It may be quite obvious from previous posts i am a fan of cannabis.
Recently there is a discussion to maximise the nr of prisoners and criminals by "reclassifying" cannabis.
The argument (it stays a bit vague, yet i think it is supposed to be the ratio),
would be that some people risk mental problems if they use it (as if they didn't risk mental problems if they don't).
That besides a few crimes have been perpetrated under influence of cannabis (and alcohol usually), i remind you, most crimes are done by sober people, does it mean
sober people should be locked up..? There has never been research to that. the incidents where someone still commits a crime under influence by cannabis are underlined in the media, but they don't have the guts to compare it with crime commited sober......
For me it is completely natural that when people anyhow statistically commit crime, they will commit some when using grass or hash.
Not so for the pharmaceutical industry and represion industry (prisons , "security" etc.), not so for right wing nutters, that like to see enemy's and relish in the power to lock others up.
So i think that is what it is about, impress more fascism on people.
---
Concerning the mental effects? The very few people that tend to have negative effects are people anyhow depressed. Not uncommonly suicidal, ofcourse it doesnt always help, yet i know of no case of suicide stoned, and i know of plenty sober.
However cannabis helps with one thing. If you think this world is rotten, that the innocents get locked up a lot, and that the weaponindustry's likes are more respected then human rights......
(all quite true,) Then indeed cannabis helps to relax and maintain your distance.
I think that is really what they have against cannabis, that users tend to take time to think and be critical.
It's a lifesaver, cannabis, unlike the military industry, unlike the psychofarmica,
unlike the prison industry , the policestate...
It's a lifesaver, and the truth should be known.
The arguments against it are to ridiculous, 99% of the few cases i know that people react badly on it, it's only the first couple of times. It's by far not 10 or 20% that has negative effects.
Even people with a very negative background often like it, and despite their fears (that they also feel sober, but less overwhelmingly) the terapeutic effect often makes them still use it years later. The real world becomes less threatening when the fear is like a dream.
Personally it made me sane. Before i used it i used to think perhaps i was crap, because i could make naught of what the rest was doing, thinking.
After using it i was relaxed, my nervosity went, in slowing down my thinking?, it gave me time to contemplate the others positions and my own more calmly..? whatever,
i realised that me being different from a lot of people, didn't mean i had to be 'wrong'. It also helped against the nightmares i knew child off.
Why is nobody talking about the beneficial effects?
pharmaceutical industry.
Why is nobody talking about how it makes you settle with a reality more bitter then you'd want it?
Because they want people that want a better reality in prison.
And why don't they allow you the fun and relaxation?(especvially when ur some kind of nervous)
Because they don't want usual cheap people to be more happy then them.
Lastly why do they promote the hard drugs?? (because they get always easier to get when cannabis gets harder), why do they promote alcohol?
because they are capitalists, and there is money to be made.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Afghanistan
In fact this covers some conflict in pakistan as well, nowadays.
Afghanistan is a country struck by death and destruction through the past 60 or so years. dictators, occupations, absolutism, occupation.
Meanwhile it is hard to figure out what exactly would justify the occupations. The sovjet one was the typical sovjet one, with attention to social services etc. but it also remained a period of, partly civil, war.
At one point, i for me still don't quite get why, i think it were the budha's,
the propaganda that emphasized the harsh circumstance for women, and the absolutist , 'undemocratical', aspects of the Taliban rule was quite succesfull once again to start a bush instigated war, as if he hadn't had his revenge ahead in irak.
Basically reason would be to await quite some incidents before a thus violent war.
Try to adopt measures in between etc. but not feature the 'reichstag promise'.
I forgot the incidents, but i once saw a list of how almost every usian war was preceded by suspect incident, so perhaps a better name is "9-11-syndrome".
These are well known and ancient tactic anyway, false flag operations, provocations, false accusations and complicity. Usia is not the only one guilty, and probably also not in historical times. In kongo for example, the accusation of provocation was/is mutual. Things in danger of escalation, would rightly or wrongly usually happen after something concerned a provocation, but it's a distraction, in a way, in congo there are more villages and the people are more unsettled.
So what happened is Nato bombed afghanistan. The fear to be considered inhumane by the usian public (i figure for eternity or for military reasons) and the fine promises that made the dutch politicians smile, or perhaps the engagement with suffrage and women's right's , the fear for a future where women wouldn't have tehse rights in some or many parts of the world, whatever.
My most severe problem in completely opposing any argument is that i think a free future is the place to be for any human. dress requirements don't even fit free here,
and we are a 100 year of of the puritan kind of dress requirements we had, wich weren't necessarilly quite as bad.
Anyway, war is an unpleasant thing. The afghans well realised they stood no real chance (much better then saddam), and tried to negotiate untill the end.
Instead of countering an offensive directly, they actually fled most of the time, trying to stay alive. The (complete once again) air superiority destroyed any kind of troops they could have had, and after a few days thus, the socalled war was won.
Colums made it into Kabul, undoubtedly meeting brave and quite utterly vain resistance at some points. I am not sure of there was something of elections, it was bush2 after all. I think Karzai got installed, similar to maliki (irak).
Afghanistan is a very rough landscape so quite some resistance apparently had escaped to certain regions and the usians decided to persecute "al kwaida" and "the taliban". It translates into: the popular resistance and the people, so you can imagine it was quite indiscriminate.
Nato tried to adapt (mh, i spoke 'peace' soldiers, their head was full of crap),
the military requires an attitude that is neither consistent with human dignity , nor
allowing itself to adapt it's policy's different from the propaganda as it presents the case to the (western) public.
That's: it is functionally dependend from ordres higher up in the hierarchy and for netherlands eg. depends on a mandate that a certain harry potter aka Balkenende rewarded after hiding up the reports that might have made the parliament think quite differently.
perhaps because he is a "christian" , raised a christian, litterally pumped quite full of the crap. Christians do have an instinctive , and when i was a kid, explicit hate against islam. When you meet it, it is like their second instinct, ooh islam,
well kill them, attack them, bomb them, it's a good idea, is how a christian feels deep inside.
problem here ofcourse, for an atheist, islam does exactly the same to its people, and is thus equally scary. It's less scary in the sense that it is badly armed, and a 100 year backward at least, or so it seems, but it is more scary since they/islam are very much more commited to the notion of belief.
in my world, the european world, religion is sometimes ok, sometimes second-rate, sometimes not necessary. Wherever u go, russia, england, norway, italy, any european nation, there are mainstream representations of non-believers.
Ofcourse i observe religion is still used as an excuse for political control, as an asset of conservatism, but i also know, the usual 'believer' wouldn't understand this, or think about such things (and actually prefer not to 'belief' it).
Anyway, this reasoning apparently turned the afghani in devote muslims, and they were making a biggest clownery of nationwide proportions, embarrassing the former colonialist who once had all the time tried not to show such was the source of their contempt.
What happened after this is hard to grab. First mistake of the nato was to choose several groups over the others. that started of at karzai ofcourse, and in a sense it so couldn't be helped. Anyhow, that allowed for a messy situation for a year or more, then the taliban united, (that was a peace effort) and started negotiating karzai, but it was still not ok. So , i think you will agree, the nr of high profile atatcks rose, one of them i think was ridiculous, a failed bomb attempt on a 100% unharmed parlementarian, it reminded me of reichstag promise. Brutal.
So that's not obvious, anyhow, by now the nato could have left afghanistan on her own, but they don't. instead they trained 100000s of soldiers. Also they maintained operations against groups of people perceived taliban, or otherways allied with anything not allied to usia.
it is many months later now, the above thing is somewhat to expanding, but for most of it i think it is still usefull that it is said. I tried to compile a description of afghanistan atthe time i started this article, one that would hint at the option to seek security not in armament, and to seek our subjective safety in afghanistan not rhough police forces.
however, obama changed that all, he took the notion that as karzai was not able to keep to a woman friendly politics, the whole of afghanistan was still in dire need of education, and perhaps he thought of that usian soldier that said: "i don't think this will work for this generation of afghans, but maybe it will for the next".
he got a lot of roundabout support for that step, a green future, equal development, it stands and falls among other things with 51% of the population that is woman.
geopolitically there is a downside to this story, but at the moment i don't really care, generally spoken it is a matter of money towards facility , and most can be bought that way. also the general trend, in particular cases, and in the wider picture is one of exchange over mere trade limitation, at least bottom up. the rich nations should really provide that green exchange to offset the unbalance.
i myself am maybe even worse, eg. if i basically believed it was environmentally proficient and lucrative, i suggest pipelines can be build evrywhere, altho with the current status quo limitations to acces might be necessary, and dealt with beforeheand.
if for some reason that trajectory serves only the opposite use, to exclude the environmental routes to monopolise efforts, likewise i consider them unnegotiable.
there is one more very important thing about afghanistan, and that is pakistan. 10000 and more pakistani have died fighting the war for terror, and the pakistani situation is completely escalated.
the pashtun and northern alliances have been outlawed to an even greater extend, and their likewise reaction is one of (well targetted usually) attacks.
i don't believe isi plays a big role in these. Allthough pakistan as a whole is much served with targetted attacks over random and desperate suicide explosions, etc.
in that sense perhaps isi has different operational motives from cia.
the problem in the decision to occupy afghanistan untill the situation for woman is settled foregood, is not in afghanistan, the current protocol is btw not sufficient, it seems to me, accidently with this scale events you would want to offer people an opportunity to develop such different visions, and bombing for opium , continual observation and the surrounding capitalists eyeing afghanistans mineral resources,
if anything that comes of the ground, nobody there is really very much impressed.
the soldiers would perhaps be better prepared for their task, when they could think of taliban as a football(or baseball) club, that for lack of grass defends rocks with guns. not like some evil enemy, not like an anonimous ideology.
just like western kids stick to their coca cola and hardcore, inhabitants of deserts cling to prayer ( for rain), and householdslaves.
before they will want to hold onto something else it should be obvious it must be a generous offer. some miners, and heaps of police and army are not the kind of freedom pashtun have allways have to fight for, and chances they will accept violent methods for real are nill.
with an open mind you really only have to look at irak, to see how right they are.
that tehse people have a moral and customs we perceive as at least a century backward, does not mean they are stupid, when they are preserving their identity in this, it should be valuable for all, and not be a reason to be at war.
Afghanistan is a country struck by death and destruction through the past 60 or so years. dictators, occupations, absolutism, occupation.
Meanwhile it is hard to figure out what exactly would justify the occupations. The sovjet one was the typical sovjet one, with attention to social services etc. but it also remained a period of, partly civil, war.
At one point, i for me still don't quite get why, i think it were the budha's,
the propaganda that emphasized the harsh circumstance for women, and the absolutist , 'undemocratical', aspects of the Taliban rule was quite succesfull once again to start a bush instigated war, as if he hadn't had his revenge ahead in irak.
Basically reason would be to await quite some incidents before a thus violent war.
Try to adopt measures in between etc. but not feature the 'reichstag promise'.
I forgot the incidents, but i once saw a list of how almost every usian war was preceded by suspect incident, so perhaps a better name is "9-11-syndrome".
These are well known and ancient tactic anyway, false flag operations, provocations, false accusations and complicity. Usia is not the only one guilty, and probably also not in historical times. In kongo for example, the accusation of provocation was/is mutual. Things in danger of escalation, would rightly or wrongly usually happen after something concerned a provocation, but it's a distraction, in a way, in congo there are more villages and the people are more unsettled.
So what happened is Nato bombed afghanistan. The fear to be considered inhumane by the usian public (i figure for eternity or for military reasons) and the fine promises that made the dutch politicians smile, or perhaps the engagement with suffrage and women's right's , the fear for a future where women wouldn't have tehse rights in some or many parts of the world, whatever.
My most severe problem in completely opposing any argument is that i think a free future is the place to be for any human. dress requirements don't even fit free here,
and we are a 100 year of of the puritan kind of dress requirements we had, wich weren't necessarilly quite as bad.
Anyway, war is an unpleasant thing. The afghans well realised they stood no real chance (much better then saddam), and tried to negotiate untill the end.
Instead of countering an offensive directly, they actually fled most of the time, trying to stay alive. The (complete once again) air superiority destroyed any kind of troops they could have had, and after a few days thus, the socalled war was won.
Colums made it into Kabul, undoubtedly meeting brave and quite utterly vain resistance at some points. I am not sure of there was something of elections, it was bush2 after all. I think Karzai got installed, similar to maliki (irak).
Afghanistan is a very rough landscape so quite some resistance apparently had escaped to certain regions and the usians decided to persecute "al kwaida" and "the taliban". It translates into: the popular resistance and the people, so you can imagine it was quite indiscriminate.
Nato tried to adapt (mh, i spoke 'peace' soldiers, their head was full of crap),
the military requires an attitude that is neither consistent with human dignity , nor
allowing itself to adapt it's policy's different from the propaganda as it presents the case to the (western) public.
That's: it is functionally dependend from ordres higher up in the hierarchy and for netherlands eg. depends on a mandate that a certain harry potter aka Balkenende rewarded after hiding up the reports that might have made the parliament think quite differently.
perhaps because he is a "christian" , raised a christian, litterally pumped quite full of the crap. Christians do have an instinctive , and when i was a kid, explicit hate against islam. When you meet it, it is like their second instinct, ooh islam,
well kill them, attack them, bomb them, it's a good idea, is how a christian feels deep inside.
problem here ofcourse, for an atheist, islam does exactly the same to its people, and is thus equally scary. It's less scary in the sense that it is badly armed, and a 100 year backward at least, or so it seems, but it is more scary since they/islam are very much more commited to the notion of belief.
in my world, the european world, religion is sometimes ok, sometimes second-rate, sometimes not necessary. Wherever u go, russia, england, norway, italy, any european nation, there are mainstream representations of non-believers.
Ofcourse i observe religion is still used as an excuse for political control, as an asset of conservatism, but i also know, the usual 'believer' wouldn't understand this, or think about such things (and actually prefer not to 'belief' it).
Anyway, this reasoning apparently turned the afghani in devote muslims, and they were making a biggest clownery of nationwide proportions, embarrassing the former colonialist who once had all the time tried not to show such was the source of their contempt.
What happened after this is hard to grab. First mistake of the nato was to choose several groups over the others. that started of at karzai ofcourse, and in a sense it so couldn't be helped. Anyhow, that allowed for a messy situation for a year or more, then the taliban united, (that was a peace effort) and started negotiating karzai, but it was still not ok. So , i think you will agree, the nr of high profile atatcks rose, one of them i think was ridiculous, a failed bomb attempt on a 100% unharmed parlementarian, it reminded me of reichstag promise. Brutal.
So that's not obvious, anyhow, by now the nato could have left afghanistan on her own, but they don't. instead they trained 100000s of soldiers. Also they maintained operations against groups of people perceived taliban, or otherways allied with anything not allied to usia.
it is many months later now, the above thing is somewhat to expanding, but for most of it i think it is still usefull that it is said. I tried to compile a description of afghanistan atthe time i started this article, one that would hint at the option to seek security not in armament, and to seek our subjective safety in afghanistan not rhough police forces.
however, obama changed that all, he took the notion that as karzai was not able to keep to a woman friendly politics, the whole of afghanistan was still in dire need of education, and perhaps he thought of that usian soldier that said: "i don't think this will work for this generation of afghans, but maybe it will for the next".
he got a lot of roundabout support for that step, a green future, equal development, it stands and falls among other things with 51% of the population that is woman.
geopolitically there is a downside to this story, but at the moment i don't really care, generally spoken it is a matter of money towards facility , and most can be bought that way. also the general trend, in particular cases, and in the wider picture is one of exchange over mere trade limitation, at least bottom up. the rich nations should really provide that green exchange to offset the unbalance.
i myself am maybe even worse, eg. if i basically believed it was environmentally proficient and lucrative, i suggest pipelines can be build evrywhere, altho with the current status quo limitations to acces might be necessary, and dealt with beforeheand.
if for some reason that trajectory serves only the opposite use, to exclude the environmental routes to monopolise efforts, likewise i consider them unnegotiable.
there is one more very important thing about afghanistan, and that is pakistan. 10000 and more pakistani have died fighting the war for terror, and the pakistani situation is completely escalated.
the pashtun and northern alliances have been outlawed to an even greater extend, and their likewise reaction is one of (well targetted usually) attacks.
i don't believe isi plays a big role in these. Allthough pakistan as a whole is much served with targetted attacks over random and desperate suicide explosions, etc.
in that sense perhaps isi has different operational motives from cia.
the problem in the decision to occupy afghanistan untill the situation for woman is settled foregood, is not in afghanistan, the current protocol is btw not sufficient, it seems to me, accidently with this scale events you would want to offer people an opportunity to develop such different visions, and bombing for opium , continual observation and the surrounding capitalists eyeing afghanistans mineral resources,
if anything that comes of the ground, nobody there is really very much impressed.
the soldiers would perhaps be better prepared for their task, when they could think of taliban as a football(or baseball) club, that for lack of grass defends rocks with guns. not like some evil enemy, not like an anonimous ideology.
just like western kids stick to their coca cola and hardcore, inhabitants of deserts cling to prayer ( for rain), and householdslaves.
before they will want to hold onto something else it should be obvious it must be a generous offer. some miners, and heaps of police and army are not the kind of freedom pashtun have allways have to fight for, and chances they will accept violent methods for real are nill.
with an open mind you really only have to look at irak, to see how right they are.
that tehse people have a moral and customs we perceive as at least a century backward, does not mean they are stupid, when they are preserving their identity in this, it should be valuable for all, and not be a reason to be at war.
Friday, January 23, 2009
peace for gaza
It seems people don't have a comprehensive picture of how Hamas could survive israel, meanwhile respecting the israelians rights like any others.
I don't feel like summing up the whole history again, but i point out inside israel palestines have no rights. Not even the right to vote. How could a democrat defend such a nation? Do the elites of the world intend to take away other minority's and majority's their right to vote?
why is this argument not weighted in assesing who is actually contrary to human rights?
The phenomenon mentioned above can be apreciated in israeli politics in many shapes,
limitations to work, housing, schooling, acces to jobs, etc.
israel is an apartheid state.
From this it must be obvious i support the palestines over israel as the situation is now and has been over many years. I can't help that i stick to the integrity of principles.
in fact i think the palestineans have a couple of rights that will not be solved by any peace proces. The right of return, the right on their ancestral lands, the right to be equal to israelians in israel(..), are hardly in the picture.
Israel is always trying to legitimise it's claim by having individual palestineans sign documents they afterwards pose as 'arrangements'. However israel itself has not followed up to UN resolutions , so it really has not all right to speak.
(hamas is the only chosen representation of palestines so far and thus the only one that could be held accountable for what it signs so far)
here is where the westbank/east jerusalem landgrabs come in, and remain a point to solve.
so point one that needs a solution is israeli landgrab.
Hamas or the palestines will not settle with israel denying un resolutions, and pressing palestines to stick to their parts of such 'agreements, and resolutions'.
Then there is the feature of asymetrical warfare. Israel has been fighting the palestines with one of the most imposing arsenals of the world, being countered by stuff such as stones and handweapons.
Any solution that could be taken serious, should disallow israel to perpetrate further violence, attacks , bulldozering and eliminations.
As of yet not one stage of the struggle has resulted in israel restraining it's agressions. That is point two,
all israeli agression against palestines in gaza and westbank needs to disappear.
As it is now people watch gaza, but even bush remarked the westbank situation with roadbloacks etc. is contrary to human rights.
Even considering only the above 2 points israel has never tried to respect them. For me it means there is no real chance on peace,(israel will take care it wont happen), yet, being the antimilitarist i am i will explore the negotiations-concept further.
So when gaza international borders are opened, actually we can improve on gaza, but as the situation inside israel and westbank remains unsolved, we can also be sure resistance boils up time and again.
That's just human, any people would protest their ongoing humiliation.
When violence is the method of the other, spats of violence and spates of armed resistance can only be expected.
It's the turning side of the israeli agression, and it is the long history of violent repression, that facilitate these emotions.
Anyone making a real start with a peace proces should not deny such reality's.
Firstly because they weill end up a henchman of childmurderers, secondly because
it shows you want to solve the situation only for the zionists.
I think a real solution should account for that, the long, long rants and lies emanating from the zionist clique that is actually 80% of israel and 100% of it's political representatives should come to an end. Israel should be disallowed to allways blamish others (irak , iran, lebanon, syria) for the violence it perpetrates and causes.
in fact palestines should have a right to vote, and a right to have any kind of job,
in israel. (Native) americans have a right to work, inuit do, and so do palestines.
So that is the first big questionmark, will bringing peace to the middle east bring down the israeli apartheid system.
And if not, will it at least make a start with it, and will the international community at least stop defending the practises of a racist (and neighing to fascist)
israeli system?
These points are essential, as israel will claim the unright to eliminate palestines, bulldozer their homes, fly drones and f16 over the kids at bedtime, because they allways did.
It follows the palestines should have a right to be free from israeli interference and violations.
The following point is starting to speak in true terms. When the deathtoll is a 100 to 1, democrats, human rights adherents, must have the courage to file complaints.
It is the awfullests of precedents israel is setting all the time. If the UN allows this degradation of agreements and human rights, they loose all right to speak in any other situation, (simple example, north korea knows no apartheid, iran targets no iraqi's).
When the situation for west bank is solved and for gaza is safe, and israel stops being a racist state, a lot seems possible, even locking up the palestines in those two small areas, without a real perspective of future or return of the refugees.
(some would return but they would just not fit in the available space).
That is westbank need to become an unbroken territory. As such it is not possible to recognise the state of israel, since it does not stick to UN decisions itself, it would be a onesided surrender.
israel would like it, but it would have no real legitimacy for the palestines (or me and other ethic people in the world), just like much remains to be wondered when a apartheid state is positively judged by the oslo agreement, but not held to un resolutions.
When israel does have the freedom to neglect the decissions of the international community, certainly palestines have the right to resist israel.
Like the wallons have the right to resist the flamish, palestines must have the right and possiblities to resist israel.
So what can the palestines deal in return??
nothing, they have nothing, they have only been raped of their soil and options, concentrated in small areas of land, and traumatised by perpetual atatcks and infringements, not to mention huge campaigns of military terror.
They only have a dream. Live a human live, live in peace with their neighbours,(syria, egypt, jordan), (dis)solve the israeli problem. And be free of agressions.
what can they offer??
that the rockets stop? at the start of this last massacre every media stressed how
the palestines were cowards, according to israeli outlets, that got repeated by international political prominents.
the argument swayed, ofcourse fighting F16s and tanks with handguns is the opposite of cowardice.
however it helps to realise israel had been shouting that a long time, and suddenly shuts up when someone (me) shows how lousy that argument is.
I think i have handed quite a few viewpoints that are essential in bringing peace for the palestines. The israeli in my opinion don't really want peace, they only want the excuse to do what they like, and achieve compromise by lies.
(the list of excuses they would have to offer exceeds my endurance in summing up and finding out and also be to long this article)
The freedom of the palestines is really only a matter of the restriction of israeli agression. And that should be the starting point for negotiations,
such negotiations should leave openings to the palestines as they have been the victim for 60 years, (3 million dead related to the nakba, more by now)
One such opening would be the availability of water resources, before i acted,(but others pointed me at it) , that availability in gaza was zero. It is now 20-30% wich is to little. The gaz field before gaza should be theirs, they should be compensated for israel destroying their fishery and trade, and israel should be stripped of any permission to still destroy palestines lives, by fly by's, attacks, and what not all.
As the situation is now, one cannot expect the palestines to stop violence, they got nothing, have been cheated and lied to by israel and the international community for decades, and the next israeli transgression more deadly and often more bloody then any palestine action is something we are only waiting for.
I hope these figureheads in the international community will understand such are not negotiations, and where principle points can be made against palestines , many more can be made against israel.
The principle of justice requires that the international community aims for equality and mutuality, otherways not only they have no right to speak (defending apartheid is contrary to justice) they will be complicit in the ongoing slaughter of palestines
and the destruction of their future.
Okay, i know the 'international community' is a biased one, this is a turning point in history, and we will soon know, wether it turns for the good, or more of the same, prejudice, bias, apartheid, discrimination, arbitrary violence, eliminations,
it is not up to me.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Theoretical entry to the destruction of apache (and other antipersonal mass destruction helicopters)
I saw a short documentary on apache helicopters, there sure is a production line that suggests significant losses, in that sense my ideas may add nothing to existing expertise i have no knowledge of.
The apache is a volatile tool of destruction, under normal circumstances and with basic arms hardly anything can be done to counter them, let alone counter them efficiently.
Under almost any circumstances the apache helicopter will have significant informations of all potential targets within reach of it's armament. Ambushing them is probably not rili possible, (except under singular circumstances, wich include camouflage, surprise attack and single helicopters, (or perhaps pairs).
Except in very complex battlefieldsituations, something that hardly occurs these days, the mere options of detection make anything but a surprise attack unfeasible.
probably any attack will provoke a represaille, and in that sense there probably are no methods to negotiate apache helicopters or their close relatives, except in very mountaneous terrain, with advanced missiles, like stingers, by surprise, so from a camouflaged position,
very hard to do because next to bodyheat a lot of the militairy informations would refer to armaments, weapons.
I figure that the only situations in wich apaches can be really brought down somewhat effectively is in organised conflict, in confused battles, with at least sufficient airdefence to limit the helicopters operational freedom, (a limitation of their movement by like 20% of the airspace (and related landareas) may be enuf to
start fighting them.
Basically you would try to fight them from the periphery of your forces, yet it is equally attractive to lure single examples deeper into lightly occupied terrain.
I think in an assymetric struggle like any that fights apaches would be, it is very hard to attack even 2 helicopters at once, that being teh case tehy will usually operate in small groups i think. 2 of them already is a huge force to reckon,
unless you would strike first and fast, so i assume 3 is their usual basic combat formation.
That means that their offensive capacity's are most only limited to munitions and it's of great interest to find ways to deal with them peripherially (or unexpected).
I am under the impression that the best way to cope with them would be to use special weaponry and munitions.
advanced mancarried missiles are the only tool available i would think in the current arsenals that forms any threat as it is. ofcourse heavy to very heavy airdefense or jets may keep them away, concentrations of such airdefence can only incidentally be achieved, and thinking airpower other then nato would be superior in the medium term of any small or great conflict is more stupid then wishfull thinking.
The only two such options would be when all non-nato nations would fights all nato nations, and when us would engage in wars with the greatest other nations and unions,
so when it would loose european support from the nato.
the latter sceme is not as completely implausible as the first , but certainly not europe nor the us have an interest in that wich makes it remarkably improbable as well.
So the more probably combat operations of apaches to come, will probably be against
firstly single targets and small lightly armed formations, like in afghanistan
and gaza, and perhaps but i hope not , against bigger armys that could set up something of a defense in depth. These army's would probably under great pressure considering numbers in nato inventory.
It is quite obvious any more solid and indepth defence would be served by a peripherial perimeter that would cope with apaches. They have a great firerate, heavy weapons, a lot of munitions and advanced sensors and obervation tools, the sooner you'd stop them the better.
So let's get technical. In principle any weapon invented or adapted to peripherial defence could be usefull in ambush, however you would still need single, low flying helicopters to do something. chances appear somewhat slim, detection, arms control, infiltration etc. remain not much hidden to big brother.
Helicoptercrews would definetly get nervous of camouflaged personel and they are optimally equiped to deal with it.
Only in situations where the bloodlet of infantry is the ap. secondary task such camouflaged personel might get a shot in. if they have the weapon...
apart from it's miraculously reinforced transmission, that turns it into so to see the best aerial firing platform available, (very stable so very accurate) the whole thing is build to specifications, these would be generally available in the public domain i think, however i have read seen them a couple of times long ago, and i see no need for me personally to know this very precisely, so i might be a few mm or even more off in some calculations.
k so there goes, it must be theoretically possible to neutralise an ap. witha usual bullet, however such could only happen through the extremest of coincedences, seperation of 2 identical wires in the tail, or a lucky hit on some of the detail of the rotorconstruction weakest points , it may be possible to ignite the rocketmunitions it carries. Perhaps it's also possible by luck to damage a radar or something like that.
I think the glass can stand 2 cm machinegun rounds, and isnt penetrated by light grenades, the iron cage is still much stronger, grenades under 4cm probably dont get through. The tail appears slightly weaker, yet the most of the length is uninterupted, and systems and strengths would be redundant, the points where the tail
would be most vulnerable (besides the tailrotor that is allways a vulnerable point to some extend (5 cm should do the trick) 4cm has a chance i think,
I know this is not much help, since it's beyond the limits of targetting really, yet i first have to describe the structural quality's of the thing before i can show where what remains to be exploited as weaknesses could be.
(rotors are relatively easy to finetarget electronically i think).
For all i know they tried to make the back rotor of the ap.s extremely strong, it having allways been the weakest spot of helicopters, albeit one hard to target.
Unless we are sure our rounds will penetrate the skin and do sufficient damage to structurally impair 75% failure, the tail would hold, so the next points to aim for are not at the end f the tail but where the first servicing ports are in the rump.
There is more change to compromise the electronical and others at such places then in the mere tail itself, the monoqoque has only few exit and entry points for cabling and wires and tehse are well protected, however every major component of the helicopter is most bulnerable at such points, so when the rounds suffice it is possibly usefull to aim just outside the cage, and just outside components, )for example some 20 cn under the the point the rotor enters the skin the machine suggests
some conenctions, some 40 cm deeper again it appears to have some connections, etc.
So the main wiring is very well protected, and its probably better to try to neutralise components of the machine.
in no case the sheer metal parts of the thing need to be targetted, parts of the rotor close to the centre of it can stand much bigger shells then 5 cm (perhaps even more then 8 with inicidental hits), targetting that is in most cases useless.
Perhaps the lateral construct on it is more vulnerable then has been admitted, it sure looks like you wouldn't need 8cm to break it.(that small spider around the top-centre). You would still need a lucky hit, it wouldn't break by a simple hit on the shoulder i think.
So what remains to be seen is what are the weakest spots, connections, exterior munitions (i can think of munition countering munitions) , windows, (i think there is some chance they are one of the weaker points, yet they are pretty tough)
Also i think there are still stronger backup windows even when they reinforced the windows after the first versions. Apparently they fear a weapon that would exclusively or efficiently target the windows, not so strange where they are almost twice as weak as the rotor parts, repeated hits on single windows would cause it to break and let subsequent muntions enter the compartment, it is quite possible, that with generic and unsophisticated weaponry they are the best place to aim. However i am curious to the result of hits on the munitions, as they would at least also cripple it's tremendous capacity's of targetted destruction. For example some mobilised AA may be able to counter ap.s , without their missiles.
(the cannon it carries however destroys tanks so i don't think it's really worth trying.) In any case it's doubtfull that even discharging the munitions would persee be lethal to the helicopter, ofcourse really igniting its munitions would actually destroy it. ok i guess my antirotor bullets might just work here as well..
because, i found out one more weaker spot on the aps. the rotors.
2 man can carry one such rotor, wich goes to say that the titanium cover is relatively thin. i think i have seen heli's with damaged rotors tho, and as long as they don't break it doesn't matter a bit, so we have to break them.
Like the tail of the helicopter the weakest spot of the rotor is not close to where it attackes, yet its not halway the rotors either, ut depends teh precise construction of the rotor when it uses no glove the weaker spot could be between 50cm (bit more) - 1m of the center, when it does use some extended kind of sock it is more probably between 80cm and 1.40. Anyhow the point where the reinforced part thins to usual armour property of the whole rotor is the best place to break it.
yet with usual guns not much happens, titanium being harder then iron or steel, at huge speed, just reflects most of the metal that hits it.
so the firing system to achieve this should probably be dedicated (aiming electronically at that property of the rotors circle) like i said, such a system would function and be scary, it would not be sufficient with usual munitions.
Lucky for this planet they have me, and i just invented the tungsten tipped hollow charge composite destructor round. (perhaps its even possible to use agressive fluids like toluene for the 'hollow' charge.)
The point being, a: we have to penetrate the titanium. tungsten tipped should achieve that, b: with penetrating into the rotor 'composite honeyrate layer'
a hollow charge with properties that for example melt or disintegrate the composite content of the rotor (perhaps aluminium it worked against some tanks) or it's tungsten all the way and actually one could apply their own D>I>M>E. munitions concept to rotors. I am not quite sure, and i don't want to improve on the rotors.
however if they improve on them, there is no other option then to use similar materials like eg. industrial diamant or what they will start using when they also think of it, and if they don't use it yet. (its bad for the environment)
It does matter since i think a more complex composit might have you want to fire a more complicated, multiaction charge and i wasn't inventing that. however it shud be possible if one uses films or in another way, films ofcourse work best.in the very far future all charges will be composites constructed partly through films, logically.
I am not sure, can they nanotube the whole thing for the price it takes (63k)?
i don't think so, but it cud be they have special deliverys, i saw tennisrackets with nanotubes that hardly costed anything extra.
so my first guess would be to enforce the tungsten with nanotubes and still try to destroy teh composite by heat or chemical reaction.
Assuming we can create such charges, how will we create a sufficiently effective targeting system. Ofcourse we need a digitalised fire system, the optimal would be a completely robotic hmg, or perhaps a high firerate machine cannon. it would then target at the rotor on a set and specific distance form the center (eg. 90 cm would probably work but if closer to the centre the structure is equally strong closer to the centre is better,
next we could calibrate the fire to the rotors rotations, to maximise the nr of hits.
