by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
Yes, I asked who and not what...
What we are seeing here, in my opinion, is nothing but a repeat of the Oil Crisis in the 1970's, the one that never was, only with different means.
This is another way for the governments continue the anti-car agenda?
While I cannot prove this, obviously, for even the powers that be do not leave a trail of evidence in this matter, it has, however, all the hallmarks of yet, like the Oil Crisis of the 1970's, another attempt of people control.
The “Oil Crisis” in the 1970's, the one that was about as real as Alice in Wonderland, happened just a very short time, something like a week or so, after the great speech by Henry Kissinger, then Secretary of State of the USA, in which he stated, and I paraphrase “if you want to control nations you have to (be able to) control fuel, and if you want to (be able to) control people you have to control food (and water)”.
If you want to be able to control, however, where people live and work you have to control fuel and have to get them off their personal means of transport, namely the motorcar.
Enter the global warming myth. ... MORE
Armed Forces Day; Proposed
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
The UK Government – or is it just a few Labor MPs? - proposes an Armed Forces Day and a law making it illegal to discriminate against members of HM Forces in uniform.
While I concur and totally agree that service men and -women should not be discriminated against or harassed when wearing uniform in public and also that they should wear their uniform in public (why should they not?) I am not entirely sure as to a day celebrating the military.
I mean if we want to do that then why don't we also bring back the “Empire Day” as well. Come to think about it; why don't we just get the Empire back. It has become obvious that those former colonies just cannot do and are doomed without us, their once colonial masters. We should, I think, start with the wayward America. Did we ever sign a peace deal with them? The next country to be brought back into the Empire and the fold and under British rule is Rhodesia. We can see where independence has got it.
Yes, folks, I am being sarcastic and facetious.
I do think that, while there is nothing whatsoever to be said against giving our military personnel in or out of uniform the respect that most of them deserve for the job that they are doing, the theaters of operation in which they risk their lives, though, for one, are more than questionable.
Both Iraq and Afghanistan are places where our forces – as well the those of the USA – have no right to be. Both are illegal wars but aside from that Britain's previous involvement in Afghanistan some centuries back should have taught us that Afghanistan is best lest alone.
Seeing that, when British soldiers fell victims to the particular sniper who now accounts for a significant number of casualties amongst the British Forces in Iraq and the local population seeing him go down laughed, it is time to get out of that country as well. Not that we should have ever been there in the first place but, alas, Britain had to follow the US like a dog follows his master. The people there see the British as much as the Americans as occupiers and have no love for them.
The fight against terrorism is as fictional as is Alice in Wonderland, maybe more so even and to follow the Americans like a dog, or slave, follows his master is not a good idea. Who and what are we really fighting for?
But, I digressed a little, as seems to be a tendency of mine.
We were really talking here about the British Labor – now there is a joke – government (dictatorship more like) suggesting a National Armed Forces Day, Home-Coming Parades for our Boys, and all that jazz. While I certainly am not against another Bank Holiday and nor against a day that would honor our men and women in uniform, but whether it should be done in such a way is questionable to the extreme.
While I am very much for our Military in its right setting I am against a standing army for starters and especially against this militarization of British society. Is this intended as a way of desensitizing us to seeing (uniformed) military personnel on our streets so that, if something is being done against the liberties of the people the people do not notice until it is too late?
I rest my case...
May questions and no real answers...
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
The UK Government – or is it just a few Labor MPs? - proposes an Armed Forces Day and a law making it illegal to discriminate against members of HM Forces in uniform.
While I concur and totally agree that service men and -women should not be discriminated against or harassed when wearing uniform in public and also that they should wear their uniform in public (why should they not?) I am not entirely sure as to a day celebrating the military.
I mean if we want to do that then why don't we also bring back the “Empire Day” as well. Come to think about it; why don't we just get the Empire back. It has become obvious that those former colonies just cannot do and are doomed without us, their once colonial masters. We should, I think, start with the wayward America. Did we ever sign a peace deal with them? The next country to be brought back into the Empire and the fold and under British rule is Rhodesia. We can see where independence has got it.
Yes, folks, I am being sarcastic and facetious.
I do think that, while there is nothing whatsoever to be said against giving our military personnel in or out of uniform the respect that most of them deserve for the job that they are doing, the theaters of operation in which they risk their lives, though, for one, are more than questionable.
Both Iraq and Afghanistan are places where our forces – as well the those of the USA – have no right to be. Both are illegal wars but aside from that Britain's previous involvement in Afghanistan some centuries back should have taught us that Afghanistan is best lest alone.
Seeing that, when British soldiers fell victims to the particular sniper who now accounts for a significant number of casualties amongst the British Forces in Iraq and the local population seeing him go down laughed, it is time to get out of that country as well. Not that we should have ever been there in the first place but, alas, Britain had to follow the US like a dog follows his master. The people there see the British as much as the Americans as occupiers and have no love for them.
The fight against terrorism is as fictional as is Alice in Wonderland, maybe more so even and to follow the Americans like a dog, or slave, follows his master is not a good idea. Who and what are we really fighting for?
But, I digressed a little, as seems to be a tendency of mine.
We were really talking here about the British Labor – now there is a joke – government (dictatorship more like) suggesting a National Armed Forces Day, Home-Coming Parades for our Boys, and all that jazz. While I certainly am not against another Bank Holiday and nor against a day that would honor our men and women in uniform, but whether it should be done in such a way is questionable to the extreme.
While I am very much for our Military in its right setting I am against a standing army for starters and especially against this militarization of British society. Is this intended as a way of desensitizing us to seeing (uniformed) military personnel on our streets so that, if something is being done against the liberties of the people the people do not notice until it is too late?
I rest my case...
May questions and no real answers...
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
Is Ethical Shopping Becoming the Victim of the “Credit Crunch”?
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
There appear to be signs on the horizon that indicate that shoppers may abandon ethical shopping in the fact of rising prices, especially cost of food and fuel.
Organic foods and fair trade goods are being bought less, already, it would appear, than it was only a few weeks back.
Concern for others less well off and especially for growers and producers of coffee, tea, cotton and such, and concern for the environment are the first to suffer and go out of the window when it comes to prices, in general and especially for food, going up. Then even BOGOF offers not longer cut it and it is straight forward price reductions that shoppers look for.
Where does this leave Fair Trade and organics and green produce and products, as well as services and suppliers?
Considering that, more often than not, fair trade and other ethical products, goods and services are somewhat more expensive – in some case a lot more expensive – than “ordinary” ones people vote, in times of economic “hardship” and recession, even if it is only perceived “hardship” and recession, with the pocketbooks and their feet. That is to say they buy other goods that are not fair trade or organic or green or ethically produced. They will then go, mostly, for non-fair trade products which are significantly cheaper that any ethical goods and products. This is with the exception of some produce such as tea and bananas at Sainsbury's in the UK, for instance, where all of their own brand tea and all of their bananas are fair trade and the price remained the same as before.
While I am well aware, as I am sure other people are too, that a fixed price and premium is paid to the producers under the fair trade agreements, ate times, I am more than certain, retailers do put a nice little profit margin onto fair trade and other ethical goods, knowing that the ethical shopper is prepared to pay extra to have the money go to the producers. Most are not aware of how high that profit margin is, at times.
Not surprising at a time when such products are demanded by the buying public and the same is true for anything recycled and “green” and for any environmentally friendly goods. Here too, in the recycled and environmental friendly product sector, because of demand, many makers, manufacturers and sellers have added a rather big margin to rake it in. Is that ethical? No!
It is therefore not surprising that at times like these when fuel and food costs are going up and up shoppers are not prepared to pay through the nose often and therefore go for the non-fair trade and other products.
While the fair trade premium paid to the producers is one thing, in many of the other cases the costs are that high because the sellers know full well that people want to be and be seen to be green and to have a conscience. People who want to be seen to be thus are therefore also quite willing to pay such premium while the economy is more or less booming but, as it seems to ease their consciences to do so and to do “their bit” for the poor or for the environment. However, when there is a downturn and the economy throws a wobbly such ethical principles soon are abandoned and no such goods and produce are being bought, or at least they are bought less.
I must say that, with some of the prices charged for “green goods” I am not surprised that under conditions of perceived hardship people will not buy them. Some are a rip off as far as costs are concerned. There was a saying that one cannot get money for old robe. Today this, however, no longer holds true. I am not sure about getting money for old rope but some green “designers” and crafts people sure ask money for old rope (see my article elsewhere).
Sainsbury's has recently fought, it would seem, a price war with the likes of Tesco and ASDA as regards to “Delight” chocolate and, as far as can be seen from the restocked shelves, has now deselected the Divine fair trade brand and has gone for a much more expensive brand that is not all fair trade and I am sure we can see here, yet again, that money begins to speak against the principles that that company was claiming it had.
The truth is, and that applies to supermarkets and retailers as much as to the shopper, that the bottom line is all that the majority are concerned with and only when it suits them will they, the majority that is, be interested to be seen to be green or ethical. There will remain some that will stay true to their principles but I doubt that many retailers will. The same will also be true for many shoppers. To the seller any fair trade that does not sell is a loss-leader and something to be replaced, period. To the shopper who has to watch his pocketbook it is the price that counts for the food or what-have-you in times of economic wobble and not whether or not he is green or does good. That is the bottom line. Now where does that leave fair trade and the green sector?
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
There appear to be signs on the horizon that indicate that shoppers may abandon ethical shopping in the fact of rising prices, especially cost of food and fuel.
Organic foods and fair trade goods are being bought less, already, it would appear, than it was only a few weeks back.
Concern for others less well off and especially for growers and producers of coffee, tea, cotton and such, and concern for the environment are the first to suffer and go out of the window when it comes to prices, in general and especially for food, going up. Then even BOGOF offers not longer cut it and it is straight forward price reductions that shoppers look for.
Where does this leave Fair Trade and organics and green produce and products, as well as services and suppliers?
Considering that, more often than not, fair trade and other ethical products, goods and services are somewhat more expensive – in some case a lot more expensive – than “ordinary” ones people vote, in times of economic “hardship” and recession, even if it is only perceived “hardship” and recession, with the pocketbooks and their feet. That is to say they buy other goods that are not fair trade or organic or green or ethically produced. They will then go, mostly, for non-fair trade products which are significantly cheaper that any ethical goods and products. This is with the exception of some produce such as tea and bananas at Sainsbury's in the UK, for instance, where all of their own brand tea and all of their bananas are fair trade and the price remained the same as before.
