Reality, Idealism, practicality, naivete ... what world do we, should we, must we operate in. Does it matter.
Should we be practical about resources? If so, we need them, they don't, we take them, whatever the cost. As long as we get the resources - practical.
Should we be realistic? Resources are needed, everyone wants them, if we don't get them, someone else will and we will lose out. We need to do whatever it takes to get what we need.
We is anyone you may be - Euros, Americans, Russians, Chinese ...
What of the consequences of the actions by the Euros, Americans, Russians, or Chinese? Practically the consequences are not material to the act. Realistically, consequences are factored in, but do not play a role - the minerals are needed and whatever method is reasonable to extracting the resource, is appropriate.
Should human rights be considered - not if we are practical or realistic. HR need not be factored in. HR may be, but, what is more critical is the resource.
Who do we turn to when the poorest and weakest are taken advantage of? When the resources of the poorest are ripped away and fashioned into an industrial engine? Who should step in, should anyone?
Making a point about the human loss is trite while I sit here, and they are killed in their sleep, on the streets, the mines, or in their schools. Yet, it is so easy to appear the ever caring liberal - whether European or American: condemn the greed and capitalism, seek boycotts of the uncaring regimes, ask the UN to investigate, request Congress to hold hearings, plead with the public to donate to the needy, and or to stop buying whatever it is the various countries produce. How quaint and so fucking stupid. I am not sure what is more pathetic - those who adhere to the preceding philosophy, or those who believe the UN can accomplish anything.
Do you use a cell phone? Do you have a Movado watch? Rolex? Tennis bracelet? Diamond ring or earrings? Any other jewelry? Computers/televisions or other electronic equipment? If so, you are one of the millions who are responsible for the oppression and devastation of the African countries and the rape of its resources, and death of innocents. So why not call the Secretary General on your cell phone while checking your Rolex for the time to ensure you catch him before he gives the press conference and you end up having to watch it from your television in the car. Hypocrite? - much worse than just hypocrisy.
For nearly eight years these whiny assholes have complained about everything Bush has done, repeated every dollar figure as to cost of the war, mentioned the stock market, or unemployment, and felt compelled to give exact numbers as to the dead in Iraq ... yet they could not, in eight years, spend anytime on learning about Africa, and instead relied upon DiCaprio and 'Blood Diamonds' for their African history lesson, all the while buying products made with mineral resources found only in African countries where this mayhem and murder occur hourly.
Not to make you feel too bad - it is not just your ignorance that has fed the massacres and death throughout Africa - it is also the UN, and the Euros. The largest mining companies are Australian, German, French, English - or if registered elsewhere, the investors or directors are in large part from any one of the aforementioned countries. Why do genocides occur - because it is easier and more practical to allow a genocide in Rwanda than allow it to spill over into regions where mining activities go on (Congo). The French had a great deal at stake in Congo in the 90s ... and they still do, but apparently events have spiralled out of control and they are attempting to put the genie back in the box. In the alternative, a genocide would clean things up and allow them to get business back on track.
The Chinese have invested heavily, as have the French - the new Heart of Darkness is not the Belgique (although they are not free of responsibility in this current round of raping Africa) ... it is the Chinese and the French, with a smattering of Australian and English, German, and Russian involvement. But where are the mean and cruel oppressive Americans in all this? Largely not involved, and what role American companies play is relatively minor compared to the French and Chinese.
So why not go to the UN and demand they investigate? I have to ask - are you really stupid or have you just practiced a lot? The Chinese and the French will veto ANY and ALL efforts. if they do not, the Germans or Russians will. And if none of those four veto anything - the British will.
So why not just go to the media? The owners of the media conglomerates - have investments in companies that are invested in, of all places - Africa, and in mining. Do you honestly believe, or were you hit too many times as a child - that the main stream media will push these stories, give them the space they deserve?
So - what to do? I don't know, but what I do believe - I really do hate people who whine, who go on and on about Bush, and criticize everything the guy has done ... there are days I wish you would be lucky enough to be dropped into the heart of the Congo where you could educate the nice people on human rights. Perhaps get dropped into Beijing and talk to the communist party about their raping Africa and South America. You would get what you really deserve and in the last moments, you just might realize what a fool you have been.
There are real crimes and real human rights violations - Africa as a continent may have been raped by the Euros in the 19th century, but that rape has never stopped and it is gearing up again, near frenzy state daily ... and the liberal response is to hold a meeting, boycott, demand change, request a meeting ... when i am not dreaming about liberals dropped into the Congo or into Beijing, I pray there is a God who is just.
(I am aware the article below deals only with part of my above stated complaint, but I have posted quite a few other articles, that when taken together, are the gensis of what I have posted above)
NOVEMBER 13, 2008, 11:17 P.M. ET
Congo Unrest Disrupts Critical Mine Reforms
By CASSANDRA VINOGRAD
As rebel fighting in eastern Congo threatens to escalate into a regional conflict, government officials in Kinshasa have put on hold important decisions affecting the mining industry, a delay that likely pushes back international investment plans and undercuts the country's efforts to rebuild its shattered economy.
International companies have scrambled to secure mining rights in Congo, which has vast reserves of cobalt, copper, tin and diamonds. But the country has been racked by years of civil war and cross-border fighting. Elections in 2006, the country's first in 40 years, appeared to ease some of the instability.
Refugees Struggle in Congo
The conflict has separated hundreds of families and displaced 250,000 people, leaving many in makeshift camps with poor sanitation.
Recently, Congo's mining ministry completed a review of the state's contracts with international companies. It was one of a series of moves by African countries to seek better terms amid booming commodity prices. The ministry renegotiated some 60 concession agreements.
But Congo's lawmakers have failed to sign off on the new deals. They have been preoccupied by the recent fighting and humanitarian crisis in North Kivu province, near Congo's eastern border with Rwanda. Renegade Gen. Laurent Nkunda has surrounded the provincial capital of Goma and has threatened United Nations peacekeepers and government troops. This week, Angola said it will send troops to the country, raising fears the fighting could draw in other countries.
"This war in the east is taking all of the government's attention," said Deputy Minister of Mines Victor Kasango in a telephone interview. "We are waiting for things to calm down."
The revised mining contracts were seen as crucial to President Joseph Kabila's plans to replenish drained state coffers and to repair infrastructure destroyed during years of fighting and neglect.
The old deals had been made by previous governments that critics said had signed them hastily, giving terms overly attractive to foreign companies.
A man reaches out to help two displaced children in eastern Congo. As the country continues to struggle with rebels, mining deals are being delayed, undercutting the country's efforts to boost its economy.
Mr. Kasango didn't provide details, but said the proposed new contracts would provide "good income opportunity in terms of taxation." Some companies have signed off on the new deals already, while others have said they will contest any renegotiation. The government, however, must formally approve them as a first step.
Congo needs the additional money. The country's central bank last week trimmed its annual growth forecast for next year to less than 10% from about 11%, citing waning demand for Congo's metals and unplanned violence-related spending. Craig Andrews, a World Bank analyst, said he would be surprised if growth topped 6% next year.
Congo's central-bank governor said last week that uncertainty surrounding the renegotiations already has slowed investment plans for foreign companies.
Analysts warn that mining companies working in the country -- including BHP Billiton Ltd., which is exploring for diamonds -- could back away from investment plans because of the new uncertainty surrounding contracts. A BHP representative declined to comment.
Analysts also say miners could use the delay and recent slump in commodity prices to force fresh contract talks, seeking better terms.
Congo "has perhaps waited too long to clinch the deals, and the pendulum may have swung back in favor of the companies," said Patricia Feeney, executive director of Rights and Accountability in Development, a group that promotes corporate accountability. "Deals may start to unravel."
Euros
Mining
Africa
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments