JIMMY CARTER, DESMOND TUTU ET AL OPPOSE KEYSTONE XL PROJECT – IS IT CASE OF SENILITY OR EFFECT OF SOME KIND OF CRAVING AND/OR MAMMON?

The Keystone XL pipeline project approval circus is getting more farcical with former US president Jimmy Carter weighing on this project. Carter joined some Nobel Laureates– Archbishop Desmond Tutu is one of them – in issuing an open letter to US President and Secretary of State seeking rejection of the pipeline.

Carter and the other writers have expressed their opposition in quite vehement terms; among other things saying that “Keystone XL project is the linchpin for tar sands expansion and the increased pollution that will follow, triggering more climate upheaval with impacts felt around the world.”

Let’s try to understand what these folks are trying to say. So, they are saying that this one pipeline – Keystone XL – which is supposed to transport 830,000 barrels of bitumen per day, will cause so much pollution that it will trigger climate upheaval with impact felt around the world?!!! Really?!!! Can anyone in right frame of mind make such a ludicrous, nonsensical, irrational statement?

Then why did Carter and others allowed their names to be used for such a ludicrous, nonsensical, irrational assertion? Seriously, why?

Is it senility or something else that has afflicted them? After all, one assumes that Carter et al should have this much of commonsense to realize that just one pipeline carrying less than a million barrels of crude per day which is just about one percent of current crude oil production worldwide cannot by any stretch of rational sense ‘trigger climate upheaval’. It is flat out nonsense. Yet, these so-called intellectuals have affixed their name to such gargantuan irrational, foolish statement.

Of all the persons whose names are listed in the open letter, Carter should know best the enormous advantage US stands to gain through STRATEGIC partnership with Canada of which Keystone is a major component. Advantage of being energy giants! Imagine the scenario wherein US and Canada can stand together as stable, dependable energy superpowers with massive amount of oil and gas at their disposal for export to the world in today’s global uncertainty – uncertainty in gas and oil supply from regions in Europe, Middle East, Africa. But Carter overlooks all this! Why?

Do the people who have written this letter really believe that by killing one pipeline they will make any meaningful impact in regard to the so-called pollution problem? If they do, they are dumb-asses. If these people had raised their voice against global use of fossil fuel that would have still made some sense at least. It is a different discussion though the theory propounded by some scientists, that the so-called CO₂ generated from combustion of crude oil is responsible for ‘climate change’, is total balderdash and piffle.

In the letter there is another assertion that is completely dubious. This is regarding the so-called impacts on First Nations of Northern Alberta – apparently their water, air, land and human rights are being ‘devastated’ by growth of oil sands. It appears that this kind of statement is drafted by someone who has no clue of the reality prevailing in Northern Alberta. Nothing but some sensational stuff meant to stir emotions of those unfamiliar with the ground realities!!

So, coming back to the question: what made these people to jump on this Keystone XL bandwagon? Do they also want to be included in the post-scripts of climate change ‘crusade’? Or, maybe they want to have their names included in the list of knights in shining armor who saved the world from some ‘climate change apocalypse’? On this point of climate change it must be mentioned that unfortunately the world is currently in the grip of a massive hoax predicated on climate change – a hoax similar to what history saw in Galileo’s time when people thought sun goes around earth.

So, if it’s true that the above cited letter writers are unable to control their inner cravings to have their names included in a so-called climate change crusade, well, then that can be said to be stemming from senility (or some psychological disorder) in some way or the other.  It is sad that these people failed to realize that campaigning against just one pipeline is totally meaningless – killing one pipeline will not make any dent whatsoever. If they had to really achieve anything substantive, they could have raised their voice against something on global scale, say, against all heavy oil – be it from Saudi Arabia or Venezuela or US or China, not just against Canadian heavy oil.

So, now the pressure is on President Obama. On one hand former president Clinton, Warren Buffet et al have reportedly supported Keystone XL pipeline apart from host of current Democrat Senators. As well, a former National Security Advisor of US testified before Senate recently that Keystone is INDEED in the national interests of US, rejection of Keystone would be playing in the hands of Putin.

People may be reminded that, unfortunately, Obama was ‘framed’ by the shrewd Europeans in his early days of presidency by very cleverly putting the albatross of Nobel Peace Prize around his neck. And, now Obama is continually getting crushed under its weight in the context of leaving behind a legacy.

Will Obama buckle down under the weight of misplaced phantom notion of legacy and reject the pipeline or think of larger long term interests of United States and approve the project? Perhaps Obama would care to remember that one of the signs of a person’s greatness and statesmanship is to subordinate one’s own hankering after greatness to the greater good of the people and the world. What greatness material is Obama made of?

WANT SOME PUBLICITY ON THE CHEAP? COME AND BASH THE CANADIAN OIL SANDS!!

If you happen to live in North America and get a sudden fetish for public attention and publicity and you do not have much money or resources to spend, what do you do? You just pack your bags, land up in Canada, meet some anti-oil sands groups and/or people and tell them that you are willing to start another anti-oil sands movement in some shape or form. Just get started with your form of protest against oil sands with some sensational verbiage (but may be factually incorrect, who cares?) and you are off to media attention and publicity!

Curiously, some celebrities whose careers are heading in to sunset and who wanted to get some publicity ‘high’, chose the oil sands bashing route to get back in public limelight. Example? Robert Redford some time ago, and now Neil Young (Young who?).

Frankly, I had never heard of this guy Young – a rock star? Really? Anyway, this fellow, for some strange reason (and may be some personal agenda which needs to be investigated and established) parachuted himself in the midst of Canadian landscape as a messiah for and on behalf of Fort Chipewyan folks and as an anti-oil sands crusader in general.

It seems his umbilical connection with Canada by virtue of having being born in that country seems to be helping him to get some traction in Canada on his oil sands related utterances and some attendance in his so-called concerts in various Canadian cities. Young is taking the opportunity of his so-called fund raising concerts to launch in to anti-oil sands tirades with all sorts of assertions that are clearly indicative of how ill-informed/mis-informed and pathetically biased he is.

Unfortunately for the Canadians (see later narrative as to why I say so) the television channels of Canada seem to be slanting the reporting about this fellow’s views with a negative bias toward oil sands. And more unfortunately, some sections of Canadian public also seem to be getting an itch to jump on the anti-oil sands bandwagon.

Why is the purported negative bias toward oil sands unfortunate for Canadians at large? Because the narrative of most of anti-oil sands rant of these people indicates that they have:

-      NEVER visited Ft McMurray;

-      Absolutely NO idea of actual foot prints of oil sands projects (i.e. land disturbance) vis-à-vis total area of Ft. Mc expanse;

-      Absolutely NO idea of historical presence of bitumen like substance for millenniums in Athabasca region and its dynamics with the environment (water and others)

-      NO factual idea (or any idea!) of official situation on various agreements, consultation with First Nations folks;

-      NO firsthand how oil sands projects are ACTUALLY taking care of environmental impacts, reclamation;

-      NO factual information about commercial venture opportunities for the First Nations folks in oil sands development process (and the economic benefits accruing to them).

The above is not taken from any leaflet of any oil company or from CAPP. The above is based on first hand understanding of the ground realities. Moreover, the perception that oil sands development would bring calamitous consequences for planet Earth is as nonsensical, blighted and mis-informed as saying that Sun goes around Earth.

The gullible Canadians are getting carried away by the scare mongering rhetoric of the so-called environmentalists. The lay person is not challenging the global warming models - that the so-called environmentalists allude to when talking of calamitous consequences of oil sands’ contribution to global warming - which have so many parameters that are fuzzy, half-baked, incomplete, un-validated.

Based on the above 'models' there is this scare mongering going on that GHG going to wreak hell soon and oil sands is a major villain in this regard. This is utter crap, balderdash, clap trap. Why? Because the GHG’s contribution to global warming in totality is no more than 5% and oil sands contribution in all this is 0.1% or even less (depends on what is the basis of calculation).

Global warming is taking place – yes, it is correct. What factors REALLY contribute to it, is not clearly understood by so-called scientists – there are so many theories, schools of thoughts, models, explanations of inter-relationship of parameters and so on. And, amongst all this, one thing is fairly clear – the overall impact of GHG is no more than 5% (and impact of oil sands ? Even less). Sounds unbelievable? Well, this is correct - the fear mongering environmentalists may not like to hear this though.

So, folks, ascertain the facts, challenge the so-called scientific material thrown at you (creating scare and negative biases), challenge the sensational verbiage (which may be zillions of miles away from facts and reality) used by people like Young and more importantly look for the hidden agenda and ulterior motive folks like Young are having. Do not get carried away by the purported grandiose sounding ‘messianic’ image sought to be conveyed by such individuals.

Remember this: Oil sands is NOT a game changing contributor toward bringing about catastrophic consequences to this planet. On the contrary, it contributes significantly towards maintenance of ‘first world’ basis/status of Canada – the whole gamut ranging from health care to education to seniors’ care to social development at large.