solsticea 2011 99.8

recently i have commented quitte a lot about the usian presidential elections. useless perhaps and overly ambitious, but it is smeared on the media so widely, it offers excellent cases to reply in the negative.

obama's change? well there is change, but to say it is a very great or speedy one... if it happenned, it happenned almost casually. sideways.

what changed is the political landscape inside and outside usia. what did not change is the trend to take from the poor and give it to the rich. the only really notable kind of change.

oh, i don't think it deserves to much negativity. what was to be expected? to emancipate any and all straight from the most primitive of projections?

perhaps we and obama are doing just fine in all our powerlessness.

more and more i am convinced i will 'root for obama'. not a guarantee for succes i admit, but it worked last time. and i think he stands a good chance. because still he is the symbol, the very justifiable and often isolated symbol, of emancipation. and by virtue of coincedence, (he should really do away with those weird yellow sunglasses of his), it is there for everyone to see.

racism really goes pretty deep. ron pauls weird pink sunglasses for example make no impression on me at all.. so true..

no wait. it is actually not true, i love ron pauls pink sunglasses... obviously..

no wait, that is also not true. i hate it we all need sunglasses as a short term protection instead of the everlasting ozone layer we destroyed.

anyway. ron paul stands accused of being a racist. i did an experiment that i will describe hereafter to test if he was truly a bad guy in the respect.

he is very old over 73, and i dont trust people that age to be in touch with modernity, with reality so to say.

don't want to say they all wear the wrong color sunglasses, but usually they do. they have no grip on what is playing before their very eyes, because they stuffed their brains full of campaignpromises of eras long gone and try to make the politics their own fathers never managed. it ends up not uncommonly to be hugely outdated and out of touch policy's.

that is what i have against ron paul in the person to start with.

but..

he signed a bunch of rather crappy and unfortunately rather pretentious papers, that form a collection of rants, in the racist, in the homophobiac, (so that is why he loves those pink glasses??), and in the antisemite (or so it says, i am not sure, i didnt read that years 1990s garbage). the descriptions have not been descriptive enough for me to judge if it was plain antisemitism, or subttle, moderated, historic revisionism, wich is imho a different thing.

that besides the intentions with what it was written may matter. it is easy ofcourse to overdo things.

anyhow. since i dont have those papers and am not particularly interested either in the kind of talk that is apparently supposed to engage white supremacists etc., i did the 'ron paul racism test,'

science is not reliable without the method. this test however allows not to only test ron paul for racism, it allows to test nearly everyone to their measure of racism.

it goes like this.

first you try not to be a racist, child off, for some 35 years. after that you manage to become "less of a racist then average" and you get a certain leverage with other non racist (ie. colored minority's) groups to be considered seriously interested ' not a racist seeking new rants and barter'

well that is easy ofcourse, life is a dedication somehow.

after you did all this the test is simple. you go to a place where people from a random minority are overrepresented, the kind of place you fear if you never tried for antiracism that is perhaps..

then you think, and talk a bit about the subject (is ron paul a racist?)

the answer will come, in the form of sad looks, sad expressions, noone yet accused anyone of being a most despisable thing aloud in such enlightened company.

they can tell two things.

1: i am looking sad because he is not a racist how could you think such a thing?.

1 is the outcome most preferred by everyone, but not the most common.

2: unfortunately we know he is a racist.

unfortunately ron paul is one. we .... "know". (i know since yesterday:().

solsticea 2011.. 99

people sometimes say i could be more productive. since what i do really , would really, would really love to, would be

about direct action, civil disobedience, transparance, human rights and dignity,
in short about what i think i certainly must still try to contribute to #occupy

purely technically spoken they are riot.

yet in some way, that i really do not completely understand myself, it is not ''that' easy,

i am familiar with it, ofcourse, i can be pretty neurotic about a few things, not only about producing these thoughts that were materialising with that topic in mind,

i destroy alarms, mh, that one mind you , i do not mind. independently very much if i sleep, for example. and if i don't want to go somewhere my bicycle can just be flat, so i dont allways have to do a lot about what does get me nervous, sometimes it does it for me.

administrative post is my great weakness. it gets me down, depressed, sad and angry. i tend and try for years now not to open any. it was just allways horrible, and very often so utterly useless and injust,
because that is how poor people are treated.

and exactly that hit me in full force when halliburnton was allowed in the full open, attempting to put the blame on anyone

destroyed the evidence.

these sunny ideas? about non-violent change and emancipation of civilian participation in decission making processes..?

dead as a radiated germ in a fresh mango pulp.

i will still try (and make perhaps this year), but i guarantee not the vindication and brilliance i planned it with.


sorry. humans are limited, humans have flaws, and humans make errors.

there's a flaw, here's a flow.

another tricky excuse i suppose people innocently enjoy in the secret even if it is all so plain.

so of all that..
and that is a lot..

basically none of it is "true", something to have a 'faith' in, or justice.

none of that is smart. it is human, and it is 'flaws'

ask the budha in it's endless incarnation of our own joy, and she will answer you:

ice skating? never heard of that.

brrr. ltr.!

solsticea 2011.98

what stupifyingly major year.

my last years weather prediction for example. exactly to the point. at least overhere.
locally so to say. the very, very dry river here.

and no matter what chaos in the climate.. that is becoming more structural.

we had more sunny days then usual. 9 of them in summer. mhpf. (grumpf, growl) it's few.


fukushima.


i had a look recently. not close or so, no human wave policy's from mine, confirmative or not that much.

not that good. arny gunderson worried, or actually not so much , about driftwood.
but the real problem is , agreed, probably with the food chain.

there is the 20 msv per japanese child story,
a gross estimate would put their surplus cancer risks at some 500% i think. and the impossibillity to clean the playgrounds or houses. (2)

there is that the evicted from fukushima still pay the mortgages from the housing bubble.
there is a promotion for them to go back. tokyo was once again noticed for being a tad worse then already unadmitted. really, all that and jazz. (3)

sipdis from the yakuzi so to say, labour union stuff. that you know a small detail. a certain phantom in tepco's concept for example.

or just a random 220m3 of some other thing. really in a drain or the other. worst? hell, how relative is that, the 4th and only in one nation shown nuclear explosion at the site?

and the same mantra. 'eventually worse than chernobyl'. mark they planary hold against me the art, imprecise use of language.

eventually worse 12th of february (did it burn the riot date in the mind ..:S i don't think so.

but say it was the 12th. and o0:00 that earthquake put an end to the rusty, unmaintained , not any more modern , reliable or even functional. beyond expirance date emergency gear,

i dont really mind not knowing when .. conform warfogging crime downnumberedly, in those waves
but that is another thing than doomsday machines build to be prepared against the ineventual.

worse then at o0:12.. that point it got about as bad as chernobyl, heh and i that is really to pessimist, not after the second day at all.

that eventually.

12 minutes probably.


if they are not antedate, expired, wrecked, old, worn, amateurishly powered up, weirdly stashed full of cummulative calamity, in short outdated.

but that besides i am supposed to blame no one, i think. for what is basically, a predicted fraude with billions.

all of them did it.

they put it in plastic folio these days. cynical, consider it like 4 simmering nuclear bombs, packed in plastic foli, and it is not even easy, or possible to do, it's slow, and costy in human resource.

with the not that executive regards of a labour unions..

it influenced the weather,

ionised some sphere, near the ozonsphere, it's remnants, did, oloril knows what, make it colder,
thinner, with weird high clouds, that didn't rain..(1)

1 million out of 1.5 go hurray it didn't rain?

sorry to build your secure housing bubble, dust allways comes down way more persistently than rain.

so i don't freaking know. but my initial 800 yrs max, with the more probable scenarios at 600 yrs max , sorteless the moreofsuch privatisation unsutainable catastrophominems

thats is not exactly super.

netherlands has urenco, and as long as you say 'shut borselle' , you are obviously somewhat of an utter nitwitz.

borselle could never mean a tiny thing, if you don't hold a thing against urenco

don't even have to guess it's ss. state secret.
(it's in the educational murdrycullium it doesn't do a thing).

that besads, that besads.

k that is one thing need sad. 2011

ltr.

(1) months after i stopped my engagemnt for sheer frustration of the lak of advance trhough denial, lies from the fraud, corruption, greed etc.. instead of a maximal attempt at starting safer energy,

the dogs told me, and birds as well, the atmosphere appeared to still be quitte ionised.
when they asked me to pay attention i could indeed still observe some faint differenc in the violet or what is close to that,

for some of them the whole skie has been looking perfectly out of ordre and scary,

allthough, they know not only fukushima, but also: occupy.

(2) up to 5 per 1000 newborn in the americas eg.

