BRICS is on a Roll, Rumors Say Germany Ready to Make it BRICS+G and 'It Makes Me Feel Like Dancin'

Family photo of the BRICS-UNASUR Summit in Brasilia 

BRICS is on a Roll.

Even before the BRICS-UNASUR Summit in Brasilia, on July 16, 2014 momentum was growing because of the huge energy deals announced between Russia and China and those already negotiated between Russia and India but yet to be announced. In each case the parties made the point quite clear publicly that these deals would not be transacted in U.S. dollars. With each passing meeting and announcement it becomes more evident that BRICS is morphing into anti anti-dollar, anti-IMF/World Bank alliance.

Recently BRICS officials announced that all currency swaps between the BRICS central banks, which will facilitate trade financing, will completely bypass the U.S. dollar. At the same time, the new system will also act as a de facto replacement of the IMF, because it will allow the members of the alliance to direct resources to finance the weaker countries. It seems that BRICS chose the all-in-one approach for establishing its anti-dollar alliance.

Even more important for non-BRICS members, on 15 July 2014, the first day of the BRICS 6th summit in Fortaleza, Brazil, the group [Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa] of emerging economies signed the long-anticipated document to create the $100 billion BRICS Development Bank and a reserve currency pool worth over another $100 billion. Documents on cooperation between BRICS export credit agencies and an agreement of cooperation on innovation were also inked.

These agreements were watched with glee by the UNSAR alliance of South American countries, especially Argentina, who i predict will be BRICS' first customer. After Argentina's 'default' today [more on this in the next Mud Report]  BRICS will now invest heavily in Argentina, China itself will, like Chavez did 12 years ago, buy up the outstanding bonds at junk rates [with a tiny portion of their fiat US currency holdings] then, following Chavez lead, China will barter and otherwise help Argentina and Kirshner to succeed and re-sell the Argentine bonds a few years later when Argentina's real wealth again floats to the top.

According to Wikipedia, "If the current trend continues, soon the dollar will be abandoned by most of the significant global economies. Washington's bullying will make even former American allies choose the anti-dollar alliance instead of the existing U.S. dollar-based system." Adding that recently "Indonesia and Turkey have been mentioned as candidates for full membership of the BRICS, while Argentina, Egypt, Iran, Nigeria and Syria have expressed interest in joining BRICS."


Vladimir Putin and Angela Merkel share a laugh as they discuss the fate of the U.S. dollar

Rumors Are Rumbling Inside the Kremlin that it Could Be BRICS+G Soon.

According to a new report prepared by the Russian Ministry Of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) circulating in the Kremlin the last couple of days, Germany’s Federal Foreign Office (FFO) contacted Moscow this week requesting an accelerated membership course for their joining the BRICS economic community as they plan to leave the European Union (EU), a move Russian experts said would “spell doom” for U.S. dollar hegemony.

According to this report, Germany became “alarmed” this past week after the Obama regime ordered the EU to “ignore and not comment on” the evidence provided by Russia relating to the Malaysian Airlines 17 flight shot down over Ukraine proving it was a “deliberate action” ordered by Kiev officials with CIA involvement. German intelligence sources, this report continues, confirm that the Obama regimes case using YouTube videos and Tweets to blame Russia is “unraveling like a cheap sweater” under the increasing realization that dubious social media-sourced evidence is essentially all there is.

Germany has a vital interest in ensuring their relations with Russia and China are not hindered in any way, especially since they rely upon these BRICS member nations for 30% of their oil imports, and 40% of their natural gas needs. Additionally, over 3000 German companies do a great deal of business with the BRICS coalition, and their economy is now more reliant upon the East than it is on the U.S. and Western countries. [relevant articles here, here, here and here].

Apparently Germany has already seen the writing on the wall for a sea-change in global economic power, and it is very likely that the linchpin to Europe and the entire European Union will look out for itself, and move forward in a partnership with the next power structure that will rule the global financial system - BRICS+G.

Of course, none of this has been confirmed by either Germany or Russia, if it were it wouldn't be a rumor it'd be the #1 story on every  news outlet around the globe. And as my 'research department' warns me most of of these articles come from sources that are known for their "wild admonishments to buy gold or silver or ?" so may have a stake in seeing the U.S. dollar plummet. They also warn me that most likely the original source of this is a leak by Frau Merkel or her subordinates as a way to get the U.S. to back-off with their demands of more and more sanctions against Russia because Merkel understands that if Putin is pushed to far it'll very cold in Germany next winter but the U.S. won't suffer one iota.

So it's a rumor, who knows what i means or if it's even true, but rumors have a power all their own. Rumors are spoken of in hushed tones and in secret. Rumors can often gain strength when they are denied [it's said "there is no such thing as bad publicity"].Rumors can be self-fulfilling because beneath them is often some grain of truth that when examined closely creates pressure for action that otherwise would be avoided if that grain were to continue being overlooked.

So it's a rumor...but it's a rumor that 'makes me feel like dancin'. Imagine what a sweet feeling it would be to see the Empire and it's profiteering capitalist vultures circling the drain instead of constantly seeing them undermining the web of life that supports us all.


The Empire's MH17 Propaganda is Unraveling Daily, the Empire is Spinning, BRICS is on a Roll

Flowers are placed on a jet engine at the crash site of MH17

The Empire's concocted story about the MH17 disaster is unraveling faster everyday. Other than in the Empire and its vassal states where the the world’s most powerful and compliant corporate media pumps out endless coordinated and synchronized propaganda the people of the world aren't buying the Empire's story. Once the MSM propaganda machine set in motion most western consumers are helpless to fend off it’s relentless repeating and universal coverage across hundreds of media outlets. We've witnessed this effect many times before, most recently when the Empire almost succeeded in the Syrian ‘chemical attack’ that was in fact staged by Syrian insurgents supported by the US-British-Saudi-Qatari Axis.

This last week has seen a number of important stories that are highly critical of the Empire's version of events surrounding the MH17 disaster being reported globally [except in the western MSM of course]. Pepe Escobar's essay in The Asia Times was quoted and referenced widely, especially his salvo about how, "The damaged MH17 starboard jet engine suggests a shape charge from an air-to-air missile - and not a Buk; that's consistent with the Russian Ministry of Defense presentation graphically highlighting an Ukrainian SU-25 shadowing MH17. Increasingly, the Buk scenario - hysterically peddled by the Empire of Chaos - is being discarded."

Pepe's article was followed by a detailed and well documented article titled 'MH17 Verdict: Real Evidence Points to US-Kiev Cover-up of Failed False Flag' which is covers so much ground that it must be read by everyone and any attempt to summarize it would leave out far to many pertinent details. One area that they covered though about the "Interfax news agency reported that Ukraine’s SBU security service confiscated recordings of conversations between Ukrainian air traffic control officers and the crew immediately after the incident."

Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet

These points about "why did the pilot divert from his usual flight plan, why did he fly above restricted airspace, and just what, if any instructions, did Kiev air control give the pilot in the minutes before the tragic explosion?" will end up being central, IMO, to the continued unraveling of the Empire's lies.

As the Russian news conference's actual evidence showed and a whistle-blower named Carlos,  Spanish Air Traffic Controller who was in the tower in Kiev during the crucial time period validates, a Ukrainian Su-25 fighter jet was in the same frame as MH17. Carlos was taken off duty as a civil air-traffic controller along with other foreigners immediately after a Malaysia Airlines passenger aircraft was shot down. Later Carlos said in a private evaluation and basing it on military sources in Kiev, that the Ukrainian military was behind this shoot down. Within minutes of evicting Carlos from the tower Ukraine's Security Service [SBU] confiscated all the Air Traffic Control recordings with MH17 and they have yet to resurface.

Fortunately the 'black boxes' also contain the communication string between the Malaysian jet and the control tower. Unfortunately the boxes are now in the UK being assessed. Hopefully the UK will release the full and unadulterated contents of those boxes not just more falsified and sloppy crap like the Empire and its flunkies in Kiev have been trying to pawn off as evidence since the disaster happened. As the Global Research article proves in detail every one of the recordings and videos released by the Empire have been proved to be fakes.

In every instance "after being public criticized for showing no real evidence the Obama administration trotted out some 'senior intelligence officials' who then admitted that they have nothing, NOTHING, to connect the case to Russia and only vague circumstantial "social media evidence" that federalists COULD have downed the jet". The assertion of evidence is not evidence. The Empire is now in full retreat, their story changes daily, they are in damage control mode.

There are eyewitnesses, the pilots and passengers of Singapore Airlines Flight SIA351 [traveling southeast from Copenhagen to Singapore] were close enough to have visually observed, at high altitude, the demise of MH17. Their testimonies have also disappeared. Their are eyewitness in Donetsk and thanks to the local news interviewer [see video below] their stories haven't disappeared though the BBC who originally let this video be posted to YouTube took it down in a few hours it still exists because of Google's caching. Further, as Pepe Escobar says, "not a single eyewitness saw the very graphic, thick missile trace that would have been clearly visible had a Buk been used."

Then just under 24 hours ago German aviation and military experts released their findings in an article titled 'NEW MH17 SENSATION' which says, "Surface to air missile attack ruled out as calibre of cockpit bullet holes puts Ukraine pilots in the frame for MH17 murders." The article goes on to say that, "Articles are beginning to appear across the Web to the effect that Angela Merkel is disturbed by (and growing tired of) the incessant US propaganda being emitted in favour of its energy agenda….and so we must perhaps in turn view these articles in the light of her alleged new agenda concerning the creation of an alternative bloc to that of America."

The fact is Frau Merkel is emblematic of what a huge percentage of the German population and the rest of the world is thinking and why the Empire is in such a tizzy. The Empire continues to spout and spin its russophobic propaganda but in the war for the hearts and minds of the globe's population, the Empire of Chaos is losing badly. BRICS is on a roll, the combined BRICS-UNASUR countries and their new development bank are the tipping point for the Empire's collapse. Soon there will be an announcement that the new name is BRIGCS when Frau Merkel walks away from the Washington Consensus.

The MH17 Video Report Deleted by the BBC! “Ukrainian Fighter Jet Shot Down MH17″, Donetsk Eyewitnesses!


GOOD NEWS: Alexandra Morton's Heroics, the MSM Demands of Proof, Argentina/ BRICS and Yats Quits

Alexandra Morton cruises Nootka Sound

Every day the news seems more terribler than the day before. Yet scattered throughout the endless dirge there is good news here and there. Stories that make an old iconoclast's heart "soar like an eagle", stories that give hope to the 99%, stories...well here's 4 of 'em.

