revolutionairy practice

as with many things anarchistic, revolutionairy, revolutionaire practice has been a fashion.

as with many things it usually get's to narrowly interpreted in practice. and as with many things,
it doesn't allways matter.

basically the role of the revolution is (i think), "if they shoot we shoot back".

when it happens sudden, it achieves a lot. recent uprisings and the masses, but also the reason for militairy coups. revolution of the tiny masses, so to say.

nazism features the idea of a tiny coup btw. i would pose it is a common trait of the european nationalisms.

nationalism is crazy and weird. ideologically the northafrican people have a lot of background,
we don't have to expect to much confirmation of the usual "arab world". what is the use for them if a popular revolt for freedom would become rewarded.

it is hard to guess where the real sentiments lay here in the "west". nobody has the slightest of interventionist intentions, dumping some "diplomats" in the night in a heli might just be an okish manner to achieve a contact, the libyans apparently need organisational aid for the rebel forces.

talking about those, the numbers are somewhat obscure. the need for that is not wholly obvious.
i would guess, and hope .., some 30 deaths a day, but i figure that is completely naive.
it is quite as possible there are hundreds, i would not even know for sure at what side.

however, just sending weapons is bad strategy, weapons dont largely contribute to peace usually.
with food and other aid a similar thing is a problem, by supplying you allways create some sort of dependence.

perhaps just inherently, that you supply things that are supplied to allow "the struggle",
perhaps by the usual means, corruption, control, police, and their counterparts.
sometimes through the army, and basically allways when the infrastructure to handle those supplies is doubtfull.

however little you want to occupy a nation, it is obviously one of the most helpfull things to have enough people on the ground to deal with anything that might happen,

the rebels should, i think, but much depends wether the struggle was merely bloody or for the greater part symbolic, consolidate some of their gains, and make sure they are practiced and probably also prepared for any further events. it's not smart to waste masses of young people in offensives.

first kadaffi needs to be contained,
either through negotiation and for example exile, and next as a danger to the libyans, around him or opposed to him. the best would be if those two still can and will find agreement.

obviously that would mean there is room for one dictator less, it is also obvious it is in the interest of the libyans around khadaffi to settle for one peacefull libya.

the opposition has asked for nothing else. what good would a civil war, and large scale persecutions still bring along the north african coast?

surgical strikes can be okish. it is a transparance thing, if the concept and practice are not used beyond their purpose they can deescalate, or litterally disarm, such confrontations.

all these things and steps do need recognition. from the libyans, their neighbours, but rather the ('arab' amongst) more remote powers. otherways such interventions can be explained to any badly informed public (there is plenty) , as interventionism.

wich is not the point, but you cannot change the course of warfare without intervening.

there is still very much dishonourfull in warfare, the peacefull solution will allways be the better for all of us.

Hypokrit Krisis

I guess it needs an update, my critics to the current approaches focus on 3 points atm.

being:
preoccupation with loans
obsession with export
lack of ecological vision

The first point i think is critic because it provides the illusion that by forever making guilts you would add value to an economy.(in the national corporate or personal sense)


the second point has a similar problem, the "crisis" is one of the world as a whole,
export as such allways means someone else is creating a deficit. Perceiving exports as balancing in that sense in this crisis would be also farfetched. They are hugely part of the problem because they can spread this illusion of growth, to the cost of some (far away and out of sight).

The third point is that what we use and 'borrow' are mostly the available natural resources. The depletion of these, that is more often a matter of destruction then one of limitation, is as predictable as can be.

for example we face leaders that promote population growth as another means to exploit the margins. yet the time that such kinds of "economical theory's" earned (the militairy-industrial complex) their place on the platforms should be thoughtfully considered part of the problem and actually longgone.

peace for gaza

It seems people don't have a comprehensive picture of how Hamas could survive israel, meanwhile respecting the israelians rights like any others.

I don't feel like summing up the whole history again, but i point out inside israel palestines have no rights. Not even the right to vote. How could a democrat defend such a nation? Do the elites of the world intend to take away other minority's and majority's their right to vote?

why is this argument not weighted in assesing who is actually contrary to human rights?

The phenomenon mentioned above can be apreciated in israeli politics in many shapes,
limitations to work, housing, schooling, acces to jobs, etc.
israel is an apartheid state.

From this it must be obvious i support the palestines over israel as the situation is now and has been over many years. I can't help that i stick to the integrity of principles.

in fact i think the palestineans have a couple of rights that will not be solved by any peace proces. The right of return, the right on their ancestral lands, the right to be equal to israelians in israel(..), are hardly in the picture.