(3) brave japanese hunted by the corporate police feed the starving pets that people were misleadingly told they could retrieve little later.

spy vs. spy

an eventfull year, i will write a bit still, my last post i mentioned what an ordeal it is if there is a despise, a contempt for justice in the system we live in. it is still a depressing thought.

it can be reflected on almost anything that is happening, well happening, relevant and in the media. egypt and "tahrir!" basically a dispute about class justice and the violence of the uniformed side.

egypt post tahrir, pretty much the same dispute. a blogger in prison for years already and that is only the most outspoken tip of an iceberg of injustice.

syria? what other thing then a contempt for justice in the sense of 'human riots' is held against assad?

ow i am concerned. the situation became terribly muddy by now. the traditional thing the camel does to it's followers is happening, the closed doors, muslims only understand repression reasoning.

well it is not really the camel perhaps, but it is terrible. and what is happening?

the reaction of the west, including aljazeera is to shamelessly portray even pro assad rallys as demonstration, what should you still believe is riot here?

the reaction of the arab world, to send 'monitors' is in itself a quite phantasmagoral idea, generals, used to pacify warzones .. in luxurious cars talk to spokespeople of the interior ministry, ok it need to be done, so far so good, opposition jumps high and low. but the point is,

do i really believe something in the sense of "true justice" will be done by them? i don't even think they have the faintest to start an attempt. it need not be a lack of will. (1)

just a lack of justice.

so do i have that against anyone else in particular? the states, not just any states, also the usian states , that trademarker of liberty.

because obviously the proceedings against manning are finally(?) taking place after months of abuse of the person of bradley manning, reportedly to turn him against assange that is still and almost openly manipulated against by usian and other states representatives.

hardly dare to say it, but it is encouraging the english courts take the story serious, where will it end, i allways see the ship of justice strand on those cliffs of money and influence.

so, why not talk a bit more than i already have about this trial of the century that is going on, what is perhaps the most important trial so far of this century.

it is not i have no gossip..

the trial of bradley manning.

ok i know this, it has been documented that the department at what the preceding 'judge' (perhaps military person is way more appropriate) is working , (doj) , is bussy with proceedings against assange. all confidentially probably and 'way secret',

so the judge considered himself .. unbiased, now that would still be tested, in the longer term for an appeals hearing, and perhaps i should not be so pessimistic as to be opportune about that, what more is known is that this doj, department of justice, has been working at the case against bradley manning in person..

reportedly in the 'actual shaping of a plea bargain to be used against assange'.
and it means he is a hero, that despite solitary confinement and brutal treatment, that is officially regarded torture under human rights criteria including expressions of those united states in (the) americas in international diplomacy, including such as referred to the security counsil, ie. cases of war and peace, life and death on a scale and measure of international justice, he is the one person that did not turn into a traitor of anyone.

i saw a very fatty senator, he thought i(we?) would like him, for his smile. over manning i think, not a bad smile, but if you think that is where reliability is..

he said he didn't 'like' bradley manning, that he had only defended his rights to still be humanely treated, he didn't follow that up, wich would be a juridical common sense, with that it invalidated the proceedings, no he followed it up with talk about treason or so.

yeah, get in the picture for someone's rights, and when it matters be gladly chatting about in the world 'you don't like him' or whatever counts as his reason for being guilty. no that was a setup.

what i do love is to see daniel(?) elsberg struggle for him. elsberg, and it is actually the one glimmer of light in the whole case, is referred to as the "most comparable case in usian history".

his weaker statement is: ofcourse the material i relayed was more topical in a way. i think that is a bit weak. his release was about the vietnam war, and more to the point about decissions concerning in effect really millions of lives were made under circumstances that were almost criminal.

the difference is not that great, the 'secrecy' and 'millions of casualties' of these days centre around irak and the crusade against muslim lands, called 'war for terror'.

much more then, almost contrary to, the vietnam war it is an event that many nations share intimate ties and informations about. so it is not that eventfull that a wide scope of topics would be the kind of arrangement against all that confidential poking around and controlling other peoples lifes really.

people, the media for one, say: it changed the world, it is getting done with dictatorships', it finally emancipates many of the muslim nations a bit, perhaps that is only me;).

people in egypt, the occupants, the tahriri, expressed that, libyans did oftentimes and tunesians share all that intention. ok it is not done, but it started.

ellsberg was freed from prosecution, before the court martial, wich is what these hearings are referring to, so not all hope is lost.

i do not see the problem of the united states (ia), they say they want to raise the humanitarian standard of the operational realitys of this planet, manning gives the great hint that we really should and have a way to go. he is the personification of the real 'usian dream' the inspirational freedom and justice.

and personally, i think that is why he suffered in that service, even the guardian does not tell, (and it is wrong in a few cases, the reasoning of that judge eg. being what we are doing at the department is secret, so there exists no 'reasonable person knowing all circumstances' and as such he considers himself more reasonable than someone that would disagree to it.
i do not think it is reasonable, i very much assume he is part and parcel in the coming strategy around bradley manning's proceedings. just on instruction or from a selfassuredness based on vanity.)

even the guardian does not tell bradley manning tried to "whisttle blow" through the official channels about his findings, and btw. did you know the documents on his computer are not the same as those on wikileaks? it is a point the defence got on the table, so i suppose it is supposed to mean that thing it is supposed to mean.

in the public discourse the aformentioned official people state 'he just randomly with no reading passed them on', hmm but also that one of the evidences on his computer is a spreadsheet with the sipdis dbase. that pretty much means he had a specific look for each of them and may have served exaactly the reason he looked at them.

wich.. btw. was his job, and i think it was completely acceptable to hav it all on that pc.

neway, a lot of the hearing is behind closed doors, however not when that request is from the defence, who would not think he would become the victim of bias when he collects books about eg. reconstructional facial surgery on women and has a record troubled amongst things with him being gay.

so alltho the guardian suggests we should not look behind, i suggest bias is necessarilly superficial and not something worth that reference.

one more glitch of the guardian is when they seriously report some uniformed army 'jurist' instruction as 'explanation, and at that.. the whole proceedings are heavily covered with military attendees, infiltrated with them so to say. making that impression , purposedly ofcourse 'something is seriously going on'.

and not in the way they have with it, having less rights than even those from guatanamo, it is. they show off infiltration in public;)

the point is, when overhere, yet it is not the only instance for me that i had peeks into that kind of regulations, when you do that kind of work, 'intelligence' work, wich is basically spy's work etc. there are elaborate rules deciding , for the superiors or officers , and people responsible, if people are suited for the job, even if they are 'still' suited for the job.

the kind of work can be very stressfull and bearing. as a direct result of your researches life and death can be decided, perhaps has to be decided, you are in other cases a direct witness of not a few, but endless incidents that hardly credibly pass the 'rules of engagement' criteria.

lives of children, women, livelyhoods, animals, even meaningfull consequences in a far future, everything can be in the balance. that is why the regulations are rather strict.

and according to the spirit of those, in wich for example his taking a foetal stance, certainly also his whisttle blowing attempt that failed (and obviously not for only the best reasons), his being a loner in his teams, his bearing great repsonsibilitys, attacking a superior, and being adviced against beforehand should have been enough to ring the warning bells.

that the psychological symptoms of stress and dissociation, problems with loyalty etc. are so precisely known is there for a reason.

to protect that doubtfull priviliges of secrecy and undercover reality, and to protect the individual armyperson against the natural consequences of a great struggle of conscience.

here's the gossip, the mainstreaming dutch media repeat me, "(the great question is rather if they ever release him early (because would not that tell if the world has changed)".

yet without raising even a question about his conviction (let alone guilt(?)).

no unpleasant surprises for the sheeple? the general negative trending in tv comments, that is in so far i seen any, but i think the listening post on aljazeera has some..) bodes a similar preparation, and a specific spin, to do indeed that what the dutch media so casually assume.

i said it before, if it was not about people it would be rather funny. funny in the sense that arguments against so much what they hold against him in that mediacircus, are all to often easily found.

tried it a bit here.


(1) i do not think they have the theoretical underground to conceive a functional action model, i would almost hope ban ki moon provides some. not that it would suddenly help all the lack of justice , more that it might help peace prevail in syria without a bloody repression and the forthcoming prolongation of differences and pains.

ps. like i posed in the first weeks wikileaks became the hottest topic of 'news' in the sense of things people did not realise or know, it need not be true, this story.

it is not infeasible assange and bradley eg. are some sort of hoax. somehow i can't get away from the idea all those cables, and what is actually this stash of a 4 million customer confidential hobby magazine, call it for usian armed forces, pentagon, perhaps even nato secret service, what you like, ambassadorial peptalks, gossips and indeed reports, that however trended to be known from public releases in the context. admittedly not the kind of source to allow the oversight you want,
releases in these many contexts.

nevertheless if they are supposed to encourage the army servants of the corporations, they would be supposed to encourage a lot of it's clients. i never heard wikileaks released major detail about say turkey, syria even, egypt , libya or any other nation i know has recently been attempting to release confidential documents, yet it is plausible many have been send.

that would give the pentagon a lot of everything: confidential informations on plenty foreign gov's corporations etc. and the opportunity to donn every kind of scare about whisttle blowing.

plus a heap of what is basically a sales talk under the attention of people that consider themselves critical and often spend a lot of effort to find informations on plenty of the topics , in wich so many nations and people outside the united states stand stereotyped and in not to positive light.

that, i already told you, however should not be a surprise as it was already confirmed in the media when the topic was running in diplomacy, and actually ofcourse sometimes shortly thereafter.

one reason for that is that the probable briefers of the corporate media, are connected to those sipdis releases. in cases that is sure as

ps2: that roommate that did not want to talk to him i suppose also counts, it shows there was little appreciation for him, and raises the question if he asked and was denied (..) a change in that.

the possibillity of change. (occ)

hello once again.

for what the mundane world, the big one, of euro's, hypes about someone's and none's moneys it stays hard to get optimistic, i could elaborate on greed, or the security industry in local media and necronomic offense elsewhere.

lest it suffice here is today's '*great*' example:

halliburton, one such security industrialist schooled-killer-mercenary-rent-outs , mainly and chiefly one that cheney has in his pocket for those that do not observe the news or remember what should not be worth remembering,

aptly figured i allways suppose they themselves decided on "hell-burned-on" after coalescing on the irakis safety "as being bombed", that one..

halliburton? rings a bell? figurehead in the not-so-great shamecases in the public reference for criminality between the rules of engagement?


well it also was at the party on the deep horizon spill, when they blew it up.

the day's news is : they destroyed the evidence of the failed concrete casing.

oh i remember some specifics, that they had not used the required number attachments, that it was not explained that to little cement was used, that there was every kind of indication it was somehow leaking and "compromised" from the tests and logs, and that not a very few people had been signalling the kind of warnings that predict calamity to a professional, wich went largely utterly completely and culpably ignored with the usual note, notes even, of coercion.

not that the last thiong is what i assume they destroyed as 'evidence' but the rest is.

mind you, still this year all 3 partners in the technical aspects of the fiasco have been declared guilty before a some court..

and now even if it was not only about billions, cohorts of people . substantial extinctions and the blackmail of 'the first black president' , for what matter his concerns as to general environmental measure and just as casually the illusion anything near decent could be discharged in terms of social projection, with the ****ing fukushima to add the total and utter disdain for human life and future and nature with regard only for magniminous, discrete and confidential summs of (once again as culpable) "white money".

