and generation first.
Jo Butlin is Vice President for Retail, SmartestEnergy Ltd

Bomb Hits Pakistan’s Spy Agency in Nothwest

Bomb hits Pakistan’s spy agency in northwest

By RIAZ KHAN, Associated Press Writer

PESHAWAR, Pakistan – A suicide car bomb devastated Pakistan’s main spy agency building in the northwest Friday, killing at least 7 people and striking at the heart of the institution overseeing much of the country’s anti-terror campaign.

The blast in Peshawar was the latest in a string of bloody attacks on security forces, civilian and Western targets since the government launched an offensive in mid-October against militants in the border region of South Waziristan, where al-Qaida and Taliban leaders are believed to be hiding out.

Security forces guarding the Inter-Services Intelligence agency building opened fire on the attacking vehicle to stop it, but the bomber was able to detonate his explosives, said an intelligence official.

The early morning blast, heard across the city, destroyed much of the three-story structure and many cars on the street outside. Most of the dead were guards trying to protect the complex, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to talk to the media.

An Associated Press reporter on the scene within minutes saw several dead or badly wounded bodies being taken away. Seven bodies and 35 wounded people were admitted to the nearby Lady Reading Hospital, police officer Ullah Khan said.

Just over an hour later, another suicide car bomb wounded 10 people at police station in Bakakhel, a town in the semiautonomous tribal regions, intelligence officials said on condition of anonymity because of the nature of their work.

The government has vowed that the surging militant attacks will not dent the country’s resolve to pursue the offensive in South Waziristan, where officials say the most deadly insurgent network in Pakistan is based. The army claims to be making good progress in that campaign.

The ISI agency has been involved in scores of covert operations in the northwest against al-Qaida targets since 2001, when many militant leaders crossed into the area following the U.S. led invasion of Afghanistan. The region is seen as a likely hiding place for Osama bin Laden.

Its offices in Peshawar are on the main road leading from the city to Afghanistan. The agency was instrumental in using CIA money to train jihadi groups to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Despite assisting in the fight against al-Qaida since then, some Western officials consider the agency an unreliable ally and allege it still maintains links with militants.

Taliban and al-Qaida fighters are waging a war against the Pakistani government because they deem it un-Islamic and are angry about its alliance with the United States.

The insurgency began in earnest in 2007, and attacks have spiked since the run-up to the offensive in South Waziristan.

Areas in and around Peshawar have experienced the brunt of the recent militant attacks. A car bomb exploded in a market in Peshawar at the end of October, killing at least 112 people in the deadliest attack in Pakistan in over two years.

On Oct. 10, a team of militants staged a raid on the army headquarters close to the capital, Islamabad, taking soldiers hostages in a 22-hour standoff that left nine militants and 14 others dead.

The U.S. has urged Pakistan to persevere with its South Waziristan offensive because militants have used the area as a base to attack Western troops across the border in Afghanistan.

Militants have also targeted convoys in Pakistan delivering supplies to soldiers in Afghanistan. Attackers fired rockets at a group of tankers near the southwestern city of Quetta on Friday that were delivering fuel to U.S. and NATO troops. One driver was killed and five tankers were torched, said local police chief Bedar Ali Magsi.

Around 80 percent of all nonessential supplies to Western forces in Afghanistan are trucked through Pakistan after landing at the Arabian Sea port of Karachi. NATO and U.S. officials say the attacks do not affect their operations.

___

Associated Press writer Abdul Sattar contributed to this report from Quetta.