Israel is always trying to legitimise it's claim by having individual palestineans sign documents they afterwards pose as 'arrangements'. However israel itself has not followed up to UN resolutions , so it really has not all right to speak.
(hamas is the only chosen representation of palestines so far and thus the only one that could be held accountable for what it signs so far)

here is where the westbank/east jerusalem landgrabs come in, and remain a point to solve.
so point one that needs a solution is israeli landgrab.

Hamas or the palestines will not settle with israel denying un resolutions, and pressing palestines to stick to their parts of such 'agreements, and resolutions'.

Then there is the feature of asymetrical warfare. Israel has been fighting the palestines with one of the most imposing arsenals of the world, being countered by stuff such as stones and handweapons.

Any solution that could be taken serious, should disallow israel to perpetrate further violence, attacks , bulldozering and eliminations.

As of yet not one stage of the struggle has resulted in israel restraining it's agressions. That is point two,

all israeli agression against palestines in gaza and westbank needs to disappear.
As it is now people watch gaza, but even bush remarked the westbank situation with roadbloacks etc. is contrary to human rights.

Even considering only the above 2 points israel has never tried to respect them. For me it means there is no real chance on peace,(israel will take care it wont happen), yet, being the antimilitarist i am i will explore the negotiations-concept further.

So when gaza international borders are opened, actually we can improve on gaza, but as the situation inside israel and westbank remains unsolved, we can also be sure resistance boils up time and again.

That's just human, any people would protest their ongoing humiliation.
When violence is the method of the other, spats of violence and spates of armed resistance can only be expected.

It's the turning side of the israeli agression, and it is the long history of violent repression, that facilitate these emotions.

Anyone making a real start with a peace proces should not deny such reality's.
Firstly because they weill end up a henchman of childmurderers, secondly because
it shows you want to solve the situation only for the zionists.

I think a real solution should account for that, the long, long rants and lies emanating from the zionist clique that is actually 80% of israel and 100% of it's political representatives should come to an end. Israel should be disallowed to allways blamish others (irak , iran, lebanon, syria) for the violence it perpetrates and causes.

in fact palestines should have a right to vote, and a right to have any kind of job,
in israel. (Native) americans have a right to work, inuit do, and so do palestines.

So that is the first big questionmark, will bringing peace to the middle east bring down the israeli apartheid system.

And if not, will it at least make a start with it, and will the international community at least stop defending the practises of a racist (and neighing to fascist)
israeli system?

These points are essential, as israel will claim the unright to eliminate palestines, bulldozer their homes, fly drones and f16 over the kids at bedtime, because they allways did.

It follows the palestines should have a right to be free from israeli interference and violations.

The following point is starting to speak in true terms. When the deathtoll is a 100 to 1, democrats, human rights adherents, must have the courage to file complaints.

It is the awfullests of precedents israel is setting all the time. If the UN allows this degradation of agreements and human rights, they loose all right to speak in any other situation, (simple example, north korea knows no apartheid, iran targets no iraqi's).

When the situation for west bank is solved and for gaza is safe, and israel stops being a racist state, a lot seems possible, even locking up the palestines in those two small areas, without a real perspective of future or return of the refugees.
(some would return but they would just not fit in the available space).

That is westbank need to become an unbroken territory. As such it is not possible to recognise the state of israel, since it does not stick to UN decisions itself, it would be a onesided surrender.

israel would like it, but it would have no real legitimacy for the palestines (or me and other ethic people in the world), just like much remains to be wondered when a apartheid state is positively judged by the oslo agreement, but not held to un resolutions.

When israel does have the freedom to neglect the decissions of the international community, certainly palestines have the right to resist israel.

Like the wallons have the right to resist the flamish, palestines must have the right and possiblities to resist israel.

So what can the palestines deal in return??

nothing, they have nothing, they have only been raped of their soil and options, concentrated in small areas of land, and traumatised by perpetual atatcks and infringements, not to mention huge campaigns of military terror.

They only have a dream. Live a human live, live in peace with their neighbours,(syria, egypt, jordan), (dis)solve the israeli problem. And be free of agressions.

what can they offer??
that the rockets stop? at the start of this last massacre every media stressed how
the palestines were cowards, according to israeli outlets, that got repeated by international political prominents.

the argument swayed, ofcourse fighting F16s and tanks with handguns is the opposite of cowardice.

however it helps to realise israel had been shouting that a long time, and suddenly shuts up when someone (me) shows how lousy that argument is.

I think i have handed quite a few viewpoints that are essential in bringing peace for the palestines. The israeli in my opinion don't really want peace, they only want the excuse to do what they like, and achieve compromise by lies.
(the list of excuses they would have to offer exceeds my endurance in summing up and finding out and also be to long this article)

The freedom of the palestines is really only a matter of the restriction of israeli agression. And that should be the starting point for negotiations,

such negotiations should leave openings to the palestines as they have been the victim for 60 years, (3 million dead related to the nakba, more by now)

One such opening would be the availability of water resources, before i acted,(but others pointed me at it) , that availability in gaza was zero. It is now 20-30% wich is to little. The gaz field before gaza should be theirs, they should be compensated for israel destroying their fishery and trade, and israel should be stripped of any permission to still destroy palestines lives, by fly by's, attacks, and what not all.