(the illegal made through secrecy . not holding to safety measures, using dangerous material, cheating a populace, bribing a government, and then the workforce.) "white money".

probably they never even payed taxes over that huge part of the energy expenses in japan.

you think it has not do with another? those 2?

in the case of the nuclear billionaires and their bribed millionaire lobbys and politicians the "whitemail" on obama is : "if you want to go into herstory as a person who did anything remotely good for the environment ,..still, you better shut up completely about the dangers and neglect of nuclear.

since he never doubted the , by the way scientifically very dubious , i find it hard to consider someone so naive, nucleair lobby promotion, propaganda actually, advertising lies.

wich is also what the general people sort of belief because they are thrown dead with garbage confirmin such a lack of notion.

but there is more what i wonder about obama in the context, is he also aware of the complexity of the complot behind the deep horizon spill?

he was not asking for much. only a social program and healthcare. voted in on a platform of control of emissions and environmentalism.

they broke her dream. immediatly.

i'll post the pick on my 'strategy' or actually analyses of activism in the public space,
later.

let me first make my point.

a justice, a court, a department of justice, a responsible ministerium or secretariate, state institutions that define peoples lives over few ill disbegotten pennys,

and to mention.. herstorically, or is that herstorykalli?,

that allows their liason in matters misnomed as 'security', responsible for the deaths of thousands of people,

to just destroy the evidence?

that is no justice. that is no democracy. that is no transparance. that is not a party to be serious about.

ACAB

social housing (5), censoring of the day

weird, i wonder as if that is supposed to be a warning that i got a request for a google pw after i was still signed on, at least so to see.

today i replied on an article in alJ, that was in the stretch of it quite positive about economical reforms, but took quite the standard apologetic aproach and rather consistently mixed up prioritys even with perhapses.

now that is a way to censor things, you say : ok we do economical reforms, and they be.....
(some sequence in some ordre).

but if the elements of the sequence are inconsistent (eg. pensions that depends social housing),
and the ordre is wrong, people will usually start with the first element they see to remember and in their naivety to 'promote change'.

so that article *needed* to be critisised over its application of psychological repression in a propagandical way, but it didnt post.

annoyed as i was i read it all, after all assuming 'good faith' thoroughly sceptical,
and what stood out is the man prioritised the standard hit the poor, capitalist gains, and economic reform ended a remote fourth.

they allways do, the rich and settled. and the trick to mix priorities with distractions is a standard receipe. (actually the raison d'etre of conservative ada. (Also Disguised As) liberals.)

so about social housing.

the idea is that when housing is cheap, sustainable and a right plenty of the effects of crisii (nr's of crisis), can be prevailed and more easily dealt with.

housing has traditionally been a thing to span generations and it still should. a house is not an investment it is a necessity for life, so

fundamentally according to the constitutions (and damn them who don't) we have a right on life.
furthermore housing and also ground transactions are not what they used. the former aristocratical distribution of rewards for soils and parcels that was obviously also another historical case of subsidising the rich through taxing the poor, and how it transformed into a similarly lukewarm system has been wittingly changed even a few years ago, after long campaigning.

in the , lets label it "neocon" altho the 'neo' is rather superfluous, the conn allways been that,
decades of profiteering privateering called privatisation, (the with any means obfuscating ownership of anything belonging to others so as to make it appear yours only is one of that words definitions)

in that lethal killing and robbery spree of the rich, social housing has been further transformed to a farce.

even very old, very cheap, very payed off, very strong, social housing projects have formal rents that are absolutely unwarranted (actually comparing to eg big private houses).

since many people are still poor, poorer then ever even, ofcourse they cannot pay such rents.
(in the 1980s the realist precarity free (so over poverty level) acceptable rent was about 10% of a minimum income. overhere it never got closer then some 20-25, and in many cases, due to cloudy regulation , and exploits much worse.

but these high rents are for the most part artificial and partly , partly in another way that has allways been, partly a huge fraud.

the rich took everything for about nothing (privatisation), they destroyed it's workings and integrity, and worse of all, they pay themselves for it amounts we cannot even imagine.

while: regulations and purposed marginalisation of the lower classes mean the formal level of rent (pre- subsidy) is ridiculous, nevertheless the already high prices in this era of foreclosure is only intended (so far had been only so intended) to rise.

and it did, for every poor housed a corrupt rich get's the same and moreof income the township gets to maintain and (if they still ever did) perform social housing.

actually they destroyed a lot of it and replaced much of it with short term habitational complexes meant to last only 30 years (and at least 4 times to high expense for housing that mounts up to.)

so social housing and also the housing function for the poor of inner citys btw., was destroyed, fake prices were formally set, the rich payed through the taxes generally raised from the poor.

such a goose with golden eggs the capitalists (ada liberals etc etc) do not want to let go of,

rather they stare at it's arse and pretend to be decent.

collective resource (4b)

restructuring earths wastefull economy. destruction of a capitalist and elitist system.

the juridical plan i keep unpublished for now, alltho perhaps i will need to expose more if the legal proceedings don't take some quick turns for the better. just in case.. for now i will rely on the oral tradition.

so.. just today the usian 1 percent admitted to be taxed, to actually say the least.. because to get back to a situation where taxation was in the high 90 percents for them... as opposed to the opposite at the moment...(that's herstory)

a nice start. what definitily has to change, and is more fundamental than how we fill in the exact circumstance of individuality and merit, is to abolish the right of inheritance.
-----------------------------
'largely abolish the right of inheritance'


similarly land ownership is a doubtfull one. but when starting out trying to reward still iniative but to no further expense in social circumstance, wellbeing or overall chances and prosperity,
so not in terms of 'austerity for the poor', it was striking to meet a friend that pointed out that simple point.

the standard of inheritance must be abolished. because if there is merit in accumulation of capital, as opposed to perhaps literature, or ideas, or even friendship and an occasional helping hand (..)

it would be an individual. next to the wacky royalty's and other despotes, the class of "have's" has throughout history persistently rewarded and protected only it's own claims, to the greatest misery of mankind (the have-not's).

in a world with equal rights for any none need to be feared and the merit would be in anyone's hands. obstructing the realisation of a sustainable and sustaining world by taking and keeping the bulk of the wealth and resource in few hands is definitily senseless, but worse, dangerous by now.

however little i sympathise with ideas about investments, resources need to be applied, and the collective reserve not only recaptured, but be selfexplanatory.

the huge administrative overload or, overhead, the juridical wiggling for bits and more , enough to corrupt the legal and administrative system, not to mention burden it with ambiguity, will be gladly missed.

corporations would be submitted to legal , taxing, insured (don't let them steal it through a new hoax of ww2 compensation eg., cus it is hard to maintain with the current predation by the privats) and scientifically valid. no backward produce for poor regions, but just up to date undertaking.

it is a crying shame how for example a national bank with 5b in unclaimed contos could be 'bought', in some stocks ofcourse, for 1b. and it went like that on countless occassions in netherlands, like with eg. transportation and energy and communication networks including the media.

so for the sort of services we need an international standard, not so hard, people have a right of water, roofing and food, by extension they have a right on information and education.

internet and computers offer the most comprehensive of those technology's and it must be rapidly provided, allthough at better energy expense than is now the case. it must be considered a right for all purposes, after children to start with prisons btw. the most dramatic expression of 'education'.

people also have a right on heating and other general needs, however for that perhaps we need to try to find more collective ways to provide, watching tv with more then a few people for example is a weirdly rewarding expense of energy compared to a flatscreen each.

thats all getting a bit sideways.
------------------

'cap wealth'


theoretically politics is supposed to equal philosophy, and philosophy equals the highest a human can obtain, 'spiritual' and social development.

so it makes sense to regard merit and reward in such terms. you could measure funds , developments , sales and trends as a function of personal functionality, if you could guarantee objectivity and reason, wich we cannot from here.

psychological factors and the predatory trend owing to recent neocon and older capitalism, forms of corporate imperialism, is much in the way of a clear analyses of real merits.

so my idea is to cap personal wealth. at say 1million euro , in cash and 1 million in property.

after all if you cannot spend it at your random will the use of accumulating it in heaps is less of a personal satisfaction.

that would leave the average dentist or other stressed group all the room to enjoy life, provide education and support for the kids, live in a nice place and have great hollidays, and so it would for everyone doing a respectable job.

i suppose i will freeze inflation one of these days to make sure the nrs remain simple;)
anyway..

since the greedy bastards pose such would be no incentive at all to perform, alltho i wonder if they would not for a medal;) besides dedicating corporate reserves to 'branded' provision,
and the reward of claiming science ofcourse.. we surely need more medals there;)

actually it is not hard to think of a system that such income overflows (automatically referred to destined 'funds/reserves/liabilitys' ofcourse in a transparant manner, how about people that perform overaverage get a say in the respect of their professional activity or personal interesse?

like a set percentage to a dedicated (relative to their 'work') project, or social projects that they, probably or actually hopefully with some 'intelligent' reason think worth managing.

assuming financial control and scientific approach, there is plenty lobbied that is not scientifically relevant, like eg. gun laws, or security industry etc., etc., people would actually be in a position to mean more for what they know and enact. despite, contributing largely to a wider and more social development.

all in all there is some juridical detail;) as usually and it can be an interesting testcase.

there is huge problem in the current legislature, here in usia and everywhere, in that it is strongly biased towards the interests of the proprietary class. the mechanisms through wich this performs are elitist and arrogant in nature, the focus on the intention of the law 'to protect',

is confused with an intention of the law "to manipulate", and the drawback is we do not at the moment have a valid legal check, except a dissident system within international and criminal legal representation.

for now this seems like enough ideas, obviously from this point on a lot needs to be reviewed anyhow, and allthough the difficulties with the legal systems partiality and partisan bias, for example seen how easily ridiculous arguments have industry's escape responsability's in economical as well as criminal law (bp, nigeria, gentech, bigpharm, hormonemeat, tobacco etc, etc, etc)

for now it is impossible to trust the courts and judges. our supposed representation, lawyers and jurist is usually bought, persee held to defend the prerogative, or actually the status quo, dependend of the will or unwill of the magistrates, depending likes, and not in the least part and parcel in the upper middleclass and upperclass abundance,

especially for a just legal system and justice we will have to work hard, take nothing for granted, and actually even.. start from scratch.

as a servant of the people, what the strong arm is trying to beat into our autonomous brains is not another message at all.. may it suffice.


note: it is interesting to reflect what the right of housing would amass with the no inheritance thing, you see that?

note 2: i think stocks should be abolished. attracting investment can be based on merit, need and science. stocks are another burocratic, criminally opportune, and pretty expensive overhead.

collective resource (4a)

the moment is there.. didn't we see the endlessly repeated request to #occupy world to 'formulate *that* list of measures, a program, and probably a request to be compromised, institutionalised and marginalised?

yes we did. that the occupy is exactly about thinking for your own, questioning things from there, about what is obvious and natural in emancipation?

predictable that the gunnery laws now play the ins and outs with the (tea) party line overthere.

it is a good moment to admire usia, the people there do more than people elsewhere. start to think of their own and organise the future that has been so far denied to the majority of earthlings.

thrilling, and guess what.. the reaction is there. not only brainless request, but the abuse of law,
occupying a sidewalk.. omg. cars that pollute us and the environment way more then nicotine manages to do, even with the extra toxics mixed into the tobacco, roam freely.

drunk, or with even only a good smoke one is supposed to be a danger, yet the population drugged on pharmaceutics, noradrenaline , sleeping pills, whatever, races about unhindered.

being environmentally neutral results in one being an unwanted pedestrian.. more unwanted then pedestrian, as english law betrays it.

the usian have decided to try for health, unsurprising in a populace that has 50% taking psychiatric drugs while getting licensed to drive cars at a record young age, freezing the meek is considered health by the degenerate , lawfuck called a judge.

insult upon injury, injure civil rights, harm law, in harming freedom, expression and people.
and weirder then that a day before that mayor said he would allow the protest, like did the english.

it's humiliating how slimy and rantfully gossippy (criminalisation) the dutch media tries to unnoticedly draw back on concerned townships statements overhere. oh well let alone they did that to law in denying the first place occupied to maintain the protest in that , unfreezing, healthy manner(1).

enough about it, people of the world need to roll back the privatisations that robbed our common funds and rights, and more. when we supply the basics and allow for education what is the worry?

that we don't enjoy? there is music for that and other recreation. that we don't get the 1% richer with making hollidays? life is so simple.

(1)and keeping of the radar, since when are public actions unnewsworthy? since.. 1932??

theorems

the past few days a new scope all to familiar pops up in the international politics. alarming,
as much as being disalarming.

cussioning.. ahmedinajaadh said 3 things basically. we would not be making 2 nuclear bombs against your 20000, it will be a monotheist state. it is about a stolen laptop from 2004, to wich they already responded in 117 pages and wich they do not hold for very reliable.

ofcourse i agree they probably would not do such a thing, curious what we will hear about the sources now, if anything ..

but that theism rubbish? monotheism is just as odd as any other kind. odder perhaps. there is plenty that goes far beyond the reach of any human's powers, the energetic content of a sun or the centre of the milkyway for example. fysically it has the looks that beyond the milkyway the next could already have a slightly different set of parameters, or at least that somewhere in the universe parameters behaved differently. wich would tell that the law of nature, this apparently supposed expression of deity behaved differently overthere, i suppose in the middle-ages they called it manifold for that.

anyway in such cases it looks more like two deity's than like one. monotheism is as wacky as the rest of the religions except for one point, it's not as risky or expensive as having sects for plenty powers that would anyhow do what they think suit. so the purpose of monotheism is the destruction of 'theisms' or it serves no purpose at all.

that is actually more probable, if it was not manufacturing advances had imposed variety's of 'authoritys', we could still do without every expression of 'beneficial ' uniformity.

as a result monotheism is only sublimate politics.

despotism.

a witch (natural human) hunt for fascism (class society).

solomon's seal (3), transigience

really i am serious about that i will write about what we need to start with a change for the better with the future of earth, and us.

it is a tough job, if i forget a thing, will people just forget about it?
if i say something in careless way, open for lousy interpretation, will it be grabbed and hammered with like all to often?

will it be taken out of context and abused , even for years? will people with a positive approach also be misleaded in such a case? it all happened before.

next i am not even (alltho there is some trauma) capable of doing my own formality's certainly not in the senseless and repetive manner that is obligatory in the policy they call "bullying policy"

wich it is.. enjoying their powers to scr.w with the individual.. stress people untill they are vulnerable and start hurting..

these things and the broad and vast material make it hard to dare to speak out.

----------------------

transigience is an example. since evryone is dependend of laws for safety and freedom, and after all to have, shape or voice an opinion, to change the world into a sustainable system we need something like laws.

very much so, in the detail with environment, and the rights of the person.

a person has rights, logical, human rights translate into civil and individual rights.

for now i stick with the word 'rights' an alternative could be guarantees, or even accomplishments;)

however since i am expressing what could be and should be right, i am talking (1) about rights that are "real", not exactly the ones we know now to be abusive and hypocrit, but theoretical ones that would apply in an effective not in a class justice way,

transigience is only one such detail i could forget, we humans have rights 'as a person',

but.. bloodless entity's want the same rights (under the capitalist circumstance of wich their 'rights' would "massively" prevail) and they want extras if they can,

denying the inherent difference between pain and cash, the corps and institutes want to be 'persons before the law'.

we will find people ready to debate that history had it's use, you find people for everything.. if money is in the picture,
but doubt it, i think the use it had was to overtake the rights on individual (and collective of) people all the way.

so we have to get rid of such false definitions, just like violence in the law is violence persee,

violence against living beings, (well it is not yet but rumpey anounced even eu was ready to change the treaty's) a person is a person persee.


we hope some day we can freely be 'persons responsible for the law', and responsability to the law is ofcourse also inherent(2) to corporations etc.

however they are not 'person', because that is a misleading term and an inroad to abuse, abuse of people , animal, groups, nations and most pronouncedly the environment,

also in legal proceeding from transigients (those entitys before the law that cannot be a person , so the ones with no 'human' rights,) towards persons a lot needs to be changed, foremostly that the principle(s like) of proportionality and force majeur apply for every individual, far and far over any transigients, (3)

(allthough that would not so much work out between transigience's , so in the (opposite of) the laws against cartels and trusts, in the negotiations between transigients they would ofcourse tend to weigh equal (unless human causes are involved and people are represented through institutions alltho that logically follows from that in fact judges should weigh the human rights under all circumstance.)

so without much further elaboration.

there are persons. humans responsible before the law,

and transigients , institutions before the law, allowing me to end this paragraph on a note,

in fact by way of joke they are also responsible to the tax office;) so it easily follows how they so often became intransigient.

ok for today? maybe i try for more, later.
thx for all the interesse and response (even if i have not learned to fully trust the kind of it),

it will get better, more radical , more gamechanging perhaps, for the masses, and worse to need to notion for the elites. i hope it serves as an example of the legalistic nightmare i move through (here and now) and into(trying to change it), and how we need to learn, learn to apply, and actually 'live' 'good faith'.

i know it is not concise,(it's just one point and not even one of the very major perhaps_ for me it feels like an okay start, so it must be like this. that's my offhandedness with formality allover,
if it don't work like it feels good for me i just don't get myself to work.

thx. please do.

(1) in these numbered articles.
(2) is iminent a word? noone ever uses it much for this.