(note from the ground it's usually much easier to have a line of fire to the main rotor then to the tale one)in that way perhaps even a 1.5cm mg could down any chopper in 20 shots.
okay so much for the conventional tools, we could ofcourse defeat the enemy by it's own means and use drones instead.
okay so drones against helicopters,
impact drones an impact drone would chase a helicopter, or even wait for it to position itself and then charge it, and try to destroy it by the means of its impact,
Allthough a good chasing drone could destroy a helicopter in that way, teh drone would be little but a ameliorated rocket, and as such have less effect on the helicopter then repeated hits with hi-energy rounds, simpler rockets or...
the utterly annoying drone, different from the impact drone the annoyance drone doesnt aim to destroy the helicopter on impact but after impacts, for example molten metals that alloy with exterior moving parts, variety's of "paint bombs" (that could for example enlarge the radar shadow, or restrict the weapons in their accuracy.
Some of these could be promising, but most of them would probably result in mobility kills only.
Then there is the drone aerial combat vehicle, any kind of drone that tries to hit its target with submunitions would be that. I think this is also promising,
but its costy and for now the target it would provide the nato is to big.
then it's better to use smaller radio controlled vehicles or homing drones, as these would be much more costefficient.
For drones ofcourse it is imperial to think of sound attack methods, you don't want to loose a couple 100 dollar drone for nothing.
Fortunately helicopters are not build to defend against drones, the cannon can hardly be expected to engage multiple small targets at high speed on very different angles, assuming a slightly sub sound drone for example, even an apache would not turn fast enough to destroy multiples of them when they would angle in from behind.
It could have a tough time with one if the drone habitually manouvers.
(flys (some 20 cm) irregulary)
There is probably a lower limit to when the rockets the ap. carry's can catch teh drone. against this its either perhaps an option to use dummy drones, to use drones that cost much less then these rockets, or to build a speedier drone.
since the drones only need to home in once, certainly attacks with several drones would destroy helicopters, the anti airmissile the heli fires should be somewhat luckily aimed to engage a system that locks in at a speed comparable to it's.
oh well i guess just hate helicopters, i do, tehy are the typical sluaghter tool kind of weapon, the killing endless numbers of innocents and defenceless indiscriminately, and surpress any kind of resistance kind of weapon.
repressive weapons for "crowd control".
The apache is a volatile tool of destruction, under normal circumstances and with basic arms hardly anything can be done to counter them, let alone counter them efficiently.
Under almost any circumstances the apache helicopter will have significant informations of all potential targets within reach of it's armament. Ambushing them is probably not rili possible, (except under singular circumstances, wich include camouflage, surprise attack and single helicopters, (or perhaps pairs).
Except in very complex battlefieldsituations, something that hardly occurs these days, the mere options of detection make anything but a surprise attack unfeasible.
probably any attack will provoke a represaille, and in that sense there probably are no methods to negotiate apache helicopters or their close relatives, except in very mountaneous terrain, with advanced missiles, like stingers, by surprise, so from a camouflaged position,
very hard to do because next to bodyheat a lot of the militairy informations would refer to armaments, weapons.
I figure that the only situations in wich apaches can be really brought down somewhat effectively is in organised conflict, in confused battles, with at least sufficient airdefence to limit the helicopters operational freedom, (a limitation of their movement by like 20% of the airspace (and related landareas) may be enuf to
start fighting them.
Basically you would try to fight them from the periphery of your forces, yet it is equally attractive to lure single examples deeper into lightly occupied terrain.
I think in an assymetric struggle like any that fights apaches would be, it is very hard to attack even 2 helicopters at once, that being teh case tehy will usually operate in small groups i think. 2 of them already is a huge force to reckon,
unless you would strike first and fast, so i assume 3 is their usual basic combat formation.
That means that their offensive capacity's are most only limited to munitions and it's of great interest to find ways to deal with them peripherially (or unexpected).
I am under the impression that the best way to cope with them would be to use special weaponry and munitions.
advanced mancarried missiles are the only tool available i would think in the current arsenals that forms any threat as it is. ofcourse heavy to very heavy airdefense or jets may keep them away, concentrations of such airdefence can only incidentally be achieved, and thinking airpower other then nato would be superior in the medium term of any small or great conflict is more stupid then wishfull thinking.
The only two such options would be when all non-nato nations would fights all nato nations, and when us would engage in wars with the greatest other nations and unions,
so when it would loose european support from the nato.
the latter sceme is not as completely implausible as the first , but certainly not europe nor the us have an interest in that wich makes it remarkably improbable as well.
So the more probably combat operations of apaches to come, will probably be against
firstly single targets and small lightly armed formations, like in afghanistan
and gaza, and perhaps but i hope not , against bigger armys that could set up something of a defense in depth. These army's would probably under great pressure considering numbers in nato inventory.
It is quite obvious any more solid and indepth defence would be served by a peripherial perimeter that would cope with apaches. They have a great firerate, heavy weapons, a lot of munitions and advanced sensors and obervation tools, the sooner you'd stop them the better.
So let's get technical. In principle any weapon invented or adapted to peripherial defence could be usefull in ambush, however you would still need single, low flying helicopters to do something. chances appear somewhat slim, detection, arms control, infiltration etc. remain not much hidden to big brother.
Helicoptercrews would definetly get nervous of camouflaged personel and they are optimally equiped to deal with it.
Only in situations where the bloodlet of infantry is the ap. secondary task such camouflaged personel might get a shot in. if they have the weapon...
apart from it's miraculously reinforced transmission, that turns it into so to see the best aerial firing platform available, (very stable so very accurate) the whole thing is build to specifications, these would be generally available in the public domain i think, however i have read seen them a couple of times long ago, and i see no need for me personally to know this very precisely, so i might be a few mm or even more off in some calculations.
k so there goes, it must be theoretically possible to neutralise an ap. witha usual bullet, however such could only happen through the extremest of coincedences, seperation of 2 identical wires in the tail, or a lucky hit on some of the detail of the rotorconstruction weakest points , it may be possible to ignite the rocketmunitions it carries. Perhaps it's also possible by luck to damage a radar or something like that.
I think the glass can stand 2 cm machinegun rounds, and isnt penetrated by light grenades, the iron cage is still much stronger, grenades under 4cm probably dont get through. The tail appears slightly weaker, yet the most of the length is uninterupted, and systems and strengths would be redundant, the points where the tail
would be most vulnerable (besides the tailrotor that is allways a vulnerable point to some extend (5 cm should do the trick) 4cm has a chance i think,
I know this is not much help, since it's beyond the limits of targetting really, yet i first have to describe the structural quality's of the thing before i can show where what remains to be exploited as weaknesses could be.
(rotors are relatively easy to finetarget electronically i think).
For all i know they tried to make the back rotor of the ap.s extremely strong, it having allways been the weakest spot of helicopters, albeit one hard to target.
Unless we are sure our rounds will penetrate the skin and do sufficient damage to structurally impair 75% failure, the tail would hold, so the next points to aim for are not at the end f the tail but where the first servicing ports are in the rump.
There is more change to compromise the electronical and others at such places then in the mere tail itself, the monoqoque has only few exit and entry points for cabling and wires and tehse are well protected, however every major component of the helicopter is most bulnerable at such points, so when the rounds suffice it is possibly usefull to aim just outside the cage, and just outside components, )for example some 20 cn under the the point the rotor enters the skin the machine suggests
some conenctions, some 40 cm deeper again it appears to have some connections, etc.
So the main wiring is very well protected, and its probably better to try to neutralise components of the machine.
in no case the sheer metal parts of the thing need to be targetted, parts of the rotor close to the centre of it can stand much bigger shells then 5 cm (perhaps even more then 8 with inicidental hits), targetting that is in most cases useless.
Perhaps the lateral construct on it is more vulnerable then has been admitted, it sure looks like you wouldn't need 8cm to break it.(that small spider around the top-centre). You would still need a lucky hit, it wouldn't break by a simple hit on the shoulder i think.
So what remains to be seen is what are the weakest spots, connections, exterior munitions (i can think of munition countering munitions) , windows, (i think there is some chance they are one of the weaker points, yet they are pretty tough)
Also i think there are still stronger backup windows even when they reinforced the windows after the first versions. Apparently they fear a weapon that would exclusively or efficiently target the windows, not so strange where they are almost twice as weak as the rotor parts, repeated hits on single windows would cause it to break and let subsequent muntions enter the compartment, it is quite possible, that with generic and unsophisticated weaponry they are the best place to aim. However i am curious to the result of hits on the munitions, as they would at least also cripple it's tremendous capacity's of targetted destruction. For example some mobilised AA may be able to counter ap.s , without their missiles.
(the cannon it carries however destroys tanks so i don't think it's really worth trying.) In any case it's doubtfull that even discharging the munitions would persee be lethal to the helicopter, ofcourse really igniting its munitions would actually destroy it. ok i guess my antirotor bullets might just work here as well..
because, i found out one more weaker spot on the aps. the rotors.
2 man can carry one such rotor, wich goes to say that the titanium cover is relatively thin. i think i have seen heli's with damaged rotors tho, and as long as they don't break it doesn't matter a bit, so we have to break them.
Like the tail of the helicopter the weakest spot of the rotor is not close to where it attackes, yet its not halway the rotors either, ut depends teh precise construction of the rotor when it uses no glove the weaker spot could be between 50cm (bit more) - 1m of the center, when it does use some extended kind of sock it is more probably between 80cm and 1.40. Anyhow the point where the reinforced part thins to usual armour property of the whole rotor is the best place to break it.
yet with usual guns not much happens, titanium being harder then iron or steel, at huge speed, just reflects most of the metal that hits it.
so the firing system to achieve this should probably be dedicated (aiming electronically at that property of the rotors circle) like i said, such a system would function and be scary, it would not be sufficient with usual munitions.
Lucky for this planet they have me, and i just invented the tungsten tipped hollow charge composite destructor round. (perhaps its even possible to use agressive fluids like toluene for the 'hollow' charge.)
The point being, a: we have to penetrate the titanium. tungsten tipped should achieve that, b: with penetrating into the rotor 'composite honeyrate layer'
a hollow charge with properties that for example melt or disintegrate the composite content of the rotor (perhaps aluminium it worked against some tanks) or it's tungsten all the way and actually one could apply their own D>I>M>E. munitions concept to rotors. I am not quite sure, and i don't want to improve on the rotors.
however if they improve on them, there is no other option then to use similar materials like eg. industrial diamant or what they will start using when they also think of it, and if they don't use it yet. (its bad for the environment)
It does matter since i think a more complex composit might have you want to fire a more complicated, multiaction charge and i wasn't inventing that. however it shud be possible if one uses films or in another way, films ofcourse work best.in the very far future all charges will be composites constructed partly through films, logically.
I am not sure, can they nanotube the whole thing for the price it takes (63k)?
i don't think so, but it cud be they have special deliverys, i saw tennisrackets with nanotubes that hardly costed anything extra.
so my first guess would be to enforce the tungsten with nanotubes and still try to destroy teh composite by heat or chemical reaction.
Assuming we can create such charges, how will we create a sufficiently effective targeting system. Ofcourse we need a digitalised fire system, the optimal would be a completely robotic hmg, or perhaps a high firerate machine cannon. it would then target at the rotor on a set and specific distance form the center (eg. 90 cm would probably work but if closer to the centre the structure is equally strong closer to the centre is better,
next we could calibrate the fire to the rotors rotations, to maximise the nr of hits.
(note from the ground it's usually much easier to have a line of fire to the main rotor then to the tale one)in that way perhaps even a 1.5cm mg could down any chopper in 20 shots.
okay so much for the conventional tools, we could ofcourse defeat the enemy by it's own means and use drones instead.
okay so drones against helicopters,
impact drones an impact drone would chase a helicopter, or even wait for it to position itself and then charge it, and try to destroy it by the means of its impact,
Allthough a good chasing drone could destroy a helicopter in that way, teh drone would be little but a ameliorated rocket, and as such have less effect on the helicopter then repeated hits with hi-energy rounds, simpler rockets or...
the utterly annoying drone, different from the impact drone the annoyance drone doesnt aim to destroy the helicopter on impact but after impacts, for example molten metals that alloy with exterior moving parts, variety's of "paint bombs" (that could for example enlarge the radar shadow, or restrict the weapons in their accuracy.
Some of these could be promising, but most of them would probably result in mobility kills only.
Then there is the drone aerial combat vehicle, any kind of drone that tries to hit its target with submunitions would be that. I think this is also promising,
but its costy and for now the target it would provide the nato is to big.
then it's better to use smaller radio controlled vehicles or homing drones, as these would be much more costefficient.
For drones ofcourse it is imperial to think of sound attack methods, you don't want to loose a couple 100 dollar drone for nothing.
Fortunately helicopters are not build to defend against drones, the cannon can hardly be expected to engage multiple small targets at high speed on very different angles, assuming a slightly sub sound drone for example, even an apache would not turn fast enough to destroy multiples of them when they would angle in from behind.
It could have a tough time with one if the drone habitually manouvers.
(flys (some 20 cm) irregulary)
There is probably a lower limit to when the rockets the ap. carry's can catch teh drone. against this its either perhaps an option to use dummy drones, to use drones that cost much less then these rockets, or to build a speedier drone.
since the drones only need to home in once, certainly attacks with several drones would destroy helicopters, the anti airmissile the heli fires should be somewhat luckily aimed to engage a system that locks in at a speed comparable to it's.
oh well i guess just hate helicopters, i do, tehy are the typical sluaghter tool kind of weapon, the killing endless numbers of innocents and defenceless indiscriminately, and surpress any kind of resistance kind of weapon.
repressive weapons for "crowd control".
3dom of speech
so far i have seen barack obamas speech once 'live' (it wasnt really but with 30 sec delay , they said..), next i heard rather some of it on a radio, that was within 2 hours, some aspects, sounds , timbres , at least were different.
Now i looked at one on alJazeeras youtube channel, and it appears to omit words, and be otwherways slightly different.
The alJ one could be the one "for the arab public" or the one "cut for the arab public" i think the last, that is a pretty excuse, nevertheless i will never watch a speech again, i had it with historical speeches, ('t was my first i watched anyhow)
they aren't historical anymore and i will deal with the texts from now on.
Thanks anyway.
The version on alJ is compellingly suggestive of they could have been working with my material they censored (on or pre alJazeera) as well, things can be obstruse.
I am a bit curious as to how the final versiosn will word stuff, but it's to mized up for me to still enjoy.
When is see the text (s...?) (i think there should be two offcial ones although one must be the confidentialised kind) and the reference to commies is also out,
I hope it will be the last i think of this speech, and possibly report some on the apparently finalised version.(I am in no hurry to find it).
So the speech, well i hope it is the gladder luckier version, altho actually a president shouldnt be speaking about all kinds of networks if further postings on the subject end censored.
oh yeah i was censored a lot.. ok alJ published some..a little, i didn't check all,
but a lot was censored. pitty, they were funny posts, i have plenty posts in archives , many of wich got censored, if someone is really interested. they can let me know. otoh i lack a lot of posts, since i am way to honest to remind the deletion of my texts straight from the screen so often. plus the bunch of other creepy ways to disappear or change my texts. when i get consequential in keeping copy's the actual result is i get moderated more.
Ok one last thing, i know i am a racist, allthough i allways try not to, but please don't think i would let my thought be marginalised even so much as through being antizionist, There is not that experience, and i would argue as stubbornly to remain reason seen.
Now i looked at one on alJazeeras youtube channel, and it appears to omit words, and be otwherways slightly different.
The alJ one could be the one "for the arab public" or the one "cut for the arab public" i think the last, that is a pretty excuse, nevertheless i will never watch a speech again, i had it with historical speeches, ('t was my first i watched anyhow)
they aren't historical anymore and i will deal with the texts from now on.
Thanks anyway.
The version on alJ is compellingly suggestive of they could have been working with my material they censored (on or pre alJazeera) as well, things can be obstruse.
I am a bit curious as to how the final versiosn will word stuff, but it's to mized up for me to still enjoy.
When is see the text (s...?) (i think there should be two offcial ones although one must be the confidentialised kind) and the reference to commies is also out,
I hope it will be the last i think of this speech, and possibly report some on the apparently finalised version.(I am in no hurry to find it).
So the speech, well i hope it is the gladder luckier version, altho actually a president shouldnt be speaking about all kinds of networks if further postings on the subject end censored.
oh yeah i was censored a lot.. ok alJ published some..a little, i didn't check all,
but a lot was censored. pitty, they were funny posts, i have plenty posts in archives , many of wich got censored, if someone is really interested. they can let me know. otoh i lack a lot of posts, since i am way to honest to remind the deletion of my texts straight from the screen so often. plus the bunch of other creepy ways to disappear or change my texts. when i get consequential in keeping copy's the actual result is i get moderated more.
Ok one last thing, i know i am a racist, allthough i allways try not to, but please don't think i would let my thought be marginalised even so much as through being antizionist, There is not that experience, and i would argue as stubbornly to remain reason seen.
paradise now
I am curious if after my vanished first comment on obama's speech my second did post to the (same/similar) moderators at least.
So except the annoyance that worldwide usian wars on terror remind me more of hell on earth then of a paradaisical promise i underline any not propagandic statement in obamas speech. In that it was really typical, that it was so splendid and full of good intents, when it wasn't militarist, nationalist or apologist.
Ofxourse that drove my mind not only to trying to match sincere objectives with his polarised words. (some 150-200 out of 2400 still) i have also been thinking a great deal about his motives.
However.. to start with the conclusion, it is still very offsetting and putting me on the wrong leg. It's complex to cope with such shrill contradictions.
After all, he did passionately call for peace.(1)
ok. evrything get's in the way with evrything, and thats what the speech did for me. It could have been a greatest moment, and perhaps it still was (tho i think my human counterparts more intelligent then that this would be their limit)
So i think if it fools people that is stupid, yet if it suffices them i also don't feel engraced.
However it would be a naive hope that this is: "best usian propaganda can do to fool people into something good". arguments before it can be made: the long 'patriotic' usian tradition must be expected to pop up, (although the suggestions to organised labour and development projects or "a national effort", reach a good way to that.)
For a dutch politician it might be enough to describe them a (retorical) populist.
in the usian tradition of selfglorification and "greeting the flag" tunnelvision
also here there is no great surprise.
His putting on one line of fascism and communism need not ever be forgiven even if it turns to no harm. communism is the endless struggle against fascism, he probably could know that well enough, to be culpable for wasting his own speech.
He should apologise for that, and i would rend it him a strategical mistake.
Yet i am not done,it wouldn't suffice
There is also his other confession to the military industrial complex. he owes the world yet one more apology.
And i guess he won't? So what have been his motivations for the two points where he completely missed the opportunity to make a speedy start with world-peace, (a communist? ideal ..? one opposed to .... fascism..).
First: US is at war with a worldwide network of terror.
observations: he is in denial (militairy violence still very much exceeds the civilian reaction everywhere)
He is not at peace, in his speech he mentions US is engaging in several wars, i imagine his standard israeli 'protect the civilians' remark in this context must be regarded the reason.
So he is at war with the world because israel is allowed to kill palestines. and he is on israels side. Or is he also at wars with the "commi's" , the anti-fascists?
(although anarchists vie for the honour).
I think it made him look really diabolic (comp. 'malicious') this out of context rape of the palestines.
He seemed to indulge in selfrighteusness all to visible. it always shows.
A few other psychological indications can suffice to sum up my only integer doubts to his sheer affiliation with "the powers that be (fascist)".
He appeared to be less at ease with a worldwide wars on terror then with casually defaming, malifying, commi's.
He appeared to be consistent in his social intentions. Those that required or invited .. more effort came not the easiest, and despite his apparently incoherent political position it is not so hard to read his mind, and look into his heart for the most part.
So for something wasted from the start he still did well.
It also leaves me little room to doubt my own conclusions.
These are that obama does either not have the power, or not the loyalty's that would have allowed him a peacefull speech. Since the martial part was very inspecific except in its rather unobvious but urging hints on israel it remains very suspect.
I think in obama's world vision the rest of the worlds attempts of cooperation, coexistence, and indeed entente, to easily coincide with what he perceives as enemy's of the US. and probably ,though not preferentially in my pov, it's representation of two-party system (ya know their 'democracy').
Usian sources start to describe obama as centre-right. The public is being prepared for another betrayal.
Will he have the mind, the wisdom, the sanity, the courage to finish what he started?
if he will, he can afford this excuse.
(much better then an apologist policy over bush' wars )
(1) our best online dictonairy is so limited, oblivate? not there .passionat(e?)ly? , not there, oftentimes it strikes me as politics, censoring. Like bush ended up superopstupating people or sth. because nobody get's a clue what it would mean and it sounds so intelligent and complicated.
sub. i noticed that several elements of the whole ceremony got dubbed or doctored, slightly improved, very quickly, it seemed not to significant, yet after observing it i didn't pay ,much extra attention, perhaps there was more then i think)
So except the annoyance that worldwide usian wars on terror remind me more of hell on earth then of a paradaisical promise i underline any not propagandic statement in obamas speech. In that it was really typical, that it was so splendid and full of good intents, when it wasn't militarist, nationalist or apologist.
Ofxourse that drove my mind not only to trying to match sincere objectives with his polarised words. (some 150-200 out of 2400 still) i have also been thinking a great deal about his motives.
However.. to start with the conclusion, it is still very offsetting and putting me on the wrong leg. It's complex to cope with such shrill contradictions.
After all, he did passionately call for peace.(1)
ok. evrything get's in the way with evrything, and thats what the speech did for me. It could have been a greatest moment, and perhaps it still was (tho i think my human counterparts more intelligent then that this would be their limit)
So i think if it fools people that is stupid, yet if it suffices them i also don't feel engraced.
However it would be a naive hope that this is: "best usian propaganda can do to fool people into something good". arguments before it can be made: the long 'patriotic' usian tradition must be expected to pop up, (although the suggestions to organised labour and development projects or "a national effort", reach a good way to that.)
For a dutch politician it might be enough to describe them a (retorical) populist.
in the usian tradition of selfglorification and "greeting the flag" tunnelvision
also here there is no great surprise.
His putting on one line of fascism and communism need not ever be forgiven even if it turns to no harm. communism is the endless struggle against fascism, he probably could know that well enough, to be culpable for wasting his own speech.
He should apologise for that, and i would rend it him a strategical mistake.
Yet i am not done,it wouldn't suffice
There is also his other confession to the military industrial complex. he owes the world yet one more apology.
And i guess he won't? So what have been his motivations for the two points where he completely missed the opportunity to make a speedy start with world-peace, (a communist? ideal ..? one opposed to .... fascism..).
First: US is at war with a worldwide network of terror.
observations: he is in denial (militairy violence still very much exceeds the civilian reaction everywhere)
He is not at peace, in his speech he mentions US is engaging in several wars, i imagine his standard israeli 'protect the civilians' remark in this context must be regarded the reason.
So he is at war with the world because israel is allowed to kill palestines. and he is on israels side. Or is he also at wars with the "commi's" , the anti-fascists?
(although anarchists vie for the honour).
I think it made him look really diabolic (comp. 'malicious') this out of context rape of the palestines.
He seemed to indulge in selfrighteusness all to visible. it always shows.
A few other psychological indications can suffice to sum up my only integer doubts to his sheer affiliation with "the powers that be (fascist)".
He appeared to be less at ease with a worldwide wars on terror then with casually defaming, malifying, commi's.
He appeared to be consistent in his social intentions. Those that required or invited .. more effort came not the easiest, and despite his apparently incoherent political position it is not so hard to read his mind, and look into his heart for the most part.
So for something wasted from the start he still did well.
It also leaves me little room to doubt my own conclusions.
These are that obama does either not have the power, or not the loyalty's that would have allowed him a peacefull speech. Since the martial part was very inspecific except in its rather unobvious but urging hints on israel it remains very suspect.
I think in obama's world vision the rest of the worlds attempts of cooperation, coexistence, and indeed entente, to easily coincide with what he perceives as enemy's of the US. and probably ,though not preferentially in my pov, it's representation of two-party system (ya know their 'democracy').
Usian sources start to describe obama as centre-right. The public is being prepared for another betrayal.
Will he have the mind, the wisdom, the sanity, the courage to finish what he started?
if he will, he can afford this excuse.
(much better then an apologist policy over bush' wars )
(1) our best online dictonairy is so limited, oblivate? not there .passionat(e?)ly? , not there, oftentimes it strikes me as politics, censoring. Like bush ended up superopstupating people or sth. because nobody get's a clue what it would mean and it sounds so intelligent and complicated.
sub. i noticed that several elements of the whole ceremony got dubbed or doctored, slightly improved, very quickly, it seemed not to significant, yet after observing it i didn't pay ,much extra attention, perhaps there was more then i think)
Saturday, January 17, 2009
in betweens
Perhaps i should not write, i know zionism will boast about everything, including me writing, it is her great accomplishment. I also know as soon as they perpetrate a new crime, they will accuse their victim of the same.
Thats just how religious fundamentalist racism works best, there is nothing exceptionally smart in it, collecting knowledge how best to cheat the rest during century's is admirably realist, but that is really the only thing that is admirable at it.
Ja , one can cheat people and record the methods, it's smart to realise it will have an effect, a small advantage over the naive people that record things about helping others and stuff.
So i desadmire that.
I think zionism is not a feat, only a fundamentalist racist fascistoid system called a religion.
It's also nauseating for what it does to the inhabitants of israel.
Take tipo livni for example, i had a bad forefeeling with her. her antecedents seemed to promise arrogance. Well i was right, she is as deceitfull as zionism can be.
Okay? to me she has shown her real face, i won't trust this person, (perhaps relevant i don't trust the european commission atm. when i note it i will get to it)
she gets both, i don't trust her over her person and words. And i will not trust her for what she historically represents. In that sense. like sri lanka, i know she will persecute her greediest intentions by violent means and lies.
The eu so far i only suspect of childishness, stupidity and greed not yet so much violence. but the machinations of worse intent show through.
So since i don't think i have to get into details about the newest israeli diplomatic perversity's (she looks like a female clone of ohlmert making you really wonder how jews' would not be a patriarchal society)
let me continue some about their old ones.
i advise all of you to have a look at what lebanon and palestine looked like , how the people looked like. before these black clad nutheads arrived. It's amazing, roaring twenty's and all. perfectly modern people, in modern dress, no halabja's kefir's or balabaja's anywhere to be seen.
so israel must have promoted the exterior looks of desertification now featured on neighbouring arabs, how will their argument they are the extrophests hold?
It's an old complaint they have been stealing water.
enuf old stuff.
talk some about gaz
isn't it weird? the commies and the gaza gaz?
positively regarding russia, this is the case:
Russia delivered all of eastern europe gaz for free (basically) for a long time.
Then capitalism arrived so russia needed to ask money.
Well they kept supplying the old network, and with many nations joining EU, got a pay. However Ukraine was not accepted in the EU. So there was no way to supply it with gaz but for (almost) free.
The EU put strong pressure on russia to deliver as much as gaz as possible for free,
ofcourse, but impolitely. Because they are capitalists and smell money they behave like that.
Anyway, Ukraine proved to be in dire needs, so Russia stuck to the old system more then could be reasonably expected, however it tried to negotiate a better price.
Somehow, gaz started disappearing in the ukraine, long ago, (one reason the eu dont want ukraine is they are to good thieves even for capitalists)and with ukraine seeking nato alliance and apparently allying nationalist politicians, more and more gaz disappeared untill gazA happened.
So, when russia had been supporting the european economy(ukraine amongst..) for many years now, dragging them through the cold winters with so much more ease, they decided ukraine and the eu should pay for it again. or at least stop stealing or killing palestineans.
The only question remains, how are the ukrainians not good enough thieves to join the EU? Seems to me they have been most helpfull and have shown they are willing to steal gaz for europe.
Sometimes i like to put russia in a positive light.
In fact russia is in a diplomatic offensive, the obvious counterside of the medals of europe becoming more complete is that the rest of europe will also have to live with it. It is rather obvious that a state that could stand out all on her own for many decades, seeks integrity towards a system that is conspirative on the highest levels.
The summit in moscow for example, could be seen in such light. Ofcourse the eu will send some representatives , yet the eu nations won't.
Okay from the european pov. indeed, there is no need for bilateral arangements, between partners and russia. yet, there is a better reason to go:
to check the eu.
because the eu top can persecute private targets unchecked the situation is very challenging for democracy and peace.
See?? now Blair comes in handy, middle east envoy, poor guy.
well i guess Blair doesnt make the mark, his alliance with bush has also proven you could not trust him in a top EU position.
Not for everyone there to see perhaps, but i judge it from his propaganda related statements. (he is willing to propagate a lie to facilitate violence)
Not blair then, there are other options, Merkel and the belgium prime minister? nice test for him. send a spaniard and at least one more european nation, as well, and have ur "high level eu talks" in the open. video conferenced for all the europeans to see.
don't forget ur new iraqi shoes!
enjoy the eu would set up anything, involving prime-ministers e.a., after all it's about what these guys consider career, not human lives.
Thats just how religious fundamentalist racism works best, there is nothing exceptionally smart in it, collecting knowledge how best to cheat the rest during century's is admirably realist, but that is really the only thing that is admirable at it.
Ja , one can cheat people and record the methods, it's smart to realise it will have an effect, a small advantage over the naive people that record things about helping others and stuff.
So i desadmire that.
I think zionism is not a feat, only a fundamentalist racist fascistoid system called a religion.
It's also nauseating for what it does to the inhabitants of israel.
Take tipo livni for example, i had a bad forefeeling with her. her antecedents seemed to promise arrogance. Well i was right, she is as deceitfull as zionism can be.
Okay? to me she has shown her real face, i won't trust this person, (perhaps relevant i don't trust the european commission atm. when i note it i will get to it)
she gets both, i don't trust her over her person and words. And i will not trust her for what she historically represents. In that sense. like sri lanka, i know she will persecute her greediest intentions by violent means and lies.
The eu so far i only suspect of childishness, stupidity and greed not yet so much violence. but the machinations of worse intent show through.
So since i don't think i have to get into details about the newest israeli diplomatic perversity's (she looks like a female clone of ohlmert making you really wonder how jews' would not be a patriarchal society)
let me continue some about their old ones.
i advise all of you to have a look at what lebanon and palestine looked like , how the people looked like. before these black clad nutheads arrived. It's amazing, roaring twenty's and all. perfectly modern people, in modern dress, no halabja's kefir's or balabaja's anywhere to be seen.
so israel must have promoted the exterior looks of desertification now featured on neighbouring arabs, how will their argument they are the extrophests hold?
It's an old complaint they have been stealing water.
enuf old stuff.
talk some about gaz
isn't it weird? the commies and the gaza gaz?
positively regarding russia, this is the case:
Russia delivered all of eastern europe gaz for free (basically) for a long time.
Then capitalism arrived so russia needed to ask money.
Well they kept supplying the old network, and with many nations joining EU, got a pay. However Ukraine was not accepted in the EU. So there was no way to supply it with gaz but for (almost) free.
The EU put strong pressure on russia to deliver as much as gaz as possible for free,
ofcourse, but impolitely. Because they are capitalists and smell money they behave like that.
Anyway, Ukraine proved to be in dire needs, so Russia stuck to the old system more then could be reasonably expected, however it tried to negotiate a better price.
Somehow, gaz started disappearing in the ukraine, long ago, (one reason the eu dont want ukraine is they are to good thieves even for capitalists)and with ukraine seeking nato alliance and apparently allying nationalist politicians, more and more gaz disappeared untill gazA happened.
So, when russia had been supporting the european economy(ukraine amongst..) for many years now, dragging them through the cold winters with so much more ease, they decided ukraine and the eu should pay for it again. or at least stop stealing or killing palestineans.
The only question remains, how are the ukrainians not good enough thieves to join the EU? Seems to me they have been most helpfull and have shown they are willing to steal gaz for europe.
Sometimes i like to put russia in a positive light.
In fact russia is in a diplomatic offensive, the obvious counterside of the medals of europe becoming more complete is that the rest of europe will also have to live with it. It is rather obvious that a state that could stand out all on her own for many decades, seeks integrity towards a system that is conspirative on the highest levels.
The summit in moscow for example, could be seen in such light. Ofcourse the eu will send some representatives , yet the eu nations won't.
Okay from the european pov. indeed, there is no need for bilateral arangements, between partners and russia. yet, there is a better reason to go:
to check the eu.
because the eu top can persecute private targets unchecked the situation is very challenging for democracy and peace.
See?? now Blair comes in handy, middle east envoy, poor guy.
well i guess Blair doesnt make the mark, his alliance with bush has also proven you could not trust him in a top EU position.
Not for everyone there to see perhaps, but i judge it from his propaganda related statements. (he is willing to propagate a lie to facilitate violence)
Not blair then, there are other options, Merkel and the belgium prime minister? nice test for him. send a spaniard and at least one more european nation, as well, and have ur "high level eu talks" in the open. video conferenced for all the europeans to see.
don't forget ur new iraqi shoes!
enjoy the eu would set up anything, involving prime-ministers e.a., after all it's about what these guys consider career, not human lives.
Friday, January 16, 2009
He said: "Obama" and the world changed.
Slowly the world is kind of melting, like a new creation, primordial stuff, glowing embers and all, the good thing with politics is you could melt down a planet with no perceivable harm. The bad thing is you don't have to melt down a planet to harm it.
However it can't be helped, the new system just melts the old, my heart get's soft, and i think the whole world will melt. slowly, gently, likely something new will come out of the huge resulting blob of bubblegum like reality.
I like pink bubbegum best. i hope that phase is not to sticky, what will we do with our new rubber reality?
perhaps to remain it flexible, elastically.
what if it rains 365 days? we will make us a huge lake. Thats flexible, the sea floods texas? we'll catch her, well, that s actually destructive.
not a good plan.
in that i am not flexible, i hope people will be like that:" oh wow!"
thats not a good plan
we won't do it.
I think it's the good thing about bad plans, they stand out so much for what they really are. The bad thing is people aren't very used to look out well for them.
That's because we want to be difficult, complicated and fascinating, but our political dimension is really quite lineair.
Like the ancient analogy good-bad, it's materially on the line social-capitalist.
It's a simplification, but a very true one, the choices that may lead to a humane ideal, a human future will be politically social choices, plainly and dumbly put,
the other side of the analogy is also true.
You can perceive the opposite political spectre as ill intended, ill willing, because it is a matter of the social consequences one accepts.
The reason not to go for the good-bad concept is because it is antiquated.
there is moral behaviour, wich should be consistent with human rights, and there is
submoral behaviour , bias, wich is not necessary same as traditional 'bad'.
to me it is obvious the same applies to the lineair political spectrum in every way.
You can say one side is bad, the capitalist one, or you can say it is old fashioned and traditional, and u can also make the point it is inconsistent with human rights.
Unfortunately , because people badly realise this, it is so.
Fortunately, maybe, is that the concept is easy to grasp this way. Changing it for the better means that we , the people, need to have the power, politically this means a future needs a leftwing politics. Because that is , humane, true, and if you want for such traditionally, good.
That's quite simple, so that is good.
However it can't be helped, the new system just melts the old, my heart get's soft, and i think the whole world will melt. slowly, gently, likely something new will come out of the huge resulting blob of bubblegum like reality.
I like pink bubbegum best. i hope that phase is not to sticky, what will we do with our new rubber reality?
perhaps to remain it flexible, elastically.
what if it rains 365 days? we will make us a huge lake. Thats flexible, the sea floods texas? we'll catch her, well, that s actually destructive.
not a good plan.
in that i am not flexible, i hope people will be like that:" oh wow!"
thats not a good plan
we won't do it.
I think it's the good thing about bad plans, they stand out so much for what they really are. The bad thing is people aren't very used to look out well for them.
That's because we want to be difficult, complicated and fascinating, but our political dimension is really quite lineair.
Like the ancient analogy good-bad, it's materially on the line social-capitalist.
It's a simplification, but a very true one, the choices that may lead to a humane ideal, a human future will be politically social choices, plainly and dumbly put,
the other side of the analogy is also true.
You can perceive the opposite political spectre as ill intended, ill willing, because it is a matter of the social consequences one accepts.
The reason not to go for the good-bad concept is because it is antiquated.
there is moral behaviour, wich should be consistent with human rights, and there is
submoral behaviour , bias, wich is not necessary same as traditional 'bad'.
to me it is obvious the same applies to the lineair political spectrum in every way.
You can say one side is bad, the capitalist one, or you can say it is old fashioned and traditional, and u can also make the point it is inconsistent with human rights.
Unfortunately , because people badly realise this, it is so.
Fortunately, maybe, is that the concept is easy to grasp this way. Changing it for the better means that we , the people, need to have the power, politically this means a future needs a leftwing politics. Because that is , humane, true, and if you want for such traditionally, good.
That's quite simple, so that is good.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Mixed feelings
embarrased over tamil nadu, what do i expect for gaza. well simply i don't want to expect for gaza rili at the moment, i would like to think of obama and even hillary clinton, i didn't dare to read what she said, knowing she has been insanely biased over israel before:(
yet i think it can be a much better priority manoevre then starting a rant at north korea, that hardly appears worse then israel even if the worse storys are all so true, and appears more of a military priority directed at china.
I do please want to agree with hillary that a better political climate in nations like north korea, myanmar, egypt and saudi arabia belongs to the possibillity's in the next 4 years, however it should be based on realism, in this case the appeal , whatever it may be, could for instance be taken directly to china. It seems to me by far the better way to geopolitically cope with these reality's.
The actual attempt to claim "korean unity" as a southern based pro usa nation is doomed to remain a provocation. Not only in the north although the opportunity's for opportunism in the south are more plentyfull. There is also the matter that asia wants to be asian, that a choice for china is then the more natural.
Not in the last place south korea is identifiable as an obvious base of US, the predictable further encrouch on china that would follow is just not, "how this world should be".
I think it would be better to think in terms of disbanding the whole US militairy networks across the globe, and replacing (US) militairy concepts with concepts of international (militairy) cooperation.
Neway if she is a human and sees what fascism is the only way to breed a good soldier, she should know it can't be a good thing to support militarism.
So about gaza, what about rafah? there is a lot of damage, more then i even expected the israeli's would do their next invasion, not completely clear is how devastating it was.
one inconsistency here, israel claims to target militants, but openly propagates the extensive destruction of civilian property. So if they belief that eliminating their political opponents "cures" the palestineans of resistance...? why in fact do they still have to bomb these buildings?
on another notion, there is the utterly proportional idea. hit behind the israeli human shield, not like them, not as indiscriminate, and instead of aiming for the whole knesseth just targetedly eliminate 1 or 2 of the worst, you may not belief it, but i think it would have a much better effect then you first expect.
we have seen 2 political assasinations in netherlands, wich both concerned very vocal and populist xenofobiacs. To explain shortly how succesfull that actually was:
they need at least 2 fake party's and 2 parliamental nazi clowns now,(they also staged "new-old" fundamental christianism ) to have the same effect of xenofobiac brainwash still, on the people.
These have less of an effect, instead of the projected racial hate, the last years dutch people have actually come closer, not always easy, and sometimes slow, but there is steady progress outside the political theatre.
so actually, basically, what a mess we are in.
yet i think it can be a much better priority manoevre then starting a rant at north korea, that hardly appears worse then israel even if the worse storys are all so true, and appears more of a military priority directed at china.
I do please want to agree with hillary that a better political climate in nations like north korea, myanmar, egypt and saudi arabia belongs to the possibillity's in the next 4 years, however it should be based on realism, in this case the appeal , whatever it may be, could for instance be taken directly to china. It seems to me by far the better way to geopolitically cope with these reality's.
The actual attempt to claim "korean unity" as a southern based pro usa nation is doomed to remain a provocation. Not only in the north although the opportunity's for opportunism in the south are more plentyfull. There is also the matter that asia wants to be asian, that a choice for china is then the more natural.
Not in the last place south korea is identifiable as an obvious base of US, the predictable further encrouch on china that would follow is just not, "how this world should be".
I think it would be better to think in terms of disbanding the whole US militairy networks across the globe, and replacing (US) militairy concepts with concepts of international (militairy) cooperation.
Neway if she is a human and sees what fascism is the only way to breed a good soldier, she should know it can't be a good thing to support militarism.
So about gaza, what about rafah? there is a lot of damage, more then i even expected the israeli's would do their next invasion, not completely clear is how devastating it was.
one inconsistency here, israel claims to target militants, but openly propagates the extensive destruction of civilian property. So if they belief that eliminating their political opponents "cures" the palestineans of resistance...? why in fact do they still have to bomb these buildings?
on another notion, there is the utterly proportional idea. hit behind the israeli human shield, not like them, not as indiscriminate, and instead of aiming for the whole knesseth just targetedly eliminate 1 or 2 of the worst, you may not belief it, but i think it would have a much better effect then you first expect.
we have seen 2 political assasinations in netherlands, wich both concerned very vocal and populist xenofobiacs. To explain shortly how succesfull that actually was:
they need at least 2 fake party's and 2 parliamental nazi clowns now,(they also staged "new-old" fundamental christianism ) to have the same effect of xenofobiac brainwash still, on the people.
These have less of an effect, instead of the projected racial hate, the last years dutch people have actually come closer, not always easy, and sometimes slow, but there is steady progress outside the political theatre.
so actually, basically, what a mess we are in.
Monday, January 12, 2009
european (mal)conduct in the gaz negotiations
cold war indoctrination first facilitated the 21st century crusade wars, recent events confirm that nearly anyone over say 45 is still tainted by it in the contacts with russia.
Europe misbehaved shamelessly, at least 4 times they tried to erase parts of the negotiations from the public memory after negotiating them.
around my last post to the subj. some attitudes changed, basically because i explained some about russian folklore, culture. The russians will have appreciated the change in aproach, but after the machinations with the press, any appendix or additional preservations now suggests the blame should not be put firstly with russia.
(it has been pretty obvious more often, i feel like i don't need to remember, to some extend such affairs are nauseating, get you sick.)
That our , the eu, government chooses such aproach shows their current insincerity towards the russians. I have told them a few of the great miracles putin worked eg.
but long it was maintained in the forementioned (our) media, he was not an asset to russia. a sheer dictator even.(1)
Ofcourse the cooperation in signing a clean accord is appreciated, but when someone (the EU)shows doubtfull trustworthyness all the time, it's dangerous to expect they are suddenly good people that would speak the truth.
So as a peace proponent i have to warn you that there is both a huge resource of undistrubed brainwash at work in high EU circles, and wich is unfortunately more probable, certain circles in nato block elements and these indications are quite many to me, have still been planning and constructing a war towards russia , not in the least because they have the brainwashed masses for ir still quitte available
(an asset).
The israeli-gaza situation carry's many paralels
:/ i was considering gaz, israel before realising anything for labels :o . that ofcourse i needn't as the joke is here.
anyhow, gaz(a), israeli would also be uncomforting. (this blog is about censorship ya know)
the israeli gaza situation carry's many paralels.
we see one party that lies a lot and has repeatedly managed to be untrustworthy,
opposite to that we see someone under agression, defending only their rights,
the russian gaz heats our houses, and i suspect the palestinean fuel warms the israeli.
Allthough russia needn't fear as much as gaza in the short term, in the longer term both their prospects are still worrysome. (think the socalled rocket shield - iran(?!) relation and the many offensive uses of (modern) radar.
Gaza knows israel to be a greedy negotiator, and one that wants all rights allowing no in return, the credibility of any solution or "peace" is very small, based on belignerent blackmail as it is.
Russia knows it is pathological in the european policys to try and exploit her, and steer towards agressiveness. It's not said that premeditated and subconscious agressivity allways leads to the worst possible conclusions, but watching the gaza example you can see it will not solve a problem quick or good, actually be the pretext for even more agression.
Be sure russia would like to steer away from that, can't EU start serious about uniting with russia? it seems better sooner then later. The deals are obvious for me.
btw. did you hear that enthropy is not lineair?
(1)(Putin outstanding statesman) In fact if you want to stress the slight totalitarian aspect of his career you might want to think positive of him as an enlightened despote, perhaps history will yet show that of all these he has been the most humane. it would not surprise me.
But even why: because the credibility of the russian elections has been very high, and mostly became more critical due international lies about that. (putin1 elections)
I consider it positive that his rules are not a "reign". It's not i want him to immediatly be the 'worldpresident' though i proposed exactly him for the job.
And i don't know a better. Perhaps Hu, he's up to date as well he's been doing mostly only good to china and the world in a hectic and challenging time. yet he applies more direct forms of censury wich is a bit primitive. it could also be a bit fairer?.. It just depends how much repression comes with it and if the system is open for progressive entry.
Anyhow i have a high opinion of chinas policy's with him in the job. You know.. i have enjoyed his 'company', and i think he could be good for you also. bit scary with the cultural gaps, small things could get incommunicatable. Perhaps he would cope easily.
Europe misbehaved shamelessly, at least 4 times they tried to erase parts of the negotiations from the public memory after negotiating them.
around my last post to the subj. some attitudes changed, basically because i explained some about russian folklore, culture. The russians will have appreciated the change in aproach, but after the machinations with the press, any appendix or additional preservations now suggests the blame should not be put firstly with russia.
(it has been pretty obvious more often, i feel like i don't need to remember, to some extend such affairs are nauseating, get you sick.)
That our , the eu, government chooses such aproach shows their current insincerity towards the russians. I have told them a few of the great miracles putin worked eg.
but long it was maintained in the forementioned (our) media, he was not an asset to russia. a sheer dictator even.(1)
Ofcourse the cooperation in signing a clean accord is appreciated, but when someone (the EU)shows doubtfull trustworthyness all the time, it's dangerous to expect they are suddenly good people that would speak the truth.
So as a peace proponent i have to warn you that there is both a huge resource of undistrubed brainwash at work in high EU circles, and wich is unfortunately more probable, certain circles in nato block elements and these indications are quite many to me, have still been planning and constructing a war towards russia , not in the least because they have the brainwashed masses for ir still quitte available
(an asset).
The israeli-gaza situation carry's many paralels
:/ i was considering gaz, israel before realising anything for labels :o . that ofcourse i needn't as the joke is here.
anyhow, gaz(a), israeli would also be uncomforting. (this blog is about censorship ya know)
the israeli gaza situation carry's many paralels.
we see one party that lies a lot and has repeatedly managed to be untrustworthy,
opposite to that we see someone under agression, defending only their rights,
the russian gaz heats our houses, and i suspect the palestinean fuel warms the israeli.
Allthough russia needn't fear as much as gaza in the short term, in the longer term both their prospects are still worrysome. (think the socalled rocket shield - iran(?!) relation and the many offensive uses of (modern) radar.
Gaza knows israel to be a greedy negotiator, and one that wants all rights allowing no in return, the credibility of any solution or "peace" is very small, based on belignerent blackmail as it is.
Russia knows it is pathological in the european policys to try and exploit her, and steer towards agressiveness. It's not said that premeditated and subconscious agressivity allways leads to the worst possible conclusions, but watching the gaza example you can see it will not solve a problem quick or good, actually be the pretext for even more agression.
Be sure russia would like to steer away from that, can't EU start serious about uniting with russia? it seems better sooner then later. The deals are obvious for me.
btw. did you hear that enthropy is not lineair?
(1)(Putin outstanding statesman) In fact if you want to stress the slight totalitarian aspect of his career you might want to think positive of him as an enlightened despote, perhaps history will yet show that of all these he has been the most humane. it would not surprise me.
But even why: because the credibility of the russian elections has been very high, and mostly became more critical due international lies about that. (putin1 elections)
I consider it positive that his rules are not a "reign". It's not i want him to immediatly be the 'worldpresident' though i proposed exactly him for the job.
And i don't know a better. Perhaps Hu, he's up to date as well he's been doing mostly only good to china and the world in a hectic and challenging time. yet he applies more direct forms of censury wich is a bit primitive. it could also be a bit fairer?.. It just depends how much repression comes with it and if the system is open for progressive entry.
Anyhow i have a high opinion of chinas policy's with him in the job. You know.. i have enjoyed his 'company', and i think he could be good for you also. bit scary with the cultural gaps, small things could get incommunicatable. Perhaps he would cope easily.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
the wall
i have neighbours building walls, just like the palestinean,
not only they build walls, they send the police against me a lot, because they have friends there. Not only that , they scream, shout and insult, accuse falsely, they steal (many things have been stolen since they moved in but never before), and they try to provocate me into reactions . They try to steal my land, as well, as well as try to give me a bad name.
In short try to make my life miserable.
apparently people are learning from israel.(they appear to have ssecret service connections), but pehraps teh technique of attacking people through walling them in is more widepsread then i knew before.
If anyone knows where is the handbook, how to build a wall and steal from your neighbours, i would be obliged.
Know thy enemy.
not only they build walls, they send the police against me a lot, because they have friends there. Not only that , they scream, shout and insult, accuse falsely, they steal (many things have been stolen since they moved in but never before), and they try to provocate me into reactions . They try to steal my land, as well, as well as try to give me a bad name.
In short try to make my life miserable.
apparently people are learning from israel.(they appear to have ssecret service connections), but pehraps teh technique of attacking people through walling them in is more widepsread then i knew before.
If anyone knows where is the handbook, how to build a wall and steal from your neighbours, i would be obliged.
Know thy enemy.
promises
Peng
one day someone came and shot a palestinean, peng, like that.
noone liked it, and someone spit in the killer face.
This family was shot to and the next, and their village burned.
then a palestinean threatened someone from the strange army, but it didn't matter, they shot the person that threatened them and countless others.
At first the people resisted or tried to talk, but they were killed in cold blood and their houses burned.
then most of them had to run away to live, but some waited to see if they would all get shot. Their land was taken, but not all were shot, they had to clean the streets and other lousy jobs for the newcomers. Laws were made to achieve that.
Very often the newcomers that named themselves "israelis" shot some people, or bulldozered their houses. Lots of people, and lots of houses saw their untimely end this way, very often they would also destroy the olive trees because the palestineans had cared for them for 100s of years, and they thought: "this must be the best way to hurt these people that don't give us their land voluntarily".
They made a state where they could get evrything, but the palestineans nearly none.
They imprisoned 10000s of palestineans, we have never again heard of, my most accurate guess would be they are aproaching 100000 now.
of these according to he latest accounts 15000 still live, but recently another 15000are taken. I don't know how long they will take to once again disappear, from the records, and from my fellow citizens of planet earths memory's.
However i remember them, so i have to tell, it's my most sad yet noble duty to tell you, to see some of you yellow of jealousy over what in fact?
mad at me for being against israel.
peng,
last year or so some 2000 palestineans died , yet this war would be over a bunch of rockets that missed mostly.
Do you think so?
i don't, i think this war is about long years of abuse and deprivation, the world should enjoy this murderous show no longer.
one day someone came and shot a palestinean, peng, like that.
noone liked it, and someone spit in the killer face.
This family was shot to and the next, and their village burned.
then a palestinean threatened someone from the strange army, but it didn't matter, they shot the person that threatened them and countless others.
At first the people resisted or tried to talk, but they were killed in cold blood and their houses burned.
then most of them had to run away to live, but some waited to see if they would all get shot. Their land was taken, but not all were shot, they had to clean the streets and other lousy jobs for the newcomers. Laws were made to achieve that.
Very often the newcomers that named themselves "israelis" shot some people, or bulldozered their houses. Lots of people, and lots of houses saw their untimely end this way, very often they would also destroy the olive trees because the palestineans had cared for them for 100s of years, and they thought: "this must be the best way to hurt these people that don't give us their land voluntarily".
They made a state where they could get evrything, but the palestineans nearly none.
They imprisoned 10000s of palestineans, we have never again heard of, my most accurate guess would be they are aproaching 100000 now.
of these according to he latest accounts 15000 still live, but recently another 15000are taken. I don't know how long they will take to once again disappear, from the records, and from my fellow citizens of planet earths memory's.
However i remember them, so i have to tell, it's my most sad yet noble duty to tell you, to see some of you yellow of jealousy over what in fact?
mad at me for being against israel.
peng,
last year or so some 2000 palestineans died , yet this war would be over a bunch of rockets that missed mostly.
Do you think so?
i don't, i think this war is about long years of abuse and deprivation, the world should enjoy this murderous show no longer.
Friday, January 9, 2009
human shield
If one had teh time or incentive to read all i wrote in this carefully you would know i plan to write about the human shield for a long time.
It is an argument hard to counter, because actually in my own concepts i do indeed stay away from collateral damages. And the ideal situation for anyone applying them is even still to stay away from them.
I don't want to waste the impact. i think i will use the dadaist feature of typecase.
don't be upset, i will put this in teh form of an example, it's israels big christmas tree of not ever a present that breaks the day at the moment.
Israel has a much bigger human shield then hamas,
they even attack hamas over the collateral damage.
at the very moment.
rounding off this thought, everyone is behind the human shield, look at the usians, they cry out loudest, because their human shield they leave at home, but when it gets a single scratch, (wtc) they start a worldwar/crusade.
It is an argument hard to counter, because actually in my own concepts i do indeed stay away from collateral damages. And the ideal situation for anyone applying them is even still to stay away from them.
I don't want to waste the impact. i think i will use the dadaist feature of typecase.
don't be upset, i will put this in teh form of an example, it's israels big christmas tree of not ever a present that breaks the day at the moment.
Israel has a much bigger human shield then hamas,
they even attack hamas over the collateral damage.
at the very moment.
rounding off this thought, everyone is behind the human shield, look at the usians, they cry out loudest, because their human shield they leave at home, but when it gets a single scratch, (wtc) they start a worldwar/crusade.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
gazA
there's a ceasefire now. They will regroup, teh criminals i mean.
the israelis, so i am like well there it is, just as predicted.
it's not going to help a lot, so the israeli perpetrators should in fact still be missiled, assasinated just like any, but..
its sth. so lets be glad some of the bloodshed stopped for now. I hate them,
what will tomorow bring teh palestineans? more mean lies? more mean insults? more assasinations?
nice ceasefire , not.
Kill a bunch and get away, profesional murderers witha legal perfect crime.
a militarist state.
bah, disgust is the word for what i feel, i blackmailed europe over the gaz tho
perhaps it will work.
seemed so.
i am not happy without full acces to and from gaza, for material and people.
just that you know?
i dont give a damn about the israeli border crossings.
Every millimeter of dependance on israel means more palestinean deaths and poverty
so its not important.
the israelis, so i am like well there it is, just as predicted.
it's not going to help a lot, so the israeli perpetrators should in fact still be missiled, assasinated just like any, but..
its sth. so lets be glad some of the bloodshed stopped for now. I hate them,
what will tomorow bring teh palestineans? more mean lies? more mean insults? more assasinations?
nice ceasefire , not.
Kill a bunch and get away, profesional murderers witha legal perfect crime.
a militarist state.
bah, disgust is the word for what i feel, i blackmailed europe over the gaz tho
perhaps it will work.
seemed so.
i am not happy without full acces to and from gaza, for material and people.
just that you know?
i dont give a damn about the israeli border crossings.
Every millimeter of dependance on israel means more palestinean deaths and poverty
so its not important.
Targetted assasinations in israel
I have plenty left to rant about this discriminationstate. but fortunately for me, to me thoughts often come funny, so listen i consider this funny....
but when is someone going to assasinate targetedly some of the enemys of the palestines? The headfigures of the political party's that damn them?
good joke?
i dunno, made me laugh.
I think its about time tho, why suicide attack when you can legally assasinate?
well put!
funny to see that. (yeah i know ok cool).
thx for the feedback anyway evryone.. i'll start paying even more attention to my blogs http then:/
(doesnt feel like it)
perhaps its blocked for major parts in the world, altho sometimes it sure seems just about any security service reads it,
well it would be a good reason, but a bit sad publicising,
anyway, more secrets about this reality...
oh yeah and why is it about time someone starts targetedly assasinating some israeli's? Because....
there is equally many bad people in every nation,
so if they shoot the head 400 palestineans of the day, (with some regularity btw. for the innocent reader) logically heh?
resolve of the conflict would be equally served by shooting israelis.
just make sure to target the right(wing) ones.
much more then killing uhm it's about 3000 would be a proportional crime tho.
fortunately this two weeks, 15000 wounded israelis would be humane.
gl israel..
happy clubbing.
but when is someone going to assasinate targetedly some of the enemys of the palestines? The headfigures of the political party's that damn them?
good joke?
i dunno, made me laugh.
I think its about time tho, why suicide attack when you can legally assasinate?
well put!
funny to see that. (yeah i know ok cool).
thx for the feedback anyway evryone.. i'll start paying even more attention to my blogs http then:/
(doesnt feel like it)
perhaps its blocked for major parts in the world, altho sometimes it sure seems just about any security service reads it,
well it would be a good reason, but a bit sad publicising,
anyway, more secrets about this reality...
oh yeah and why is it about time someone starts targetedly assasinating some israeli's? Because....
there is equally many bad people in every nation,
so if they shoot the head 400 palestineans of the day, (with some regularity btw. for the innocent reader) logically heh?
resolve of the conflict would be equally served by shooting israelis.
just make sure to target the right(wing) ones.
much more then killing uhm it's about 3000 would be a proportional crime tho.
fortunately this two weeks, 15000 wounded israelis would be humane.
gl israel..
happy clubbing.
Gaza 2
I hate it to give in to the israeli intent to be the "centerpiece of humanrights (degradation)" I warn all the world to take care, things are not what they seem.
I hate it that my cherished human rights and dignity are grossly devaluated by a racist political entity. Seeing the nato run behind it doesn't help, apparently the powers that be intend to degrade our rights and dignity in united cooperation, ever more.
The israeli will get a solution as if they had won the argument. But in the minds of the people of the world, they haven't. Yet all teh world will suffer the higher level of government terror that is teh real intentions behind this israelian strategy.
Thats also what makes it so hard to see the whole concept of israel as a different thing then this mondial complot to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, israel plays into the hands of that situation every day.
Governments will bombard crowds, and asssinate the leaders of the reaction, and we will have to thank israel for it. Everyone will be registered and controlled, and if as much as a usefull item is found, you will be a terrorist. free for all. thanking the heavens u weren't in pakistan, where u'd be bountyhunted.
After cheating teh world out of any kind of reason (it is about the proportionality of violence) is teh prime target of teh israeli policy, they would have their hands free to do anything on the palestineans, and aptly ready to say "but you do it yourself".because they trained that over the past decades.
The only option is we dont give in to this blackmail, this purposed inflation of human rights and political freedoms.
yet our governments are all hands on a same belly.
Our chances are slim, minimal.
terror and mass murder are the tools of the opressor, and we have nothing to counter left, every of our chats is registered, every phone tapped, every location satelite handed, we are just tiny blots on a big screen, Collateral blots. falling victim to arbitrary violence.
Sure tomorrow rice will anounce the israeli agression in a reaction, and probably again defend it's proportions. But it's not. Politicians get a job out of lying, so rice wont be bothered. We ourselves have to be bothered.
and if ur bothered, ur a terrorist, likened to the great examples of this policy, goebbels e.a. in discussions where a zionist fraction repeats her clichee's ad nauseum.
In teh hope that people forget paying attention to what is real, to what really happens, and happened in the past.
Most of hamas rockets have been fired in the past, just like most of the complaints are rooted in the past.
Really as long as the international community accepts israel to have its own warshaw ghetto, the palestineans will suffer, year in, year out, year in, year out.
And we all will.
Now turn it around, .. if our governments get away with israel oppressing another people, they will feel safer to do teh same to us.
All the world will suffer for the fate of the palestineans. except teh utterly rich.
Most of us won't notice ofcourse, many people never bother about human rights, peace, stuff like that. Like animals on a farm, usefull, but voiceless.
The result of this is that i got a hatred against israel, i hope they will have to count the victims too, i rejoice when reuters says, 75 nazi tanks (israeli soldiers) killed, (by naked bleeding weeping children, all that is left of the legitimate representation of teh palestineans).
AT least that is my picture of the affair, a brave and desperate remain of a populace that saw its leaders eliminated, still fighting back with that the ghetto has to offer,
altho i know ,except the ones targetted, even the palestineans are not in a hurry to fight, why would they, they are completely disempowered, purposedly kept dependend of israeli signs of "goodwill" (read food water medicines). Israel keeps it taht way.
They bought egypt , to close one border, they siphon the aids funds, and meanwhile they tell deceitfull pittyfull story's about their intentions.
To stop the rockets fire? no, to have their hands as free as possible, to put more repression in any way they like.
Thats why this is so hopeless, every result of a talks will only mean: more humiliation for the palestineans, and as a side effect , tougher repression for the rest of the world.
I hope gaza wins this war against big brother,
a ridiculous hope, the highest strategical win would be israel drawing back, wich it will shortly do, because the offensive is starting to cost them, both lives and goodwill.
it will be concerted with usian attempts to "negotiate" actually attempts to star.
attempts to turn rights into wrongs.
All premeditated; israel cannot afford a second armed occupation of gaza.
They have the money and the manpower, the bulletproof vests, teh infraredcameras, to kill indiscriminately without any chance on repercussions, but tehy wont endure the 100s, 1000s even, casualties this would bring them.
So tehre will be some huge blackmail .centering around the hamas is bad theme.
and israel will gladly draw back after her succesfull campaign of terror.
probably some nobel peaceprice will go to blair, sarkozy and definetly one to liar typo lviv. After getting even more of the international community in their ploy to disarm the hopeless, they will continue to eliminate political oponents, just calling them rocketfiring hamas terrorists or something.
This whole thing is to get the world as sick they deny the oppressed (ouselves) the right for resistance. Don't buy it people, it will be the end of the free world,
it will destroy the fabric of every society and turn us into a big meat factory.
(quite literally with organ trade killing the youth and prolonging the crippled lives of the old and rich (jews).)
Whatever happens we have to take care these zionist values of torture and murder will not become part of our own as a world community, they should be allowed to live out their sadism only on other "jews", and everybody will be quite happy in the ME.
on the funny side new israeli research proved the real descendants of the jews from palestine are ...... guess what?
the palestineans. Go chosen people! i admire your courage, my days are filled with sadness, i hope the hammer of that ancient gods will burn ur enemies to ashes.
I love this world and humans, i hate every one that tries to turn it into a fascist system. or wants lie to prevail over truth and moderation.
I hate it that my cherished human rights and dignity are grossly devaluated by a racist political entity. Seeing the nato run behind it doesn't help, apparently the powers that be intend to degrade our rights and dignity in united cooperation, ever more.
The israeli will get a solution as if they had won the argument. But in the minds of the people of the world, they haven't. Yet all teh world will suffer the higher level of government terror that is teh real intentions behind this israelian strategy.
Thats also what makes it so hard to see the whole concept of israel as a different thing then this mondial complot to make the rich richer and the poor poorer, israel plays into the hands of that situation every day.
Governments will bombard crowds, and asssinate the leaders of the reaction, and we will have to thank israel for it. Everyone will be registered and controlled, and if as much as a usefull item is found, you will be a terrorist. free for all. thanking the heavens u weren't in pakistan, where u'd be bountyhunted.
After cheating teh world out of any kind of reason (it is about the proportionality of violence) is teh prime target of teh israeli policy, they would have their hands free to do anything on the palestineans, and aptly ready to say "but you do it yourself".because they trained that over the past decades.
The only option is we dont give in to this blackmail, this purposed inflation of human rights and political freedoms.
yet our governments are all hands on a same belly.
Our chances are slim, minimal.
terror and mass murder are the tools of the opressor, and we have nothing to counter left, every of our chats is registered, every phone tapped, every location satelite handed, we are just tiny blots on a big screen, Collateral blots. falling victim to arbitrary violence.
Sure tomorrow rice will anounce the israeli agression in a reaction, and probably again defend it's proportions. But it's not. Politicians get a job out of lying, so rice wont be bothered. We ourselves have to be bothered.
and if ur bothered, ur a terrorist, likened to the great examples of this policy, goebbels e.a. in discussions where a zionist fraction repeats her clichee's ad nauseum.
In teh hope that people forget paying attention to what is real, to what really happens, and happened in the past.
Most of hamas rockets have been fired in the past, just like most of the complaints are rooted in the past.
Really as long as the international community accepts israel to have its own warshaw ghetto, the palestineans will suffer, year in, year out, year in, year out.
And we all will.
Now turn it around, .. if our governments get away with israel oppressing another people, they will feel safer to do teh same to us.
All the world will suffer for the fate of the palestineans. except teh utterly rich.
Most of us won't notice ofcourse, many people never bother about human rights, peace, stuff like that. Like animals on a farm, usefull, but voiceless.
The result of this is that i got a hatred against israel, i hope they will have to count the victims too, i rejoice when reuters says, 75 nazi tanks (israeli soldiers) killed, (by naked bleeding weeping children, all that is left of the legitimate representation of teh palestineans).
AT least that is my picture of the affair, a brave and desperate remain of a populace that saw its leaders eliminated, still fighting back with that the ghetto has to offer,
altho i know ,except the ones targetted, even the palestineans are not in a hurry to fight, why would they, they are completely disempowered, purposedly kept dependend of israeli signs of "goodwill" (read food water medicines). Israel keeps it taht way.
They bought egypt , to close one border, they siphon the aids funds, and meanwhile they tell deceitfull pittyfull story's about their intentions.
To stop the rockets fire? no, to have their hands as free as possible, to put more repression in any way they like.
Thats why this is so hopeless, every result of a talks will only mean: more humiliation for the palestineans, and as a side effect , tougher repression for the rest of the world.
I hope gaza wins this war against big brother,
a ridiculous hope, the highest strategical win would be israel drawing back, wich it will shortly do, because the offensive is starting to cost them, both lives and goodwill.
it will be concerted with usian attempts to "negotiate" actually attempts to star.
attempts to turn rights into wrongs.
All premeditated; israel cannot afford a second armed occupation of gaza.
They have the money and the manpower, the bulletproof vests, teh infraredcameras, to kill indiscriminately without any chance on repercussions, but tehy wont endure the 100s, 1000s even, casualties this would bring them.
So tehre will be some huge blackmail .centering around the hamas is bad theme.
and israel will gladly draw back after her succesfull campaign of terror.
probably some nobel peaceprice will go to blair, sarkozy and definetly one to liar typo lviv. After getting even more of the international community in their ploy to disarm the hopeless, they will continue to eliminate political oponents, just calling them rocketfiring hamas terrorists or something.
This whole thing is to get the world as sick they deny the oppressed (ouselves) the right for resistance. Don't buy it people, it will be the end of the free world,
it will destroy the fabric of every society and turn us into a big meat factory.
(quite literally with organ trade killing the youth and prolonging the crippled lives of the old and rich (jews).)
Whatever happens we have to take care these zionist values of torture and murder will not become part of our own as a world community, they should be allowed to live out their sadism only on other "jews", and everybody will be quite happy in the ME.
on the funny side new israeli research proved the real descendants of the jews from palestine are ...... guess what?
the palestineans. Go chosen people! i admire your courage, my days are filled with sadness, i hope the hammer of that ancient gods will burn ur enemies to ashes.
I love this world and humans, i hate every one that tries to turn it into a fascist system. or wants lie to prevail over truth and moderation.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
newsbits
K the czech played a bad card. My trust in them is lost, whats teh use of this ME tour when u say the most ridiculous thing in advance.
I remember sth odd now about us- czech ties, and i wonder wether the ordre to reveal this nonsense stemmed from washington, tel aviv or brussel.
Yet being teh loyal frak i am and try to pay atetntion, but tehir wording is mind bogging.
If israel is one thing it is aggressive, it has allways been on the offense against palestineans. Sarkozy i miss you.
we are not going to solve this situation by denying the israeli part of the blame.
Not in the long run, because partiality has in teh long run never offered a solution but only invited violence riots and war before the evil was finally rooted out again.
Bad news about the czech thus.
Maybe it are the british tho, i would guess they are also fast in recognising my blogs value.(using it against its well intents in many cases.)