Alexandra Morton, Independent Biologist and Mudville Hero

i have to admit i'm prejudiced. Alexandra Morton has been a hero of mine for many moons. Morton, founder of the Raincoast Research Society, makes her home in Echo Bay - a community without roads, electricity or stores where she's lived there for decades. Alexandra is a world famous scientist who rejects the fame and fortune that could be hers in other settings preferring to dedicate her life to saving the wild salmon of BC's west coast from the capitalist machine that is destroying the web of life that supports us all.

In the spring of 2010, Morton helped found the social movement Salmon Are Sacred to make people aware of the value of salmon to society. Her latest thrust has been to first investigate the many letters and emails she's received about the dying salmon in Grieg Seafood's farms in the beautiful Nootka Sound, Gold River region of British Columbia. Yesterday, after visiting the area and seeing what's going on there for herself, she wrote a moving and well documented letter to Morton Vike, CEO Grieg Seafood in Bergen, Norway. [full letter and pictures here].

As the Salmon are Sacred website says, "Wherever salmon feedlots operate worldwide they kill wild salmon, because they break the natural laws that control disease. This 92% Norwegian-owned industry uses the BC coast as a dumpsite, spreading devastating diseases and parasites to the wild environment. These companies are driven by shareholder obligation to grow relentlessly and will never be satisfied, removing more food from the ocean than they make and rapidly mechanizing to reduce jobs. We can no longer accept this business as reasonable."

The Mainstream Media Gagging on the U.S.State Department's Propaganda

Yesterday the U.S. State Department's spokesperson Marie Harf held a briefing [full transcript here] that was remarkable, not because of its content or because the State Department refused to disclose any proof backing up their allegations. But it was the fact that the MSM questioners had the cajones to stand up on their hind legs and call out Ms. Harf and demand proof [pertinent Q/A exchange mid-page here].

Amazing eh. A person can almost hear the derision in the questioner's voice, the shock in Harf's non-answers. Gives a person hope that the kids and grand kids might get to live in a world not controlled by the Empire one day.

Argentine Government "Choosing" to Default

NEW YORK, July 24 (Reuters) - NML Capital Ltd, one of the lead holdout creditors in Argentina's sovereign bond dispute said on Thursday the government refused to negotiate through a mediator and was all but preparing to default on already restructured debt

This is, IMO, the best news in a long time. It takes a bit of reading to understand why fully but basically Argentina defaulted in 2002 on loans taken out by the previous Military Junta from the IMF/World Bank [to buy tanks, jets and mansions for themselves ]and the hedge funds who bought the bonds the generals sold to skate their way through the interest payments required. The 'capital markets' cut Argentina off, their bonds plummeted to junk status. Most bond holders sold their bonds at cut rates and Venezuela's Hugo Chavez bought them. Chavez then bartered oil for food with Argentina and over the next decade those bonds rose in value. Chavez sold, Venezuela made beaucoup bucks and the Yanquis hated him even more. The remaining bonds that the hedge funds hung onto [mostly 'cause they were un-saleable] also rose due to the Chavez deal but nowhere near to the price the vultures had paid originally.

Since 2012 the vultures have been suing Argentina in the U.S. courts demanding full repayment. Last month SCOTUS ruled [surprise, surprise] in the vulture's favor. Here's where it gets interesting. About two weeks later Putin arrives in Argentina and invites them to join in at the BRICS meeting in Brazil after the World Cup Final where BRICS announces the formation of a new worldwide investment bank designed to compete with the IMF/World Bank/Wall St. vultures.

Argentina probably wasn't going to comply with SCOTUS but they would have had to negotiate some sorta deal with the vultures or risk much of the progress they've made since the generals got 'the boot'. Now though Argentina can give the vultures the finger they deserve.Argentina can and will wait until Aug. 1st then announce that they will be the BRICS Bank's first customer. WAHOO

One last note: Hedge funds are supposed to be, in theory anyway, like going to Las Vegas, a gamble. Like Vegas, there's supposed to be winners and losers. But the vultures don't like the theory, they think they're supposed to win every time automatically. NML Capital Ltd and the rest of the scumbags deserve the taste of loss that most of us taste everyday.

Unable to Continue the Unbridled Fleecing of Ukrainians, Our Man Yats Resigns

On Thursday, the founding coalition of the Ukraine parliament in Kiev collapsed as Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk [our man Yats] resigned alongside the withdrawal of other key parties that came together as a block after the overthrow of the previous Ukraine government earlier this year. "I announce my resignation in connection with the dissolution of the parliamentary coalition and the blocking of government initiatives," Yatsenyuk said in a statement before parliament. "The coalition has fallen apart, laws haven’t been voted on, soldiers can’t be paid, there’s no money to buy rifles, there’s no possibility to store up fuel. What options do we have now?”

Well, here's a few options for Ukraine: Fuck the IMF/EU/US cabal. Start representing the people of Ukraine not the oligarchs and bankers. Stop the ridiculous 'pacification' of Eastern Ukraine demanded as part of the IMF/EU/US conditionality underlying the noose they lent you. Start the process of developing the rich natural resources your country has been blessed with for the good of 'all' Ukrainians.