(3)into the detail transigents should ofcourse be dictated similarly for proportionality among another, and force majeur should be restricted to cases where 'force' has a practical meaning.
like floods (uncaused and not effected by transigients), but not like industrial accidents.
applying force majeur to eg. a board of directors would signal intransigience, they are the 'force' of a company, easy to see i do not want to deal with every detail and that things must be interpreted 'radically' because change is relatively 'radical' , and btw. because so am i, i am not trying for halfhearted compromises with any lobby or 'power that be'. i am not trying to formulate any, so don't try to find them in what i write.

i will touch on organising the judicial system in another post. alltho there is observably much wrong , justice will be 'what is just', and allthough judges are not that 'just', (actually a bunch of elitist morons but we will change that) they can for now continue and try to decide in reason,

when somewhat more of the concepts are in a 'working at' state, and probably it is essential that i first write on the plans concerning justice, it is early enough to 're educate' them judges.

a bit of an exageration, and concerning the mentalitys in transigients (a court would be one),
even optimist, my hope is systems will work out and judges will at least be willing to try for a more obvious and transparant system, go figure.. we need to free 100000s of prisoners , if even experimentally , as a test, in cases. would they like that? not if the context of 'justice' is unclear,

wich they will hold against 'it' (me) the very second they can probably, because that is what elites do, find excuse.

gl.

conspiring the death of ghadaffi

surely in such an obvious case as the elimination of an unwanted government through also foreign means the whole idea of any sort of conspiracy is outrageous.

utterly farfetched. who would ever associate getting rid of despots with conspiracy's.
completely beyond me there are people that see conspiracy's everywhere.

let alone in such a case where the icc is fullfledgedly involved and hung to the next civic catastrophe, serajevo or sirte, what is the point to be made?

can we distract you?

so there is something uncanny about his death, it looks like an extrajudicial killing , a collector of gold guns on the run, targetted by nato, goated into the sewers, and apprehended by the next nearest unit in control.

anyway,

i don't know, habit or instinct, but as the news emerged i tried to understand what had happened,

there was no more anything tenable in the position in sirte, not for gold guns, and 75 vehicles
tried a break out, that is plausible, there have been enough desperate counteroffensives, and sirte was no exception.

it was a bit weird also the last time, where would you really break out to? the other thing would have been more or less to wait and die. the breakout initially went largely succesfull.

5km onward from the narrow frontline the nr of vehicles mentioned is still 75. allthough burned out carwrecks on tv now suggested another message.

that's a somewhat interesting detail. there is just that much suspicion. it would be a bit hard to get 75 running cars in an all out manouvre on the supposed square mile or less.

it also follows that to stay closest to the original story, 75 cars and the firepower was enough to make some impression, and a group, or unit of the ntc started to chase.

somehow it's already a bit of a strange affair, but perhaps reality was more confusing, and there were actually a few more things going on.

you could also interprete it that they broke through easily, and were not followed in another fashion then in coordination with nato , it's plane and drone.

it has been repeatedly reported to the media there were such or such advances in the coordination with ntc's forces,

especially in the kind of mixed action for example, and that most of the time past weeks nato had a presence over sirte. also that they struck on occasions.

with all that there is a continual and planned thing going on for a month. i would say nato knew what unit would follow.

actually they know much more then we think or they admit.

after the airplane struck, it "struck again against the eleven vehicles in one of wich was ghadaffi."
not against the others.

surviving the impact of that ghadaffi and still rather some of his men ran, apparently through some trees, to their last stand. the possibly so calculated irony of history.

running through trees is the one thing people like when they have just been shot at through the sky. and the cars did no more function, or perhaps even, they did no more dare to drive them.

anyway it took ages, when ntc arrived in the hot chase bridging the 3 mile gap in within 6 hours,
they located the refugees.

after some searching, nato appears to have been privvy about these sewer pipes. what does all the graffiti on them say i wonder?.
things about sewers and rats would be my first guess.

so they trim the anti aircraft guns, no that is not possible on a toyota, they train the antiaircraft guns and start firing, perhaps not in the general direction of the sewer pipes because it had no effect at all.

it's interesting to wonder what kind of effect they had been waiting for. you cant really surrender when people are firing anti aircraft guns in your general direction.

at least you would be a hero for trying. anyhow, whatever effect they expected, it failed to occur.

perhaps the ntc military was describing it's role in a slightly to positive light.

they had just been firing aircraft guns not in any direction at all. it is certain that nato nor anyone would allow for any of their embeddeds on the scene.

in that case i wonder why they stopped firing them, after all it had no effect.

next the man infiltrate.. oops i do it again,
i guess they didn't. they just got closer, not so hard i suppose when you have some 20 or 30 people in two sewer pipes and aircraft guns.

the story after this lacks depth, it allways does, you never hear the real story of the real heroes.

what he did tell was someone got out to call for surrender, that upon seeing his face (..)
started shooting at him.

thats also somehow weird, did he know his face?, but i gues it's lost in translation, the face of me or so.

what to think of that?

it's much like a clichee honestly, then again, could be, it was rather a suicidal affair all in all.

it's also the foremost excuse that applies for shooting potential prisoners on the frontline, so already news had come certain institutions were not quite happy without the live version of intolerance.

there is something about it, if it is really such a common affair, why is it the single incident singled out in the run of that story told,

beyond that, apparently the same man (the one that had dared to come out i suppose) said he had his boss muamar there and wanted to surrender.

in principle that is interesting if you want to know what has happened because it implies some interaction, on the other hand, it is also quite symbolic, it is not really a detail, 'the capture of muamar' is why the man is interviewed.

but symbolically it again need not be true, the guy that survived having started shooting in the face of an armed unit with antiaircraft guns, surrendered now for his boss.

whoever surrendered in what way, muamar was apparently seated, or more presumably lie down, wich suggests that the surrender was actually the kind of 'we inside the tube surrender to you outside the tube' and that they went in to enjoy the privilige of arrest.

(because he had a gun 'under him') so perhaps by that point indeed the ntc knew about muamar and had indeed started inspecting the (therefore wounded at his legs) prisoner.

a bit weird, since all the 24 body guards were killed.
somewhere along that way. he wasnt the last they got at, or the only, in fact mutassim has supposedly been filmed alive after that point. (couldnt tell if it is him eg.)

the really painfull point what happened with the other persons apparent is not the 'clean base for the future libya' we are talking about.

it's about killing someone from the elite, instead of a unit of common soldiers.

a warcrime.

oh yeah next? they beat him up a bit, and he dies, you can see him touch his head to get his hands in blood and watch it, how bad is it? seems.

so looks like they shot him by there, or let's say he shot his? someone shot him? maybe he was even hit in some last desperate shoot-out of the guards being 'no clean base for a future libya', and in the proces of being killed.

whatever. not what jabil or whatever his name said, if you feel it counts.
that they were shot at when they went army and all in pickups toward misrata.

because, the film that he is dead and dragged about bits so to see is at the same location where he is still alive. in the story after all next he is (dead i suppose), but in an ambulance, underway to misrata. where he is 'put in the morgue'. so no dancing on his corpse in that town.

that was all completely obvious. what was not obvious is what happened to the others,

in that context icc or nato and foreign ministry's don't impress me very much with their 'clean base for libya'. let's say that part has perhaps started after him being killed in the way so many that fought for him were.

why would a president or other member of the elite not become the same sort of warcasualty as the rest? suddenly be a warcrime?

it would be laughable if it wasn't so painfull.

what it is is exactly why we can be glad our time will not be wasted by endless verdicts on khadaffi, classjustice is a big fake and a cheat.

what a great time to set a wrong example badly. i really think they try to make up for that lost opportunity at icc.

for whatever reason and perhaps it is pretty mainstream, the usian voices appear to repeat a unified 'dictator' mantra, i suppose it doesn't really matter in the case, but how much of a fertile soil for propaganda of the kind that allows warfare through polarisation is usia still?

with that in mind there would be serious stuf to add.
mexico? iran? somehow they are out of their minds.

filtration

why do i need to voice this?

it is because i know it is. you cannot change reality you do not witness.

whence this is not about things i like, and not an easy thing to write.

---------------------

there need not be no excuses, the filtration of political expression is to longstanding for that.
state's interesses through political file, it all exists from the days of your nations first parlementarian and long before.

who knows the freemasons are really the ones to inherit the greek scala of secret registration of possible enemy's of the elite.

don't even know if this is btw part of the array of usual or unusual transpirations on the topic, never heard it before myself.

anyway's, to call an example, the "french revolution"'s revolutionarys got thoroughly registered, followed, bribed, etc.

to give it a context.

-------------------------

what get's me suspicious.

you could say there have been two moments in dutch politics that have influenced my thought on it most.
in weighing the moral consequence of international politics that would be the former yugoslavia debacle, and in the personal life-style kind of way, having to do with activism indeed,

it was perhaps, 'encapsulation'.

"encapsulation" is a great word in dutch translation, sufficiently descriptive to be explained, i hope it is for english.

otherways it is more confusing to make a difference with 'institutionalisation', wich is only one way filtrage expresses.

encapsulation is closer to the infamous phenomenon of infiltration, the infiltrated organisation will become shielded from the outside world, and may end up completely institutionalised.

weird as it is, with it's 'market' (a wide assortiment of discontent and solidarity),
profitable in many cases. obviously not necessarilly because things "are what they seem".

how very profitable get's clear when you realise the investment in for example the line of well indoctrinated 'educated' 'workers', is actually made to get a grip on movements that might change the status quo.
----------------------------------------

since that is how smart people be, i recognise the all to often institutional infiltrate usually through that. a hesistance to like change of status quo,

but there are rather a few more indications.

selfishly i like to be creative in activism, it's quite a pretence ofcourse, but you often see the attitude not to be open for alternative (and that is where peacefull comes into the action comparison) action, more direct action, that has consumer impact eg., sometimes even the rather visible publicitary aspect, in longstanding organisations.

some of them may function in their parts, but basically they are 'institutionalised',
for example the dutch 'socialists' had a complete agreeal with the capitalist elite about organisation.

normally you would not be made known, that such was already explicitly standing out in the 1920s.

anarchists do know. for no other reason then the fear of the power of the idea, whole police and army divisions were mobilised against a meeting on that political expression.

a lot of the people institutionalised would not even consciously know they are actually preserving the status quo,

for some odd reason undercover police often are not psychologically capable of denying their uniformist admiration of authority.

it will allways stay odd, the whole group of uniformed employed has thorough psychological sensitivities with authoritive inception.

the usual freudian expression with such a symptom is 'a inferiority complex'.

that besides they feel proud at it.

otoh. they possibly also give some of these open reactions because 'they know me' (and that there is not much i can do about it). also i figure they feel still safe.

not much of a madman, perhaps i just make an acutely sane impression, but i often hint notice,
wich they do not typically psychologically receive, allthough almost allways register.

