Adonis Diaries

 

What is Rule 41?

The U.S. government wants to use an obscure procedure—amending a federal rule known as Rule 41— to radically expand their authority to hack.

The changes to Rule 41 would make it easier for them to break into our computers, take data, and engage in remote surveillance.

These changes could impact any person using a computer with Internet access anywhere in the world. However, they will disproportionately impact people using privacy-protective technologies, including Tor and VPNs.

The U.S. Congress only has until December 1st to stop the changes from taking effect.

Rule 41 authorizes federal magistrate judges to issue warrants for law enforcement searches and seizures. But it contains an important limitation: it requires the government to get a warrant from a judge in the jurisdiction where they want to conduct the search, except in certain limited circumstances.

The amendments to Rule 41 would water down that restriction, allowing the government to apply for warrants in one jurisdiction to conduct remote searches of computers located in another.

The changes would apply:

  1. When someone uses “technological means” to conceal the location of his or her computer; or
  2. When investigating botnets, where damaged computers are located in 5 or more districts.

Read the proposed update to Rule 41 (PDF).

Read our coalition letter

50 organizations—including public interest groups, privacy tool providers, and Internet companies—have united to speak out against the changes to Rule 41.

Read our letter.

What’s wrong with the changes to Rule 41?

  • The rule changes could dramatically increase the frequency of law enforcement agents hacking into computers. That’s because the changes would authorize almost any federal magistrate judge in the country to issue these warrants. Law enforcement can forum shop, finding the most prosecution-friendly or technically unsophisticated magistrate in the United States to sign off on these dangerous warrants.
  • Under these rule changes, judges in almost any U.S. district could authorize law enforcement to remotely search or hack into the computers of people in cases where their privacy protective technology obscures the location of their computer. This means those most concerned about privacy are likely to be disproportionately impacted by this rule change.
  • In many cases, magistrate judges would likely be unknowingly signing off on warrants for computers located all over the world, not just in the United States, regardless of the legal protections of other countries.
  • The rule changes also invite law enforcement to seek a single warrant to remotely search thousands of computers—in violation of the protections of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and international human rights law.
  • Hacking—stealthily breaking into computers, copying data, deleting data, or executing code—can have serious consequences for users and their devices. A government agent could actually do more damage to the computers of innocent users during a botnet investigation than the botnet itself. If Congress ever takes the extreme step of authorizing government hacking, it must have strict limitations on when such action is allowed and strong protections for users consistent with the U.S. Constitution and international law.

If the U.S. Congress does not act, this new rule update will simply go into effect on December 1, 2016. That’s why Congress must speak out and disavow this rule change. Sign the petition.

Experts oppose the change to Rule 41:

Any expansion of law enforcement’s ability to remotely attack computers should be thoroughly considered by Congress, not passed off as a minor procedural adjustment.  Yet Rule 41 would grossly expand the power of law enforcement to seek orders to attack and exploit computers around the country and around the world, with no statutory guidance, safeguards, or consequences for the harm they will cause.

Cindy Cohn, Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation

I believe that government hacking is one of the gravest threats we face to our privacy and security. Consider how our devices have become seamless extensions of our lives, replacing our journals, address books, filing cabinets, and photo albums. Do we really want to allow governments broad access to this part of ourselves? It will give governments too much information about—and therefore too much power over—each of us.

Dr. Gus Hosein, Director of Privacy International

I stand by the Stopping Mass Hacking Act because I am not yet convinced that the proposed changes to Rule 41 are wise or necessary. This rule change is designed to streamline investigative techniques that allow law enforcement to gain unauthorized access and control to remote computer systems. Until Congress has had an opportunity to examine this proposal in detail—and until we have adequately addressed the privacy concerns raised by my colleagues—this rule change should not take effect.

Representative John Conyers (D-MI)

We’re in the midst right now of one of the biggest battles in the privacy world that we have faced. If we keep down this path, we’re going to wake up in a few years in George Orwell’s 1984. This is why, as we fight for security, any intrusion on privacy needs to be narrowly tailored and aggressively overseen.

Representative Blake Farenthold (R-TX)

If Congress doesn’t stop these changes, a single judge will be able to grant a warrant to hack a million (or more) computers and other devices. By hacking the devices of victims of a botnet, the government will be treating victims the same way it treats attackers. We need to pass my Stopping Mass Hacking (SMH) Act right now.

Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR)

Privacy is a right for all of us. The changes to Rule 41 would allow the US government to remotely search—or even try to hack—the computers of Tor users and others who use privacy-protecting technology. Thousands of computers could be searched with a single warrant. This is a major policy change—-without any input from Congress. We oppose it.

Shari Steele, Executive Director of the Tor Project

Whatever euphemism the FBI uses to describe it—whether they call it a ‘remote access search’ or a ‘network investigative technique’ or ‘equipment interference’—what we’re talking about is government hacking, and this obscure rule change would authorize a whole lot more of it. We’ve never had any public debate about this important issue even though the feds have been remotely hacking into computers since the turn of the century. Now is the time for Congress to finally hold hearings, shine a light on the government’s hacking practices, and have that debate, rather than simply stand by and passively allow this power-grab to proceed.

Kevin Bankston, Director, New America’s Open Technology Institute

While our law enforcement policies need to be updated to reflect the 21st century, Congress should be the one deliberating policy, not a back room judicial committee. We cannot give the federal government a blank check to infringe upon our civil liberties.

Senator Steve Daines (R-MT)

The changes to Rule 41 harm both our human right to privacy and the cybersecurity of innocent users. Even worse, these changes are hidden from the public behind obscure procedural rules. The U.S. Congress needs to consider the rights of users all around the world, and insist on a public conversation about government hacking.

Brett Solomon, Executive Director Access Now

We oppose Rule 41 because we believe people should be able to use the Internet privately and securely. We’re standing up for our users and everyone who believes that advances in technology shouldn’t come at the cost of our privacy or security. Government surveillance tools should be the product of a reasoned and careful public debate—we welcome that debate in Congress.

Gabriel Weinberg, CEO & Founder, DuckDuckGo

We oppose Rule 41 because we believe people should be able to use the Internet privately and securely. We’re standing up for our users and everyone who believes that advances in technology shouldn’t come at the cost of our privacy or security. Government surveillance tools should be the product of a reasoned and careful public debate—we welcome that debate in Congress.

They gave us powdered milk…and took away our childhood
(Mohamad Maghout)
They gave us watches and robbed us of the Time
They handed us shoes and exploited the Roads
They offered us rings and perfume and hided from us Love
They brought us the swings and prevented us from Celebrating
They lavished on us chemical fertilizers and stole the Springs
They initiated us with Parliaments and denied us Freedom
They extended to us guards and locks and robbed us of Security
They gave us powdered milk and took away our Childhood
They infiltrated insurgents for us and wasted our Revolution…

RAY OF HOPE?

Finally, A British Newspaper Admits UK Are Backing Terrorists in Syria

This appears to be the first UK mainstream media outlet to openly admit that the UK are backing terrorists extremists in Syria.

A breech in the mainstream media firewall on Syria?
http://21stcenturywire.com/…/ray-of-hope-a-british-newspap…/

21WIRE + Express | Horrific footage emerges of UK-backed Syrian militants beheading an 11-year-old child
21stcenturywire.com

Although 21WIRE has been exposing this fact for the last 4 years, mainstream media outlets have maintained a code of silence over the US, UK, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other ‘Coalition’ members who have been financing, training and arming of Islamist extremists currently running amok in Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Yemen.

1-Moderate-Rebels

 

 

 

 
The Express article, filed by Charlie Peat, describes the latest savage barbaric deed done by NATO-backed “Moderate Rebels”, and admits how the US-led NATO confab is supplying weapons to these Islamist terrorist groups:

 

 

“The young [11 year old] boy is said to be a soldier for Liwaa al-Quds, a group which supports Assad’s Syrian forces. He is seen in the back of a truck in the Palestinian refugee Handarat Camp in Northern Aleppo.

One of the militants shouts “Allahu Akbar”, meaning “God is great”, before slaughtering the child.

“The Nour al-Din al-Zenki group is part of the Levant Front, made up of the Islamic Front and the Free Syrian Army who are fighting to overthrow the Assad government.

It is also fighting against heinous group Islamic State with the US government has supplied the group with anti-tank missiles.”

Here is one still image of one of the US-UK backed “moderate rebels” holding up the head of the child they accused of being a spy for the Syrian government before murdering him (below).

Note: Does this very sick boy of 11 who needed medical treatment has a Name? Just a slaughtered boy of among the massacred ones?

“The people demand Dignity, and Destiny bows down”

The Moslem Brotherhood of Egypt leadership woke up in total shock:

The youth in Tahrir Square are chanting

“When the people demand to recapture dignity

Destiny has no alternative but to bow down.

The dark night can’t but clear up…”

The Grand Mourchid (spiritual guide) discovered the revolution aflame

He told us: “You have got to submerge the liberals

Go in by the thousands

Infiltrate their ranks as if one of them

Shave your long beard, look one of them…

 

As the Square is swarmed by you

And as the military becomes your accomplice

Say:

“We are the leaders of this mass disobedience movement

We are in charge of guiding the revolution…

If they respond “we revolted for man’s liberty…|

Reply: “No, No. To gain paradise, you have got to submit to Allah’s will

Destiny is in the hand of God.

Allah is in charge of men’s destiny

Any contrary opinion is apostasy and doomed to failure…”

Say: “Wahabi, Wahabi, Allah hates Springs, Arab and Islamic…

The masses chanted:” No, No , No

No Wahabi, no petrodollar

The people demand dignity and human rights

And destiny will bow down

And the darkest of skies will clear up

To the bright dawn of Liberty and free conscious opinions…

Note: Inspired by the poem of the Egyptian Hasan Taleb.

The Tunisian Abu Kassem al Shabi wrote a poem of 80 verses in 1930 while in Egypt that started “The people demand Dignity, and Destiny bows down”.

The Tunisian national hymn adopted part of this poem and the new Tunisian Moslem Brotherhood Al Nahda is trying to alter this hymn that replace Allah to people’s will…

YEMEN: Israel Has a Man Down after Officially Entering Saudi Genocidal War Against Yemen

It has been reported that Israel has recently, officially, committed to supporting the NATO backed Saudi Coalition war of aggression against Yemen.

Importantly, Israel is imposing the condition that it has use of the Taiz air-base in the Red Sea. 

It is also being reported that Israel has another casualty in this asymmetric war of aggression, a warfare very familiar for Israel after three wars of disproportionate force against the tiny besieged Gaza enclave.

“According to reports, the Chief of General Staff of the Israel Defense Forces, general Gadi Eizenkot said on the meeting between Jordan’s ambassador and his Saudi confrere, Khalid bin Faisal bin Turki, that was held in Amman, the capital of Jordan.

The general added that the situation in Yemen was discussed at this meeting. Saudi ambassador said that the war of attrition in Yemen has changed the strategy of the kingdom that is ready to use the experience of Israel now.

Israeli ambassador answered that Tel Aviv is ready for military cooperation with Saudi Arabia in Yemen. But he also noted this cooperation depends on the provision to Israel of the air base Taiz on the Red Sea.” ~ SouthFront

IDF Man Killed Working for Saudi Military

The following is a report from Hassan Al-Haifi, an academic and political analyst living in Sana’a, Yemen’s capital city.  He writes for Yemen Breaking News:

“A Yemeni military source said that a Toschka Ballistic Missile fired by the Army and Public Committees Rockets Forces into the Operations Room of a Military Camp of the Saudi-led Coalition and their local mercenaries killed several foreign and local officers and troops.  Among the dead foreigners is an Israeli Colonel named Vegedora Yagronovesky, a Data Analyst with the Israeli Army. The military camp is called Al-Hajf South of Ta’ez Governorate.

Patrick Henningsen shared this link

NOW this is interesting: what are the Israelis doing fighting alongside Saudi Military..?

Yemeni forces shot down a drone spy plane said to be supplied by Israel on July 10, 2016 North of Sana’a in Arhab District.

The Saudis and Israelis have entered into negotiations about the latter providing assistance to the “Saudi-led Coalition” to defeat the Army and Popular Committees in Yemen who have remained undefeatable against all the invading forces  including official armed forces of Saudi; United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain, Sudan as well as US and British advisors, US and Egyptian naval vessels, in addition to private mercenary armies like Blackwater and Dyna and local tribal mercenaries and Islahi militias.

(The United Arab Emirates has withdrawn its forces, along with Morocco. Bahrain does Not count, nor Qatar or Kuwait)

Reports of these talks have appeared in Haaretz Israeli newspaper and at South Front.

The Toschka Missile has dealt a deathly blow to the hodgepodge forces of the Saudi led cheaply bought alliance on a number of occasions once, in Ta’ez and another in Marib, both of which killed scores of UAE and Blackwater troops, including senior officers of both.