While I am well aware, as I am sure other people are too, that a fixed price and premium is paid to the producers under the fair trade agreements, ate times, I am more than certain, retailers do put a nice little profit margin onto fair trade and other ethical goods, knowing that the ethical shopper is prepared to pay extra to have the money go to the producers. Most are not aware of how high that profit margin is, at times.
Not surprising at a time when such products are demanded by the buying public and the same is true for anything recycled and “green” and for any environmentally friendly goods. Here too, in the recycled and environmental friendly product sector, because of demand, many makers, manufacturers and sellers have added a rather big margin to rake it in. Is that ethical? No!
It is therefore not surprising that at times like these when fuel and food costs are going up and up shoppers are not prepared to pay through the nose often and therefore go for the non-fair trade and other products.
While the fair trade premium paid to the producers is one thing, in many of the other cases the costs are that high because the sellers know full well that people want to be and be seen to be green and to have a conscience. People who want to be seen to be thus are therefore also quite willing to pay such premium while the economy is more or less booming but, as it seems to ease their consciences to do so and to do “their bit” for the poor or for the environment. However, when there is a downturn and the economy throws a wobbly such ethical principles soon are abandoned and no such goods and produce are being bought, or at least they are bought less.
I must say that, with some of the prices charged for “green goods” I am not surprised that under conditions of perceived hardship people will not buy them. Some are a rip off as far as costs are concerned. There was a saying that one cannot get money for old robe. Today this, however, no longer holds true. I am not sure about getting money for old rope but some green “designers” and crafts people sure ask money for old rope (see my article elsewhere).
Sainsbury's has recently fought, it would seem, a price war with the likes of Tesco and ASDA as regards to “Delight” chocolate and, as far as can be seen from the restocked shelves, has now deselected the Divine fair trade brand and has gone for a much more expensive brand that is not all fair trade and I am sure we can see here, yet again, that money begins to speak against the principles that that company was claiming it had.
The truth is, and that applies to supermarkets and retailers as much as to the shopper, that the bottom line is all that the majority are concerned with and only when it suits them will they, the majority that is, be interested to be seen to be green or ethical. There will remain some that will stay true to their principles but I doubt that many retailers will. The same will also be true for many shoppers. To the seller any fair trade that does not sell is a loss-leader and something to be replaced, period. To the shopper who has to watch his pocketbook it is the price that counts for the food or what-have-you in times of economic wobble and not whether or not he is green or does good. That is the bottom line. Now where does that leave fair trade and the green sector?
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
Record set for World's Largest Fair Trade Coffee Break!
On May 10 2008, a grand total of 12,128 people in more than 150 locations from coast to coast in the USA convened to set the record for the World's Largest Fair Trade Coffee Break. An estimated 50,000 people participated in more than 200 events taking place throughout North America during Fair Trade Fortnight (May 3-18).These World Fair Trade Day celebrations contributed to efforts in 70 countries worldwide marking the importance and benefits of Fair Trade. Together, Fair Trade Resource Network, Fair Trade Towns USA, and other leading Fair Trade organizations made WFTD 2008 the largest celebration in American history!
Thanks for all your great work making this the largest Fair Trade event in North American history. And here's to breaking the record next year. CHEERS!
Britons wasting £10 Billion worth of food a year, research says
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
We’ve already heard lots about the food crisis that is threatening global development, and we have had plenty of debate about how eating no meat, a little meat, fake meat and even the plain old potato might help ease global hunger, stop global warming, and generally make life easier for all of us. But let’s forget about what we do eat for a moment – a new report coming out of the UK shows the staggering costs of what we don’t eat:
The British people are throwing away £10 billion worth of food that could be eaten each year, £2bn more than estimates have previously suggested, a government-funded programme to cut waste has revealed.
And that folks, is ten billion Pounds Sterling as in British billion and not US billion. In other words the calculation that someone made of this being equal to US$20 billion is off as the US has a different billion to the UK, so at least I have always understood that. Apparently the US billion is a thousand million and the other billion a million million.
The average household, ranging from a single older person to a group of students, is throwing out £420 of such food each year and the sum rises to £610 for the average family with children.
About £6bn of the wasted annual food budget is food that is bought but never touched - including 13m unopened yoghurt pots, 5,500 chickens and 440,000 ready meals dumped in home rubbish bins each day. The rest is food prepared or cooked for meals but never eaten because people have misjudged how much was needed and don't eat the leftovers.
Well, I guess I must be one of the odd ones out, as very little gets thrown out; at least not into the trash can. The important thing is to make sure that one;'s food is in date and rotate supplies, be those cans or other stuff.
Leftovers, if perfectly good, goes in the frigde and is used next day. Cans the contents of which has only been used half, say, also can be saved in that one uses food saver containers and, again, keeps the stuff in the fridge till the next day.
The problem is though that most people cannot cook from scratch anymore, at least not in this country, that is to say in Britain, and either entirely rely on ready to do meals or such. And even if they cook from scratch they just cannot think of what to do with leftovers. Children turn their noses up at something cooked from leftovers but there is nothing wrong with it and if the person doing the cooking has imagination and flair in cooking and often all that is needed is just a little then nice meals can be made from such leftovers.
The complete £10bn consists of food that could have been eaten, not including peeling and bones, the researchers say. Tackling the waste could mean a huge reduction in CO2 emissions, equivalent to taking one in five cars off the road.
The figures have been compiled by WRAP, the Waste and Resources Action Programme, which previously made the £8bn estimate and has warned we are throwing away a third of the food we buy, enough to fill Wembley stadium with food waste eight times over in a year.
Food waste has a significant environmental impact, and that not only from having to go somewhere. The research confirms that it is an issue for us all, whether as consumers, retailers, local or central government. This will, I believe, spark, and so it should, a major debate about the way food is packaged, sold, stored at home, cooked and then collected when it is thrown out.
While I have just mentioned the way food is packaged the food packaging here as waste, is and was not even the issue, but could also be mentioned when it comes to waste per se. That, however, could be another story all together.
What is most shocking here the most is the cost of our food waste at a time of rising food bills, and generally a tighter pull on our purse strings. It highlights that this is an economic and social issue as well as how much we understand the value of our food.
Consumers' wastefulness is costing them three times over. Not only do they pay hard-earned money for food they do not eat, there is also the cost of dealing with the waste this creates, and they pay for that through their council taxes and such. Then there are climate change costs to all of us of growing, processing, packaging, transporting, and refrigerating food that only ends up in the bin.
In addition to that there is the ethical bit, so to speak. We waste tons and tons of food daily while there are 1,000s upon 1,000s in this country and elsewhere in the developed world – I do not even want to mention the poor in the developing world, the are I still call Third World – who go hungry. I must say that I, like probably many of my generation, was raised with the adage of not wasting food, whether on the plate or elsewhere. Being of Romani-Gypsy stock may have something to do with that too as food was not always plenty.
When it comes to food waste though and it having to be dumped it is time to start thinking seriously about municipal composting programs like those in Mexico, Seattle and San Francisco, and on an individual level we can all take responsibility by biting off only what we can chew - check out some of the helpful tips on everything from portion sizing to storage to using left overs at Love Food Hate Waste, the campaign that commissioned the original report.
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
We’ve already heard lots about the food crisis that is threatening global development, and we have had plenty of debate about how eating no meat, a little meat, fake meat and even the plain old potato might help ease global hunger, stop global warming, and generally make life easier for all of us. But let’s forget about what we do eat for a moment – a new report coming out of the UK shows the staggering costs of what we don’t eat:
The British people are throwing away £10 billion worth of food that could be eaten each year, £2bn more than estimates have previously suggested, a government-funded programme to cut waste has revealed.
And that folks, is ten billion Pounds Sterling as in British billion and not US billion. In other words the calculation that someone made of this being equal to US$20 billion is off as the US has a different billion to the UK, so at least I have always understood that. Apparently the US billion is a thousand million and the other billion a million million.
The average household, ranging from a single older person to a group of students, is throwing out £420 of such food each year and the sum rises to £610 for the average family with children.
About £6bn of the wasted annual food budget is food that is bought but never touched - including 13m unopened yoghurt pots, 5,500 chickens and 440,000 ready meals dumped in home rubbish bins each day. The rest is food prepared or cooked for meals but never eaten because people have misjudged how much was needed and don't eat the leftovers.
Well, I guess I must be one of the odd ones out, as very little gets thrown out; at least not into the trash can. The important thing is to make sure that one;'s food is in date and rotate supplies, be those cans or other stuff.
Leftovers, if perfectly good, goes in the frigde and is used next day. Cans the contents of which has only been used half, say, also can be saved in that one uses food saver containers and, again, keeps the stuff in the fridge till the next day.
The problem is though that most people cannot cook from scratch anymore, at least not in this country, that is to say in Britain, and either entirely rely on ready to do meals or such. And even if they cook from scratch they just cannot think of what to do with leftovers. Children turn their noses up at something cooked from leftovers but there is nothing wrong with it and if the person doing the cooking has imagination and flair in cooking and often all that is needed is just a little then nice meals can be made from such leftovers.
The complete £10bn consists of food that could have been eaten, not including peeling and bones, the researchers say. Tackling the waste could mean a huge reduction in CO2 emissions, equivalent to taking one in five cars off the road.
The figures have been compiled by WRAP, the Waste and Resources Action Programme, which previously made the £8bn estimate and has warned we are throwing away a third of the food we buy, enough to fill Wembley stadium with food waste eight times over in a year.
Food waste has a significant environmental impact, and that not only from having to go somewhere. The research confirms that it is an issue for us all, whether as consumers, retailers, local or central government. This will, I believe, spark, and so it should, a major debate about the way food is packaged, sold, stored at home, cooked and then collected when it is thrown out.
While I have just mentioned the way food is packaged the food packaging here as waste, is and was not even the issue, but could also be mentioned when it comes to waste per se. That, however, could be another story all together.
What is most shocking here the most is the cost of our food waste at a time of rising food bills, and generally a tighter pull on our purse strings. It highlights that this is an economic and social issue as well as how much we understand the value of our food.
Consumers' wastefulness is costing them three times over. Not only do they pay hard-earned money for food they do not eat, there is also the cost of dealing with the waste this creates, and they pay for that through their council taxes and such. Then there are climate change costs to all of us of growing, processing, packaging, transporting, and refrigerating food that only ends up in the bin.
In addition to that there is the ethical bit, so to speak. We waste tons and tons of food daily while there are 1,000s upon 1,000s in this country and elsewhere in the developed world – I do not even want to mention the poor in the developing world, the are I still call Third World – who go hungry. I must say that I, like probably many of my generation, was raised with the adage of not wasting food, whether on the plate or elsewhere. Being of Romani-Gypsy stock may have something to do with that too as food was not always plenty.
When it comes to food waste though and it having to be dumped it is time to start thinking seriously about municipal composting programs like those in Mexico, Seattle and San Francisco, and on an individual level we can all take responsibility by biting off only what we can chew - check out some of the helpful tips on everything from portion sizing to storage to using left overs at Love Food Hate Waste, the campaign that commissioned the original report.
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
Kantha Collection Released by Rising Tide Fair Trade
Unbeknown to, I am sure, many of us, Fair trade company, Rising Tide Fair Trade, introduces artisan-made kantha quilt bags to the U.S. with the debut of its Spring line, in NYC in Februart 2008.
Rising Tide Fair Trade (RTFT), distributors of fair trade fashion to the U.S.A., on the 20th February announced the release of its signature kantha collection – a limited edition line of carryall bags hand-crafted from vibrant vintage Indian quilts and cruelty-free dark brown suede.
Each bag is an original, designed exclusively for RTFT under the direction of company co-founders, Virginia Dooley and Nicole Jones. The cotton kantha textiles are sourced from a fair trade womens’cooperative in West Bengal, where the bags are all hand-crafted. Kantha artisans earn a living wage to support their families. RTFT individually chose each quilt for the collection from the cooperative’s wares.
The finished product, a combination of vibrantly colored floral and geometric patterns woven together with the finest kantha embroidery, embodies the adventurous spirit and stylish sensibility that puts Rising Tide at the forefront of the American fair trade marketplace.
“Nicole and I want fashionable women to realize the impact of the purchases they make. In the past, environmentally and socially conscious fashion meant traditional handicrafts, burlap and Birks. We created Rising Tide to help integrate fair trade fashion into the main stream, so modern women can embrace a people and planet friendly lifestyle and great style.”
Each kantha bags measures H 12” x W 20” x D 8”. Two 12” cruelty-free suede straps fit easily over the shoulder. The bags retails at $220.
Dooley and Jones plan to expand their line of limited edition bags by rolling out seasonal collections based on specialized textiles native to specific global regions. Plans for lines featuring fabrics of Uzbekistan, Cambodia, Senegal, and Bolivia are already in the works.
The Kantha collection is available on line at www.rtfairtrade.com.
In Bengal any garment or cloth with kantha embroidery, a running stitch which forms or outlines decorative motifs, is dubbed a kantha garment. Kantha is prevalent on saris in Bengal where women wrap themselves in decorative fabrics with its intricate embroidery. The stitching is also used in simple quilts for daily use. Women in Bengal often compile old saris and cloths and layer them with kantha stitch to make a light blanket or throw, especially for children. Also known as “rilli” (derived from the local word meaning to mix or connect) kantha quilts are often collected as a status of wealth and used for a daughter’s dowry.
Rising Tide Fair Trade was founded in 2004 by Virginia Dooley and Nicole Jones, two friends united by an obsession with exotic textiles and a belief that fashion and sustainability should go hand in hand.
Dooley and Jones realized their common interest while studying together in London, where they were inspired by the prevalence of fair trade goods in the U.K. and the lack of such products in the States. Determined to fill a hole they saw in the U.S. market and to disseminate fair trade labor practices to mainstream shoppers, the friends launched Rising Tide in June 2004. After testing a variety of clothing and accessories, Dooley and Jones decided to feature weekend bags as their signature item.
All Rising Tide bags are made with the highest quality craftsmanship and most eye-catching raw and recycled materials available from fair trade cooperatives across the globe. No two pieces are the same. Call or visit their website for more information, www.rtfairtrade.com
Rising Tide Fair Trade (RTFT), distributors of fair trade fashion to the U.S.A., on the 20th February announced the release of its signature kantha collection – a limited edition line of carryall bags hand-crafted from vibrant vintage Indian quilts and cruelty-free dark brown suede.
Each bag is an original, designed exclusively for RTFT under the direction of company co-founders, Virginia Dooley and Nicole Jones. The cotton kantha textiles are sourced from a fair trade womens’cooperative in West Bengal, where the bags are all hand-crafted. Kantha artisans earn a living wage to support their families. RTFT individually chose each quilt for the collection from the cooperative’s wares.
The finished product, a combination of vibrantly colored floral and geometric patterns woven together with the finest kantha embroidery, embodies the adventurous spirit and stylish sensibility that puts Rising Tide at the forefront of the American fair trade marketplace.
“Nicole and I want fashionable women to realize the impact of the purchases they make. In the past, environmentally and socially conscious fashion meant traditional handicrafts, burlap and Birks. We created Rising Tide to help integrate fair trade fashion into the main stream, so modern women can embrace a people and planet friendly lifestyle and great style.”
Each kantha bags measures H 12” x W 20” x D 8”. Two 12” cruelty-free suede straps fit easily over the shoulder. The bags retails at $220.
Dooley and Jones plan to expand their line of limited edition bags by rolling out seasonal collections based on specialized textiles native to specific global regions. Plans for lines featuring fabrics of Uzbekistan, Cambodia, Senegal, and Bolivia are already in the works.
The Kantha collection is available on line at www.rtfairtrade.com.
In Bengal any garment or cloth with kantha embroidery, a running stitch which forms or outlines decorative motifs, is dubbed a kantha garment. Kantha is prevalent on saris in Bengal where women wrap themselves in decorative fabrics with its intricate embroidery. The stitching is also used in simple quilts for daily use. Women in Bengal often compile old saris and cloths and layer them with kantha stitch to make a light blanket or throw, especially for children. Also known as “rilli” (derived from the local word meaning to mix or connect) kantha quilts are often collected as a status of wealth and used for a daughter’s dowry.
Rising Tide Fair Trade was founded in 2004 by Virginia Dooley and Nicole Jones, two friends united by an obsession with exotic textiles and a belief that fashion and sustainability should go hand in hand.
Dooley and Jones realized their common interest while studying together in London, where they were inspired by the prevalence of fair trade goods in the U.K. and the lack of such products in the States. Determined to fill a hole they saw in the U.S. market and to disseminate fair trade labor practices to mainstream shoppers, the friends launched Rising Tide in June 2004. After testing a variety of clothing and accessories, Dooley and Jones decided to feature weekend bags as their signature item.
All Rising Tide bags are made with the highest quality craftsmanship and most eye-catching raw and recycled materials available from fair trade cooperatives across the globe. No two pieces are the same. Call or visit their website for more information, www.rtfairtrade.com
Bluetooth: A Danger to Privacy
Bluetooth leaves you open to intercept by anyone
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
If you are concerned about your civil liberties and privacy then it may come as a shock to you to discover that you may have, unwittingly, been allowing your phone to signal your every move to the great wide world, including your communications.
Bluetooth, which is, as most will know, a wireless link built into many mobile telephones, makes our movements trackable by anyone equipped with a PC and an appropriate receiver. And this means ANYONE, not just the security services and the police, if that would not already be bad enough. Anyone, as the word says, can listen in and track where you are if they have the right equipment.
Vassilis Kostakos at the University of Bath in the UK placed four Bluetooth receivers in the city's centre. Over four months, his team tracked 10,000 Bluetooth phones and was able to "capture and analyse people's encounters" in pubs, streets and shops.
Bluetooth is now more of a privacy threat than the more frequently publicised RFID chips, Kostakos says. "If people are worried, they should turn off the Bluetooth function on their mobile phones."
Not everything, as we can, yet again see, that is supposedly good for us, is so.
“Oh, but without my 'Bluetooth' I cannot make phone calls on the move”, I hear some complain. “Can we not just make those things safer?”
Well, we probably could and could add encryption, if you, the consumer, is willing to pay the high costs then.
What is wrong with safely stopping your car, motorbike or your bicycle, to take or make that call? Also, no call is that important that it cannot wait until you get to a safe location where to return the call or make a call.
If you are concerned about your privacy, as said, turn the Bluetooth function off. While it may be something that can and does make life easier it also, yet again, is something that can be used to invade our privacy and to spy on us.
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
If you are concerned about your civil liberties and privacy then it may come as a shock to you to discover that you may have, unwittingly, been allowing your phone to signal your every move to the great wide world, including your communications.
Bluetooth, which is, as most will know, a wireless link built into many mobile telephones, makes our movements trackable by anyone equipped with a PC and an appropriate receiver. And this means ANYONE, not just the security services and the police, if that would not already be bad enough. Anyone, as the word says, can listen in and track where you are if they have the right equipment.
Vassilis Kostakos at the University of Bath in the UK placed four Bluetooth receivers in the city's centre. Over four months, his team tracked 10,000 Bluetooth phones and was able to "capture and analyse people's encounters" in pubs, streets and shops.
Bluetooth is now more of a privacy threat than the more frequently publicised RFID chips, Kostakos says. "If people are worried, they should turn off the Bluetooth function on their mobile phones."
Not everything, as we can, yet again see, that is supposedly good for us, is so.
“Oh, but without my 'Bluetooth' I cannot make phone calls on the move”, I hear some complain. “Can we not just make those things safer?”
Well, we probably could and could add encryption, if you, the consumer, is willing to pay the high costs then.
What is wrong with safely stopping your car, motorbike or your bicycle, to take or make that call? Also, no call is that important that it cannot wait until you get to a safe location where to return the call or make a call.
If you are concerned about your privacy, as said, turn the Bluetooth function off. While it may be something that can and does make life easier it also, yet again, is something that can be used to invade our privacy and to spy on us.
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
Downsizing from Tractors to Camels
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
The world is finally, even in the developing world, waking up; in Rajastan, India, at least.
There farmers are giving up on their gas- and diesel-guzzling tractors and are returning to using their trusty camels for haulage again, as they have done in times not so long ago.
Due to rising fuel prices farmers are rediscovering the "ships of the desert", and this is good too. Why they ever gave up the use of the camel for haulage is a question that can only be answered by them, but I would assume that they encountered the kind of salesman that can sell refrigerators and freezers to the Eskimos.
The price of a good camel has gone up sharply as a result: two years ago camels, good camels, were almost the same price as goats, now they are three times the price.
A good male camel will live for 60 to 80 years and costs about £500.00 while the cheapest tractor is £2,500.
This is good news according to the League for Pastoral Peoples and Endogenous Livestock Development because the camel population has been falling over the past ten years and this could lead to a revival of this age-old usage. So, let's hear it for the camel!
Camels have a long and regal history in India. They were, traditionally, used by Maharajahs and had great status and so did their breeders. Now decreasing amounts of grazing land and lack of investment in the existing lands have resulted in inadequate nutrition and lowered the resilience of the herds. Camel slaughter is forbidden in India but in fact sources believe that it is rampant, with the meat exported to Bangladesh. Not only is the use of camels being promoted but also its by-products such as camel milk, camel leather handbags and camel bone jewellery.
Well, this is in Rajastan, India. What about the Arab countries for camels and some of our countries, such as the USA, the UK, and countries in the EU for horses, mules and donkeys, once again?
The Amish in the USA still use the horse and many of their farms and businesses are, in their way, far more productive than many of the modern ones. In the UK in a number of areas the horse is making a comeback as a foresters timber moving animal and its use is beginning to spread. While a horse, alas, does not live as long as a camel, it nevertheless, I am sure, beats a tractor in acquisition and running costs.
Fair enough, you do not have the power of a tractor, but then you neither have the noise, the cost of fuel and maintenance – not that a horse may not need the vet or the farrier at times and neither of them are cheap – and neither the other associated problems you have with running a motor vehicle.
In Egypt and some other countries thereabouts the donkey is still in use as a means of haulage and in some of the new EU member states so is the horse, and not just by the Romani People in those countries. In Poland in the rural districts the horse and wagon are still a normal sight and they can even, at certain days, be found in the larger towns.
This might be something that we all should look at again. We also must not forget the ox and the bullock and others...
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
The world is finally, even in the developing world, waking up; in Rajastan, India, at least.
There farmers are giving up on their gas- and diesel-guzzling tractors and are returning to using their trusty camels for haulage again, as they have done in times not so long ago.
Due to rising fuel prices farmers are rediscovering the "ships of the desert", and this is good too. Why they ever gave up the use of the camel for haulage is a question that can only be answered by them, but I would assume that they encountered the kind of salesman that can sell refrigerators and freezers to the Eskimos.
The price of a good camel has gone up sharply as a result: two years ago camels, good camels, were almost the same price as goats, now they are three times the price.
A good male camel will live for 60 to 80 years and costs about £500.00 while the cheapest tractor is £2,500.
This is good news according to the League for Pastoral Peoples and Endogenous Livestock Development because the camel population has been falling over the past ten years and this could lead to a revival of this age-old usage. So, let's hear it for the camel!
Camels have a long and regal history in India. They were, traditionally, used by Maharajahs and had great status and so did their breeders. Now decreasing amounts of grazing land and lack of investment in the existing lands have resulted in inadequate nutrition and lowered the resilience of the herds. Camel slaughter is forbidden in India but in fact sources believe that it is rampant, with the meat exported to Bangladesh. Not only is the use of camels being promoted but also its by-products such as camel milk, camel leather handbags and camel bone jewellery.
Well, this is in Rajastan, India. What about the Arab countries for camels and some of our countries, such as the USA, the UK, and countries in the EU for horses, mules and donkeys, once again?
The Amish in the USA still use the horse and many of their farms and businesses are, in their way, far more productive than many of the modern ones. In the UK in a number of areas the horse is making a comeback as a foresters timber moving animal and its use is beginning to spread. While a horse, alas, does not live as long as a camel, it nevertheless, I am sure, beats a tractor in acquisition and running costs.
Fair enough, you do not have the power of a tractor, but then you neither have the noise, the cost of fuel and maintenance – not that a horse may not need the vet or the farrier at times and neither of them are cheap – and neither the other associated problems you have with running a motor vehicle.
In Egypt and some other countries thereabouts the donkey is still in use as a means of haulage and in some of the new EU member states so is the horse, and not just by the Romani People in those countries. In Poland in the rural districts the horse and wagon are still a normal sight and they can even, at certain days, be found in the larger towns.
This might be something that we all should look at again. We also must not forget the ox and the bullock and others...
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
British Police out of control?
British cops get away with murder – literally!
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
First – well, was it the first one? – we have Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005, just after 7/7 and the other aborted attempt of suicide bombs in London some weeks later, who was gunned down by armed police officer of the anti-terrorist unit mistaken for a terrorist. The question here is as to whether that actually were cops and not SAS men. The entire operation had the signature of security services and SAS all over it.
And then we have had in 2006 the murder of the Nigerian businessman Frank Ogboru, 43, in London on holiday, who was sprayed with CS gas and pinned down after a minor row. Witnesses said officers had their "knees and feet'' on him as he "wailed like a dog".
But the CPS decided there was insufficient evidence" for any officers to be charged in connection with the death in Woolwich in 2006. What a surprise – NOT!
In both cases the cops got away scott free with killing someone. In the latter instance the CPS has decided NOT to press charged despite all the CCTV video and other evidence that clearly the police officers were extremely heavy handed and that their action directly contributed to the death of the person.
A pathologist even gave: “asphyxia during restraint" as the cause of death but the CPS decided "a jury would find that the restraint was not unlawful”. How come the CPS knows what or what not a jury would find unless the judge would, as is so often the case in court cases in this country, instruct the jury that they must find this way or that and cannot find any other way.
Then again, we all know that British Justice is the best that money can buy, if you have the money, that is.
Are cops in Britain now above the law?
Theoretically they are not and should not be but the more of this that we are seeing the more we must ask the question as to whether they – one – think that they are above the lay and – two – whether, somewhere along the line they are made more and more to be above the law.
I remember years ago already cops that we still rather wet behind the ears banding about comments like “I am the law”, also to yours truly, upon which I informed one officer of the truth with the comments “No, officer, you are NOT the law. You are but a law enforcement officer”. But the attitude was creeping in then in the late 1970's but it may have been there already, though I remember old officers who never seem to have had that attitude. Now, though, it would seem that even the highest officers have the attitude that they are above the law and, again and again, it seems to be borne out by the fact that no actions are taken even when it is truly murder or at least manslaughter.
Methinks it is high time that the law makers and the public, through their elected bodies and otherwise, put a stop to the abuse of power by the police. The abuse of power and powers that they do not have and should not have either. The actions during the Olympic torch relay in London as well showed this heavy-handedness that has become the common culture and currency in the police services across the UK, it would appear. Some of our police, and other agencies, are beginning to act like those agencies in countries with repressive regimes and which we, including our politicians – at times, rightly condemn. We have begun to head down a very slippery slope towards a police state. The surveillance state we already have and are, considering that the UK has more CCTV cameras per head of population than any other European country. Not something that we should be proud of, especially since it has made not one iota of a difference, a fact even admitted by police forces up and down the country, in fighting crime and deterring it. So much for the great hype.
Now the Independent Police Complaints Commission will decide on whether action should be taken in respect of the officers involved in the manslaughter or even murder of Frank Ogboru. The very same commission that basically found that no one was responsible for the murder of the Brazilian electrician at Stockwell Tube station. A whitewash and a farce is all that that is going to be, yet again. It is time, I should think, that one might examine actually as to how independent the Independent Police Complaints Commission actually is.
Many question, I think, but I doubt that we will ever get honest answers.
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
First – well, was it the first one? – we have Jean Charles de Menezes in 2005, just after 7/7 and the other aborted attempt of suicide bombs in London some weeks later, who was gunned down by armed police officer of the anti-terrorist unit mistaken for a terrorist. The question here is as to whether that actually were cops and not SAS men. The entire operation had the signature of security services and SAS all over it.
And then we have had in 2006 the murder of the Nigerian businessman Frank Ogboru, 43, in London on holiday, who was sprayed with CS gas and pinned down after a minor row. Witnesses said officers had their "knees and feet'' on him as he "wailed like a dog".
But the CPS decided there was insufficient evidence" for any officers to be charged in connection with the death in Woolwich in 2006. What a surprise – NOT!
In both cases the cops got away scott free with killing someone. In the latter instance the CPS has decided NOT to press charged despite all the CCTV video and other evidence that clearly the police officers were extremely heavy handed and that their action directly contributed to the death of the person.
A pathologist even gave: “asphyxia during restraint" as the cause of death but the CPS decided "a jury would find that the restraint was not unlawful”. How come the CPS knows what or what not a jury would find unless the judge would, as is so often the case in court cases in this country, instruct the jury that they must find this way or that and cannot find any other way.
Then again, we all know that British Justice is the best that money can buy, if you have the money, that is.
Are cops in Britain now above the law?
Theoretically they are not and should not be but the more of this that we are seeing the more we must ask the question as to whether they – one – think that they are above the lay and – two – whether, somewhere along the line they are made more and more to be above the law.
I remember years ago already cops that we still rather wet behind the ears banding about comments like “I am the law”, also to yours truly, upon which I informed one officer of the truth with the comments “No, officer, you are NOT the law. You are but a law enforcement officer”. But the attitude was creeping in then in the late 1970's but it may have been there already, though I remember old officers who never seem to have had that attitude. Now, though, it would seem that even the highest officers have the attitude that they are above the law and, again and again, it seems to be borne out by the fact that no actions are taken even when it is truly murder or at least manslaughter.
Methinks it is high time that the law makers and the public, through their elected bodies and otherwise, put a stop to the abuse of power by the police. The abuse of power and powers that they do not have and should not have either. The actions during the Olympic torch relay in London as well showed this heavy-handedness that has become the common culture and currency in the police services across the UK, it would appear. Some of our police, and other agencies, are beginning to act like those agencies in countries with repressive regimes and which we, including our politicians – at times, rightly condemn. We have begun to head down a very slippery slope towards a police state. The surveillance state we already have and are, considering that the UK has more CCTV cameras per head of population than any other European country. Not something that we should be proud of, especially since it has made not one iota of a difference, a fact even admitted by police forces up and down the country, in fighting crime and deterring it. So much for the great hype.
Now the Independent Police Complaints Commission will decide on whether action should be taken in respect of the officers involved in the manslaughter or even murder of Frank Ogboru. The very same commission that basically found that no one was responsible for the murder of the Brazilian electrician at Stockwell Tube station. A whitewash and a farce is all that that is going to be, yet again. It is time, I should think, that one might examine actually as to how independent the Independent Police Complaints Commission actually is.
Many question, I think, but I doubt that we will ever get honest answers.
© M Smith (Veshengro), May 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