---------------------------------

so what is the situation? i think in usia .. like here, every 'organisation', every staged event,
would be as 'depoliticised' as here.

the other way around it also works, the most politicised groups, like marxists, are indeed the ones to tell a serious thing, because they will be the more ideologically correct to take it serious.

i suppose it is like being branch oriented, oftentimes organisations in a field perform admirably but all to often only for what their limited context allows them.

the illusion of power is also a great tool, in keeping people 'occupied',

so the receipe is the same, occupy yourself and stay self-occupied.

it's never been comfortable that clichees don't matter.

--------------------------------------------

on the side of gossip.. i had the first thought at the first moment it perspired 'the occupy protests' and so far they have ofcourse been, were there 'to stay', it was a damn pitty we were so close to winter.

it is also a comforting sign of obama's engagement with civil action, notwithstanding flatter would still seem baseless.

it is a wonderfull thing so many people will be thinking such great things over such important things. would it be realist and netsavvy to work at that the southern hemisphere that is unfortunately less important, for now offers the best prospects for manifestations of direct action?

or are people going to set the record straight for housing rights? it's quite possible that with the usual speculation and foreclosures and ecological tipping points (the crisis), there is plenty room,
if you have great places warm cloths help a lot for activism in winter.
------------------

conclusion, i do not think it is possible to organise a bigger movement unobserved.
tolerance for one anothers activism, hopes aspirations and dreaming is what does the trick best.

really be a bit principled about things also helps a lot.

if something 'should actually be okay'. (for damage it is proportional), it should just be okay.
hampering political expressions, and delegation of tasks are the primary instruments of institutionalised infiltration.

it has been really painfull, many people hardly know what they do, but in how they communicate, and the attitude towards people they need to make their compromise with a more resolute integrity against (for), you immediatly notice the 'attitude'.

it is not exaactly, exactly police infiltration, but institutionalisation, typically 'educating' (brainwashing) people for the job, is surprisingly related.

one respect in what police actually does not try to limit the impact of events, is the scale of the escalation. having the arms , the tools, and the repressive instrument to win all those battles, the more typical infiltrant attitude is to push for violence against persons, and actual misplaced excess against goods i would think. instigating violence is more their point.

but that would be a bit hard to judge, for a beginner and even after a while, people do have particular trauma's and experiences of their own, and by far nar not all are allways ready to
express anything very thoughtfully,

it's often the difference between 'i hate the pigs' (with not uncommonly some of all the good reason), and: let's bloodthirstily escalate.

as allways with psychology it is as much of their projection as it is the desire.

all that said. cops can 'turn'. it's a much feared thing in the establishment. it is rare, and not many are that good at it, but it is nice to respect that all humans do try for a human aspect.

forgive me the lightheartedness, but it is also funny that for example when i see these students, student cop's really quite often i think, but.. etc. etc. , conformism rewards already for students,

and i notice how relatively violent they think, it is also possible to take it serious, perhaps really violence is how a cop think would be the best way if a 'turned' person (they forget we are not like them) wanted to do something about injustice.

typical, it's really quite lighthearted, makes me think that the fbi didn't like that ambassador:)
well, thought of that immediatly:)

occupy

a friend of mine is strongly interrested in the occupy protests worldwide. taken worldwide, apparent worldwide, talking on the matter with him is very enjoyable.

he liked it back so i was for my doing moderately flattered.

whence that comes first, i like it like mad.

----------------------

over the years i have allways been thinking the way change would one day allways come to be is when people unite over a goal that is not limited but diverse and that they have to carry it "themselves" a lot more then you would somehow expect or understand even in a few years.

burn out is a word, that does not fit the load. not only because it is worse, and ideological problems can be a superhuman burden, also because it is different, what change needs is the engagement of plenty, and not a great few can get/keep it organised through dedication.

action, and grassroots 'power-building', needs an informed and interested critical lot. ' a critical mass' in some theory, but is more about the numbers than about a limited weight.

they need to engage for something that is within their understanding and strangely, probably within their reach. a limited target like "peace", or a definite and often specific environmental, human rights or animal rights complaint seem not enough to have the people unite.

in the case of war and peace, this is psychological, but it is also that people appear to regard many things as out of reach. so indeed, the old (and classically anarchist) idea of fighting poverty, and the fighting the structure for poverty in society , wich perhaps too is general of the movements against the further distribution of wealth to the few, is the kind of handhold that might do.

it is hard to be definite, i get insecure of great events with a positive approach and intention. people are powerfull, but also powerless often.

ideally the people come up with all the ideas they need, but in describing events i reason from my own experiences, i am not really such a common person it feels like there can be 'the critical mass' of people similar to me.

somehow it all seems so relevant. it is so desperately relevant to be positive, whilst there is actually so and so very much to be rather edgy.


so i take an excursion into occupation.
scr.w neoconomics, and neocology will have to wait a bit more.


activism and strangely also anarchism wich is the way i politically analyse events and weigh relations (in the sense of in actuality foremostly but sometimes in the personal), have a charming dynamics of their own.

that is more intuitively for me in anarchism. but that is only subjective, activism itself generates similar associative strength.

however anarchism is to what i test the human value and quality of judgement (a very 'ethical' quality) so for you it can be activism (or in a more symbolic way of speaking 'activity', a psychality), but i would like to refer to everything within terms with anarchism.

the dynamic in activism is often absolute. it is not anyone's special thing, it works for all and everything. for example the word occupy.

keep bussy.., don't be vacant.. weird associations with a tool imperialised,

the occupied nations , and used to be people.

but within activism (and considering housing and non-housing basic rights is about the most feasible thing in anarchism), occupation is something still entirely different.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

terms with a vast impact tend to get obfuscated, confused through the application of different meanings..

there is a reason you can say : are you not occupied? are you occupied with that you are not preoccupied? or are you in fact the opposite?

because 'occupation' is an ancient, age old and powerfull tool of emancipation, that naturally and anarchistically follow to be basic freedoms of people, ancient dispositions.

it has been 'obfuscated' purposedly obscured from clear insights.

that does not mean it is no good as a tool. no, even the worst of the machiavellian (occupy every other) thinking ofcourse respects how occupation is a superefficient direct action.

we actually seen it this year, each and every side has their bias and preoccupations with the events, but that 'occupying' squares did have enough of a impact and visible aspect to change destinys is typical.

(thinks ok.. so that is where at least the definite association is from, had been wondering)

but really it is historical, the olympus is about the first sinai to been occupied, and so have symbols of power been all through the century's , from the fora to the bath houses to the roofs, and even the whole homes of the rich with the romans.

probably more burocratical institutions have been occupied then one nation singly features (said the optimist, well, reasoning there should be less institutions than people for me at least it is true).

in any case the pavements before more then any of these institutions have been occupied for plenty of the day. a usual 'capital' features usually tenfolds of protests and demonstrations, routinely ignored on windy corners of motorways, just as often on the pavement and with nearly allways some police seemingly keeping possible public at a distance.

it is a nice idea to a place like washington or brussels, (and both probably have the policys in place to prohibit) to join in a wide range and variety of protests in an organised fashion whilst you are at it in occupying the metropoles.

anyhow it is getting cold and i will get back on that, because the southern hemisphere is actually warming up.

to judge whether you can publicly as a movement or symbol of your own can join in the oftentimes specialist and remote requests of the various protests i would merely look at principle.

it is predictable that any organisation, even perhaps the small political foreign platforms, with the dear naivety to consider protest an option on a once per year or whatever base, is charmingly naive and often limited but somehow the ground cause is within a bigger concept..

for justice, against corporative power, for political freedom..

unless there is complete disagreeal with a case perhaps you do not need to be as informed or concerned as the protest , to just join in because protests actually lack power.

activism is or at least has been for me, to explore protest and action, to find new things to 'occupy' for example, to find new ways to give voice.

so that is all very absorbed, how i lived it. but somehow it is what turns in the anarchist idea, so perhaps it is just as true for activism.


i look forward to some more philosophy on the subject, more then explaining what meritocratical let alone corporate securitys would perhaps not doom the people of this planet to utter insignificance or slavery, risking being misinterpreted or face straight forward abuse.

-----------

tomorrow it will be about the negative side of todays activism, the police infiltration, the punishment or lifelong file to unfollowedly still to fool you fully, personalness and whatever.

today it suffices to remark:

anarchism is without borders, and activism is not to stick to many limits.

you can occupy a house but you can occupy a huge place to keep warm and protest.

you can occupy the police and not keep them occupied, but you can also occupy yourself and stay occupied.

don quichotte (2)

in scared anticipation of the contination of the releases on neocology and necronomy, the capitalist marketing in our realms of perception begs for deeper crisis and more injections while we wait.

it would suit for intermezzo.

possibly it is a play into the game. after all the perspective of necronomical crises lives a life of it's own, and.. actually.. the climate is pretty f.u.

more probably it is the usual blackmail, perform so we can make a profit or we doom the poor fellows you do it for..

since concepts can be misused, and intentions hyacked, what if we'd derive an eternal motive, and who we do that for? perhaps best is to just make the straight proposals.

well-being is a distribution of wealth. it is slightly more, a distribution of what you might call pleasure or happyness, but it has been researched, if needlessly, that even in the groups with the most minimal incomes money is necessary to undertake those things that fill in the needs to be happy.

the matter is one of distribution. distribution of powers as in small scale democratical involvement and in moral obligation as dedicated through a herstory of conceptualisation of what we must call 'human rights' , or fundamental principles of justice.

not differently to be accountable.

so in a political as much as financial sense we are talking transparance.

=============

to apply what human resource extra offers, and even within constraints natural to a financial system domesticating privilige, wealth needs to be distributed.

the weirdest of all problems, 'overpopulation', is a matter of financial privilige, birth control is a financial privilige. it is fascinating to wonder how much active birthcontrol did to facilitate the necronomical spurts in china and india, and how with no means tools of the wealthy were handed to the have-nots.

in fact that active family planning is one of the advantages of the ones 'well off', before a few decades was still largely taboo.(1) researched but 'climate scepticked', so to say.

_____________________________________

the opposite is also true, there is so far no limit to contempt.

-----------------------------------------------------

k the google interface is deleting for clipboarding once more.
need to break, or the interrupted flow get's to easily corruptable.
ltr.


(1) one didn't tell poor and or uneducated people they were stupid for allowing their lives to be stressed through plenty kids, nor defend how chanceless children like that would stay.

the narratives of ecology necronomy, neoconomy and neocology (1)

the very global ideas, currently reinterpreted as 'mondial',

for a lack of integrity in the use of the term, just like one of those neoconomic ideas i had about the need for manual task to be diverse and the people variedly engaged in production.

don't blame me, i used to call the concept 'flexibility'.

so that is against exploring the real fronteers of the social context, it get's abused long before that.

anyway nature is mercifull and benevolent, ecology is so that even in terms of jobs and "economical" , or perhaps better to think of it as just 'human' engagement, the sky is the limit and only pigs can fly.

so as to say, the idea of profit and consumption tells you you can fly, but it is easy to tell who is really the bird to fly under the umbrella of fake-"justice". it would not to be to bad to return to the double speak undo thing of the 60s. and talk about 'wrong_is'

all in all not that it would put people with their (bare) feet in the (exemplary natural) soil.
all the blessings after all come from above, as the mindless repetition requires the cultures that failed to aprehend zen. (the religious ones).

for fun value the pope, obviously german, begged the germans for obedience, yesterly,
contempt for the real light of day (today's so to say) as if anyone there would get that message, obviously a publicity stunt for the still 'to be' meeker (esp. africa and south america).
__________________

the problem in explaining basic concepts for a sustainable human society is not as much in the principle, everyone understands in principle 'most of us' would agree to ' positive developments, be they natural notwithstanding it is the absolute primary, even in the human psychology but definitily so in new ecology and thus new (in the sense of sustainable) economy.

basically there is an empiric base for "good faith" (better put : "solid sceptics").
it's very shallow in the personal respect, the individual psychology and hardly worth mentioning in institutional operative, but the basic is there unmistakebly.

in the case there is no pious reference i don't mind to explore the cultural context, and for it we would only have to look at the strong tendency of people to engage with a concept of supposed

"good against evil" like religion , or the somewhat amazing ease with that people can be couched to quitte unkowingly to the real effect or effort contribute to sponsor actions or donating.

it is not especially effective or informed and structurally more often all but generous, nevertheless consider it a symbol of the will and expression of solidarity, it is there in people and it is pretty plain to see.

so in so far i recognise ' solid sceptics' that it is there in a somewhat embryonal state.
with that i would have liked to have said enough about motivation, it's not the realist situation we run into, or become somehow placed or displaced in.

maybe it is important to note it is not 'part of', it does not add much to deny this world is full of places, or to overlook that for each of us the own individual is the one thing essential in whatever functionality or positive arrangement.

change the world, and know you have to do it with yourself.

matters of priority's ... motivation.
-------------------------

so now we are motivated i want to touch on the "history" of it. (better : "herstory")

just like motivation is uselessly debated, "herstory" is unusually unpronounced.
there is "allways two sides to a story"

not that there really allways is, but such is to keep you think that. ok, on the personal and individual psychological side there is allways two story's, except that it is not mostly fresh story's, it doesn't tell anything about facts.

take for example einsteins theory of relativity, it may be not only "relative but also more true then we yet realise. both at the same time, because simply, "the universe is bigger then that.

so for the sake of omission (you name him the guy with the two passports and a double name),
i would love to leave the debate on the herstory of profit and exploitation , overconsumption and pollution, power and victim, a debate and point of it's own, and something for another occasion.

in as far as herstory directly applies to society, "the glocal community", it is usually in the ecological context. that what people, continents and nations have available to operate within.

so if you like this to be concepts restrained through herstory (that's" half of the story that's never been told" bob m.) it is not what i will write on for neoconomy, and it is part of a different debate, one in wich it is more the diversity of human impressions and opinions then the set letter that describes the most, b.t.w.
-------------------------

d dc. the debilitating debts crises.

curently media are featuring the european community's 'financial' prospects. i figure they took some inspiration from al jazeera and then what i wrote to get in the mood.

be warned, like i mentioned for starters, neoconomical concepts are easy to abuse, based as they are on the human psychology and natural context, and for my part the juxtaposed human context and natural psychology, they apply. and with what can be applied can be worked,

so with the rather glamorous advent of the angels of the market in incarnated multicolor,
the tales about our necronomy (the dead one), the tv and multimedia era, and professional politicians and by far not only them hitching on the wave of the promises of capital forever,

whatever you will understand from me, is not what i regard as "what they have in 'mind' ".

general experience and critical reading neither have ever let up to the conclusion that: " in this world, i *must* say, this capitalist world, truthfull neoconomic future is *not* the objective of the establishment".

i.o.w: the people with the interests, near the stake, can not be trusted to be honest let alone impartial or unbiased. not when it is about the future of 'all', societys, the global community.

sorry.

anyhow the idea about 'stimulating european economy' is actually the idea to 'stimulate global wellfare/wellbeing' (motivation remember?)

this is the same as development. wellbeing. as simple as it is obvious. the earth and it's climates offer a varied amount of options to different areas. did you just get robbed of your woodcover and natural resources (the live ones), like say haiti, and it is warm, chances are you best build light, making things earthquake safe would be much more effective then making them earthquake 'proof'.

not that you need no such buildings, but for common people you must wonder if that line , not only in haiti, bodes ill. huge apartments do tend to be huge tragedys when they collapse.

when it is somewhat colder, you have no choice, and in quite a few nations the temperatures are thus people hardly have a choice but to be laborous, because you just can't sleep a whole winter even if it is dark.

so the reeling and dealings of societys differ vastly, and are bound to be strongly characterised by the context of nature and climate, it is a fascinating subject and leads just to one major conclusion and rightly so;):

people are not made for work, nature is not.

the stoopit necronomical denial is , "work is made for people", they will pretend as if not, as long you can't view inside of the financial portfolios. but the next moment it is a favorouble boast..

'we made the work', said the ones that limited development for their own 'good'. (their 'bad' actually).
---------------------

the financial detail is revolting, none of the developments the past 30 years in macronecronomical sense, have been conceived, debated or 'effectuated' with the idea it would really benefit the lot. it will be abused as an excuse still, and has allways, but it is the embryo.

the head knows most people do have a heart so the argument is to well received. the tongue arguably speaks to submit, in the institutional realms, wich is distracting, purposedly, and hardly fascinating.

'privatisation' resulted in greed and assault on even the most basic 'riots'. trickle down necronomy is such an old farce it didn't deserve mention in the whole 20 or 21st century.
'free trade' , everyone restricted but usia and it's compliants.

imf, not only grey booking the 'debt' to a taste, delving in the potential for cheap labour by deranging conditions. the eu, the carreer for the priviliged. a priviliged project with intentions of centralising absolutist, 'decission' power. 'privacy'.. the rite to fraude, be perpetually observed,
forever deridden, and distribute privilige arbitrarilly.

just a few things those past decades that did not make the mark. that indeed were also not of 'good intention'. 'good faith' only fools you blindly there.

you know what, i think a day or so more about these 'my concepts'.
i can just start next, this was most of what i felt it needed for an introduction.

--------------------------------------

because

there is so much going on.

yet it is not anything very special, i have a few remarks on the arab spring only. libya admirably tries, but report from the african side of the continent are still in the pessimist.

israel is once over fighting all "arabs" ideas, saying it is basically an attitude against racism they have. it doesn't compute but the argument is still valid. no matter if nato or islam (and i damnedly even know about asia) racism is all to commonplace. without it, no millions would be killed in irak, kurds would not be one of the more suffering ethnics in the world, palestineans would be quite fine in israel, and probably even in the westbank and gaza, without it it wouldn't be feasible to judge whole populaces for the islamic leads they get at. etc.

racism is the big evildoer even when you don't directly notice.

remember london? completely conceived through racism, no i liked libya lauded sarkozy over cameron. remember paris?

now that actually didn't cause that much of a policestate extravaganza. (allthough i overheard i had sarkozy watching me when i visited:)

i liked the french statements in libya, it's so nice to see a nation honour the revolutionairy principle, if even in lipservice. erdogan is doing generally admirably. he is one of those, and go figure how much israel disagrees, that seems to overstep old grudges. sometimes i dislike his policy's (esp. with bombing kurds and calling them attrocious,

/from here google deleted my rather rounded posting.. asking to sign in when i was and suddenly not having saved the draft it "saved" (like every second, it stood out), and destroying the layout by inserting loads of spaces in the text./

edit: that nato, the security counsel (usia) ea. so much need this asset of racism, to manage profit in the face of climatecatastrophe

and with his willingness to attack syria (with or for nato))

ah.. well i went on about how the un veto security counsel wouldn't but that the sacrifices do require us to learn a lesson..

that nato and usia, and that counsel consider repression and racism the best guarantee to manage profit of theirselves and other rich in the face of climate catastrophe, and that is why they will most probably continue a line of downgrading and detroying 'rights'.

so much people are sacrificed we should make it worth, instead "rivers of blood flowing into an ocean of repression continued". that we should actually stand up for those rights, (not only the ones left)

that it actually boils down to racism.

note:
sorry for my public it works so well to interrupt my flow, hope to serve you better next time, but you can hardly guess how often i have to correct for example the first line of a thing i write, because it got altered.

should i be surprised when i agitate against racism this basic capitalist asset is so defended?
i hate to admit i am not. maybe i better the post still later, i am to annoyed to expect much of an effort here and now.

road to nowhere

there's plenty of political tomtom these days.

so i' ll announce to great drums and marching music :

libya... (2)


that should do for now.

khadaffi hides and cides, he does not believe for one moment libya will be better without his family in a racist position of divide et impera.
and indeed libyans all over the line, and unfortunately more it seems even with the rebels, engage in racist acts.

acts of violence, extortion, torture, massacre, and rape..

eu aiming it's arrows at syria , what will be there?

eu is as hypocrite as can be. they neglect their allied navy/oil base bahrein's foreign intervention totally, yet they antagonise over syria.

it's amazing to see how the sheople are obsessed with hate and prejudice to perform not the slightest of nuance.

i say down with the bahreini sunni dictatorship.

about syria? i really don't know, i have the faint suspicion the syrian rebels would be every bit as racist and divided the libyans are, and that it is not very probable outside actions will help to defuse that.

dictators , but also all the other elites (fake democracy's), thrive on sowing division.

as far as i can see for the white and potentially influential public on both sides of nato's ocean, it worked.

i feel like i am living between fools drenched with hate through a system that starts the indoctrination in the kindergarten.

worse then when i was a kid, every form of rebellion is now repressed with numbing medicins.

the public should save us from worse. but they have been denied the political or common knowledge and historical background to understand.

i am sorry to say, not 1 in 10 of the average readers anywhere seem to have some collection of their witz. i am deeply pessimist about the results of a continued political engagement once more guised as a humanitarian cause, towards the dictatorships the proprietary class does not like.
(assad, iran)

as long as the western publics can't put things into proportion, we can also forget about muslims doing so, when we in the supposed so free western world don't start out to make sense, they will look for their own opinionmakers. and those, are part of the lucky few, just like here.

will no doubt do everything to betray the people and sheople, just like here.

the cataclysmic environmental destruction sees the priviliged monetary elites glasping at any blunt or delegitimised form or instrument of repression available, cause they damn well know disaster is inevitable, and they want the poor to suffer only for theirselves to survive.(1)

in between all that israeli and other (amazingly related) outfringe is stoking tension where possible.
enjoying the sheople bow to their discord like they would in churches and other centre's of
despair.

(1) wich is just as unreasonable, only to be explained by them dimming their own views, firstly to keep a secret they know better, but secondly for being in permanent denial as a matter of survival (meaning they have no apreciable estimation of the real state of earth's affairs themselves).

(2) actually the result is inconclusive, ghadaffi is out to opt for a prolonged duration of the war and terror, for his or his rich family's part untill there is no libyan left, besides them, so that is still inconclusive.

succesfull slaughter of the arrogant air

after all the firing at and from the clouds finally it is done. libya is getting back to peace-bussiness as usual. eu and usia anounced they will 'help the rebels implement reforms over the coming months and years'.

wow, thats great news if you just lost a sun or father for lybias freedom.
in some years the nato will still promise freedom.. i would be.. well let me not tell you what i would be,

i hate people to go around with guns, be they the uniformed brutes that follow upon any order to incarcerate black people, like in usia, or camerons, or be they the libyans that perforate the skies for no obvious reason. wow its peace, let me fire a gun, makes sense? not to me.

that is only impressions, perhaps it doesnt matter, i heard story's about how (only) after ww2 the dutch got hold on plenty weapons, they emptied on, basically anything in sight that wasnt moving. nude women, shaved women or even just the other side of the river.

people are like that, in the absence of resistance they turn into great hero's.
reminds me of drones and gaza btw.

but i should be happy and thankfull, the bloodlet is over, one of these in denial of legitimate governance left the theatre, libyans will finally have the possibility to listen to vague promises of change for years to come, as predicted by eu, usia and nato statements.. wow...

will libya change for the better? i dont know, really don't, it should i think, but i am not very optimist, the nato axis is doing it very utmost to run far behind the facts " gadaffi should step down" once over according to plenty of the fatnecks, today still. and the promise of years of promises has been made.

gadaffi is still at large, personally i hope it stays like that, not that i think his last few speeches were so great, but i also don't think they have been correctly translated or quoted. only the endless repition of that last speech in itself, even when the scene totally changed and all the libyans answered khadaffi's call to go forward, forward, forward. over 24 hours it is the topic of the news on alJ. and with my experience with media so far, that wont be unique.

saif el islam is a bitch. sorry to say, but yesterday he was still inciting killing, telling they were not about to surrender and now he is caught enjoying the ever illfetched richess in a luxury resort. that it left supporters and common people bleeding and dead.. did it ever matter to him?

not yesterday.

i disliked his recent act, allthough i guess only it's excesses were made known to us.
as usual the poor have been made to suffer, and the rich to get away with it. who else but nato to blame?

moreno o campo. heh a 'judge' someone that thinks its legal to deal with racist cops, racist verdicts, inequality of justice, a fraud, someone like saif el islam.

a clown, a puppet of the wallstreet frauds that steal more in a year then the whole poor part of london can lay it's hands on.

so let's set aside the international perspective that is rubbish anyhow.

gladder now. this is great for libya. why? because as autocrats tumble the future might just become more democratic. it might not, but that risk has allways been. it may otoh. because once you threw over an autocrat that usurped power for decades, next time possibly people will prevail such a development. stop them dead in their tracks after 4 or 8 years.

i dont think it will be better for the libyans now. gadaffi wasnt half bad in distributing housing, education healthcare and other basics. he was bad in being tolerant, maybe as bad as cameron even. he was also bad in applying justice equally, much like cameron eg.

the capitalist system however has a doctrine, a religion even, that to become rich, you have to keep the poor under, punish them where and when you can, rob from them, and nato and the other archenemy's of the poor promised assistance, so will it get better? no i think.

that besides people might still starve feeling liberated, why not, the proverb is: it is better to die a free person then to live as a slave.

i figure already today the gasoline prices will fall, for example my dutch people that supposedly voted to be able to cause way worse accidents on the highways, will once again pollute like mad, spread dust and toxins through the poor people's air like there is no other day.

because no matter elections in the west are a fraude, realising you can kill even if you are middleclass gives people a good feeling. the sheer power to threaten who or what you don't like with 3 tons of metal at high speed is a good thing in the compassionate mind of the believers.

take out your revenges on those pathetical non-polluters they will think, is justice, make m die from lungcancer, only to notice tobacco is not to blame when it is to late.

whats wrong with tobacco you might ask, well people work less hard, they take breaks, their lungs function less before all of the backs are broken in the pursuit, the crusade for distinguishing wealth for the 'bosses'.

i will see in a year or two. what's libya then. no more housing, less healthcare, more poverty and starving, lots of nato trained security to lock people up for longer.

thats what i think would happen. a new clique of priviliged, taken from colonial stock will reitterate the hollow phrases of the capitalists, politics to be lost forever before it was even born into the continent, oh well should i care?

it's not as if politics is the territory of reason either way. it's possible one less sheik is enough of a result, nato get's it's guns and drones free for assad, then again the syrians this time, will bleed. assad will sit in his palaces untill the criminal court takes him in to cut into stone their version of the tale, poisoning the mind of the future generations..

so great..

the next about to fall is israel, after the unknown assailants in eilat bravely challenged it's supremacy and universal right to lock up the palestineans, suddenly in the shade of a bombing campaign, netanyahu will be referred to the criminal court, ofcourse with his hatemonging associates and admirers overhere in europe.

saif el islam will need to be sedated not to risk a lifelong sentence over singlehandedly attacking the breivicks and their admirers and instigators in the one hour of caged open air a day left for his lifetime. (he should thank me now, just to proof i am wrong they will not punish him as hard as they would like to, solidarity between the rich will rule his day, and the courts proceedings, just like so far he, gadaffi and assad are left in peace.)

brothers in bankaccounts, fellow criminals, you don't hurt these do you? people might notice it works. thumbs up libya.

V for vulnerable. make it better then it was, don't allow the rich to make it worse.

(you know this is almost as inciting civil war: don't allow the rich to make it worse?)
good for me the powerfull and their servant judges(also priviliged) won't admit.

make it better libya, can you? please try, your chances are better then egypts.