Blackwater has since left Yemen and UAE troops have also left Mareeb and Bab Al-Mandeb area.

Blamed as Coup Mastermind? Fethullah Gulen

ISTANBUL — Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, says that a mild-mannered Muslim cleric living in self-imposed exile in rural Pennsylvania was pulling the strings of a coup attempt last week that almost succeeded in taking over the state, and killing Mr. Erdogan himself.

Now, Mr. Erdogan says that many thousands of Turkish citizens — soldiers, policemen, bureaucrats, teachers, judges, lawyers and many more professions — are all part of the cleric’s movement and must be punished.

Tens of thousands of people have already been arrested or suspended from their jobs in the four days since the coup failed, after a night of violence that plunged the country into chaos.

Mr. Erdogan and the cleric, Fethullah Gulen, have been adversaries in recent years, and Turkey has said that Mr. Gulen must be extradited by the United States. Now, though, Mr. Erdogan appears determined to get him back, a matter that threatens to aggravate relations between the two NATO allies.

But who is Mr. Gulen? And is it possible he is behind such a vast conspiracy?

James F. Jeffrey, a former American ambassador to Turkey now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, called the organization a “cultlike” movement, and said no one really had solid information about its size and aims.

But many experts on Turkey, Mr. Jeffrey included, say the followers of Mr. Gulen have sought to gain power within Turkey by infiltrating state institutions, most successfully the judiciary and the police.

“They are a state within a state,” he said. “They have infiltrated many places.”

In the past, Mr. Gulen has been embraced by American officials as a moderate Islamic leader: someone who promotes interfaith dialogue, leads a worldwide network of charities and secular schools, favors good relations with Israel and opposes harder-line Islamist movements like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. (He is the Turkish Moslem Brotherhood leader)

In Turkey, his supporters have long filled the ranks of the police, judiciary and, to a lesser extent, the military, something Mr. Gulen has encouraged in speeches.

Having fled the country in 1999 as Turkey’s old secular elite charged him with trying to overthrow the state, he landed in the United States, where a former C.I.A. official helped him get a green card.

The darker suspicions of his movement have emerged as a central plotline in the aftermath of the failed military coup in Turkey, with Mr. Erdogan accusing him of being the mastermind of the conspiracy.

Turkish officials on Tuesday, including Prime Minister Binali Yildirim, raised the pressure on the United States to hand over Mr. Gulen, promising to send dossiers of evidence of his role in the plot.

The White House said on Tuesday that it received an electronic file from Turkey on the matter, though it was unclear that it was a formal extradition request.

“The Department of Justice and the Department of State will review those materials consistent with the requirements of the extradition treaty between the United States and Turkey that’s been on the books for more than 30 years now,” Josh Earnest, the White House spokesman, said.

On Tuesday, Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Obama spoke by telephone, with Mr. Obama offering help to investigate the coup, but giving no indication in a statement by the White House of a willingness to promptly send Mr. Gulen back.

Mr. Yildirim said Turkey was intent on destroying the Gulen movement “by its roots.” And the government has moved quickly, raising concerns it is more interested in silencing all opposition than rooting out those behind the coup.

Nearly 35,000 members of the military, police and judiciary have either been arrested or dismissed.

On Tuesday, the government suspended more than 15,000 members of the Education Ministry, forced more than 1,500 university deans to resign and revoked the licenses of 21,000 private schoolteachers.

All of them, officials said, are suspected of having some link to Mr. Gulen.

The Turkish military, in a statement, blamed the “Fethullah Terrorist Organization” for the coup plot, and said the plotters had held at gunpoint the military’s chief of staff, demanding that he sign a document supporting the coup, which he refused to do.

nytimes.com|By Tim Arango and Ben Hubbard

Mr. Gulen, a mystic preacher of the Sufi branch of Islam who lives in a secluded compound in the Poconos, in Pennsylvania, has become a central point of tension between the United States and Turkey.

One Turkish official said he believed the United States played a role in the coup, an accusation Secretary of State John Kerry dismissed on Sunday as “irresponsible.” Still, in a front-page column on Tuesday, the editor in chief of a pro-government newspaper wrote, “The U.S. Tried to Assassinate Erdogan!”

At the very least, the prospect of a contentious extradition process is likely to complicate relations between the allies at a time when the United States is relying on Turkey as a crucial partner in the fight against the Islamic State.

Referring to the United States, Mr. Yildirim said, “we would be disappointed if our friends told us to present proof even though members of the assassin organization are trying to destroy an elected government under the directions of that person.” He added, “At this stage there could even be a questioning of our friendship.”

Mr. Kerry has said Turkey, as part of the extradition process, must provide evidence that withstands scrutiny in an American court — something analysts say Turkey does not have.

On Tuesday, Mr. Gulen again denied any involvement. “Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan today once again demonstrated he will go to any length necessary to solidify his power and persecute his critics,” Mr. Gulen said in a statement. “It is ridiculous, irresponsible and false to suggest I had anything to do with the horrific failed coup. I urge the U.S. government to reject any effort to abuse the extradition process to carry out political vendettas.”

Turkish officials may be certain about Mr. Gulen’s actions and motives, but the nature of his movement has long confounded analysts and diplomats in Turkey, partly because the organization is opaque and individuals do not openly declare allegiance to it.

Mr. Jeffrey said it would have been hard for Gulen followers, as Islamists, to infiltrate the armed forces, which have been a stronghold of secularism in Turkey.

In diplomatic cable written in 2009, and made public by WikiLeaks, Mr. Jeffrey detailed how Mr. Gulen came to exile in the United States.

He left Turkey in 1999 after being charged with plotting to overthrow the state. The charges, Mr. Jeffrey wrote, were based on a sermon Mr. Gulen had given in which he said, “our friends, who have positions in legislative and administrative bodies, should learn its details and be vigilant all the time so they can transform it and be more fruitful on behalf of Islam in order to create a nationwide restoration.”

Mr. Gulen was later acquitted, in absentia, on all charges.

Jenny White, a professor at the Stockholm University Institute for Turkish Studies who has studied the Gulen movement, said it is centered on a worldwide network of secular schools. The goal, she said, is to create a “golden generation of young people who are educated in science, but have Muslim ethics.”

The group is socially conservative, but religious texts do not play a large role for the movement. While women are active in the movement, they are not included in decision making.

Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Gulen were once Islamist allies, at war with Turkey’s old secular elite.

After Mr. Erdogan’s Islamist Justice and Development Party came to power more than a decade ago, they teamed up to tame the military, which overthrew four elected governments last century.

A series of sensational trials, which were overseen by Gulen-affiliated judges and prosecutors and were later determined to have relied, in part, on fabricated evidence, sent hundreds of officers to prison and seemed to have secured civilian control over the military.

But three years ago, the two men had a bitter falling out as Mr. Gulen opposed the leader’s increasingly autocratic tendencies. Mr. Erdogan accused Mr. Gulen of orchestrating a corruption inquiry of top officials close to Mr. Erdogan, using the same prosecutors who had targeted the military.

Ever since, they have been enemies, and this week the government accelerated its efforts to purge the state of anyone it believes is affiliated with Mr. Gulen, or directly involved in the coup.

Ibrahim Kalin, Mr. Erdogan’s spokesman, said on Tuesday that the United States should turn him over to Turkey.

“Why hold him?” he said. “Send him to Turkey to let him go through the judicial process here and if he can prove that he is not guilty, then he can go back.”

Turks have long suspected that Mr. Gulen was an American agent, and inflaming the conspiracy theories is the fact that Graham E. Fuller, a former C.I.A. official who was once stationed in Istanbul, wrote a letter to support Mr. Gulen’s application for a green card.

Mr. Fuller, in an interview with The New York Times in 2014, said he did so on his own, not on behalf of the American government. (Funny)

In the letter, he said he wrote, to the effect, “of all the movements I’ve studied, this one is probably least likely to be a security threat.”

Clean energy won’t save us –

Only a new economic system can

What would we do with 100% clean energy? Exactly what we’re doing with fossil fuels

Infinite growth is a dangerous illusion

Earlier this year media outlets around the world announced that February had broken global temperature records by a shocking amount.

March broke all the records too.

In June, our screens were covered with surreal images of flooding in Paris, the Seine bursting its banks and flowing into the streets. In London, floods sent water pouring into the tube system right in the heart of Covent Garden. Roads in south-east London became rivers two metres deep.

With such extreme events becoming more commonplace, few deny climate change any longer.

Finally, a consensus is crystallising around one all-important fact: fossil fuels are killing us. We need to switch to clean energy, and fast.

This growing awareness about the dangers of fossil fuels represents a crucial shift in our consciousness. But I can’t help but fear we’ve missed the point.

As important as clean energy might be, the science is clear: it won’t save us from climate change.

Let’s imagine, just for argument’s sake, that we are able to get off fossil fuels and switch to 100% clean energy. There is no question this would be a vital step in the right direction, but even this best-case scenario wouldn’t be enough to avert climate catastrophe.

Why? Because the burning of fossil fuels only accounts for about 70% of all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.

The remaining 30% comes from a number of causes. Deforestation is a big one.

So is industrial agriculture, which degrades the soils to the point where they leach CO2.

Then there’s industrial livestock farming which produces 90m tonnes of methane per year and most of the world’s anthropogenic nitrous oxide. Both of these gases are vastly more potent than CO2 when it comes to global warming.

Livestock farming alone contributes more to global warming than all the cars, trains, planes and ships in the world.

Industrial production of cement, steel, and plastic forms another major source of greenhouse gases, and then there are our landfills, which pump out huge amounts of methane – 16% of the world’s total.

When it comes to climate change, the problem is not just the type of energy we are using, it’s what we’re doing with it. What would we do with 100% clean energy? Exactly what we are doing with fossil fuels: raze more forests, build more meat farms, expand industrial agriculture, produce more cement, and fill more landfill sites, all of which will pump deadly amounts of greenhouse gas into the air.

We will do these things because our economic system demands endless compound growth, and for some reason we have not thought to question this.

Think of it this way. That 30% chunk of greenhouse gases that comes from non-fossil fuel sources isn’t static. It is adding more to the atmosphere each year.

Scientists project that our tropical forests will be completely destroyed by 2050, releasing a 200bn tonne carbon bomb into the air.

The world’s topsoils could be depleted within just 60 years, releasing more still. Emissions from the cement industry are growing at more than 9% per year.

And our landfills are multiplying at an eye-watering pace: by 2100 we will be producing 11m tonnes of solid waste per day, three times more than we do now.

Switching to clean energy will do nothing to slow this down.

The climate movement made an enormous mistake.

We focused all our attention on fossil fuels, when we should have been pointing to something much deeper: the basic logic of our economic operating system. After all, we’re only using fossil fuels in the first place to fuel the broader imperative of GDP growth.

The root problem is the fact that our economic system demands ever-increasing levels of extraction, production and consumption.

Our politicians tell us that we need to keep the global economy growing at more than 3% each year – the minimum necessary for large firms to make aggregate profits. That means every 20 years we need to double the size of the global economy – double the cars, double the fishing, double the mining, double the McFlurries and double the iPads.

And then double them again over the next 20 years from their already doubled state.

Our more optimistic pundits claim that technological innovations will help us to de-couple economic growth from material throughput. But sadly there is no evidence that this is happening.

Global material extraction and consumption has grown by 94% since 1980, and is still going up.

Current projections show that by 2040 we will more than double the world’s shipping miles, air miles, and trucking miles – along with all the material stuff that those vehicles transport – almost exactly in keeping with the rate of GDP growth.

Clean energy, important as it is, won’t save us from this nightmare. But rethinking our economic system might. GDP growth has been sold to us as the only way to create a better world.

But we now have robust evidence that it doesn’t make us any happier, it doesn’t reduce poverty, and its “externalities” produce all sorts of social ills: debt, overwork, inequality, and climate change.

We need to abandon GDP growth as our primary measure of progress, and we need to do this immediately – as part and parcel of the climate agreement that will be ratified in Morocco later this year.

It’s time to pour our creative power into imagining a new global economy – one that maximises human wellbeing while actively shrinking our ecological footprint.

This is not an impossible task. A number of countries have already managed to achieve high levels of human development with very low levels of consumption.

In fact Daniel O’Neill, an economist at the University of Leeds, has demonstrated that even material de-growth is not incompatible with high levels of human well-being.

Our focus on fossil fuels has lulled us into thinking we can continue with the status quo so long as we switch to clean energy, but this is a dangerously simplistic assumption. If we want to stave off the coming crisis, we need to confront its underlying cause.

adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

July 2016
M T W T F S S
« Jun    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Blog Stats

  • 787,670 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 429 other followers

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 429 other followers

%d bloggers like this: