Thanks to Jo Abbess of the Campaign Against Climate Change for pointing this out. While Gore hits a few duff notes, in his central argument he's bang on the money. The scientific case for action is urgent. The sooner the West decarbonises its economy the better, for our security and for our fragile economies - balanced precipitously as they are on an unsustainable source of energy. And a single thread runs through and connects these fundamental crises. This is a global problem, and requires a global solution - but it is precisely by taking a strident lead, as Gore points out, that the West can create the conditions in which others will be willing to join us. Compelling stuff.

Here’s how the Independent sums up the UN’s State of the Future report, due to be published late this month, and which is “[b]acked by organisations ranging from Unesco to the US army, the World Bank to the Rockefeller Foundation”:

“Humanity stands on the threshold of a peaceful and prosperous future, with an unprecedented ability to extend lifespans and increase the power of ordinary people – but is likely to blow it through inequality, violence and environmental degradation. And governments are not equipped to ensure that the opportunities are seized and disasters averted. ...

““The future continues to get better for most of the world,” it concludes, “but a series of tipping points could drastically alter global prospects.” ...

“But the report’s authors say that governments are not up to the job: “Many of the world’s decision-making processes are inefficient, slow and ill-informed, especially when given the new demands from increasing complexity [and] globalisation.” They call on world leaders to do more long-term planning, and to join in global approaches to the interlocking crises. “Climate change cannot be turned around without a global strategy. International organised crime cannot be stopped without a global strategy. Individuals creating designer diseases and causing massive deaths cannot be stopped without a global strategy. It is time for global strategic systems to be upgraded.””

If this report details half of what the Independent says it does, the outlook is very grim, on issues from availability of food and water to nuclear proliferation, terrorism, climate change, war and poverty (indeed the paper’s choice of headline for the story is rather baffling in this respect). And yet, this comes at a time when we have the capacity to implement the kind of changes necessary to bring about a far more just and decent form of life for humanity. Unfortunately, this is very far from being assured, or even likely: all that is required to produce the conditions for a genuine global catastrophe is that we continue on our present course.

“Since 9/11, and particularly 7/7, the BNP has gone all out to tap a rich vein of anti-Muslim sentiment. The party’s leader, Nick Griffin, has described Islam as a “wicked, vicious faith” and has tried to distance himself and the party from its anti-Semitic past. Party members are now rebuked for discussing the Holocaust and told to focus on terrorism, the evils of Islam, and scare stories of Britain becoming an Islamic state.

“Griffin’s strategy has been inspired by the press. He said: “We bang on about Islam. Why? Because to the ordinary public out there it’s the thing they can understand. It’s the thing the newspaper editors sell newspapers with.”

The above is from Peter Oborne’s excellent article on the mainstreaming of Islamophobia in Friday’s Independent. Well worth a read.

At last - someone’s prepared to talk some sense on the shape-shifting Nazi lizard conspiracy responsible for climate change. It’s about time, say I.

“Uniformly, Afghans and Somalis were interested in a candidate that would bring an end to the conflict in their respective countries. The majority of respondents demonstrated overriding concern with a change in the US “War on Terror” policies as a route to peace.”

It’s pretty clear, it’s pretty consistent, and no-one seems to want to talk about it. Except this crazy guy: