Unfinished posts

Heh it is time to make the balance, I wonder what my first post for next year will bring. Actually perhaps that will be more interesting. It cheers me up to hear firewirks just now, i am not such a christian, i prefer to think about the future as a religious enterprise, all the time there have been fireworks, and at this moment it makes sense. So that should be a nice year, well it is somewhat, conflicts were limited to the results of ongoing occupations, and a few simmering ones, not the hyped masshypnosis of yet another attack.

I am a conflict person, being an antimilitarist you turn into a conflict specialist.
So where is the conflict? It seems pakistan turned huge on india, well it had plenty elections so shortly after the assasinations in the hotels, india.

I guess you can never tell.To me the pakistani worry that usia will march into south-east asia and china by faring war through india as proxy is overrated, but that they worry so much makes me think.

Essentially in pakistan a solution of kashmir that i would call non-commitment is surprisingly far to seek, perhaps the massive india machine is guilty to that.
Like i said in a previous post about mumbai the indian media fails to leave a affirming impression, bluntly put that says it's definetly less democratic then pakistan.The complaints about kashmir are in that sense also a modern complaint,
India is treating the muslim minority's influenced by the wars of terror. It fears that a militant muslim reaction in india could be violent and apparently it does more then you would like to witness to negate any, real or imagined.

Meanwhile i think the pakistani system, likely it's upper (financial) class, can't do without the distraction of india. Wich is partly caused because there is no pakistan yet that is not heavily affectionate with islam. As the strikes on afghanistan , irak and now northern pakistan are also perceived as attacks against muslims, (for example because they are), the political ways of pakistani politics are most diffuse. Given that a politician would make a secular islamic choice for example they stumble upon a reality that forces militairy excursions upon them.

So it is more integer to make a pro-islamic choice, but then you get settled with all the ancient machinery of control and indoctrination that goes with it to rather some extend, and in effect you form a distraction for both the national and the international unity.

So the people in charge tend to be the ones that think more secular, partly for historic reasons, pakistan has in many ways tried to set examples of being a modern state allways. More because the pragmatical reasons off money and power as a result.

Zardari is trying to take good care showing some reliance on musharaf in matters of souvereignity of state, but unfortunately he is less equiped to cope with the somewhat absurd flows of national sentiment in pakistan.

In a way it is funny they make such a show of their innocence, but it is also very fearsome. Pakistan is really of the opinion india is purposedly preparing her population for agression towards pakistan, and since they 'found out' (through mumbai), that the truth about pakistan doesn't count in india but that it is subject to a campaign of allegations, while being provocated into action over repression in kashmir perhaps, well i figure they fought, a warned man counts for two.

Anything else i spend the year with? Irak ofcourse, and obama, a few friends,some african affairs, maybe i should say something about kongo.

But what? this is already going on for years, my opinion about the affair is not flattering but i don't think even when history changes all of that opinion over what happened in the past changes. Southern africa is rather a postcolonial mess, incredibly so actually, angola is very poor, perhaps also because it was colonised by portugal , wich was a development nation itself untill the 1960's 70s', to european standards. Perhaps they should ask the chinese to set up farms:) one thing the chinese have experience with is bringing food production on an acceptable level.
Well i also know thx to al jazeera on what level that often happens, chinese farmers are a partly destute group to european standard.

Then again, so was portugal, greece etc. etc. etc. It's more that people don't know that then that the differences evrywhere have been so immense.

That development in china is an ongoing process is also a reality.

Myanmar and a few other standard targets of western propganda still more or less misbehave, but so do plenty other nations that are not criticised as rigourously.

The climate , or the weather, is something that fascinates me, its not so good, the industrial haze in the eveningsky's still turns what would be clouds into vapors
Yet the continued baking seems to have been altered more then i expected, i dont know what to think, perhaps saddams oil really cooled the climate. I would say there is better rain then there used to be some 5 years ago during the negative trend. Another explanation could be that human generated dust cools the planet by reflecting the sunlight, i used to see that have no appreciable influence on the incoming radiation at all, but in the longer run it may still show to happen. Still not satisfied with that radiation at least it feels safer then also being boiled off.

mh.
cheer up ppl.. now we have obama, we can change evrything, i can keep him for the newyear post i suppose. but he was a big thing this year, one would expect. sth to come out of the victory of respect over insult wouldn't one?

i have more unfinished posts:)

interview with mohammed

In the current political climate, and with the hajj going on, an interview with mohammed (Mo) is the ultimate interviewing experience for a blogger like me.

Me: Hello Muhammed, how are you ?
Mo: Fine, (smiles) how's your grass? my plants died.
Me: Well they are ok, what did you do?
Mo: They turned terribly yellow and died, after i gave them cows dung (loox puzzled).
Me: you must have given them a lot of cow dung?
Mo: i put them in a bucket full of it (looks reassuring)(1).

thx for the interview Mohammed!.

(1) 20-30% is enough

rare metal

Today or yesterday a convoy for afghanistan packing humvee's and militairy supply's was attacked succesfully by only 30 fighters. Like usually attacking the material dependency's of an oppressor makes a huge impression.

It made me wonder, i related (somewhat suddenly as i hadn't yet perceived that militairy need(1)) the nato trying to absorb georgia could well have a to do with the war in afghanistan.
Okay that seemed to make sense from a militairy pov. , but i didn't get the economics.
It would be so easy to think of a cheaper way to protect an oilpipeline, i just cudn't wholly get it.
So i wondered... uranium?? no there isn't in afghanistan, mining?? perhaps iridium lithium? , i assume there should be a little, but never heard it mention in the context. Except some primitive gemmining i may have never heard of any mining in afghanistan at all. Noone ever stressed in the discussions there would be huge quantities of even iron or anything, soo.. well i googled.

The first hit was very revealing, http://www.bgs.ac.uk/AfghanMinerals/mininfo.htm

Now that is an interesting geology, there is evrything, even lots of coal, gems, piles! more then i expected knowing what is extracted. And evrything else, rare earths, lithium, rare metals, gold, a pile of copper, iron, and....

surprise surprise.. yellow uranite.

k then. with so little populace i know what fortunes they are seeking now.
I suppose considering the geology that is supposed to be extremely fractured, the methods of excavation would tend to be disastrous (first rate and more second rate rare deposits in daymining ruins the landscape ) .. the lesser people, the lesser concern? Fascinating geology really.

(1) i did consider georgia a strategical nato investment (a militairy spending) , for the region yet had not identified an acute relation with afghanistan..

India (censory)

We have been reading about the shocking evets in mumbai for 4 days now. Nobody with some brains that did some research will deny india has been reporting completely inconsistent and even improbable events, including (several?) that didn't take place.

summing it up would be a lot of work, one example the nr of attackers has been named as: 100, 25, 38 (dont know where) 12, 10, 22, about 30, 100 or more, and 18 and 20.

The nr of dead 'gunmen' can be reconstructed as anything between 9-18. the nr of prisoners at 6 or 7 (unknown nationality) , 3("pakistani"), or 1 (status since yesterday)"pakistani" though the indians deal him 5 different names.
The 10 attacks are now 9 (the second "hospital" 'attack' being raised from the records).

There is nothing known about the circumstances of karkares (and 2 aides) death for
4 days now, although different indian statements suggest 'an attack in the policestation, or near the policestation or death in combat , the suspicion is he is actually murdered by the hindu militants.
(under the guise possibly and with suggestive foreknowledge of the attacks.)

Pakistanis think that is the matter, as they have a much larger record on hindu violence blamed on muslims in india, not in the least place with elections shortly.
Pakistani's on that line of thought aren't even sure the whole matter wasn't 1 of hindu militants.

then there is the matter of the nationality of the attackers, two of them spoke during the action and were recorded to the public. 1 probably an indian, native hindi speaker, that adressed the muslim rights in india, he actually appeared to be someone from a small village, that had needed to learn the words to represent his case.
so he went through political schooling (or so you want indoctrination, wich is inevitably connected), although the boy made rational points only (not much of the pbhm stuf etc.). The other person is rumoured to have had a pakistani(1) accent.

Then there is suggestive evidence english phones were on the guy's, the few publicly published photo's appear to show indians, though a witness described some (at taj) as 'whites' (suggesting more pale then the average pakistani to me), but for the man it appeared synonymous with pakistani. He was an indian national tho and a tad more brown then the average wellbeing pakistani with a manager job.

If he is sincere he could know. But i doubt he is very sincere. All the people gotten out of the hotels had been instructed not to tell certain things and details.

Ok i think i have made my point enough. the situation is very vague at best despite 4 days of international coverage, wich i think for the most part hopped dutily behind the indian official version. (without asking serious questions, or seriously investigating the several incidents (karkare))(1).


Now what does this tell us about india? Not much good, does it?
Considering the anti-pakistani stance one would guess hindu sentiments are abused in elections. The inherent denial of the own wrongdoings, paired with known hindu violence, supports that muslims in india hae a lot to complain. (so does participating journalism). It is not very obvious how many of these complaints relate to religious practice tho. My guess is that it is a mix, wich leaves the western side with india possibly. Since the mechanics of islam nations tend to be religiously coloured, if anything we want to modernise kashmir, and not traditioalise it, that should be obvious.