Seeing the Tsilhqot’in Decision Only Through the Veil of Our Hopes is Naive and Dangerous

Chilko Lake - Spiritual Center of the Tsilhqot’in peoples

Since writing 3 articles [here, here and here] about the impacts of the Supreme Court of Canada [SCOC] Tsilhqot’in decision i've received a lotta emails from a wide range of readers, including quite a few U.S. attorneys. The one thing i can say unequivocally is that the responses show just how valid the Rorschach Test is. Conservatives and investors see the decision as a road map to successful development strategies. Liberals see it as a regulatory victory against unbridled development. Human rights advocates see it as a huge victory for non-treaty First Nation [FN] peoples who have been treated so unfairly for so long by the European colonists [with which i totally agree]. Environmentalists see it as winning an important battle, but certainly not the war [me too].

FNs themselves see it in their own Rorschachian way. Some, like the Tsilhqot’in leaders, spoke with heartfelt joy the day after the ruling about how hopefully now their poverty stricken villages can afford running water, septic tanks and maybe year around road access. Others who have already signed treaty agreements [especially after the Grassy Narrows decision a week later] know that the new Aboriginal Title rights are meaningless for them.

Many other First Nations who haven't signed away their claims through past treaties view the Tsilhqot’in decision with great hope. The Sechelts, whom i lived next door to for over 35 years, said in an article in the local paper that the, "High court ruling will have ‘astronomical’ impact". Citing the fact that BC's Ministry of Forests had already contacted them to setup a consultation process about development proposals on the Sechelt's traditional lands.

It's mainly this last, perhaps overly optimistic, group i'm concerned about.

Quoting Judith Sayers, Aboriginal Law Professor at UVIC about the 'Right of Consent' portion of the ruling: "The court was clear that when aboriginal title has been proved as the Tsilhqot’in have, they must consent to any development on their lands.  If they do not consent to development, the government must ensure that it has fully consulted and accommodated their interest and can only do things that have compelling and substantial objectives and now have to take into account the aboriginal perspective on their actions. They must also ensure their action are consistent with their fiduciary obligation and are within the framework of s. 35 requirement.  That means there will be minimal impairment to aboriginal interests and there is enough for future generations.  Finally, there has to be a principled reconciliation of First Nations interests with the interests of all Canadians.  Principled, a new word added by the courts for a good reason."

IMO, whatever development a First Nation doesn't consent to will be taken to court by the government who will claim the development has "compelling and substantial public purpose" [which Canada's Harper regime already claims willy nilly about every corporate friendly thing]. The only recourse Aboriginal Title holders would have, if the claim of "compelling and substantial public purpose" is upheld in court, is to a fair 'market' compensation [again probably determined by a court]. gone will be the right to defend the 'web of life' that supports us all on spiritual grounds. In the eyes of the courts, money talks and bullshit walks. In which case, the latest jubilation will turn into another debacle for the environment. It will though, thankfully, stand as a human rights victory for Canada's FNs and will be a big step towards a more fair economic solution for some FNs going forward which is a very good thing.

Almost all of the U.S. lawyers pointed out how important the use of the word 'compelling' is in the SCOC Tsilhqot’in ruling. Compelling is apparently a pivotal word in Eminent Domain law stateside. As of now the law there follows the Illinois State Supreme Court ruling which says, "That any government body can generally always find some public purpose to justify a taking therefore there must be a limit on the eminent domain power." Going on to say, "The court is the main guardian of the public needs in eminent domain cases" And, "That compensation for the easement or foreclosure, if not arrived at through negotiation, must be determined by the courts."

The Fraser Institutes's latest report sees a growing role for Ottawa to 'justifiably infringe' on Aboriginal rights. It warned if two sides can't come to terms - a growing challenge given the polarized debates over pipelines and oil sands - it will create a greater role for governments to "justifiably infringe" on Aboriginal rights to ensure the development goes forward for the greater good of the country. Adding, "The federal and Alberta governments routinely cite the national importance of building pipelines to tidewater ports to transport growing volumes of oil [tar-ed.] sands bitumen to lucrative oil markets in Asia and around the world. Ottawa has estimated the lack of market access costs Canada as much as $18 billion annually."

It's time for all Canadians to look into what is 'really' happening and how this precedent setting SCOC decision is going to be used in the exploitation of an estimated 33 trillion dollars of our natural resource wealth in Canada. Seeing the world only through our own preconceptions, our own worldview, our own hopes, is naive and dangerous.


MH17 Propaganda-'Other Side's' Version of Events. Common Sense-'Your Side's' Version of the Events

Head of General Staff of the Armed Forces Lt. Gen. Andrey Kartopolov ( left) and chief of the Air Force Main Staff Lt. Gen. Igor Makushev ( right) at a media conference in Moscow, July 21

Propaganda is the 'other side's' version of not clearly defined events. Whereas common sense is the only justification needed when 'your side' posits their theory of those events. That's exactly where the we all are right now about who shot down MH17 over Eastern Ukraine nearly a week ago. Nobody knows, or at least there is no public information out there that clearly defines the facts. Yet the western MSM has taken the U.S.version of events as gospel hook, line and stinker.

Of course, i don't know what happened that sorry day either and as i said the other day, "...the details here are as clear as mud. The most likely scenario is that a mistake was made by the rebels who thought they were firing at a government transport plane." It now appears, according to the article 'Airliner Shot Down 'By Mistake' say US Officials' quoting new comments from high-level U.S. officials and portions of declassified intelligence information released on Tuesday that indicate - contrary to earlier comments by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry - that Russia had no direct involvement in last week's Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 disaster. A tiny climb down from the Obama team at best. They still refuse to release any pictures or video instead relying on the meaningless common sense argument.

From the 'other side' though Russia has released military monitoring data, images and video which show plenty of documented evidence dis-proving 'our side's' version of events and posed 10 questions from the highest ranking Russian military leaders to Ukraine and the US over the circumstances surrounding the MH17 tragedy. Please read through these questions as they certainly won't be appearing in the western media anywhere.

This past week has seen quite a few articles by other highly respected independent journalists from around the world who haven't bought the pentagon's spin. All of them remember the the pentagon's lies about weapons of mass destruction leading to the Iraq war for example.

Pepe Escobar's always insightful column The Roving Eye in the Asia Times Online focuses on the larger questions as well as the lack of clarity about the event itself.

Robert Parry's explosive piece 'What Did US Spy Satellites See in Ukraine?' says, "What I’ve been told by one source, who has provided accurate information on similar matters in the past, is that U.S. intelligence agencies do have detailed satellite images of the likely missile battery that launched the fateful missile, but the battery appears to have been under the control of Ukrainian government troops dressed in what look like Ukrainian uniforms."

A little chill ran down my back this morning when i considered the possible implications of Russia's 10 questions. When playing Texas Hold'em a player doesn't show his hole cards until the end and maybe not in this great game either. Could it be that the reason the Pentagon won't release their proof is that they know the Russians have far more in the hole than they're showing so far? Could it be that the Yanquis can't let Russia's evidence hit the media in answer to, and totally invalidating, whatever the Pentagon releases.

If this story were to blow up on the Americans, if they were shown to be lying through their teeth for geo-political advantage even their now compliant corporate media genuflecters could use the opening to begin questioning a whole lotta lies. Anyway i remember how reluctant the people living around me in my hometown in New England were back in the 60s to accept any information that countered their government's propaganda about Vietnam and this feels the same now. The difference is now the whole world is watching because of the Internet and Snowden has already put a big dent in people's gullibility quotient in accepting propaganda from the Empire's truthy-ness machinery.

Finally, who knows, but as Frank Zappa said, "I think that if a person doesn't feel cynical then they're out of phase with the 21st century. Being cynical is the only way to deal with modern civilization, you can't just swallow it whole."


The IMF’s Demand That Kiev 'Pacify' the Eastern Rebels Makes Them an Accomplice to Murder

Malaysia Airways Boeing 777

Who knows at this point who actually pushed the button that launched the missile downing Malaysian Airlines MH17 over eastern Ukraine and the murder of 300 innocent people. Was it a mistake by the rebels? A false flag operation by Kiev? But one thing is certain, nothing happens in a vacuum, set and setting are always factors. One factor unmentioned in the western media, or anywhere else that i can find, is the role played the IMF's conditions in pressuring Kiev to continue the violence instead of negotiating a settlement with the rebels.

The Zerohedge article on 05/01/2014, 'IMF Warns Ukraine: Fight For The East Or No Money', says, quoting the IMF announcement of the previous day, "If Ukraine government loses effective control over the east of the country, the $17B IMF bailout would need to be redesigned." Which, roughly translated, appears to mean go to war with pro-Russian forces and 'pacify' the resistance or you don't get your money.

As economist and author Michael Hudson told RT’s Truthseeker [complete interview here]: "IMF and European lending is designed to prop up the Ukrainian currency so the Ukrainian oligarchs can move their money safely to British and US banks. Adding, "The IMF has publicly threatened and blackmailed Ukraine that it will ‘re-design’ its aid package, unless Kiev goes to war on fellow Ukrainians in the East of the country and stops them protesting. Does that not make it now literally a criminal accomplice or instigator of war and murder?"

Hudson concludes ominously, "What is at issue is whether economies throughout the world will let financial leverage dismantle the power of elected governments, and hence of democracy. Governments are sovereign. No government actually needs to pay foreign debts or submit to policies that negate the three definitions of a state: to create its own money, to levy taxes, and to declare war. At issue is who shall rule the world: the emerging 1% as a financial oligarchy, or elected governments. The two sets of aims are antithetical: rising living standards and national independence, or a renting economy, austerity and international dependency."

When assessing who is guilty of a crime establishing motive is usually of prime investigative importance. The criminologist’s question is: who benefits? It seems to me the only side that would stand to profit by this atrocity is Ukraine and the U.S. What would they have to gain by shooting down a friendly aircraft? On the surface, nothing. However, when a person one listens to the rhetoric being ratcheted up by seemingly outraged voices directed at Russia who would have nothing to gain by having a passenger aircraft shot down, or to encouraging the separatists to do it, one sees some of reason for the U.S. side to have murdered 298 humans. False Flag operations have been the CIA's trademark since its inception.This mass murder could be yet one more bloody instance.

Today's article by Finian Cunningham titled 'US Aims at Blowing EU-Russia Rift with Downed Airliner' speaks to the immediate returns such a False Flag operation might generate for Washington's 'Evil Empire'. In this long but very informative piece Finian points out that, "American geopolitical interests are best served by this atrocity, by shocking a laggardly Europe into adopting its aggressive sanctions towards Russia, even though that militates against European economic concerns. Shooting down a civilian airliner would ensure blowing a decisive rift between Europe and Russia."

Countering the U.S. claims that they have satellite and other 'intelligence' proving that the missile was fired from rebel held territory are the reports from local eyewitness that claim they saw Ukrainian army units fire surface-to-air missiles, or official Russian military sources who say they have radar traces on the ill-fated day also implicating the pro-Kiev forces?

So the details here are as clear as mud. The most likely scenario is that a mistake was made by the rebels who thought they were firing at a government transport plane. But, if it isn't a mistake and we may never know for sure, considering that the three biggest questions in any muddy criminal investigation, and the murder of 300 innocent people is a criminal act, all sides, IMO, equally have the 'Means' and the "Oppurtunity' but only one side has the 'Motive'.


My Question: Does the Tsilhqot’in Decision Bring U.S Style Eminent Domain into Canadian Law?

In the last week a number of very good articles have been written by a number of very well educated legal experts about the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) decision in Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia.  The two best from my perspective are 'Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia: Implications for the Enbridge Tankers and Pipelines Project' by Jessica Clogg, Executive Director and Senior Counsel of West Coast Environmental Law and 'How the Tsilhqot'in Decision Changes Business in BC' by Judith Sayers (Kekinusuqs), a lawyer from the Hupacasath First Nation in Port Alberni, B.C. Both of their remarks and opinions are written in non-jargon, neither is overly long winded, and each comes from a slightly different point of view.

i learned a lot from both of the articles and others, but neither of them or any of the many others i've read. Attempts to answer my 'Big Question' [below]. Apparently this is a big question according to legal experts in the U.S. who have written to me in the last few days about my last Mud Report - 'The SCOC's Historic Tsilhqot'in Decision Granted Aboriginal Tiltle Plus Rights and Responsibilities'.

i have written to Jessica Clogg, Judith Sayers and others who worked on the Tsilhqot’in case but have received no replies as of now from any Canadian lawyer. i assured all of them that they could feel free to send their opinions, thoughts, comments to me without me ever revealing their or their firm's name and that, as i've assured many others on a wide variety of issues, that i'd never quote them without their express consent. i've assured them all on every issue i write about that i'm only interested in an educated answer to help me better explain whatever issue it is to my readers. If you have an informed opinion about my question, please help me out. i guarantee your anonymity too.

My Big Question is:

My question is about how this decision actually introduces the concept of Eminent Domain into Canadian law. In the ruling it states that the new Aboriginal Title holders are obliged to consent to an easement if/when the govt. proves in court the project is in the greater public good. The only recourse the Aboriginal Title holders have, if the claim of "compelling and substantial public purpose" is upheld in court, is to a fair 'market' compensation [again probably determined by a court].

This is exactly how the Tar Sands Resistance movement in Texas was overrun. The courts ruled and the cops enforced the Eminent Domain law that says the landowners had to give an easement for the KXL pipeline [regardless of their proof of eventual damage to their multi-generational ownership land] but were due fair 'market' compensation for their losses.

The Texans tried to argue the Trans Canada Corp was a foreign entity so the law didn't apply, that was thrown out. In the end the only voice that had 'standing' was the govt. declaration of the greater public good.

What i fear will really happen is appeal after appeal of the wording of bits and pieces of the new ruling by governments and corporations not real consultation. Followed, if they lose their court appeals, by declarations of exception because of the "compelling and substantial public purpose" line.

This argument that whatever development a First Nation doesn't consent to is one is "compelling and substantial public purpose" will be used at every hearing in every case by every government -local, provincial and federal. Sooner or later i fear the courts will agree with the Texas Supreme Court's logic [and many other U.S. precedents before that] about Eminent Domain and the latest jubilation will turn into another debacle for the environment. It will though, thankfully, stand as a human rights victory for Canada's FNs and will be a big step towards a more fair economic solution for FNs going forward which is a very good thing.


The SCOC's Historic Tsilhqot'in Decision Granted Aboriginal Tiltle Plus Rights and Responsibilities

Chief Francis Laceese, of the Tl'esqox First Nation, who still oppose the NGP after the SCOC Tsilhqot'in decision

i live in B.C.. Two days ago was a day of celebration among everyone i know because of the historic unanimous ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada [SCOC] about the granting of aboriginal title to the Tsilhqot'in people. Then yesterday a more 'sober' attitude caused me to remember that rights and responsibilities are two sides of the same coin. After spending hours yesterday reading the opinions of legal experts, politicians, environmentalists, industry spokespeople, investment analysts and just plain folks, i went to bed with my mind muddled and my questions multiplied.

The ruling, according to legal experts, is historic in terms of First Nations land title and their future financial compensation for resource extraction and jobs for their peoples. This is very important as so many First Nations throughout Canada live in 3rd world conditions [or worse] despite the fact the lands they traditionally have lived on for centuries are so abundant in natural resources.

However the ruling, according the experts does not give First Nations a 'veto' over development on their lands. The government can still bypass the consent of First Nations to any project, including the Northern Gateway Project "by establishing a pressing and substantial public purpose" which is exactly what the Harper regime will do in each and every court case.

Yes the ruling does mean that First Nations will be compensated for the value of the imposition on their 'rights' [think Eminent Domain] but that's all it means in terms of environmental protection. In the Tsilhqot'in decision the SCOC defined not just the rights we were jubilantly celebrating but also some of the responsibilities on the other side of the coin. As i went to bed last night after trying to assemble a coherent picture of all this i realized i was still muddled.

This morning it became clearer that my BIG question is: Can First Nations [ceded or un-ceded land, new decision type of title or not] say NO to things like pipelines on the grounds of long term devastation to the biosphere or must they, like in the case of Eminent domain in the US, grant an easement then negotiate a compensation package based on the monetary 'market' value of the imposition?

