Belize - Belize News - Channel5Belize.com - Great Belize Productions - Belize Breaking News
Home » Commentary, Featured » To drill or not to drill in the Sarstoon Temash National Park! Viewers comment
Feb 11, 2011

To drill or not to drill in the Sarstoon Temash National Park! Viewers comment

To drill or not to drill in the Sarstoon Temash National Park? In response to Thursday night’s question, sixty-nine percent of viewers believe it would be illegal for GOB to allow the US Company, Capital Energy, to drill for oil in the protected area because of a court ruling. The remaining thirty-one percent of voters said no while others shared their thoughts on our blog. On viewer responded that: “It is not a matter of legality but more a matter of “is it the right thing to do”. If this oil exploration will leave us exactly where we are… then I don’t see why we need to destroy our reserves.”

Be Sociable, Share!


Viewers please note: This Internet newscast is a verbatim transcript of our evening television newscast. Where speakers use Kriol, we attempt to faithfully reproduce the quotes using a standard spelling system.

Advertise Here

11 Responses for “To drill or not to drill in the Sarstoon Temash National Park! Viewers comment”

  1. The People Had Enough says:

    It is all about the money, it will always be about the money; the money that is the power of worlds elites, the money that is the tool for them to control and profit from the worlds resources; people in Belize have no clue as to the BIG PICTURE, THE REAL WORLDWIDE, INTERLINKED, BIG PICTURE. All we see that is happening in Belize is all smoke and mirrors, keep the masses dumb down and confused, quibbling about the insignificant, while the architects of world domination of all natural resources pull the strings that is connected to the bodies of all our politicians. OPEN YOUR EYES, OPEN YOUR EYES, OPEN YOUR EYES.

    Here is an interesting article in The Economist; for those of us who actually read things outside of Belize:

    “YOU can do nothing against a conspiracy theory,” sighs Etienne Davignon. He sits in a lofty office with a stupendous view over Brussels, puffing his pipe. He is an aristocrat, a former vice-president of the European Commission and a man who has sat on several corporate boards, but that is not why some people consider him too powerful. He presides over the Bilderberg group, an evil conspiracy bent on world domination. At least, that is what numerous websites allege; also that it has ties to al-Qaeda, is hiding the cure for cancer and wishes to merge the United States with Mexico.

    In reality, Bilderberg is an annual conference for a few dozen of the world’s most influential people. Last year Bill Gates and Larry Summers hobnobbed with the chairman of Deutsche Bank, the boss of Shell, the head of the World Food Programme and the prime minister of Spain. One or two journalists are invited each year, on condition that they abstain from writing about it. (Full disclosure: the editor of The Economist sometimes attends.)

    Because the meetings are off the record, they are catnip to conspiracy theorists. But the attraction for participants is obvious. They can speak candidly, says Mr Davignon, without worrying how their words might play in tomorrow’s headlines. So they find out what other influential people really think. Big ideas are debated frankly. Mr Davignon credits the meetings for helping to lay the groundwork for creating the euro. He recalls strong disagreement over Iraq: some participants favoured the invasion in 2003, some opposed it and some wanted it done differently. Last year the debate was about Europe’s fiscal problems, and whether the euro would survive.

    The world is a complicated place, with oceans of new information sloshing around. To run a multinational organisation, it helps if you have a rough idea of what is going on. It also helps to be on first-name terms with other globocrats. So the cosmopolitan elite—international financiers, bureaucrats, charity bosses and thinkers—constantly meet and talk. They flock to elite gatherings such as the World Economic Forum at Davos, the Trilateral Commission and the Boao meeting in China. They form clubs. Ethnic Indian entrepreneurs around the world join TiE (The Indus Enterprise). Movers and shakers in New York and Washington join the Council on Foreign Relations, where they can listen to the president of Turkey one week and the chief executive of Intel the next. The world’s richest man, Carlos Slim, a Mexican telecoms tycoon, hosts an annual gathering of Latin American billionaires who cultivate each other while ostensibly discussing regional poverty.

    Davos is perhaps the glitziest of these globocratic gatherings. Hundreds of big wheels descend on the Swiss ski resort each year. The lectures are interesting, but the big draw is the chance to talk to other powerful people in the corridors. Such chats sometimes yield results. In 1988 the prime ministers of Turkey and Greece met at Davos and signed a declaration that may have averted a war. In 1994 Shimon Peres, then Israel’s foreign minister, and Yasser Arafat struck a deal over Gaza and Jericho. In 2003 Jack Straw, Britain’s foreign secretary, had an informal meeting in his hotel suite with the president of Iran, a country with which Britain had no diplomatic ties. But Davos is hardly a secretive institution: it is crawling with journalists. The other globocratic shindigs are opening up, too. Even Bilderberg has recently started publishing lists of participants on its website.

    Some American organisations, such as foreign-policy think-tanks, are also well placed to exert global influence. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, for example, has established itself as one of the most globally trusted talking-shops, with offices in Beijing, Beirut, Brussels and Moscow, as well as Washington—though it has yet to fulfil the vision of its founder, Andrew Carnegie, who wanted it to abolish war. The key to wielding influence, says Jessica Mathews, Carnegie’s president, is “very simple. You hire the best people.”

    In countries where think-tanks are subservient to the state, such as China and Russia, foreign outfits such as Carnegie enjoy a reputation for independence. If they can back this up with useful knowledge, they can sway policy. For example, Carnegie scholars advised the authors of Russia’s post-Soviet constitution. And when relations between American and Russia grew frosty under President George W. Bush, Carnegie’s Moscow office helped keep a line of communication open between the two governments.

    Such meetings are “an important part of the story of the superclass”, says Mr Rothkopf, the author of the eponymous book. What they offer is access to “some of the world’s most sequestered and elusive leaders”. As such, they are one of “the informal mechanisms of [global] power”.

    Some globocrats think the importance of forums like Davos is overstated. Howard Stringer, the boss of Sony, is the kind of person you would expect to relish such gatherings. Welsh by birth, American by citizenship, he took over Japan’s most admired company in 2005, when it was in serious trouble, and turned it around in the face of immense cultural obstacles. He says he has enjoyed trips to Davos in the past but will not attend this year. He can learn more, he says, by listening to his 167,000 employees.

    On the face of it there seems much to be said for the world’s shakers and movers meeting and talking frequently. Yet for all their tireless information-swapping, globocrats were caught napping by the financial crisis. Their networks of contacts did throw up a few warnings, but not enough to prompt timely action.

    The limits of jaw-jaw

    Jim Chanos, a hedge-fund manager who made his first fortune betting that Enron was overvalued, warned the G8 finance ministers in April 2007 that banks and insurance firms were heading for trouble. He made another fortune when bank shares crashed, but is still furious that his warnings were politely ignored. He thinks it an outrage that several senior regulators from that period are still in positions of power. And he accuses some bankers of “a wholesale looting of the system” by paying themselves bonuses based on what they must have known were phantom profits. He thinks they should be prosecuted.

    Globocrats failed to avert the crisis, but they rallied once it struck. Rich-country governments acted in concert to prop up banks with taxpayers’ money. In America the response was led by a well-connected trio: Hank Paulson, George Bush junior’s treasury secretary and a former boss of Goldman Sachs; Tim Geithner, Barack Obama’s treasury secretary and a former boss of the New York Federal Reserve, as well as a veteran of the IMF, the Council on Foreign Relations and Kissinger Associates; and Ben Bernanke, of Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Princeton and the Bush White House, who is now chairman of the Federal Reserve. The bail-outs were unpopular everywhere, but may have prevented the world’s banking system from imploding.

    Governments are now trying to craft rules to prevent a recurrence. Lots of people have offered advice. Among the weightier contributions was a report from the Group of Thirty (G30), an informal collection of past and present central-bank governors. The Volcker Report, advocating a central clearing mechanism for derivatives trading and curbs on proprietary trading by banks, helped shape America’s Dodd-Frank financial-reform bill. The G30 is influential because it consists of people with experience of putting policies into practice, says Stuart Mackintosh, its director. So when it makes recommendations, they can be turned into action, he adds.”

    – Source: The Economist http://www.economist.com/node/17928993

  2. The People Had Enough says:

    According to the article : a cosmopolitan elite—international financiers, bureaucrats, charity bosses and thinkers—constantly meet and talk. They flock to elite gatherings such as the World Economic Forum at Davos, the Trilateral Commission and the Boao meeting in China. They form clubs. Still, if you question this, you are a tagged as a “conspiracy theorist” and therefore a nut job.

    To desire open, public debates between democratically elected officials is simply crazy. Either you accept undemocratic proceedings or you’re crazy. Are you crazy? Because if you have any concerns or opinions regarding what is happening, they are surely not rational. They are crazy-conspiracy-theorist-ramblings. That’s the underlying message of the article. I love those kinds of articles.

    Thank you Bilderberg-owned The Economist.

  3. reggie says:

    No Drilling in the Park.now you can see why the Pm had is wife fighting the Mayas.so he could sell out that area of land to the US Capitol for oil.the Pm have no heart about the Belizean People.He think only The Barrow must life happy.What he should be doing is to give the Maya people royalties from the Ruin .Stop the DEVIL PM From DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY.BELIZEAN AMERICAN WILL UNITE IN THE USA AND COME AND FIGHT ALONG WITH YOU GUYS,HOLD YOUR GROUNDS BELIZEAN,

  4. iqsheriff says:

    Someone always has a reason why the Maya in Toledo should stay poor. Unfortunately, the ones who fight every job opportunity that comes to the rural areas of Toledo District, do not live in thatch homes with dirt floors and ride the bus to town. They live in an air conditioned home, ride an air conditioned vehicle (donated to them from someone else) to fight these ‘selfish business prospects – in their one sided pursuit to keep the Maya in a cage of poverty.
    If the Maya want to be monkeys in a cage that survive on the peanuts that are tossed to them by the socially anointed who pretend to care for their well being, run the selfish business guys out of town. Haiti did it with 100% success!

  5. ivan cal says:

    for dean barrow its a case of ONLY money,money,money nothing else,money talks and bs walks’. so wat example is he giving our Nation of Belize if he same one is violating our constitution and LAWS? he is a treat to our coutry! we need to stand up fi we rights before its too late,enough is enough.

  6. must wanted says:

    some a we like money we no wan call name barrow

  7. must wanted says:

    enjoy it only two year left for you

  8. john says:

    mr. barow, no drill, or you have your own agenda for such drilling too.. like mr. heredia , ;’facelift for san pedro.” , .. NO DRILLING, why not drill infront of your porch, mr . barrow?

  9. Earl Grey says:

    LET’S NOT SELL OUR SOULS & future FOR A FEW DOLLARS……………

  10. kenrus says:

    It’s all about money, so far all the oil that have left Belize, where is the improvement in the country, why would the americans drill in our reserves, they don’t drill in theirs,do they?

  11. shock says:

    I like to see that someone has put some teeth into the Forum insteadof the one ant two liners, which is as a result of limited exposure which should be no excuse in these when serious research can be done on the Internet. Lets understand one thing, the world is not waiting on Belize; if Belizeans does not know how to leverage their natural resources someone elce will. But with all of the hoopla about independence and soveriegn Belize you all might be surprize to realize that in reality we are not independent, just like the new revelation that United States did not really got independence from Great Britain, neither is the Canadian, Australian, and Newzeland. Check it out folks, the information is in plain view on the Internet.

    The slight of hands that was done with United States is the difference between the United States Of America and Corporate United States of the Commonwealth of Verginia that is out side the Constitution of the United States of America. When the Brits got tired of the roncus about wanting to be independent they did the slight of hands and gave us the responsibility we wanted, like a parent who get tired of a child that want to leave the confines of their home. Lots are been discovered about how, and who runs the world, such as the significance between Westminister, city of London and Buckingham Palace. How about the Night Templers and other secret orders such as Skull and Bones and Free Mason. Great power are within these organization. much of the wars has to do with these power groups fighting over turf ,and hide the real facts with prapaganda away from the real reason.

    Its hard for many rational individuals to believe that one of these groups foster genecide such as the Rhowanda., Sierra Lion and many other African conflicts as the Biafra civil war in Nigeria many years ago, and they are still fanning the flames on the continent of Africa. Looking at the socio-economic situation in Belize that is the root cause of most of the violence between displaced black youths, and the govrnment lact of real consern, it could well be that the agenda of such a group is operating within the country with certain brain washing mind control that they are capable of using on unsuspected society. The sad reality is that Belize has some big socio-political battles to be fought as we try to find our way in a fast changing world. Unfortunately those who are aspiring to be leaders of the country is hardly ready to deal with the challanges at hand, consequently its the blind leading the blind.

    One parting shot about the Mexican been the richest man on the planet; don’t believe that nonsense. his wealth is chump change compare to others that are not for public knowledge.

Leave a Reply

CAPTCHA Image
*