As of this writing, the demands have been supported by over 179,000 signatures spanning 128 countries and 227 organizations.

COP24 will focus on hammering out guidelines for how governments will implement the landmark Paris climate accord, and, as Action Aid, one of the convening organizations behind the vision statement, declares, “If governments don’t agree on strong guidelines for the Paris Agreement this year, our next chance won’t be until 2023. That’s far too late for millions of people around the world, many of whom are already experiencing climate change’s devastation.”

“So right now,” the group adds, “we must demonstrate a groundswell of support for the People’s Demands for Climate Justice—a joint global call to government delegates demanding that this year’s climate talks actually lead to meaningful, just climate solutions.”

Arguing recently that “the tide is turning from Big Polluter obstruction toward people-powered solutions,” Corporate Accountability Europe said, “The People’s Demands are a bold plan to show a united global front demanding climate justice and an end to the harmful impact of Big Polluters. And you’re the key: When thousands of us join together, we’re a force to be reckoned with. “

COP 24, known formally as the 24th Session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), will run from Dec. 2 to Dec. 14 in Katowice, Poland.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

For its part, WikiLeaks strongly denied the explosive report on Twitter and said it is “willing to bet the Guardian a million dollars and its editor’s head that Manafort never met Assange.”

The publication also announced on Tuesday that it has launched a “legal fund to sue the Guardian for publishing [an] entirely fabricated story.”

If true, the Guardian‘s report could have major implications for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, a fact that may explain some of the reactive acceptance of the story by a segment of high-profile analysts, including cable news regulars like Malcolm Nance, who treated the thinly-reported story as a smoking gun:

The alleged 2016 meeting between Manafort and Assange, the Guardian notes, may “come under scrutiny and could interest Robert Mueller… A well-placed source has told the Guardian that Manafort went to see Assange around March 2016. Months later WikiLeaks released a stash of Democratic emails stolen by Russian intelligence officers.”

But the vagueness of the sourcing left many journalists extremely wary of running with such a politically charged story without corroboration beyond an unnamed but supposedly “well-placed” source, an unverified intelligence document, and other anonymous officials.

“There are so many weird aspects to the Guardian story beyond the fact that it doesn’t describe its sources or show any evidence. But nobody cares. People will claim it’s true or not based solely on whether they want it to be,” wrote The Intercept‘s Glenn Greenwald on Twitter.

“Which is true? The Guardian‘s anonymous claims or WikiLeaks’ vehement denials?” Greenwald asked. “You can pick which to believe based on which one most advances your political narrative, or refrain from forming judgments until evidence is available. I’m going to opt for the latter course.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Many of Brown’s supporters expressed hope that her case would bring more attention to the 2,100 inmates who are serving life sentences for crimes they committed as juveniles, as well as the thousands of Americans who are victimized by sex-traffickers every year. 

“We need to see this as a national awakening,” J. Houston Gordon, one of Brown’s lawyers, said in a statement.

While celebrating Brown’s early release and applauding the work of activists, writer and organizer Mariame Kaba was among those who hesitated to express full satisfaction with Haslam’s decision, which includes supervised parole for Brown until 2029—meaning by that time, she will have spent 24 years under state control after spending part of her childhood under the control of a sex trafficker.

“That isn’t justice,” Kaba said.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Click Here: gws giants guernsey 2019

Babin’s letters note that Tlaib is a supporter of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement and accuses her of having “personal vitriol” towards the president. He dismisses her as a “yet unexperienced and overly caustic member of Congress.” He also argues that the “mere prospect” of such a delegation would upend the special relationship between the U.S. and Israel and urges the Democratic leaders to reject any approval for the trip.

According to one Jewish American who walked off his so-called “Birthright” trip, Tlaib’s move should be applauded, as the AIPAC-funded trips normalize “endless Israeli occupation.”

“Tlaib’s trip constitutes a marked shift, and we should welcome it. Congresspeople who join her delegation will see the daily nightmare of the Occupation. They’ll learn that Palestinian voices are not inherently dangerous, and that opposing the Occupation shouldn’t be controversial — it should be a moral imperative,” Elon Glickman, an organizer with IfNotNow, recently argued.

Babin, for his part, has welcomed the internally-condemned decision to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and supported legislation including the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, which the ACLU rebuked as “an unconstitutional infringement of core political speech rights.”

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

Click Here: COLLINGWOOD MAGPIES 2019

“The Commission is the pre-eminent global body responsible for the conservation and management of whales and leads international efforts to tackle the growing range of threats to whales globally, including by-catch, ship strikes, entanglement, noise, and whaling,” said Australia’s environment minister, Melissa Price, in a statement. “Their decision to withdraw is regrettable and Australia urges Japan to return to the Convention and Commission as a matter of priority.”

As Common Dreams reported  last week, Japan first denied rumors of its plans to leave the IWC. Chief cabinet secretary Yoshihide Suga admitted in a statement that the government is putting its own ” life and culture of using whales” ahead of conservation efforts.

“In its long history, Japan has used whales not only as a source of protein but also for a variety of other purposes,” Suga said.

In fact, demand for whale meat in Japan has plummeted in recent years, with the industry depending on government subsidies to survive.

Commercial whaling represents the exact opposite direction Japan should be headed in regarding marine activity, Greenpeace Japan said.

“The world’s oceans face multiple threats such as acidification and plastic pollution, in addition to overfishing,” Annesley said. “As a country surrounded by oceans where people’s lives have been heavily reliant on marine resources, it is essential for Japan to work towards healthy oceans. Japan’s government has so far failed to resolve these problems.

“As the chair of the G20 in 2019, the Japanese government needs to recommit to the IWC and prioritize new measures for marine conservation,” he concluded.

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.

If it goes forward with these presidential decrees, the administration will very likely face opposition from powerful figures in the judiciary, including the country’s top prosecutor. Speaking at a conference attended by representatives of some of Brazil’s 305 indigenous tribes, advocacy groups and a dozen European nations, Prosecutor General Raquel Dodge noted that indigenous land rights are guaranteed in Brazil’s Constitution and warned: “There can be no backsliding on public policies toward the indigenous people.”

The Amazonas branch of the Federal Public Ministry (MPF), an independent group of federal and state litigators, is so concerned at Bolsonaro’s mining plan that in February it went to court to ask the National Mining Agency (Agência Nacional de Mineração, ANM), the federal body that administers the mining sector, to turn down all requests by international and Brazilian mining companies to prospect or mine on indigenous land.

According to the MPF, mining companies and individuals have altogether lodged 4,073 requests with the ANM for mining-related activities on indigenous land since 1969, seemingly in preparation for an eventual land rush. The companies say that they are only registering their interest, but MPF argues that, until the required constitutional amendments have been written and approved by Congress, such requests should not even be permitted.

Brazil’s indigenous peoples have clearly indicated that if the mining plan goes forward they will fight back. Most don’t want mining on their land. Munduruku female warrior Maria Leuza Munduruku told Mongabay: “We’ve had a lot of outsiders coming onto our land to mine. Many fish disappear and the ones that remain we can’t eat, as they’re dirty.”

Joenia Wapichana, Brazil’s only indigenous female federal deputy, said that Indians don’t want the money mining might bring in: “For us indigenous people wealth is having health, land to live on without receiving threats, a stable climate, demarcated land, a preserved culture and respect for our community.” Brazil’s mining environmental and safety record is marred by frequent waterway contamination and land pollution, and includes two deadly tailings dam collapses in the past three years,

Davi Kopenawa Yanomami, one of Brazil’s best-known indigenous leaders, says that large-scale mining by big companies is particularly harmful: “This kind of mining requires roads to transport the mineral, large areas to store production, big dormitories where workers can sleep. It will transform our forest.” A 2017 study found that mining and its auxiliary activities caused 10 percent of deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon between 2005 and 2015. How much Amazon deforestation might skyrocket if indigenous reserves are opened to mining now is anyone’s guess; indigenous groups are currently the Amazon’s best land stewards.

After last year’s election, the pro-mining lobby in Congress, known by some as the “mud lobby,” is stronger than ever.

Their main spokesperson, federal deputy Leonardo Quintão, is a member of Bolsonaro’s Civil Office. He openly admits to receiving money from mining companies: “I am a parliamentarian legally financed by mining companies,” he says. Quintão was the first rapporteur for Brazil’s new Mining Code, presented to the National Congress in 2013, which mining companies helped him formulate. He is proud of his work: “Our Code is modern… outlawing all kind of speculation in the mining sector.”

But others complain of Congress’s failure to talk to potentially impacted communities when planning the new code. According to anthropologist Maria Júlia Zanon, who coordinates the Movement for Popular Sovereignty in Mining (Movimento pela Soberania Popular na Mineração), “The companies’ economic interests, evident in the elections, help explain the lack of democracy in the [congressional approval] process.”

As of now, the new Mining Code has yet to be signed into law, and the horrific Vale mining disaster in Brumadinho this January, with 193 people dead and another 115 missing, might further delay approval. Andréa Zhouri, at the University of Minas Gerais, said the disaster stemmed from “politico-institutional failures,” particularly a lack in regular monitoring of hazardous mining operations. “The [value of] ore is above everything and everyone,” Zhouri said.

There has been little indication so far that the government intends to significantly toughen environmental controls in the new Code. Some fear that, once the Brumadinho hue and cry dies down, it will be business as usual and the Mining Code will be approved. Prosecutor Guilherme de Sá Meneghin, who led the investigation into the earlier Mariana mining disaster, said: “What we clearly see is that Brazil doesn’t learn the lessons of history.”

Today, mining companies chomp at the bit, having registered many prospecting requests within indigenous reserves. Minister Albuquerque – an admiral with a long, illustrious military career, and known for getting what he wants – has signalled readiness to help those firms translate their plans into action. However, Brazil’s indigenous people, with a history of batting away threats, often against bad odds, are ready to fiercely resist. The lines are drawn for battle, likely in the courts, and potentially all across Brazil.

© 2019 Mongabay

Click Here: Maori All Blacks Store

“They get hot, the brake cooling itself is relatively closed up here – you don’t do a lot of braking so you need to close the ducts to actually get the temperature,” he said.

“The problem is there’s not a lot of air going through and there may have been a little bit of fire but as soon as you get going it will go out.

“The worry is only is whether you’ve burnt some of the carbon work, the cake tins and all the carbon work around the upright, that can cause a bit of grief.

“But it didn’t look particularly bad. Saying that, we’d rather not have it, but it wasn’t causing a great deal of panic.”

Gallery: The beautiful wives and girlfriends of F1 drivers

Keep up to date with all the F1 news via Facebook and Twitter

Click Here: All Blacks Rugby Jersey