The Supreme Court's ruling on the Tsilhqot'in case makes clear that this new aboriginal title does not give a band a veto on development. Governments must notify and consult bands whose rights may be infringed upon, and try to meaningfully accommodate the concerns. The bands must negotiate to reasonably resolve their concerns.

What about the Wet'suwet'en people, and many others, who never signed a treaty [unceded lands], who don't, as of now, have this type of Aboriginal title to their traditional lands but vow to keep all pipelines off their land? The Supreme Court stated, "the provincial or federal government can only pass laws impacting on lands under Aboriginal title if it shows a compelling and substantial benefit to the general public." But what about the Wet'suwet'en people's blockade? How about the many other First Nations living on unceded lands not covered by this new Aboriginal title who strenuously oppose the plans of developers [think Site C, LNG/fracking, forestry, mining, etc], who have stated numerous times they have no intent to permit the destruction of the web of life that supports us all on their traditional lands regardless of environmental protection or mitigation efforts?

The environmental destruction war up here in B.C. is far from over. One important battle for First Nations rights has been won, but that's all. First Nations have been being screwed for a long time up here. As of a couple days ago, they are now less screwed financially, but the biosphere is just as endangered, maybe more so, than it was before the ruling. IMO, most First Nations have been fighting for their traditional integrated biosphere worldview, for the web of life that supports us all, not compensation. But that's most, not all. First Nations are just people, they have different views, like all of us, they live under different conditions and pressures. The  Tsilhqot'in leaders, for instance have talked almost exclusively about the compensation due them and the third world conditions that their people and so many other First Nations live under and how this ruling will change that.

Below are some interesting quotes that, IMO, show how this 'clear and consise' ruling, like all human utterances, is being interpreted through the worldviews of the interpreters. Of course, i too chose those quotes that resonate best with my often muddled worldview.

“This [decision] gives them the right to determine, subject to the inherent limits of group title held for future generations, the uses to which the land is put and to enjoy its economic fruits, wrote McLachlin in a decision joined unanimously by seven other judges.
McLachlin rooted her definition of Aboriginal title in the oldest of legal authorities, the English common law, and its equation of ownership with general occupancy of the land:" which says "A general occupant at common law is a person asserting possession of land over which no one else has a present interest or with respect to which title is uncertain.” - Vaughn Palmer, Vancouver Sun

"The court established strict environmental rules that aboriginal groups and the government can do nothing to harm land for future generations. She said that in cases where aboriginal consultation on projects is in question, the government may be required to begin those processes over." - West Coast Environmental Law attorney Jessica Clogg

"The Supreme Court's unanimous ruling that governments must consult in good faith on proposed uses of aboriginal lands that could impair aboriginal rights will apply to decisions by all levels of government on major resource projects. The court also said governments may have to reassess prior conduct and legislation, which could prompt court challenges of past government actions, including controversial 2012 amendments to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act and the Navigable Waters Protection Act." - Jean Crowder, aboriginal affairs critic for the New Democratic Party in the Canadian Parliament. 

"All of which raises an interesting question. If we are agreed to constitutionally protect the property rights of some Canadians, why do we shrink from doing the same for others? Recall that the same Constitution that entrenched aboriginal rights, from which we now see derived aboriginal title, declined to protect the right to own property - a right that is also founded in common law, and that is often spelled out in statute, but was deemed unworthy of constitutional entrenchment. Like aboriginal title, the right to property is not absolute: In the constitutions of other countries, it is typically expressed as the right not to be deprived of one's property except by due process of law, and with just compensation. And yet at the time it was considered expendable. It would be too costly to have to compensate property holders for infringing on their rights. It would be inconvenient." - Andrew Coyne, The Leader Post, Regina


Joy in Mudville, Canadian Supreme Court Grants Title to the Tsilhqot'in Nation in Historic Case

Chief Roger William of Xeni Gwet'in speaks about the SCOC decision on aboriginal land title 

First Nations leaders were jubilant and more than a bit surprised this morning by the clarity and scope of the Supreme Court of Canada's precedent setting decision today recognizing an aboriginal title claim to land for which there is no treaty - land that was never ceded. Most First Nations communities in B.C. never signed treaties or land agreements, but the band argued it could claim title because the band has traditionally occupied the land since before European settlers arrived.

The unanimous ruling, written by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, also said all economic projects on traditional Aboriginal territories will now require “consent” as well as consultation before they proceed. Reacting to the decision Thursday, Tsilhqot'in Nation Chief Roger William [pictured above] said, "Once the first people of this country have title, then only good things are going to come. We have come from our land, we come from our people, from our history. We are part of the land."

The Vancouver Sun's article 'Landmark Supreme Court ruling grants land title to B.C. First Nation' says, "A room full of surprised veteran B.C. Aboriginal leaders erupted in “cheers and tears” after the Supreme Court of Canada, in the most important aboriginal rights case in the country’s history, ruled that the Tsilhqot’in First Nation has title 1,750 square kilometres of land in south central B.C."

Aboriginal title isn't absolute, but the ruling means agriculture, forestry, mining, and hydroelectric or pipeline development proposed for the area will require consent from the Tsilhqot'in Nation. One of the lawyers who worked on the Tsilhqot'in case, David Rosenberg, of Woodward and Company Lawyers, said, "This is a majorly important precedent with far-reaching implications for other First Nations."