It's relevant that india is "in the western camp", pakistan also is , but the indian side has had and will have some preferential treatment.
Ok now what matters here is that bad media coverage is then not a good message,
it means the 'western(est)' side is spelling war.

okay.. with the secret involvement i suspect in the mumbai case itself, then this can also be analysed from the perspective it would be a preparation for a more hostile attitude. The completely ridiculous suggestion here is that all the nato-effort and pakistani manpower couldnt challenge the north pakistani community's, and they expect it to run better when india contributes.. operating from a set of provinces that are neigh to starting an outright violent struggle.

a costly experiment in militairy terms.(..)

This scenario is not as farfetched as it seems. So long as nato policy does not want to admit it's err's, it will try to find excuse from it.
What follows is that the perceived flaws and tactics of the afghans are projected on the like minority's that exist in pakistan and india. Single mindedly kashmir is perceived as a 'next terrorist reservoir' and probably in terms of information and control treated like that. wich means that the kashmiri focus in the indian nation is not apreciated and overlooked,(or failed to achieve even 1% support in 55 years).

the indian coverage is "100%" nationalist and plain (all the time the same pictures, (like israeli stations featured the baby jewish boy picture for almost whole 24 hours.)

The whole jewish building matter in this still smells. In essence i completely don't understand the police actions there, i am sorry to say that i would need way more convincing (and probably detailed) documentation before i can make anything of it.

The giant spectacle around that building can be 3 things, a serious indian attempt
to 'save jews', a serious indian(?) attempt not to save jews, just a huge spectacle.

How am i to tell, surely it is propagandistically exploited.
What happened to 'other' attackers?? not a single information, but from the hotels, or the jewish centre.

I still go with the hotels for my conclusions like in the first bit i wrote about this. The action on karkare is relatively surely a political murder, except the first attack on the station no other attacks have substantialised in the 100 plus articles i seen or read. Like i concluded in the second piece: Information that romantically still arrives i would regard with thorough distrust anyhow.

Third conclusion "on the international approaches", as long as the western public hasn't the power and persistence to question each and every detail of the situation it will have a negative impact on them. The origin of that is scattery, yet what stands out is the reason is weapons trade, euphemistically 'free trade', and in fact the disempowered masses having no say in their future.(capitalism aka fascism).

It shows us(the rich west) silly, but with indian and pakistani blood on our hands.
It also shows we will have to keep strong reservations to the indian policy's,
the indian establishment, i have seen it mentioned as "zio-hinduism" somewhere.

As it stands either the indians don't have their analyses round, or they support the west in the idea that a war on the muslims in and close to india will weaken their position for the indian government. I would call that "bloody naive".
Look at irak eg. or afghanistan,even palestine, lebanon, under stress and occupation muslims turn from 'completely religious' into 'extremely religious'.In extreme cases their actions for the most part stop making sense except as a bloody reminder.

A real muslim would make fun about that india exagerated the nr of attackers with 2, and 8 people sufficed to get the indian police to kill 50 of theirselves among with some 100 collateral hotel guests, Also that 5 of the attackers actually escaped (like in 9-11).4 of their names we know from the indian media.

But actually something else happened, and perhaps it was a sad carnage, like a respresaille against a village. sth. u'd expect in kongo, but i think also happened in irak and afghanistan, north pakistan. the whole instructing of guests and prolonged escaping suggest the indian police got footholds in the buidling rather quickly and found it impossible to hit much but indian guests during a lot of the operation, probably due to the small nr of attackers.(7).

If it is true the attackers went for a maximum lethal effect, obviously the indians did well in keeping the gunmen under pressure inside(?!) the building.(taj)

the oberon hotel event is even less clear. apparently 28 guests got killed, yet it is also described as a carnage, the nr of attackers is hard to reconstruct, but could then well be the offial nr of 3 or 4. It is not excempt the 3 disappeared, (inconvenient?) prisoners of doubtfull pakistani background came from here.

At least the effect there seems to not have been maximum lethality, the indians slowly blasted their way through each and every floor getting the 'gunmen' only at the top floor (they must have had a pile of gasmasks.)

in the jewish orthodox centre the attackers are supposed to have carried "100 kilo of chicken meat" so they can't have been with 3 it seems. (they were running in after dropping a bomb). The nr's of hostages there also makes no sense, it's either, 5 or 6,
(dead) or about 10-12 (during the event), unexplained how or why.
considering i don't think the indian account of the events is very credible, i almost feel as if upon me writing this, israel will raise the death figures, i would like to see pakistani, chinese, japanese, german, palestine and russian confirmation of the forensic events, i am quite convinced usian, yurpean, indian and their assorted allies confirmation i can get. Whatever the as yet inexistant 'whole story' they decide to go with.


i'll quiz into it a bit more,

(1) not without some doubts as to kashmir border region
(1) relevant is that the nr of KIA civil servants is high, over 40, this is also not represented in the coverage. I am under the impression that especially at the taj india was forced into action by foreign pressure.

Mumbai (attacks)

Allthough yesterday i tried to get what was happening from little information, trying to acces all was less of a help then you'd expect. However a few things cleared up.
The attack on the jewish centre eg. I now think it was possibly genuine, for two reasons mainly, the centre is a landmark building (i thought of it as some office annex guesthouse), and that it is not over yet, or at least not when the indians announced it. You would expect a violent rampage not to immediatly release any ultraorthodox jew they caught. So that story gained credibility.

Yet there is something wrong, with these attacks. For one thing contrary to alJ (and i assume international news, first announced, the confirmed nr of attackers sticks at 18, sidenote, that could be a few more by now , as the building are not all (completely) cleared. Next there are supposed to be 10!! targets. and a few random bombings.. the attacks started 15 minutes from another, the station (wich is a genuine incident i think now), first. About the station i am not sure, but it did have the characteristic of sacrificial attack, apparently it concerned only two attackers and not the nr the carnage initially suggested to me. (say 8-10). At the hotels the situation was not much agrevated by security forces initially, the guys stormed in guns blazing. (appears confirmed by some of the pictures and that it was moreless in the news all the time)


This puts a questionmark at the seriousness of the hostage taking, and indeed the demand was outrageous, (if sincere) the release of all mujahedheen in india prisons.
all?? no nr was mentioned. For some time apparently the attackers were in contact with the media untill the police made it impossible.

A few incidents still need scrutiny, the boat loaded with explosives, its doubtfull a well organised group would need an extra boat with explosives they have no use for.

Militairy explosives in a restaurant close. Suspect since the indications bombs have been used are minor. The kind of explosions mentioned are hard to get, except in the militairy. Since they tried to set fire at the hotels(?) and had no problems with using a lot of grenades, one would assume they would use the explosives before leaving all of them behind in a not connected place.

So thats a no so far,(the computer crashed and apparently exposive charges are now exploding..) such events, or non events appear to suggest the situation escalated not only through the attackers, they are 'criminalised' after all, people want to make it worse then it was..
yet this theory, what initially happened at the hotels or any other place is somewhat unclear.

Next problematical issue, there have been two attacks (?) one of them including hostages, on a childrens hospital and some other hospital.
In the pattern of actions this makes no sense, all other targets have an obvious profile (rightly or perhaps wrongly applied) except the station, that was apparently attacked first. Beside that i found not a single story in the newspapers confirming attacks on the hospital took place. I found indications something happend there, people were glad to have escaped, but not a single descriptive account wich is suspect when all tv stations of the world are on a newshunt.

About the other supposedly attacked hospital i havent seen even a single fact, allthough i think wikipedia mentions a name. Even if a better articulated story is later released (like today) i insist it is suspect the media knew no other contribution earlier, i am not in mumbai and not a police chief there, so i have to be reserved about what is true and what not.

The attack on the police station also goes without description, apparently it was the most professional part of the action as it succeeded in killing 3 high profile cops.
I must guess it was well prepared and they knew to intrude in the right offices, still then taking the total suggested nr of attackers, its quite a miracle 1 or 2 man came through the defences of a policestation. So perhaps it was even better planned or coordinated, and the killed guys were just getting out.

peculiar detail, also about this event i found none but the vaguest descriptions in the media. 'policestation got attacked', and high profile cop killed, but not one description of the event altho article's relate the killed cops to the attack on the policestation it does not mention how, or any other circumstance.

Soo what are the conclusions? Firstly due to the lousy overall picture during a session of massive media representation i have a strong feeling there is more behind this. But what? The story as it stands now suggest to me still a dehumanising of the attackers, random bombs. extra weapons and even extra attacks belong to the evidence for that. Sometimes not related events are in the course of the action related by the police, if for example an armed man took hostages at a hospital, (it's happened before) the police might think it is a related attack.
That leaves us with the other hospital, since i know nothing factual yet about these 'attacks' i think they are suspect.

There are a few other incidents that are being related to these events, none of these have been exactly well described in the media, none of them lead to facts, and except the ones i already mentioned in my first post, none of those apparently claimed deadly victims. (perhaps i missed a victim at some bombing, apparently there have been a few bombings in mumbai, one would guess not through the known attackers (dead or alive), but perhaps still as the 15 minutes pause between actions suggests timing and leaves some space for actions.

I am annoyed that with so much fuzz so little facts are actually displayed, it takes like 10 articles to find out there are 18 known attackers for example.
(one article mentioning the dead , two others prisoners, (3 ,9 resp.) similarly only after a rather long period i find that there have been only two attackers at the station. Reading 30 articles (including some rather comprehensive ones), i am yet to find the first descrption of the police station event.

Such limited informations actually suggest a story is being prepared. The credibility of reports arising after the crisis is less then the ones yet released. (that could be checked in reality at least partly.)

Allthough not evrything is clear yet , are the jewish hostages free?, news said that through more then a day now, or are they not? some sources in alJ say the event at the 'jewish tower' is not over yet, and apparently in the hotels as well some shooting still took place today.

That would make some sense, the whole operation could hardly been carried out by 8 -18people, assuming even only half of these attacks were carried out by one group, one team. curiously estimates of nr of attackers lack, the only revealing source are their casualty's and prisoner nr's.

Today 3 captured attackers have declared or stated to be from kashmir, suggesting all would be, and although i see a more indian wide perspective behind these attacks it surely appears the most logic one group so organised (that what they did was well organised) comes from one place. Speaking against that is the apparent nr of attackers are higher then the nr accounted for, for example apparently today there has been another incident at the station, (i consider that incident genuine after finding out it concerned two attackers only) i think what is called copy cat action.

Like other events suggested inside mumbai there are also people (moreorless) willing to violently rise up to make a statement. This is kept out of the news, yet it explains why the indian government plans immediate emancipatory action.

good for a laugh when an interviewed westerner in another building stayed covered in a darkened room when actually 1000s of indians were moving about on the same street.
Also good for a laugh, the interviewer found that a wow , smart thing to do, the indian policeman commenting ,who's voice sounded suspectedly amused no matter that he tried to restrain it to a professional sound said, well ofcourse it is practical if people follow the government directions...

At the moment i am less certain about far reaching government involvment in the actions, but i still suspect infiltration, infiltration usually takes place (but not starts always) on a higher then 'soldier' level. The secret service is there for influence.

This effect is twohanded, altho the infiltration serves to expose the group and hinder it's violence, to gain a credible position within such a group a regular infiltrator (vying for influence) usually promotes escalation. A less inspired militant would stand out, but also not gain a lot of credibility.
The other side is still, that the police wanting to expose the pressure group would try to steer it in more violent ways often. Ofcourse under the premisse of being able to control and expose the group.

There are a lot of scenarios that secret services would opt to let this attack pass through (lets be optimistic, thus preventing other, easily worse attacks, like bombs on markets and streets). It has all the looks of such an action, with these obscure side events that defy description(hospitals?, jewish hostages rescued thrice?, the *not a bomb* attack in the station, most every yurpean routinely escaping with all but 1 indians staying back, a very probable police assault during the rescue of the westerners, the murder of a rumouredly moderate police officer?

Like someone rightly pointed out, actions like this serve to instill fear, and as such facilitate repressive measures.

I hope the indian government manages a reaction that proofs me wrong. (they appear to be doing that through adressing the fact india does have some problems with its treatment of minority's)

What we can learn of this? That unbiased and unhindered reporting are not a reality in india,(the financial capitals of the world), even with major parts of the world press assembled. I think things would look much better now, if journalism had had more resources, whatever will now be the reported outcome of events, none of it has been confirmed in actuality, and the facts will be so much harder to proof.

The whole great 'life'show i didnt witness seems mostly aimed at emotionally touching people, more then 100 poor people die in india every day, why is that less of a problem then when for once a hundred rich die? It is definetly not that the two problems are not related.

oh i foget i tried to reconstruct the events that must have facilitated the 40 parlementarians escape. Not a pretty picture, bunches of security guys around, a very calm (waiting an hour ) escape through a door that later seems used as an escape still, (a rather natural exit then). it suggest a level of control of the movements of the attackers inside the building. That would ofcourse be also the case when city police attacked the hotels from the outside (in rather obvious with the security agents as they were active inside) It cannot be wholly excluded this suggests some form of contact between some of the attackers and the securty agents, a form of contact i would think several others had no knowledge off. It may mean that at least one of the security personal inside had some knowledge of the attack ahead.
Overall if the descriptions of the weaponry etc, fit and the deathcount etc. at the hotels is correct (i think that it means like 85 people killed in the hotels),
the atack wasn't aiming at maximal casualty's.

oh yes i stopped thinking about all teh other attacks but the ones on the hotels because i think they carry less information of the intends, wishes and mentality of the attackers. Perhaps the attack on the jewish building must be excluded, but i still consider it untypical, possibly a different (sub)story.

for the station attack i have a keen eye if other figures of the attackers arise, and you could try and find out if it was meant as a distraction, but that seems obvious.

Anything they will still tell about the 'hospital hotels' will turn me highly sceptical.

Also statements of the captured persons i regard as highly doubtfull, you have to realise that to cover any story such statemets will be (ab)used.
witness"statements" are a necessary element in any cover up.

Even when only or mostly kashmiri's sympathise with some pakistani group, wich i think is easily explained through representation usually, it doesnt mean people from kashmir are not dissatisfied.

Rumour again.. but some voices tell us there is definetly discontent in kashmir, and it is an old complaint, in india clearly better understood in material terms then here. Scetching all these people as some anonymous monster with farfetched intends will create animosity first among us, the west, and immediatly in india that is forced into some western policy of fighting the muslims between the black sea and mumbai (decca in fact). Such animosity obviously already exist among afghani's and pakistani and us (..), we tend to overlook that the one does not go without the other,
and it's the easiest of all things to now involve kashmir into such a onedimensional picture.

Piracy (mumbai)

Have it happen, the first day you'd write about piracy , the next day there is a naval attack against mumbai. Everyone blames the muslims and we must assume it were not the tamils, but it could be anything, the few pictures of 'attackers' show moreless indian types. I think a taiwanese pirate trawler mothership did this, and india is just lucky to shoot the next before it came into action against new delphi.

Incredible how corruption in south asian politics affects the indian stockmarkets, btw. did you see that boat? it had tibetan colours, yellow and black, it must have been a covert operation of the chinese then.

and a jewish family meeting... oh wow, storm into the indian mainstation shooting??
that is sth i would trust an indian police force, it's either a police or rightwing kind of action, storm the railways and blame the lefties, a very old scenario.

storm the hotels of the rich with suicide like commandos? thats typically islamist at least when it happens at this moment of time in india, so there i think we meet the suicide bomber mentality of radicalised islam (checks if usia is at war with india.. no, by proxy?? mh .. maybe..)checks if japan is at war with india? mh .. (maybe over trawlers, but i didn't think that.)

the picture isn't very clear yet, part of the attackers escaped, (from the trainstation i bet, t' was either the indian or the western police after all),

guys inside the hotels blew up stuff, theirselves? TV's? Others? just the hotel?
it's casino? all of that? i'm curious. There is also the rare fact that people already identified as europeans escaped when being seperated from the interior of the building, sth. that you would expect only the indian police to easily facilitate.

It get's weirder, there is a slight reluctance from any indian authority to act, at first, to say anything, i think it is because they sympathise with what they personally perceive as the most logic reasons for this attack, at least slightly.

That's natural, i do that to, i really wonder how life looks when you are in kashmir.
It's anyhow a characteristic of secret services in the region to have troubled loyalty issues, for some reason indeed in the ISI for example there is a fool for evrything, the idea can hardly be so nuts not a single ISI guy identifies with it.
Some events in afghanistan suggest similar operative values, and even iraq showed only you can trust not a single militia or any army.

For me pakistans alliance with the usa war on terror is to blame, if you get an automatic weapon for shooting a nr of 'terrorists' (tribal elements or god knows what?) it's a good declaration of total war. Not much is unethic anymore, and a weaponsdeal belongs to these options.

The complaint of the kasmiri people is a prolonged one, altho i think in administrative ways they get what they need, their complaints about discrimination , poverty and discrimination related poverty are substantial.

So i think kashmir could be governable to kashmiri as it is, but the muslim population needs emancipation, (and to find that without intrusion of other people's liberty's probably).

In the discussion someone mentioned asantavari(?) islam, that is very interesting,
if you are free to interprete the koran, the horrendic social construct of islamism suddenly turn's muhammed's a more deserved place as a rationalist (modernist even) counterweight for religious bigotry, but i guess that is beside the point.

India is meant to be a model state by the british, it's some dream of ongoing hindu emancipation (plausible and a bit shallow) and multiculturality and multireligiousness, possibly not in the last place cus christianity with it's direct appeal to peacefullness and friendship usually does well in a nation where islam is on equal footing with others. At least i read today there are supposed to be 160 million christians in india. I think of india as a budhist nation.. so that's pretty multicult.

The real india is an attempt to a 'that kind of model state' so i guess the controversy's are exagerated, the indian 'hindu' majority tending to associate the muslim part of the population as a great factor in the struggle with pakistan and their owns, for wich there isn't enough reason.

The kashmiri otoh suffer from the resulting discriminating situation because it 'continues to proof' their second rate position is artificial.

It won't turn every indian or kasmiri mad, but it might confuse some. The indian middle class is so formal it is almost backward, and i wouldn't be sure they have a large understanding of the situation. (they rely on the western stratification of their societys a lot)

That is if you dare to regard it in an indian context, wich it obviously at least partly is not. The attack has similar characteristics as the attack on a pakistani hotel, i think it is part of a ploy using similar strategy's, that it appears a diffuse and incoherent action i would interprete as a sign of (more) involvment of (secret) police agency's, because it is inconsistent with the more efficient operations in pakistan.

So the worst case scenario is the indian police needs to have had a hand in this,
(it would mean india is in for an effort to start a war "on" terror.)
I think this could be forensically reconstructed from the station. ALso foreign service may have had a hand in it, as witnessed by the unrepresentative attack on a jewish orthodox group, necessarily this means then a western agency has involved, because the israelians wouldn't operate without the western parameters.

This in turn suggest something about the professionality of the services in pakistan,
and it runs a questionmark for all the recent talk about the ISI.

then again, i don't like the ISI, i am a humanist and the current ISI is undoubtedly a result of (amongst) musharaf, and the afghani ... mh aha found the link..
so through the western involvment in afghani intelligence operations, the spearhead of 'fbi' activitys in the region is greatly depending on the israeli's.. mh. could be more true then it appears at first glance,

ok in that model what does it want to proof? That jews are still a victim?
or that anti capitalism is anti semitism? (it's definetly has an antizionist effect on me). I think it wants to proof you can blame an anticapitalist over antisemitism even if that is not true.

Anyhow it so also proofs what it proofs to me, thus that crime is perceived as minor compared the incidents in the hotel and station.
Brutally put, we are secretive sneaks, but at least they didnt target the complete innocentest (didn't we minimise the damage to yurpeans), and beside showing their real character (hindu police shooting hindus and islam/hindu militants shooting hindu's because the yurpeans escaped thx to the jews (uhm indian police that was precluded through the uhm... some service with contacts with the ISI?

(this or a bloodbath), it's quite possible,

next point, what with the hostages, it's not natural like the story stands, there are hostages but no negotiations, no ransoms or demands?

maybe there have been and they kept quiet, wich tells us something. Had the demands been just outrageous there had been no need to keep quiet. Money then??

concerning the hostage taking efforts that would occur to me quickly, it also suits the pirates mind, the only thing would be, it would be so farfetched to start a naval landing for it. mh the attraction of taking the 'bussinesest' hostages could be great,
and the current policy is not to pay.. well indeed you can't expect the world to unite all potential pirates of every sea to take hostages evrywhere, so if that happened, the tale becomes to big for even ISI to connect.

Neway the hostage taking operation in the hotels apparently immediatly failed, security operatives and perhaps infiltrants must have interfered with the events more then the (it appears much smaller then 100) attackers on the hotels (the 'genuine' organisation inhere) anticipated, or i think could handle.

No demands were made public, so if it wasn't about money it must have been about india's internal matters, because anything that would not be sensitive in that respect, would be as outrageous it could be broadcasted or relatively harmless (internationalist rhetorics just like....).

The only statement around that so far comes from exactly the wickiest event, the jewish hostages. The person there appears to make the kind of statement one would expect. a bit to much even so, it's a bit like an alquaida osama tape. But if it's that it is well acted, the young man seems to reach for a terminology he learned, phrases he needs to apply , and his statements are very integer. Very authentic, at least partly, and not religious at all in the first place.

So that suggests the hostages served for the hostagetakers to get broadcasted.
Wich any sane government would admit to...
But! they had already opened the attack on the hotels, or opened it after the station was clear again (the restaurant as well?),
most probably after someone from inside signalled them it was the proper moment to start interfering, wich must at some point have failed. (the attackers stayed active inside the hotels). Since they were not so many they must have regrouped, possibly without the infiltrators, but more certainly with losses. It would have escalated the violence, (or) caused random people to get hurt in the shooting.

So very probably the attackers made use of the hostages at that point, and for the hostages or something else (explosive charges?) the municipal police didnt press on the attack , yet.

The attackers gained some control of the hotels, that have 100s of rooms, many many more then there are attackers. strangely people keep foremostly escaping, it's not like some reign of terror broke loose. Seems to me the attackers were still serious about their attempts on hostage taking, and must have gathered people in some larger rooms away from where the most blood had flown. although the media doesn't report so much about that period, there must have been a period the scene was in relative calmth, with only many, many people escaping from the hotels still.

occasionally there was fire from the inside, at people outside (escaping?) but i don't understand that lead to much bloodshed. So the question rises, where have these "100" people been killed? mostly at the station?

at the restaurant? the description of the station event. well prepared heavily armed man going rampok with hardly (yet attemptedly) policeopposition, is dramatic, the picture i saw tells a bloody story, the 30 odd police in action do carry rifles but nothing decent, peculiar in an enormous city like mumbai, with security services etc. abound.

Reports suggest some attackers (quite some) escaped, but don't yet tell from where.
a policestation was attacked, yeah why not.. that could easily turn a bit bloody on either side, it's quite undoable even, perhaps a superficial local attack? not what the paper suggests but the lack of drama makes it still an option.

this attack fits nicely in the pattern off taking it out on the real enemy's,
something only the station and the jews case don't express (concerning the bloodbath elsewhere the 'jews' wouldn't have survived such a same attack so easily seems to me).

It might also have tactical value, and provide some escapee's, since there are no descriptions of that event, i would guess it achieved much of what you should expect,
very little.. (imagines slowly aggrevating loads of fire from a policestation and it's surrounds), also when the police got attacked in the fashion the hotels did,
(intrusive) or the station did (bloody) the police would from that point be warned to equip its personal with what they had, and not what is the regulation in cases of public disorder. (allthough that again is very respectfull in a confused hostage taking case, it is completely irresponsible and inapropriate in response to automatic fire.)

If the attempt on the station was a sacrificial one we would see that confirmed,
if many of these attackers escaped , there is plenty room for doubt.
The attack on the policestation appears a distraction, perhaps a part of the plan or
a more coincedentual event, or alliance. It could serve to win some time for a hostage taking action. Or an escape from the station ...

i have to find out in what ordre the things happened. More on this later (i guess)
it's a strange story and so widely broadcast i must be able to find some more information.

piracy (something against)

every coastal nation knows piracy is great. Piracy has always been the way to clear some goods from the aggressive empires, when you live in a delta you also know piracy is an excellent means of defence against foreign agression. Is? well, was maybe, nowadays boats are a blot on a screen.

In that sense i, with some apparent seafarer blood in me, can only say piracy is great, it's good that pirate radio's, pirate music and pirate software replace the bronze age mechanism of piracy in an economic and folkoristic sense, because the empires still don't clear the goods to distribute the wealth.

This is an honourable cause. The pirates that brave so much of the fire of the greatest warships that it apparently became uneconomic to shoot them all, what a drama.

Being an honourable pirate i wonder if piracy is still the right word, perhaps it is valiance beyond what can be requested in the cause of duty.

A million things left to right

My mind buzzes, i don't know how i do this now but i overflow it with informations even if i see nothing i have to think about. Perhaps some of you, or all, know i regularly contribute on the your views page of aljazeera. I love the medium, perhaps i even love the fame, but it's the kind of blog i feel ok with, many opinions and from evrywhere in the world, so many new things viewpoints occur.

However there is a limit to its uses, not to bitch alJ. one is the western bias in censorship. Recently i come to wonder if its even usefull to, again and again, be abused just for wanting things in the open. Defy one lie, the next springs up to bother you in the same boring and annoying way.

So the next limit is where I run into repetituous argument, and it does that a lot.
actually enough to make me mad about ziofascism right here.

However there is not one lie in the world i think is more strongly defended then the "zionism is modern" lie, "zionism is anything but fascism".

I am even very sorry for the israelis and the jews, i am glad my affiliations are not theirs, i am glad not to be in a position where i would smear all the world to hold up one lie. (this suggest that "1 lie" is israels right to exist)

So thats what i think, an archaic racist and authoritarian set of values dominates the discussion on these subjects, as soon as you are against them(zionists/israelis), no word is bad enough to insult you, these are really the least constructive discussions on that forum.

I am one elaborate target of that strategy and it annoys me plenty to let know, sideways like this, i had it with racists calling me fascist.
fascists with a fascist mindset calling me fascist.

That discussion is so dead it is not a funny history anymore.

So let's switch subjects, leave the israeli mess for what it has been since 1917 or thereabouts ('terrorism' amongst), and throw an eye on the real world.

Kongo

Tough, will kongo be news untill solved? the recent examples of irak and pakistan
don't stem greatly optimistic. "Kongo" is also a thing that has been going on for years, everyone "knows", but noone accounts for it, bothers, contemplates.

There is certainly a worldwide consensus the problem is at least partially caused by the resource policys of EU, US, kagame, kabila and a couple more.

However the details , and those are details i know off for almost a decade now!,
escaped public scrutiny, i think they are basically secret, no head of state would be accountable for "allowing local geniocides to extract tin" or buying from the cheapest armed faction. otoh each party in those games is well aware thats how the ball rolls, what follows is there is some kind of secrecy involved.

That there is some kind of secrecy involved is quite obvious from a researcher pov.
The shit happens, but there is no publicity about why and how these agreements work.

Also many parties have knowledge of some aspects of these resource deals, but the most comprehensive picture i have so far seen is belgian (former coloniser) older generations research, wich would neither naturally always have acces to all sources of information (it's quite competent tho), nor be unbiased in every aspect.

This i will for goodness sake try to describe, it could be a bias to hold on to research conclusions reached in a dedicated contex but to long ago, at least that would be the typical for such researches even if you think me a bragger.

So there only i would know to look for more detail.

The un doesn't impress me, like amnesia international and other (zionist?(1)) cover ups, it plays on the goodwill of people including it's personnel, it uses some mantra of emergency-aid helpfullness, definetly a resource hard to deny in an area in crisis.

Obesanjo appears an enthusiastic, and i must say nkunda tries to show principle on many occasions, yet... we at least i do not have the informations that would warrant to embrace nkunda. So thats a matter of trust.

What i ask obesanjo is twofold, do you think nkunda escalated the conflict as it evolved after the rwanda crisis? Do you think nkunda's actions dislodge the sense of security and future, "possibilties", as it took shape when kongo accepted kabila?

I just ask, the real background of social injustice centered around capitalist tools,
"contracts", weapon "aid", diversion, and resource "security", needs different solutions then a political kongolese make-up.

Okay the last point i make in this post is the same as the first, i tell it all,
it just continues, the obvious conclusions are not handed to the (any) public, and the people are not informed to sway opinions. Elaborate negotiations and agreements may follow, but so far the real issues have never been adressed , the wars went on and on and on...

what shows secrecy better?




(1) some zio nazi equated some perceived succes , forgot what cus it was actually bragging, as a reason to praise amnesia into heaven today, good pr for a bad memory.
made little sense, obviously implied the zio-guy tried to regain credibility for amnesia, perhaps he's looking for pay. hardcore conservative, propagandist guy.

a very strange detail about zio-nazism on aljazeera is the guys are all affluent, rhetorical, derogatory and extremely labelling, once you got used to it it's actually so stupid i really don't easily understand how this fools the world. They are also all guys.

One reason i am so angry is they apply their hate schemes to every discussion to a greater extend then any of their opponents, except a very few individuals and even these appear more reluctant to apply it everywhere. Worse then being a bore and a liar in one discussion it is when you waste all the discussions with the same dumb scheme.

Strangely usually progressive thought, is immediatly confronted by zio fascism, it seems themselves they don't notice. but when they apply rascist rightwing schemes to every situation, they are a fascist. I don't so much blame the "jews" as the conservatives.
Perhaps from the rightwing pov the jews became a usefull distractor again. "Who cares what happens to them". Just calling names cus it confuses and poors unwanted attention on the jews.

go figure mossad. what i think now has been said before to the jews, and who tells me the reason wasn't the same.


Anyway, everyone! be warned!

terrorism

Jay! 100th post .. congratulations Barak this one is for you..

I witnessed today how barak for the second time to my knowing, used the word terrorist adverbial, 'terrorist groups' it was about iran.

From the iran point of view these people may be "freedom fighters", as *opposed* to terrorist groups.

Now this has to do with credibility fo iran, but let me explain.

In rwanda the us supports basically the tutsi's, these killed a load of hutus in recent years, mostly outside rwanda. Now the government there has a name for their victims..

Usia uses the same word (there).. terrorists.

terrorist don't exist, only in the american dream, and when you talk about a thing that doesn't exist to much, you make it true for yourself,
can we have a president that doesnt want terrorists for once?

cheers!

Historical day

thanks!

thanks for having a historical day,
nothing compares

gorbatjov tho,
he, the people and his duma besides,(1)

i worked at that to,
for me this is more emotional.

Jesse Jackson ! cheers! You deserved it well,
a brave man to. Whoopy! I always trusted you.

I think Bill Clinton performed! Man i am enthusiast,
i even admire hillarys dedication now , perhaps it was the best thing after all.

all the people of the world have been working this,
the children, and sometimes the animals even..

i am glad i didnt go that deep into it!

wow people (..)
animal kiss.

Good luck with it all,

we have to hold our promise.
Congratulated Barack, it would be great to meet you i am sure.
I have never said that of anyone 'important'.

so take it as a compliment, you remind me of a friend, 'Frits', you must be smarter though, maybe you can do with a lesser appeal of fame.(2)


personally, i hope your secret service 'annoying policies' will be a bit moderate.

Maybe i should say something about reagan, (uh bush..) it's always a bit personal,

you know bush is a bad guy, rather a bad one, but, in one thing and it is a thing many 'bad' people are not of the worst, he has been respectable.

he respected sillyness, people being human, really.., i guess zardari is like him,
and occasionally that could be a compliment, a bad guy , out for cash, but not without the idea to make a better world, otherways this couldn't have happened.

It couldn't for Jesse, chances are we have to forgive bush ..

Good luck world:P
we are there.

historical day!
hugs for all.

(1) salt accords could have been and done better and more easy from guess what side ..)
(2) to much to do with motivation ..

traffic

I have not been writing a lot recently, perhaps its the overdose, i write and think about inetrnational matters, and then after a while i don't want to think about it..
perhaps becus i fear to fall into repetition, , tiredness or a general fear things will take turns for the worse if i insist on turns for the good.

Perhaps its just the old depression i get when i to much focus on one or a few subjects, i remember when i last posted the word NATO kept coming to my mind in a most unpleasant way. I am now in a game, it also cheats the poor,but i am used to games online doing so. so i enjoy. The game is really absorbing, altho my first fit of fanatism is slowly fading.

Internationally a lot of things are happening, i am very impressed to see how the arab nations and muslim people struggle for a change for the better. Sometimes futile, and not rarely shocking, many of the events are understood better in that context.

The usia circus is also still distracting, the thing is not i don't care, it is i doubt if it matters that i and a majority of people care.

today and even the day before yesterday however i found a solution to that whole usian
spectacle.
the solution is called whoopy goldberg.

whoopy goldberg for president and i will trust the usa like never before.
even if she is not a president it is still a comfort a great person like her can live in a nation that exhibits such compulsive traits regularly.

In that sense usa is indeed like netherlands, in both nations u can refuse to drive a car and be the most fun aspect of the whole life threatening traffic event.

somehow the fate you, the safer person, are still the one running all the risk is acceptable, this whole society is build to repress the defenseless.

Its unpretty but it feels familiar. It's how it should be, all these people that dont care about plants , animals, environment and human life drive like madman in their tanks producing permanent danger to the innocent is like real allegory for this world.

whoopy goldberg for president!

amen

double dutch exposed

ahead of me the unpleasant task to try to describe the current mediapolitical climate in the netherlands.

Do the media do well? well honestly ? the media i know off, no.
they do about 4% well, and about 99% badly. I got into the habit of not spending much time on it tho, certain comments sections on teh internet do offer a consequent countervoice, when people really dedicate to it. However you might say tehre is such an urge in people with less usefull opinions to shout them out , always replying on such becomes rather a headache. That besides teh arguments aren't always even worth making, it is not said such conservative repetitions are real or even a produce of humans, it might as well be scripts, just out to convince the masses of the existance of a dumber mass. Perhaps also really dumb opiniated people are stimulated in voicing them loudly and prefered over a more moderate and negotiating comment.

Often to look for sth positive well placed and a true observation you'd have to spit through 7, 8 pages of doubtfull news of doubtfull integrity, and worse, obviously ill willing intend. in the free newspapers taht are distributed to the workers in the mornings i end up reading teh football news, cus at least that is about nothing, and so it doesn't hurt so much that it may be lies.

I dont want to get into its generality's but push right through what is the politics behind it. Basically i think, netherlands used to have tolerant value's, we grew used to rather some freedom, in the process and for many years we have been wel proud for what we achieved, the lifestandard and social standards we (often) met.

that lasted so from 1955 to 1980, and before that, perhaps even in the colonial area dutch have felt modern, and tolerant, not all dutch and not always, but definetly it has been an aspect of our people's personality to try progressive thought. In teh old christian days it failed miserably, the renewing movements seemed to be ugglier then what they did away with, but it had some elan, there was an attempt towards justice.

In the late industrial era, but not untill the very start of the digital era, dutch value's overall qualified nicely. Human rights, police government, freedom of expression, bipartisanship, were value's often well practiced and not uncommonly researched by many elements of the media. It didn't always go well, but those were times of great social advances still.

Even before europe became a fact, and before the digital era started, there was a trend however towards the opposite. interest-groups had to be turned into ngo's in that period to through payed management make them dependent and negotiable. In every case for example teh government made a point of having a public discussion, wich they did pretend a few times, teh publ;ic took care to get some of the facts on the table.

Really in the sense of juicy research, thorough rationalisation, analyses, those were great days.
As i say it was pre digitally, and yet in the late industrial , modern, era copy machines, printers, stencil, each of tehse media had contributed to sets of alternative magazines that filled the gaps in information now more commonly accesible (but not quite as structurally applied) through internet.

One of these magazines was "BLUF!". it lighted out many juridical absues and malperceptions, corruption even, it was extremely critical towards tyranny anywhere, evry cultural, and abiding and promoting to every human right.

You understand teh people that did teh work, the research and are the inspiration were pretty dedicated and worked hard for hardly any pay. Becus more free then that? no, we haven't had.

he magazine had a tendency to publish very very strong articles that were the condensation of much more documeted and wider research of other magazines, and some ideological recoinaisance's. It also published press statements of action groups, soemtimes of foreign pressure groups, or illegal party's, teh iraki resistance, the kurds the irish teh basques, it had a somewhat european focus, but that was more because practically the information-exchange often was limited mostly to the european circuit without internet.

among many other things it also covered the housing rights of netherlands, more specifically also squatting. It happened to be that he cultural squatting movement was also the humanitarian active group. Especially renewing efforts found their roots there. For excample the effect in clothing worldwide, hairdress, but also theatre, decor, lightshows, music, alternative music, surrealist, nihilist and even geometric influences hahe much to do with the cultural movement of the 60s, 70s early 80s
why do i need to tell you all this?????

well it happened in these days that some(..) we now call them "the neocons" decided tehy wanted a society thatw as far more blunt, far more stratified, far more unfair,
far more plain, far more dumb in other words: more capitalist.

To that end a lot changed, step by step, sometimes sth. good, but usually sth. bad.
It hit housing rights, incomes, healthcare, it send people to prison, it generally hit the atmosphere hard, it hit the credibility and worst of all it managed to intrude the minds of the people, setting them back, prejudicing them and creating a lot of fear between people. It also obstructed justice, by just not abiding teh dutch law sth. treated as precedents are created, but actually it means nto even agreements have value, just because they label people they deny them basic rights of justice.

This however didn't happen on the level of huge direct violence, well it did, but it escaped the eye of the many, the terror, the measure of direct repression wasn't enormous always, not often teh secret police beat someone up , it happened a lot when sth was going on tho, and completely out of any proportion usually (i have witnessed many times) that (secret) police used excessive violence, what i mean is thatnot many a [political one, an activist was beaten up in their houses or at night on teh streets, although the circumstances have their creepy aspects..
i know i have an incorrect dossier wich briefs the police eg. so when i meet them they are more dangerous to me then they should, wich not rarely results in a scary confrontation if tehy seek any.

so its scary and dangerous, but not openly or outright violence in the daily life.
After some trial and error the atetmpts to get you to work for them also loose the direct and indignant initial character.

"They" the police, the secret services, (can) know me better then even i myself, they can tehrefore lie about me better then i even myself could, they certainly have their powers, and with the justice system being proven unidirectional biased, and elitarist, reknownedly nepotist, what have you to count on.

So some stress they standardly deliver. otoh with somewhat more usual affairs, they donlt necessarilly misbehave(although then they are not as informed about ur identity, and unless real danger for themselves is thinkable, you can also count on them somewhat. (they are not rili objective tho, i figure there are a lot of people who think they tend to anyhow draw the wrong straw). Sometimes they are quite smart and social, othertimes they are really stupid not uncommonly so biased they find argument in even reasonable speach,( a lot of ppl who know that start out rough), rather like the usual schooled professional that wants to think they know how to treat their business.

When you start out a bit rough and things can get constructive usually you know you met someone who can stand a small creep to suffer less of a shivver.

Man if u r rili a criminal? hwo can you talk to the police? what about? that too is an element in the policy of teh netherlands, turning it into a policestate.

It's amazing, perplexing flabbergasting, and awfull, yet it's all to true, teh distance and authority of police is accentuated, despite a policy that claims to be a friend of all these people that are so scared they are rather an insult to a sane human.
scared for me, friends, or other people or reasons that need no fear, well not the kind they tend to imagine at least.

The ironic of it it alienates a lot of principally rather good people. This underlying fear.. taht sth odd or awfull could happen, ofcourse always existed.These days however it is exagerated. People are scared on a daily bases by millions, for even things that happen 3 times a year to at most 2.

it is not a way to solve a problem, but it is much more dangerous then teh fear that was teh bases. It legitimises measures of fear. Those for some reason shape into patterns of nationalism xenophobism , alienation etc. etc. teh negative psychological effects of teh modern times..

So we see a fear that creates terror and repression, but is actually very minor compared to teh danger of not polluting the environment.(cycling).

over and over this legitimisation is recycled as legitimisation for still more repression. nwo we did that oh they won't notice we do a bit more.
and actually they get away with it. people can be scared with nothing once? they can be scared with it again. you can imagine the sheer perversness of with what teh media and politics occupy the mind is of ridiculous proportion. Moreso becus it is uncompromisedly fraudulent. Integrity and transparance, there is not.

back to the ancient magazine 'bluf!'.
BLUF used to be the strongest protagonist of freedom of speech in print, well actually not by far, but the one with some reach, it came under for of procedures, police harrasment etc., and it had an advertisement action in wich a statement strongly for the freedom of expression , speech and reporting, was phrased.

so far so good, some bobo's signed, usual dutch adds like that in the period went with bobo's, and the add was printed.
i don't remember if it was considered a succes, in the end bluf had to resign the struggle, perhaps due to the repression, or more because newer media were taking over peoples spending of time. To some extend the sheer nr of musics, video's, nets games etc. even before internet became some intellectual distraction.

The follow ups to bluf, can be found @ ravage.nl if i am correct.

The paper featured a cartoon of an old grey minister burning her old (seriously grasroot intellectual) blufs.

Thats because there is a witchhunt going on in dutch politics. every day in day out we see prognoses the rednecks are growing, when actually these signs are rare even if you exagerate, specific rednecks, people never ever talk about , are called very popular by dutch media.

And i deal with the kind of people that even have the destute attitude to judge harshly and unwittingly. All of these, and the whole dutch population are joining in the constructive and progressive thoughtsprocesses, so where the hell do they get teh story extreme rightwing patriotism and nitwitzism are gaining in popularity.

also the wilders guy noone ever mentioned to me and get's free seats in parliament, like if they are 2 euro gardens chairs, is not a political phenomenon in the worlds i meet in netherlands, and no, these are not only classy and intellectual.

meanwhile these same people are the excuse to raise security to a level public expenditure would be essentially better off if these people actually emigrated.

and ofcourse all these blatant freedom obstructing notions in teh paliament find their loyal support. One big fake, and people that stopped believing in the news, have much turned away from thinking about politics ()not so strange with so little fact to go by) , or got so confused they stick to just believing the complete nonsense offered. Not that they vote right wing then, just that they are annoying to talk with. right wing votes and the propagation of that you mostly exclusively find among the ultrarich, the top 5% , and less, not their wives eg. some 18 years old that have no clue, and a few that never find a clue either, i did meet one or 2 in my life.

I'd doubt if they think the same because they were still young. some young guys think: i want to be ultrarich so i have to vote as capitalist as i can, (they call themselves the liberals here), ofcourse for a few of them it worx, but not often.

and now theres the witchhunt, what is the premise? what is the intend?
repression and securing a singularly nato minded elite. eliminating every incent for change, the intend is evry negative and involves raising the general level of intolerance, repression, the distance between poor and rich, and the complete disempowerment of the masses, practically, psychologically, and attemptedly politically, the thing that justice is the exact wrong word for.

in this complex political ploy international pressure and planning plays a big role, models of repressive ideas , control, arbitrary legal value, they are applied internationally, netherlands is sometimes even considered a "guidenation" for that, but the opposite , usian and english models(1) that are implemented here happens as often, and without notice.

(1) models of desempowerment , hierarchy, nationalism and most often misleading and propaganda.it's just a personal note that actually many of these models focus around misleading and desinforming people, unfortunately not withour some scary succeses.

those were the days

I am a bit dazed. the whole usia election thing is going on with strong undertones as ever. Suggestive voices whisper through every channel, people that before seemed to want moderate exchange, suddenly turned rabiatly convinced conservatives.. etc.
probably a racist card. The dumbest on that one was.. if Obama looses it proofs we don't discriminate. Well *that* exactly it don't proof to me.(1)

Obama is a much greater guy then you would even need to change the world there,
come on mcCain.., it is true, Obama is really a smart and enlightened person with great care and policy.. how does mcCain have a vision when his party only comes up with negative portrayal of the other?

Obama's nomination speech is perfect. Every option is open, and the policy of change outspoken. the world goes for that deal. Exactly these republicans the ones in power, should want usia to stop becoming the pariah of the international community,
often even regarded a mere tool of israel (sozocaust(2)).

However these guys in charge are rich, whatever happens to the populace they will be fine.

A depression i only endure cus i countered it the first of january.
The receipe is to make one voice (there), to stand up as one nation.
And you should, every nation in the world should be able to make a great 4 years with a great man like Obama, one would try to help him wouldn't we all?

So thats a rather revolutionairy change from the POV of the ones in power, becus they know that their 1 percent holding 90% in the income in the west and 80(china,russia)-90 elsewhere(3) will have to start contributing, no more great oil profits to get away with for example..
neway, that is with ambition. And it's nice. Thumbs up usian brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers, we only have to remember to be as dilluted, shout we won all the time, to be convincing, because many more voices will shout we won, then there were to say the opposite.

Obama is the next president. Fine, i am out to visit an african friend now.
2009.

hehe feel like writing on justice, care i check him there:p
byez!


(1) even obama winning proofs we *know* we (our systems) are still racist and have to work at that.

(2)sozocaust when you have to say sorry a lot, cus you are not really allowed to say it.

(3) interesting calculation here, the dutch situation is about the general western one, 1 percent of the people own 90% of the income, 10% own 95% of the income, 95% of ppl own 5% of the income.


In china it is different. 10% of ppl own 90% of the income, that means 1% owns about 80. 95% of the people then own around 17% of the income wich is over thrice as fair.

In russia it is not obvious, i would think the nr are better, the top 10% would have it at least 11 times better then the poor, wich would make it still 13 times better then here, meaning the 95% of the people get 65% of the income there and the 5% still 35.
lets be safe, 60-40. wooooow thats *good*!? follows 'russias oilwealth' is not yet so exagerated, or the people 'd be richer.(viva cuba)

(4) find a new name for that nation. jew SOA just doesnt hit the mark, does it?
it's got a remarkable relevance for aids(HIV) and that is all. It's all the old,"... but words are slaves to the truth" story again.

A-bomma or Fusia might be better;) defusia? or just sth. natural, Mixico? Danada?
Terra Rico for my part or Exdomingo, Piety, Braggica, United-Ex-Americans (UEA), Thina?, Maffia?, newJerusalem even. Erika? Highety:P? Byraq, Hatenam? Clashia?
no that wouldn't help. well like it is now they might as well call it Penisoala or alQuaida. Rapland, Jazzica?

I like Maffia, 'maf' is jidish for funny, they would be Maffians. Thats good against crime. turns them into Maffins slowly. Usians, i stick to usians for now.

warcrimes

before i start an article called wo3 i feel inspired to write about war crimes.
In some ways i have been thinking over it already for a long time, and now the situation we face a court procedure between russia and georgia serves as an example.

Not in the last place because the scale is handsome, comprehendable. An example as Irak where different bombing campaigns immediatly killed over a million ppl. (an estimate but not an irrealist one) ofcourse is more sensitive. Do you, like many usians, perceive the fake WMD as *the* excuse, then the guilty ones walk completely free, and are still occupying the iraki nation. So the example may be better, but harder to explain and validate.

I do not choose the georgian problem because it is of the bigger i can think of, only because the determination russia shows for justice in the case , may proof me still right later, wich is a thing you could not expect eg. maliki or karzai hold the greatest interests in.

So i choose the subject of georgia because i think it has the same relevance to the russians, an action for transparance, good international relations worldwide, and about the responsibility of *all* nations to abide to similar laws.

Ofcourse Russia could that way show her system of democracy is not necessarilly less effective or representative then the european or usian. That is sth. i am rili curious after myself. Altho i am quite aware the socalled "democracy's" actually don't hold up to direct representation. (it could be hard to do worse)
however this will not be the subject of the procedures, the subject will be measure and proof of warcrimes.

measure and proof of warcrimes.

Basically the definition of warcrimes has two objectives, the first is to prosecute great "evil": inhumane deeds, events. Examples are: torture, ethnic violence in a context of armed conflict, elimination of people and groups of people, the targetting of civilians, neglicence towards victims, etc. etc. It is almost easier to think of a new warcrime then to sum it up.(the elimination of whole army's of defenceless enemy's i think is also one the nato can be blamed for)

Prevailing brutality and violence, is the second objective. That means single incidents can comprise warcrimes, it would be brutal if torture was okay if you did it to one or two people only.

A result is the use of the term warcrimes is still complicated, and perhaps that is why the different party's have been so eager to grossly implicate another so often.

The answer to all this is integrity. The use of singular and identic measure to crime. That is not always precisely the same as identical punishment perhaps, it is about keeping things in a context, having a future possibillity to compare, and doing justice to victims.

This integrity will not exist without transparance, openess, unbiased reporting, plain and fair numbers, and equally thorough checks on all party's involved.

It is simply so that each participant taking part in censoring is indicated, and lost all credibility to judge or accuse. There should be no ground for censoring if there is no implications of guilt of the censor.

As such, all major party's in these kinds of procedures are suspect(1), it appears to always be the nato, europe or usa that get's their enemy's filed for warcrimes and crimes against humanity. Meanwhile each of these applies censorship, in every form.

That means the nations and alliances have no credibility, even a nation as russia with a better record of mutuality in the accusations, can for the performace of justice only be labelled as partial. (ie. it will underestimate it's lethality and may overestimate the impropriateness of the reaction)
To be straight one will always have to keep comparing with the other, georgia and her accomplices (if any, but there is: the nato is a military partner that has eg. been arming georgia with more lethal weaponry ).

in this case the nato shows to have no credibility at all. The media are and have been stricly censored to show an anti russian picture that does no right to the situation and leaves us wondering what else happens evrywhere else in the world.

However fortunately there is a theoretical solution to this, the independence and power of justice.

Paralel there are theoretical solutions to the violent models that are now implemented. Usia even manages to be proud to be a "counterinsurgent" army.
"counter insurgent" means it targets a population or at least a significant part of it persee. A warcrime, and action that will provocate many smaller or bigger warcrimes. in this example usia provocates them, and in many cases the basic principle of justice dedicates that the reaction bears an element of selfdefence.

Provocation does not need to be violent, it can come in ways of discrimination, and (quite common) arming up, or tightening repressive measures, and probably in many more. However in terms of justice, and terms of warcrimes, crimes against humanity and the likes, ofcourse no provocation at all exists in wich the element of violence is not represented.

See what we are getting at is that a term that doesn't directly connotate to "warcrimes" namely the term violence, has absolute implications. Then justice can only be done when violence is measured accordingly.

There must be a great degree of certainty and objectivity , that is mutuality , transparance, a horrible, nearly undoable task. From that it follows the measures should be quite high, bombs on a town eg. that is inhabited, like tshikivalli or baghdad immediatly are a degree of 'warcriminal violence' , that would justify the other party so much atrocity and represaille in legal terms of selfdefence, that a definition of warcrime cannot come without a direct verdict against such incidents.

Only if these cases are solved, these matters settled, what follows could be considered a warcrime of the kind that can be complained about by the other party, or anyone. (besides ofcourse on humanist, humane ground) (2)

do you understand me?

warcrimes yet (possibly) perpetrated through, in and about georgia

in the practical case of georgia, from my meagre informations i can't judge evrything, but i can give examples. Ofcourse they will be contrive.(complicated,dense and interactive)

one should start with the beginning. For me it is guesswork, perhaps for example agreements from CIS or elsewhere must be counted. When these have military implications, or implications for the status wich of ethnic groups (ossetians, abchazians), wich ofcourse there are it must be taken in account in terms of being a incident with "violent ("war"criminal) implications.

long story short, let's weigh this apropriatly, that is proportionally, to measures of mutuality and reasonability (not to mention human rights).

human rights however need fixes to. The "democracy" pretence of freedom eg. should not be the measure, becus it is actually a very desinformed and biased project.
like warcrimes cannot be fixed without transparance, questions and accusations of human rights can not.

dr.Rice 's statements that russia used disproportional violence for example are a warcrime. There is no transparance, no evidence, no objectivity, not even free media,
her statement is then a very violent one, a usual judge would punish a perpetrator that accuses the victim harder.

To her luck i must add, she is not the only one. Bush for example had no better to offer. I just don't think bush is a relevant person. Heh, miss Rice has everything,
including an amazingly valuable psotion as "most succesfull cuddle negroe in the world" a possible all times champion. I certainly allow her the honour.

Another detail here is that i don't know how she is used or abused in that position,
there might be elements of racism etc. that she can't check and compromise her role beyond herself. champion cuddle negroe not for no reason.

Obama is not a cuddle negroe, he is a horde runner on a track that is better for your legs then the sport itself.
cheers O.! sorry i can't endure Condi's escalations.

k so these are only examples. diplomatical and political abuse of the unclarity about what consists provocation, intimidation, escalation, witnessing set aside, we could still clinically sum up the directly to the ground related events that give real reason for thought.

there is the long history of georgian interference with abchazia and ossetia, the peaceforces, some russian interests in containing georgia, saaksvillis persona,

saaksviile is for one thing indicated because he uses a populist rhetoric.
He is also indicated since he didn't manage to give any relativation in any case to a russian behaviour that was modest, untill he was regarded for all his lies.

That's why from the very start saaksvilli is suspect. What he does to the georgians compares to what the taliban wants, to what the serbians stand accused of, to what the croatians did, (make it a do usually, when they got away with it), it relates to what saddam held up to his people, its the way usa and iran control their populace,
pakistani politics suffers heavily from the phenomenon, sarkozy used it, it is something that has an impact on less developed nations (but not so much the most marginal people) very strongly often, it's what hitler did:

Nationalism.


on a sidenote russia labels his digressions from humane as on par with H. and stalin.
No smoke without a fire? in the very least there must be something against him they hold don't you think?
in the first phases of the war the georgian offensive was genocidal and ethnic clensing, the target was to drive as many south ossetians as possible into russia, and eliminate any resistance, the means where the ones of the nato offensive against baghdad probably more modern, albeit probably supplemented by older material.

the (nationalist) georgian army has a sinister history of operations against civilians , an element of nationalism is that it prohibits the development of moderate views on surrounding not completely advantegeous ethnic groups.

as such it apparently didn't improve, the methods were genocidal because completely disproportionate violence was applied (miss Rice?), because civil concentrations were targeted, 10 villages completely ruined, the main city bombarded over at least a week, the occupation of that city prolonged, (the russian were very quick with telling georgia to pull back), and after that there was no real cooperation to the ceasefire for about a week from the georgian political side, (sorry if we tried to save soldiers lifes), still now saaksvilli routinely falls back into acquisations.

I think what should be clear is that this is the incident, and that these complaints should have taken seriously in the nato=world. Not in the media, and not by the political representatives. Obviously the media are handed several kinds of restrictions and requirements, very possibly there is a permanent censoring going on,
the care with what journalists express what they still can suggests this.

seriously in terms of warcrimes and genocide. The only point that could be made from the nato side was a discussion about proportion.

when is something a genocide? does 2000 people and complete ethnic cleansing of 100000 people suffice, didn't abchazia suffice?
do military victims count somehow?

apparently these questions of proportion are the ones the nato does not want to hold up in the eyes of the world..

not so strange, arming nations, blasting them back to the stone age, causing every afghan and large parts of pakistan to flee, the relevance of modern arms and the development of bases around russia (and other nations) in fact over the whole world,
wouldn't stand the light of truth.

Nothing russia can be accused of the nato hasn't done, and over plenty things that georgia did the nato did punish or prosecute, serbians, russia or iraki's with international courts.

So i think the russians are out to hand the world a chance for peace again, if the world listens up we can start to get some definition and definite agreement on the
what's and whatsnot's of warcrimes and escalation.

(finally seriously start to disarm the world)

(1) also the courts of justice
(2) unless proportion would level the victim would remain justified to a much greater extend in any action then the agressor wich in the case of the usa has not happened since their own civil war. russia what is now and as an inheritant of the soviet unions moral ground can either just be considered (self) defensive or a relative ground for blame, relative to georgia here, but also relative to accepting a unipolair world through her history. Like i said these measures would become very contrive.

Conclusion:
With the current methods and practice it is impossible to objectively apply value to warcrimes, they should be thoroughly revaluated and appreciated in their diplomatical and political contexts , because there lays much of the responsability.
The dilligent system , the delegate justice that deals an unipolair quality, must be objectified, that can only happen through transparance, including a historic perspective, a freedom of press (in the sense of reporting, not misrepresenting),
an unfreedom of media to misrepresent even. Wich is "free" media's juridical definition: the duty to report every truth, not just some or something else.
to allow extrajuridical exposes there must be transparant and reciprocal proof.
The courts need to become objective, a working model could be to involve judges and jurists from exactly these involved matches, a touchy subject for justice itself.

It's very relevant that not only the constitution but also the proceedings and procedure of the courts need to apply transparance and reciprocity.

There will be so many guilty partys and persons, states might consider to stop armsraces and wars. The usa/nato and her closer allies, must reconsider their status in terms of warcrime. As a result of that their validity in a discussion of geopolitical determination like georgia's appears moot.

wow, is that so?

russia will no longer be forced to deal with the usual business of the nato?

mh, i guess not wha:t nato not going to continue bussiness as usual with the russians means.

People i admire the russians, they have stated now that an anti russian propaganda offensive in the world would surely not help the nato's case in georgia.

Thats brave and clear. It's also sth. that the bourgeois will deny in all chords.

It seems russia is not intend on leaving georgia at the speed nato envisioned.
Thats a very inaccurate statement btw. From here it is hard to judge in how far russia doesnt already (with gori a few kilometres from the conflict zone, much closer then the ever as close lauded tblisi), show her intends to commit to peace.

So despite the russians could have overrun most of the country they are now in a few rather fixed positions. They still dig, ofcourse digging is a required daily routine in any operational army of some name, yet it is somewhat telling.

In a few places and georgia the russians are digging in, Gori, another military town and the military georgian hub near abchazia.
(all guesswork but it follows the descriptions of the situation).

perhaps still somewhere else, the highway near gori has been mentioned.

Poti has seen a few russian patrols, but the sole need to underline former "raids",
(no, also the navy is not going to bother us), shows there was no military activity.

this in turn proofs that even a journalistically scoring alJazeera is probably limited in what they are allowed to express.

Russian-english tv seems to have somewhat disappeared from youtube. Who knows what journalism they perform..

I would bet great. her last shows a week ago that i found on youtube were impressive, well phrased, well agumented, well underbuild.
(in terms of camerawork and shots)

alJ counters with their usual subtlety, an incredibly honorous shot (for me then) of what represents HRW in georgia made my day, i still feel jolly when i think about that one. There is also am appreciable trend to bring some face value news, and to confirm through different alJ reporters. Much like with me many rather big revelations get in between the lines and are made only once.

Since i focus on human rights issues, (military) protocol and accurate information on especially military "ground" level, it will be clear i would have liked a little more consistency in even their apreciation of the topic.

Especially the ground level informations appear a bit lost in the whole nato war of words and worlds, but also matters of protocol appear to have escaped public notice.

military protocol basically is , what and when you shoot and what not, and on that line how to protect your army's interesses.

For example i have not seen an analyses of that aspect of the russian action at all,
not a single incident explains why the russians are digging somewhere, or speculates on it even, what else is gori but saaksvillis todays favourit topic of conversation?

That means there is a newsblock on anything that could explain some of the russian action to us, and the responsabiliy to do that falls on people like me.

Well Gori is symbolic and military strongly related with the whole south osseta operations of georgia, besides that it appeared to be an effective stop on georgian comfort to control Gori, from wich the russians have not convincingly or greatly advanced at all since they captured it a week ago.

otoh it is obviously also true that the current positions russia holds in georgia actually deny georgia , and i think saaksvilli, much control, but could also serve as a base for future actions.

Proably one reason the russians are in no hurry to leave all positions, is they don't feel secure about the nato.
The moment they leave georgia nato might bring in troops, to escalate it into a multinational war, nato might start making the weirdest promises and wickiest commitments.

If they are in georgia, it will be more easy to see for the world, and easier for the russians to prevent, counterfeit or moderate, all sufficient to stop this war from becoming bigger.

So russia is in a position were it might be an option to prevent georgia from becoming all that (a nato fortress or base), and this is of strategic concern for the russian international politics at the moment.

it is not so hard to explain and the west would appear more in her right (stronger) if they at least showed they understood the russians.

it seems not, the anger of the russians about the western media has to do with for example western media repeating the russian forces will draw back into russia, or south ossetian territory, when actually the bufferzone is extended, Gori might even fall well into it (i remember i wanted it (gori) a week ago so perhaps thats a russian sneak then;)

so altho the russian intend (atm) is to only leave the reinforced peacekeepers, there should be no confusion about the actual area of operation they now have negotiated. that besides obviously russia is looking for diplomatical signs of "detente" a thing nato and esp. georgia as it gets represented in nato influence sphere (the media in the most of the world) completely fail to deliver so far.

well i think even a politician could understand this, so gl with it.

1991

first this blog:
the sp. errors are piling up with the uncomfortable experience that i had actually checked some, since textdestruction is a tool of the neocon propaganda machines I get a bit pissed, little i can do either, otoh i make some sp. errors myself, but for example teh word actions in teh next article i remember i checked.
Thats why i stopped correcting them after i published the post.
long ago. The sytem used to destroy individuals text and work may show more clearly since i am such a target.

oke 1991

Do we remember 1991? Georgians definetly do. 1991? do you remember how happy we were, how we all thought now finally money would go into development instead of arms?
Yes and actually most of the world started of nice, ok admittedly 1992 and 1993 alredi showed usa was not intend of giving up hegemonic claims, perhaps also in georgia, in principle i myself was ok with how the russians/ sovjet union outlayed the new nations.

Oke i had some bythought at the entree in EG at such speed and with such clear capitalist bias, two at once, a poorer oculd only come if a richer was with it, and a greedy yes when the nations were economically promising and strategically usefull like the baltic states, however with kalinigrad quietly settling i assumed the russians can live with it. That besides, yes it makes sense, russia is a european nation, even if we never consider turning EG in a massive state, they are still a rather european nation, majorly white, blonde even (i was surprised to find them so much lighter then eg. french, esp. in haircolour), and in history, russian despotes always remained close and friendly ties to western-european ones, barring exceptions.
The claim on the baltic states is very doubtfull but the baltic claim for a historical identity stood firm, never since the christian crusades these nations have lived autonomous or in peace(well for a few years), i loved them to get their
identity, and indeed they turned into sweet little countries.

For me culture is a bigger thing then territory, when a people speak a different language i consider them a people for example, not when they own a certain amount of soil, money or (former) states institutions.

So i was happy with it, even like wow there is an armenia, and oh is the ukraine that much different? and georgia, what an ancient name, azerbeidjan and uzbekistan? it shows the russians don't discriminate either, it was a wonderfull sight.

After 1991 however hopes sooner then ayone wanted dwindled, i had suspected a quicker escalation when that became apparent, but the breaking point was the starts of the balkan wars, 1993? way to soon anyhow.

From that moment on it was ultimately clear usia still lived with coldwar rhetorics, and had nothing better to offer rhetorically, worse, many a european nation surfed on teh waves of ignorance and adapted similar hypochondriac (and as the russians justly state, cynical ) positions.

It spoiled the fun, the war for drugs and the one for terror further disturbed the picture and corrupted ideology, from here on we had to deal with megalomaniacs.(hegemonics, monopolists, imperialism)

all in all it wasted the last clear indications of detente, and left the people of the world wondering if they would know peace ever.

Now the russians made a statement, a violent one perhaps, but by far not as violent as the usual usian one, or the georgian attack, and the world is changing once again, will we finish what started in 1991 (mostly only in the former sovjet union),
or will we end on a path of intolerance, misantropy and xenophobia...

who knows, i for me will voice only for peace, screw the nato, and dr.rice hypocrasy.
detente!
teh international comments show ppl evrywhere are getting the picture straight, usia is a monster, a lie and a hypocrasy, georgia is sold out by saaksville, for his personal gains, and the people of georgia are together with their victims and policeman russia the ones to bear the brunt.

thats what perhaps the georgians forgot, war always makes victims, and if you start one yourself, some ppl will think you are the one that deserves the victim status most. I for me only want to give humanitarian aid and none that would allow saaskville to put his tank named georgia back on tracks.

curious, but scared from the nato rhetorics i await further developments.