It's to much what israel wants to hear, or bush, i am not impressed. You still have to go on that tour and you come with an old clichee, that can't even be true?
okay enuf about that, sorry my loyalty now finally is overcome, the propaganda to shrill not to witness.
Fine thats settled then.
Next.. gazprom and the ukraine. Now this is funny, there appears to eb a dispute belarus should not applu to nato liek it does, and so does ukraine...
tthe ridiculous thing is just some 5 years ago i was teh only person in the world to be against an invasion of belarus, they were making a start massing teh armys on its borders, i think not the way to say thank you, to join the superblock of militairy agression in response.
That besides that russia needs to feel attacked appears to suggest belarus really makes a chance, (it makes a more territorial sense then doing so with georgia at least concerning nato is partly an european tool)
Thats so wicked over some one that was blindly demonised 5 years ago.
I refrain from comment(actually comment on lukashenko. whats his name again?
Its the second indication in as many days the nato is out for the russian resources still.
the third in for if you count my wondering the first of januar about the christmashat militairy.
Jay i really think i have been thinking a bit more profetically by now about the year to come. I think perhaps one thing of the "i don't want to know kind " will happen. Because i am sure there is nothing i know will happen, and that is quite impossible, rationally i am sure things will happen.
well these things to, happen every year, the sichuan earthquake or sth. So mayb its just paranoia, but i wouldnt be surprised, because once before sth like that happened out of the blue exactly because i concluded nothing would happen.
I would think a flood becus the picture is off a (blue?) sky over a flat gray landscape. sth desolate of ppl or anything. Like myanmar essentially looked when it had flooded.
well its only sth like an association with a picture, and i personally doubt very much it would happen, But for me it's strange i have no idea that sth will happen this year.
I fear i feel "that will not happen".
Certainly within the human linguistic (its how *i* do it) context denial has an
effect that can negate forthcoming disaster.
otoh last year i thought of floods as a climate thing not really the disaster kind, so maybe i am scared,
look i also don't think teh warming of teh planet has stopped,
yet i am quite sure teh coming year will again not be the hottest.
Also ofcourse the northpole would melt just for the offset of a trend of every year being the newest hottest.
even if it would essentially cool, instead of bend from its catastrophe curve.
(possibly temporarily indeed.) ya know.. cooling is nina heating nino?
then the cooling teh atmospjhere through dust would set up nina's, don't be so stupid.
I remember sth odd now about us- czech ties, and i wonder wether the ordre to reveal this nonsense stemmed from washington, tel aviv or brussel.
Yet being teh loyal frak i am and try to pay atetntion, but tehir wording is mind bogging.
If israel is one thing it is aggressive, it has allways been on the offense against palestineans. Sarkozy i miss you.
we are not going to solve this situation by denying the israeli part of the blame.
Not in the long run, because partiality has in teh long run never offered a solution but only invited violence riots and war before the evil was finally rooted out again.
Bad news about the czech thus.
Maybe it are the british tho, i would guess they are also fast in recognising my blogs value.(using it against its well intents in many cases.)
It's to much what israel wants to hear, or bush, i am not impressed. You still have to go on that tour and you come with an old clichee, that can't even be true?
okay enuf about that, sorry my loyalty now finally is overcome, the propaganda to shrill not to witness.
Fine thats settled then.
Next.. gazprom and the ukraine. Now this is funny, there appears to eb a dispute belarus should not applu to nato liek it does, and so does ukraine...
tthe ridiculous thing is just some 5 years ago i was teh only person in the world to be against an invasion of belarus, they were making a start massing teh armys on its borders, i think not the way to say thank you, to join the superblock of militairy agression in response.
That besides that russia needs to feel attacked appears to suggest belarus really makes a chance, (it makes a more territorial sense then doing so with georgia at least concerning nato is partly an european tool)
Thats so wicked over some one that was blindly demonised 5 years ago.
I refrain from comment(actually comment on lukashenko. whats his name again?
Its the second indication in as many days the nato is out for the russian resources still.
the third in for if you count my wondering the first of januar about the christmashat militairy.
Jay i really think i have been thinking a bit more profetically by now about the year to come. I think perhaps one thing of the "i don't want to know kind " will happen. Because i am sure there is nothing i know will happen, and that is quite impossible, rationally i am sure things will happen.
well these things to, happen every year, the sichuan earthquake or sth. So mayb its just paranoia, but i wouldnt be surprised, because once before sth like that happened out of the blue exactly because i concluded nothing would happen.
I would think a flood becus the picture is off a (blue?) sky over a flat gray landscape. sth desolate of ppl or anything. Like myanmar essentially looked when it had flooded.
well its only sth like an association with a picture, and i personally doubt very much it would happen, But for me it's strange i have no idea that sth will happen this year.
I fear i feel "that will not happen".
Certainly within the human linguistic (its how *i* do it) context denial has an
effect that can negate forthcoming disaster.
otoh last year i thought of floods as a climate thing not really the disaster kind, so maybe i am scared,
look i also don't think teh warming of teh planet has stopped,
yet i am quite sure teh coming year will again not be the hottest.
Also ofcourse the northpole would melt just for the offset of a trend of every year being the newest hottest.
even if it would essentially cool, instead of bend from its catastrophe curve.
(possibly temporarily indeed.) ya know.. cooling is nina heating nino?
then the cooling teh atmospjhere through dust would set up nina's, don't be so stupid.
Saturday, January 3, 2009
Gaza
Actually i think this attack on gaza is the israelian way to make sure obama's presidency will not bring world peace, because naturally they have little more to gain from justice. I don't so much belief outside the nationalist propaganda israeli's don't realise the palestinean rockets are a reaction on their actions, no matter how much they will deny that.
Yet it's all they know to talk about, calling it terrorism because that worked before.
Obama for his part has remained silent, i think he hadn't expected this escalation,
because now already rahm turned into a possible liability. otoh we should not forget obama might be in religious odds himself, i dont blame him over churchgoing, but usian churches are amongst the more fundamentalist, so his real thoughts in religious matters may very well be bigotted.
Israeli dogmatics, aka zionism, are anti negroe, so they might want to upset any afroamerican successes beforehand.
That besides the world that voted in obama, or so you want voiced in obama, obviously doesn't sympathise with the israelian method of terrorising the palestineans. They may have thought it was safer to attack now under bush.
An israeli feature of the day is typo lviv, the offspring of violent and rabiate anti arab zionists, raised comfortably in the mansions of the generals.
Well ty[o is a different person from many other israelis, yet her behaviour so far lies completely predictable within the standard israelian politics. Onesided, even deceitfull she says: there is no humanitarian crisis in gaza, just to announce one the next day tho.
Really we should train our memorys to change this worlds vices, so many people have completely forgotten the targetted assasinations, the endless incursions, the artillery bombardments, the ongoing terror of the drones and missiles, etc..
Israelis gladly recognise this fact and hammer on the propagandic statements they by now pressed into most of the worlds duller brains.
Arabs kill another.. they say, or hamas has no right to send rockets, keeping the right to do exactly that as some typical monopolist patent for theirselves.
Endlessly they voice their hatred towards iran, why in fact, it has become so much better and more modern since khomeini passed away and the revolution took root.
I think the reason israel creates all this animosity towards the arab world is fear, they fear an arab world that would be honestly regarded. They need conflicts in arab nations to survive, so they single out arab nation after arab nation for agressive action, they all get their turns, lebanon, syria, iran, and who remembers their polemics and actions against irak? I do..
They founded hamas, subsidised it for being bygotted and religious, now they pretend surprise it turned against them, i bet it was actually conceived the very way.
Divide at impera, so much is obvious for the funding of hamas, and so much is obvious about the entire israelian international politics, that israel creates division when it can.
There is allways a major arab target for israelian prop, sometimes its been syria "syria terrorises lebanon" (who else you might wonder).
Saddam hussein has wmd!
syria has wmd!
Iran has wmd!
we proved it! we bombed them!....(they bombed all 3)
Similarly the palestinean resistance is used to make the point islam is aggressive..
israel assasinated palestineans, so they must be violent... isn't that true?
no, but, who cares, who is paying attention?
Now they have decided to go for the impossible, stop the hamas rocket reaction, oh surely they will eliminate some rockets for some time to come, or even allways,
but they will not break the palestinean spirit anymore, what they have been trying for so long.
I think these 19th century practices against a small overcrowded territory will finally fail to break the palestinean resolve, that has very often been affected by the strategys of division and intimidation.
Israelis think humans are a predictable herd of nay sayers, and by killing enough palestineans there will only remain those with no voiced opinion, with no real ideas, or identity.
They say " we want to change the situation on the ground" (means kill palestinean cadre).
we want a final solution they even said.
eliminate hamas once and for all they started out this adventure, but that i think has already been given up as utterly undoable.
the symptomatic suppression of the mostly symbolic rockets reaction, is what is now the standard claim, it makes me wonder what will come in it's place.
I have the faint hope palestines prepared for this agression and set up many remotely controlled roadside bombs to eliminate the israelian tanks, it woudl force israel to also sacrifice life, lives, and it would hurt them dearly to see some of their sophisticated tools of carnage desinvested.
who knows, israel seems to have lost grip with reality, in recent years, the attack on lebanon, bloody carnage and pollution it may have been, has not led to military succes much, alltho it stopped some rockets coming from lebanon,
the usual downfall of a militairy oppressor goes in small significances, they loose a bit of the war here or there first, and after that a loosing streak will finalise the doom of the agressor, and perhaps israels time has come.
I am glad not to be a palestinean, not to have to encounter the anonymous instruments of terror personally, and i fear for their happiness, their lives, their options, i wouldn't know how to even stand up against drones and missiles, but if they can? However horrible all these events, if they lead to the downgrading of a militairy rule, a militarist policy's, i wouldn't be only sad.
yet i don't like many of the arab governments, many that i do like i have my sidenotes, my remarks ,(i like khadaffi but i hate his grip on power and typical trend to institute a family dynasty.(well so goes for typo, for the bhuttos, for mubarak)
the point there is, two wrongs don't make a right, israel.
good luck all, may this attack on a future of peace and coexistence be defeated in its intends. Let's hope obama won't loose his wits through these escalations, provocations.
Yet it's all they know to talk about, calling it terrorism because that worked before.
Obama for his part has remained silent, i think he hadn't expected this escalation,
because now already rahm turned into a possible liability. otoh we should not forget obama might be in religious odds himself, i dont blame him over churchgoing, but usian churches are amongst the more fundamentalist, so his real thoughts in religious matters may very well be bigotted.
Israeli dogmatics, aka zionism, are anti negroe, so they might want to upset any afroamerican successes beforehand.
That besides the world that voted in obama, or so you want voiced in obama, obviously doesn't sympathise with the israelian method of terrorising the palestineans. They may have thought it was safer to attack now under bush.
An israeli feature of the day is typo lviv, the offspring of violent and rabiate anti arab zionists, raised comfortably in the mansions of the generals.
Well ty[o is a different person from many other israelis, yet her behaviour so far lies completely predictable within the standard israelian politics. Onesided, even deceitfull she says: there is no humanitarian crisis in gaza, just to announce one the next day tho.
Really we should train our memorys to change this worlds vices, so many people have completely forgotten the targetted assasinations, the endless incursions, the artillery bombardments, the ongoing terror of the drones and missiles, etc..
Israelis gladly recognise this fact and hammer on the propagandic statements they by now pressed into most of the worlds duller brains.
Arabs kill another.. they say, or hamas has no right to send rockets, keeping the right to do exactly that as some typical monopolist patent for theirselves.
Endlessly they voice their hatred towards iran, why in fact, it has become so much better and more modern since khomeini passed away and the revolution took root.
I think the reason israel creates all this animosity towards the arab world is fear, they fear an arab world that would be honestly regarded. They need conflicts in arab nations to survive, so they single out arab nation after arab nation for agressive action, they all get their turns, lebanon, syria, iran, and who remembers their polemics and actions against irak? I do..
They founded hamas, subsidised it for being bygotted and religious, now they pretend surprise it turned against them, i bet it was actually conceived the very way.
Divide at impera, so much is obvious for the funding of hamas, and so much is obvious about the entire israelian international politics, that israel creates division when it can.
There is allways a major arab target for israelian prop, sometimes its been syria "syria terrorises lebanon" (who else you might wonder).
Saddam hussein has wmd!
syria has wmd!
Iran has wmd!
we proved it! we bombed them!....(they bombed all 3)
Similarly the palestinean resistance is used to make the point islam is aggressive..
israel assasinated palestineans, so they must be violent... isn't that true?
no, but, who cares, who is paying attention?
Now they have decided to go for the impossible, stop the hamas rocket reaction, oh surely they will eliminate some rockets for some time to come, or even allways,
but they will not break the palestinean spirit anymore, what they have been trying for so long.
I think these 19th century practices against a small overcrowded territory will finally fail to break the palestinean resolve, that has very often been affected by the strategys of division and intimidation.
Israelis think humans are a predictable herd of nay sayers, and by killing enough palestineans there will only remain those with no voiced opinion, with no real ideas, or identity.
They say " we want to change the situation on the ground" (means kill palestinean cadre).
we want a final solution they even said.
eliminate hamas once and for all they started out this adventure, but that i think has already been given up as utterly undoable.
the symptomatic suppression of the mostly symbolic rockets reaction, is what is now the standard claim, it makes me wonder what will come in it's place.
I have the faint hope palestines prepared for this agression and set up many remotely controlled roadside bombs to eliminate the israelian tanks, it woudl force israel to also sacrifice life, lives, and it would hurt them dearly to see some of their sophisticated tools of carnage desinvested.
who knows, israel seems to have lost grip with reality, in recent years, the attack on lebanon, bloody carnage and pollution it may have been, has not led to military succes much, alltho it stopped some rockets coming from lebanon,
the usual downfall of a militairy oppressor goes in small significances, they loose a bit of the war here or there first, and after that a loosing streak will finalise the doom of the agressor, and perhaps israels time has come.
I am glad not to be a palestinean, not to have to encounter the anonymous instruments of terror personally, and i fear for their happiness, their lives, their options, i wouldn't know how to even stand up against drones and missiles, but if they can? However horrible all these events, if they lead to the downgrading of a militairy rule, a militarist policy's, i wouldn't be only sad.
yet i don't like many of the arab governments, many that i do like i have my sidenotes, my remarks ,(i like khadaffi but i hate his grip on power and typical trend to institute a family dynasty.(well so goes for typo, for the bhuttos, for mubarak)
the point there is, two wrongs don't make a right, israel.
good luck all, may this attack on a future of peace and coexistence be defeated in its intends. Let's hope obama won't loose his wits through these escalations, provocations.
Friday, January 2, 2009
2009. january
I hope every day of your life starts a good year for you, yet i hope this year will be special, the Obama thing, i don't expect anything outrageous, just a window of opportunity and a world that may be eager to get through.
I for my part will try to be positive and keep it in mind, Try to contribute.
Bush has been a bit quiet, i think he hopes the same, Condi threw the stick in the ring, remained a low profile. Fascinating, what she did say about mumbai had some of the usual apertness , but it wasn't as mean as she could have been, setting things up worse. I guess it was styly. I didn't much agree tho.
Predictions are not the big thing this year, having a post last like last year is nice, but i haven't an idea what new the year would bring, i am pretty sure the trend of cooling will still be apreciable, meanwhile apparently we are all but save of droughts, i think that will remain, like last year, wich was rather a disaster year, with that terrible flood in myanmar, the huge earthquake in china and 3 terrible hurricanes in cuba. food production in cuba has been at only 20 percent
of the usual level, so i am a bit worried, these hurricanes are an obvious trend,
Ah, yes the financial "crisis" i think it's an another economic phantom, that will chase you only if you believe in it. Perhaps just because i am not so surprised.
We have been saying for many years there is a limit to the growth.
It is so very obvious that in many ways we are reaching there. We could easily just be challenged and adapt, start making enough, instead of ever more and more..
I guess that is why i am not in much of a profetic mood, the idea to just do something about it appeals more. India is bluntly surprised pakistan got affronted,
wich is good news , although i am still embarrased by the idea of such a huge nation having such utterly partial and controlled media. Also its not quite credible even diplomats and politicians in india wouldn't realise they make this impression on pakistan. Allthough the premier spoke out somewhat moderately even under great pressure to strike at pakistan hard, he did accompagny that with a wish.. a demand, so he was being a pawn even in my eyes of (what i perceived as) hindu sentiments,
ofcourse a pakistani would notice. The matter of an anti-islam context is not for me to judge, but has been easily collaborated.
That is a pretty tough thing. Obama announced, i think, to continue operations with (and in) pakistan, i must say that was a political statement, go with the flow when asked in very challenging election times, so perhaps he has some nuance in reality.
Pakistan is actually martyred by the "allies" in the war for terror. 10000s of pakistanis have been heartlessly forced to sacrifice their lives fighting their brothers for the blackmail of the bigger wars that would otherways follow.
It's a crying shame and one reason they would like to see a real enemy they could beat on equal terms. A completely ridiculous situation, 10000s of pakistani dieing for a war that officially we wage. (Usia and EU). And tehse idiot usians boasting it as genuine heroism. It's terrible, well it is what every army does. Armys are a tool of evil so they are a great and inevitable source of inhumane indoctrinations.
A professional army is a crime against humanity, even the motivation of a police force can only be regarded as utterly suspect, and in practice has often shown to be as awfull. There was quiet some attention for christmas, and less so for new year,
i would guess it means the nato plans war. christmas is for nato soldiers,(they put the red hats on their uniforms in masses) new year is the dream for a peacefull future,
I didn't pay attention in my blog yet to israels newest mass murder. Actually because for me that they apply inhumane measures to the palestinean reaction has become obvious very much in the attack on lebanon. It made me wonder where all the prisoners israel ever took went.
It made some lebanese and palestineans wonder as well i think, the conflict was slightly different from there, yet hezbollah won, i don't wonder that was to greater sacrifice then we know of. (off 1600-130 killed)
It seems israel is preparing to advance into gaza, perhaps they need to reassure themselves about their militairy capacity, it's a strange country, i think they consider the palestineans some experiment.
The predictions are israel would not like to start ground operations, but the area is very tiny and they have complete air and information superiority.
(I think it very nazi to apply such overpowering technology to eliminate your political opponents.)Israel itself is giving a good show of wanting to attack, "clearing minefields" and i suppose perhaps they will, wich would be very sad and bitter for the palestineans that would then again be forced to fight the israeli drone to man. Meanwhile the israelis and other usians talking about cowards elsewhere ofcourse.
So i think i covered that now. Recently i saw a nice entry in wich the palestinean cause was represented with much more serious claims, that was encouraging, i am not the only one that thinks the palestineans could have a little more instead of only ever less.
Anyway when we finally settle the eu border to include iran, ofcourse we have no real excuse left to exclude israel, i am still not so happy about the creation of all kinds of medieval mini states in "my eu".
You can say netherlands is one itself, but at least it existed before the eu.
i like to see things connected, in history, before i think they are ideal.
How does the EU have to defend the territorial results of some most doubtfull quarrel over ethnicity's not worth mentioning.
It's a complot to frame us with 'pragmatic nazism' "this is the superpowers militairy result so we keep it at this.." i believe in european people and that they a better representation is their right.
talking european people , i am charmed with sarkozy still, he is quite a surprise in international affairs usually, i thought of this last year ehrn something bigger happens i still hope to see some of his statements, perhaps his position as intermediate has now and then been a bit easy, because quite dearly needed, but i will pay attention to what else he says in the geopolitical context, he even deserved it from my pov. i am curious in what he thinks about conflicts and geopolitics, but i think he is strongly motivated for peace and quite engaged with the french mind. Not as impressive as putin, yet very diplomatic, ofcourse people will say its a dangerous course, to be easy on people, but as long as people deserve that you are easy on them it is a hell of a lot better.
Last year his attitude has saved the world from some harm, quite a lot actually, whatever he did after georgia's crisis, was equally articulated, but it slipped my memory, i think i wan't the only one to look for a reference.
So we have a czech president now.. gl czechs, i like the idea so far..
Don't forget people will look what ties you already admitted to, if you keep free of that you won't harm. It's quite important to pay attention tho. Otherways for eg. arab nations the presidency could be quitte meaningless.
Sarkozy behave nice for a presidency of EU. He didnt push the position for anything, but gave it a rather positive aspect of being on the affairs and still constrained.
Thats suits the idea of am united europe well, for my feeling it is not the first time the old bases of culture and you might call it civilisation, saves us.
I really liked his attitude. For paddo's and france in that way he is still an ass as far as i an concerned. So i am still wary about his national politics. but it's a great deal in international politics he opted strongly for peace and entente.
He also did in the newest israeli case, but israel wouldn't let him. I think a bit predictable, that is when israel has further agression in mind, wich they say they do a lot.
Thats what Ban noticed. That the discussion is inflamative. He should take a bit care tho, i doubt hamas has so much said inflammatory things, or said that before his statement. Perhaps that is also a matter of taste, but it's worth noticing.
Israel actually wants to make the weirdests points by this action, for example they think it clearly shows the muslim nations (and also the western) should rise up against their governments.(perhaps not all israeli's)
They are really a bit silly in that, you would say, why don't you rise against your's?The pun being they can have another zionist fart at that point... becus i don't dare to before you do.
so when israel will be part of the proper eu, england will have to abolish sharia again and so will israel and iran, otherways i suggest they make some union of their own. We would be at war, because no nation is allowed to make people believe stuff that is not empiric, but at least it seems they could have peace amongst theirselves.
I would like to have turkey in the eu, that we could start with having syria and irak and kurdistan (as a result) join, but i opposed it, it seemed improper, another continent, indeed the greek went to afghanistan over turkey.
so i am proud we didn't. qalso beacuse we held at the border of ukraine and belorussia i am proud. Nowadays i alsready feel terribly romantic about the idea we could always have russia join, and the rest, well now there is abchasia to and ossetia, quite terrible, a bit beyond the european reach even.
Obama is said to have connections with banks with connections to saaskavilli.
so that nationalist i fear we would still see around, strange how this reminds me of israel in more then one way now.
Georgia is snall tho, and it being newish you can expect some rather wacko types to arrive in power. Tss.. reminds me of something, guinnee, i wonder it wouldn't be a first that the "international" community (usia eu (and israel?)) makes a great point for a small nation.
The people of guinee , mostly according to alJ, appear to have no great problems with the takeover. The idea that economy and burocracy will be differently arranged and non corrupt apparently is quite a dream. If Camara really wants this remains to be seen. but he is being quite secure about it.
Two years should be anough to make a great start with undoing corruption wouldn't it?
I think it should if you are ready to lay still all the mining industry.
Anyway.. thats quite an action, good luck ppl of guinnee.
It's a bit of a paradox when you say you are a technocrat though, why then didn't you lay the mines still before.. I think camara was really of the opinion conte was a bit of a dictator. They messed up with the burial a bit allthough he appeared to not really have a hand in it he made no great point in "paying respect".
Lip service, ofcourse half the nation regards their former leader as a figure of almost mythical proportion for due or undue reasons, he is obviously taking care with that. He also sacked 12 or so generals, thats 24 times more then the dutch have btw i think . it's quite credible they served no real purpose. Lol i think he was no general.. oh well details.
Thailand. I think thai politics are either ridiculous from my point of view in a similar way to the bangladesi(a sistertwist with oprah aspects), or the matter is more serious and perhaps incredibly obstruse. I tend to do belief allegations of corruprion against south-easian leaders, but i think i would have voted taksins party, if one of the two was the only option. Well they looked like santaclauses pretty much all in yellow. It's a mess still, perhaps indeed it is now up to the reds to test tolerance. Anyhow i think it was incredibly funny as it was.. keep it going guys! Did you notice how when wasn't it taksin? returned handgrenades were tossed pnto the yellows? well there were other incidents as well, but i will allways wonder if he himself did that.
Now on with soemthing really sad. tamils have become a sidenote of the war on terror,
the ongoing militairy campaign has unrooted most of the tamil territory on sri lanka,
i always despise teh government of sri lanka no matter how long it takes.
After the native americans, and the maori , the aboriginal, tamils are now the only ethnicity to have no nation of our own, how very colonialist to see it happen.
Sad, Ok i quit, no predictions much, maybe next post.
Do it the obama way people! respect, and we are still the majority!
I for my part will try to be positive and keep it in mind, Try to contribute.
Bush has been a bit quiet, i think he hopes the same, Condi threw the stick in the ring, remained a low profile. Fascinating, what she did say about mumbai had some of the usual apertness , but it wasn't as mean as she could have been, setting things up worse. I guess it was styly. I didn't much agree tho.
Predictions are not the big thing this year, having a post last like last year is nice, but i haven't an idea what new the year would bring, i am pretty sure the trend of cooling will still be apreciable, meanwhile apparently we are all but save of droughts, i think that will remain, like last year, wich was rather a disaster year, with that terrible flood in myanmar, the huge earthquake in china and 3 terrible hurricanes in cuba. food production in cuba has been at only 20 percent
of the usual level, so i am a bit worried, these hurricanes are an obvious trend,
Ah, yes the financial "crisis" i think it's an another economic phantom, that will chase you only if you believe in it. Perhaps just because i am not so surprised.
We have been saying for many years there is a limit to the growth.
It is so very obvious that in many ways we are reaching there. We could easily just be challenged and adapt, start making enough, instead of ever more and more..
I guess that is why i am not in much of a profetic mood, the idea to just do something about it appeals more. India is bluntly surprised pakistan got affronted,
wich is good news , although i am still embarrased by the idea of such a huge nation having such utterly partial and controlled media. Also its not quite credible even diplomats and politicians in india wouldn't realise they make this impression on pakistan. Allthough the premier spoke out somewhat moderately even under great pressure to strike at pakistan hard, he did accompagny that with a wish.. a demand, so he was being a pawn even in my eyes of (what i perceived as) hindu sentiments,
ofcourse a pakistani would notice. The matter of an anti-islam context is not for me to judge, but has been easily collaborated.
That is a pretty tough thing. Obama announced, i think, to continue operations with (and in) pakistan, i must say that was a political statement, go with the flow when asked in very challenging election times, so perhaps he has some nuance in reality.
Pakistan is actually martyred by the "allies" in the war for terror. 10000s of pakistanis have been heartlessly forced to sacrifice their lives fighting their brothers for the blackmail of the bigger wars that would otherways follow.
It's a crying shame and one reason they would like to see a real enemy they could beat on equal terms. A completely ridiculous situation, 10000s of pakistani dieing for a war that officially we wage. (Usia and EU). And tehse idiot usians boasting it as genuine heroism. It's terrible, well it is what every army does. Armys are a tool of evil so they are a great and inevitable source of inhumane indoctrinations.
A professional army is a crime against humanity, even the motivation of a police force can only be regarded as utterly suspect, and in practice has often shown to be as awfull. There was quiet some attention for christmas, and less so for new year,
i would guess it means the nato plans war. christmas is for nato soldiers,(they put the red hats on their uniforms in masses) new year is the dream for a peacefull future,
I didn't pay attention in my blog yet to israels newest mass murder. Actually because for me that they apply inhumane measures to the palestinean reaction has become obvious very much in the attack on lebanon. It made me wonder where all the prisoners israel ever took went.
It made some lebanese and palestineans wonder as well i think, the conflict was slightly different from there, yet hezbollah won, i don't wonder that was to greater sacrifice then we know of. (off 1600-130 killed)
It seems israel is preparing to advance into gaza, perhaps they need to reassure themselves about their militairy capacity, it's a strange country, i think they consider the palestineans some experiment.
The predictions are israel would not like to start ground operations, but the area is very tiny and they have complete air and information superiority.
(I think it very nazi to apply such overpowering technology to eliminate your political opponents.)Israel itself is giving a good show of wanting to attack, "clearing minefields" and i suppose perhaps they will, wich would be very sad and bitter for the palestineans that would then again be forced to fight the israeli drone to man. Meanwhile the israelis and other usians talking about cowards elsewhere ofcourse.
So i think i covered that now. Recently i saw a nice entry in wich the palestinean cause was represented with much more serious claims, that was encouraging, i am not the only one that thinks the palestineans could have a little more instead of only ever less.
Anyway when we finally settle the eu border to include iran, ofcourse we have no real excuse left to exclude israel, i am still not so happy about the creation of all kinds of medieval mini states in "my eu".
You can say netherlands is one itself, but at least it existed before the eu.
i like to see things connected, in history, before i think they are ideal.
How does the EU have to defend the territorial results of some most doubtfull quarrel over ethnicity's not worth mentioning.
It's a complot to frame us with 'pragmatic nazism' "this is the superpowers militairy result so we keep it at this.." i believe in european people and that they a better representation is their right.
talking european people , i am charmed with sarkozy still, he is quite a surprise in international affairs usually, i thought of this last year ehrn something bigger happens i still hope to see some of his statements, perhaps his position as intermediate has now and then been a bit easy, because quite dearly needed, but i will pay attention to what else he says in the geopolitical context, he even deserved it from my pov. i am curious in what he thinks about conflicts and geopolitics, but i think he is strongly motivated for peace and quite engaged with the french mind. Not as impressive as putin, yet very diplomatic, ofcourse people will say its a dangerous course, to be easy on people, but as long as people deserve that you are easy on them it is a hell of a lot better.
Last year his attitude has saved the world from some harm, quite a lot actually, whatever he did after georgia's crisis, was equally articulated, but it slipped my memory, i think i wan't the only one to look for a reference.
So we have a czech president now.. gl czechs, i like the idea so far..
Don't forget people will look what ties you already admitted to, if you keep free of that you won't harm. It's quite important to pay attention tho. Otherways for eg. arab nations the presidency could be quitte meaningless.
Sarkozy behave nice for a presidency of EU. He didnt push the position for anything, but gave it a rather positive aspect of being on the affairs and still constrained.
Thats suits the idea of am united europe well, for my feeling it is not the first time the old bases of culture and you might call it civilisation, saves us.
I really liked his attitude. For paddo's and france in that way he is still an ass as far as i an concerned. So i am still wary about his national politics. but it's a great deal in international politics he opted strongly for peace and entente.
He also did in the newest israeli case, but israel wouldn't let him. I think a bit predictable, that is when israel has further agression in mind, wich they say they do a lot.
Thats what Ban noticed. That the discussion is inflamative. He should take a bit care tho, i doubt hamas has so much said inflammatory things, or said that before his statement. Perhaps that is also a matter of taste, but it's worth noticing.
Israel actually wants to make the weirdests points by this action, for example they think it clearly shows the muslim nations (and also the western) should rise up against their governments.(perhaps not all israeli's)
They are really a bit silly in that, you would say, why don't you rise against your's?The pun being they can have another zionist fart at that point... becus i don't dare to before you do.
so when israel will be part of the proper eu, england will have to abolish sharia again and so will israel and iran, otherways i suggest they make some union of their own. We would be at war, because no nation is allowed to make people believe stuff that is not empiric, but at least it seems they could have peace amongst theirselves.
I would like to have turkey in the eu, that we could start with having syria and irak and kurdistan (as a result) join, but i opposed it, it seemed improper, another continent, indeed the greek went to afghanistan over turkey.
so i am proud we didn't. qalso beacuse we held at the border of ukraine and belorussia i am proud. Nowadays i alsready feel terribly romantic about the idea we could always have russia join, and the rest, well now there is abchasia to and ossetia, quite terrible, a bit beyond the european reach even.
Obama is said to have connections with banks with connections to saaskavilli.
so that nationalist i fear we would still see around, strange how this reminds me of israel in more then one way now.
Georgia is snall tho, and it being newish you can expect some rather wacko types to arrive in power. Tss.. reminds me of something, guinnee, i wonder it wouldn't be a first that the "international" community (usia eu (and israel?)) makes a great point for a small nation.
The people of guinee , mostly according to alJ, appear to have no great problems with the takeover. The idea that economy and burocracy will be differently arranged and non corrupt apparently is quite a dream. If Camara really wants this remains to be seen. but he is being quite secure about it.
Two years should be anough to make a great start with undoing corruption wouldn't it?
I think it should if you are ready to lay still all the mining industry.
Anyway.. thats quite an action, good luck ppl of guinnee.
It's a bit of a paradox when you say you are a technocrat though, why then didn't you lay the mines still before.. I think camara was really of the opinion conte was a bit of a dictator. They messed up with the burial a bit allthough he appeared to not really have a hand in it he made no great point in "paying respect".
Lip service, ofcourse half the nation regards their former leader as a figure of almost mythical proportion for due or undue reasons, he is obviously taking care with that. He also sacked 12 or so generals, thats 24 times more then the dutch have btw i think . it's quite credible they served no real purpose. Lol i think he was no general.. oh well details.
Thailand. I think thai politics are either ridiculous from my point of view in a similar way to the bangladesi(a sistertwist with oprah aspects), or the matter is more serious and perhaps incredibly obstruse. I tend to do belief allegations of corruprion against south-easian leaders, but i think i would have voted taksins party, if one of the two was the only option. Well they looked like santaclauses pretty much all in yellow. It's a mess still, perhaps indeed it is now up to the reds to test tolerance. Anyhow i think it was incredibly funny as it was.. keep it going guys! Did you notice how when wasn't it taksin? returned handgrenades were tossed pnto the yellows? well there were other incidents as well, but i will allways wonder if he himself did that.
Now on with soemthing really sad. tamils have become a sidenote of the war on terror,
the ongoing militairy campaign has unrooted most of the tamil territory on sri lanka,
i always despise teh government of sri lanka no matter how long it takes.
After the native americans, and the maori , the aboriginal, tamils are now the only ethnicity to have no nation of our own, how very colonialist to see it happen.
Sad, Ok i quit, no predictions much, maybe next post.
Do it the obama way people! respect, and we are still the majority!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
wanted terrorist: name silencer aka stealotron
Through lies and fraud this one is managed to rob 1000000s of the fruits of their work and their voice