Congratulations are rolling in from First Nations and environmental groups all across Canada and beyond. Everyone, including the mr. mud, understands the huge difference between the words 'consultation' and 'consent'. Before today's decision the governments and industry simply had to have some meaningless meeting with a First Nation and claim that as the required consultation, which is what they did time and time again, to fulfill their legal obligations was met. Now, it's a new ballgame.

For sure the Harper government, the provincial governments and corporate 'developers' will be using every type of bribery and every lie they can think of to convince First Nations to grant their consent on all the present controversial projects in western Canada, including the Northern Gateway, the Kinder-Morgan Expansion, Site C and B.C.'s fracking/LNG nightmare. But given the strong opposition of First Nations groups who now have the right to title and control of lands that each of this projects requires to proceed, this is a great day for trillions of living creatures, for the future non-renewable fresh water resources, or the air we all breathe and the futures of our children and grandchildren.

Of course, the war isn't over, but it sure feels good to win even one battle for a change. The billionaires and their corrupted government lackeys won't just quit, they'll wiggle and squirm and try other tactics. The already fast paced expansion of 'pipelines by rail' will quicken, so will the movement of tar sands crud and other heavy oils by truck and the pipelines that go directly from Alberta to the U.S. on existing rights of way will be expanded as fast as possible.

As Adam Brandt, an energy expert at Stanford University, pointed out recently, “With growing global demand, the economic pressure to develop unconventional resources is enormous and not going away. Can environmental groups expect to win a series of fights for decades to come, when the economic forces are aligned very strongly against them in each round? The answer is obvious: no. The emphasis should be on demand, not supply."

This morning my inbox was alive with perhaps more enthusiasm and joy from every quarter than ever before. So today there's joy in Mudville because we're all - flora, fauna, microbes, minerals, forces and faeries - in this together. And untold trillions of our cousins will live another while in harmony with the Great Mother of us all.


Fracking Protestors Don't Need Secret Russian Conspiracies to Empower Them, They Have Facts

Ya gotta hand it to the dis-information folks in the fossil fuel industry, this time they've managed to fill the rightwing media with ridiculous stories that say the evil Russians are orchestrating the worldwide. anti-fracking protests. In case you haven't heard about it, two days ago the out-going Secretary-general of NATO, Anders Fogh Rasmussen,  said it was his personal opinion that the Russian government was secretly working with green organisations to paint the process of extracting shale gas in a bad light and that, "that he believes Russia is working with environmental groups to oppose fracking developments in Europe, so that countries stay hooked on Russia’s gas supply."

Of course, the claim has sparked ridicule from environmentalists who know full well that outrage against fracking, the fossil fuel industry's latest scheme to get rich by destroying the biosphere, needs no support beyond common sense. Rasmussen offered zero proof of his claims and Greenpeace, the major focus of Rasmussen's dis-information statement that Russia is involved in a secret anti-fracking plot, says, “The idea we’re puppets of Putin is so preposterous that you have to wonder what they’re smoking over at NATO HQ,” a Greenpeace spokesman said,. "Mr Rasmussen should spend less time dreaming up conspiracy theories and more time on the facts.”

The story has grown like a California brush fire throughout the fracking friendly media. Some now saying that, "Russian secret agents have infiltrated Greenpeace and other campaign groups to co-ordinate the war against fracking, it has been alleged. The Kremlin's distaste for shale gas fracking is not down to a keenly-felt concern for its environmental impact. It is pure economics, born from a desire to keep Europe dependent on gas imports from Moscow." [notice the lawyerly use of 'alleged'].

Methane bubbling up through to the surface through the fractured geologic structure that contained it before fracking destroyed that containment.

The last couple of weeks The Mud Report has focused on the fracking facts in detail complete with links to peer reviewed scientific studies from the world's leading researchers about the existential dangers that this short-sighted, stupid scheme poses. In short, fracking's abuse of our globe's limited and non-renewable fresh water resources, it's release of fugitive methane emissions from both drilling and geological fracture into groundwater and it's deleterious impact on the people and environment make the fracking industry and the corrupt governments who genuflect at its alter the 'Real Terrorists'.

The fossil fuel industry knows that studies by scientists maybe true but they are inconvenient hurdles that must be neutralized in the minds of consumers lest they begin to question the system that's delivering their world consuming exceptional lifestyles. Questioning by consumers must be avoided above all, and what better way to avoid those questions than to blame the evil Russians.

As one commentor wrote, "Drilling holes in the earth and using explosives to destroy sub-strata to release coveted fossil fuel located thousands of feet down? What could go wrong? The science is well-proven? Like all science, there are assumptions that are made based upon risk-reward modeling. I suggest that there are many more outcomes and consequences to fracking than the energy companies and regulators are willing to admit. It's against their best financial interests to do so. It's why tobacco companies maintained smoking was safe for years...until the mountain of evidence was so great, and the pool of retrievable monies so great, that the lawyers changed their allegiances to where they could reap their next class action pot of gold."

IMO, the worldwide fracking outrage is based solely on the ability of everyday people to study and learn for themselves what the truth is about any and every issue. The capitalist democratic governments can't be trusted, they are all on the corporate payroll. The authoritarian, totalitarian governments [including Russia] can't be trusted either. The corporate media is totally controlled by their owners [though by reading a very wide spectrum of their bullshit a person can often find by 'telemetry' a few bits of content that slipped through here and there, then, by accumulating those bits and following them by personal investigation, find answers to their questions].