As the situation is now, one cannot expect the palestines to stop violence, they got nothing, have been cheated and lied to by israel and the international community for decades, and the next israeli transgression more deadly and often more bloody then any palestine action is something we are only waiting for.

I hope these figureheads in the international community will understand such are not negotiations, and where principle points can be made against palestines , many more can be made against israel.

The principle of justice requires that the international community aims for equality and mutuality, otherways not only they have no right to speak (defending apartheid is contrary to justice) they will be complicit in the ongoing slaughter of palestines
and the destruction of their future.

Okay, i know the 'international community' is a biased one, this is a turning point in history, and we will soon know, wether it turns for the good, or more of the same, prejudice, bias, apartheid, discrimination, arbitrary violence, eliminations,
it is not up to me.

european (mal)conduct in the gaz negotiations

cold war indoctrination first facilitated the 21st century crusade wars, recent events confirm that nearly anyone over say 45 is still tainted by it in the contacts with russia.

Europe misbehaved shamelessly, at least 4 times they tried to erase parts of the negotiations from the public memory after negotiating them.

around my last post to the subj. some attitudes changed, basically because i explained some about russian folklore, culture. The russians will have appreciated the change in aproach, but after the machinations with the press, any appendix or additional preservations now suggests the blame should not be put firstly with russia.
(it has been pretty obvious more often, i feel like i don't need to remember, to some extend such affairs are nauseating, get you sick.)

That our , the eu, government chooses such aproach shows their current insincerity towards the russians. I have told them a few of the great miracles putin worked eg.
but long it was maintained in the forementioned (our) media, he was not an asset to russia. a sheer dictator even.(1)

Ofcourse the cooperation in signing a clean accord is appreciated, but when someone (the EU)shows doubtfull trustworthyness all the time, it's dangerous to expect they are suddenly good people that would speak the truth.

So as a peace proponent i have to warn you that there is both a huge resource of undistrubed brainwash at work in high EU circles, and wich is unfortunately more probable, certain circles in nato block elements and these indications are quite many to me, have still been planning and constructing a war towards russia , not in the least because they have the brainwashed masses for ir still quitte available
(an asset).


The israeli-gaza situation carry's many paralels

:/ i was considering gaz, israel before realising anything for labels :o . that ofcourse i needn't as the joke is here.

anyhow, gaz(a), israeli would also be uncomforting. (this blog is about censorship ya know)


the israeli gaza situation carry's many paralels.

we see one party that lies a lot and has repeatedly managed to be untrustworthy,
opposite to that we see someone under agression, defending only their rights,
the russian gaz heats our houses, and i suspect the palestinean fuel warms the israeli.

Allthough russia needn't fear as much as gaza in the short term, in the longer term both their prospects are still worrysome. (think the socalled rocket shield - iran(?!) relation and the many offensive uses of (modern) radar.

Gaza knows israel to be a greedy negotiator, and one that wants all rights allowing no in return, the credibility of any solution or "peace" is very small, based on belignerent blackmail as it is.

Russia knows it is pathological in the european policys to try and exploit her, and steer towards agressiveness. It's not said that premeditated and subconscious agressivity allways leads to the worst possible conclusions, but watching the gaza example you can see it will not solve a problem quick or good, actually be the pretext for even more agression.

Be sure russia would like to steer away from that, can't EU start serious about uniting with russia? it seems better sooner then later. The deals are obvious for me.

btw. did you hear that enthropy is not lineair?


(1)(Putin outstanding statesman) In fact if you want to stress the slight totalitarian aspect of his career you might want to think positive of him as an enlightened despote, perhaps history will yet show that of all these he has been the most humane. it would not surprise me.

But even why: because the credibility of the russian elections has been very high, and mostly became more critical due international lies about that. (putin1 elections)

I consider it positive that his rules are not a "reign". It's not i want him to immediatly be the 'worldpresident' though i proposed exactly him for the job.

And i don't know a better. Perhaps Hu, he's up to date as well he's been doing mostly only good to china and the world in a hectic and challenging time. yet he applies more direct forms of censury wich is a bit primitive. it could also be a bit fairer?.. It just depends how much repression comes with it and if the system is open for progressive entry.
Anyhow i have a high opinion of chinas policy's with him in the job. You know.. i have enjoyed his 'company', and i think he could be good for you also. bit scary with the cultural gaps, small things could get incommunicatable. Perhaps he would cope easily.

may bug

The coming period i will be less "close" to the news. How that goes? the difference is not so big, usualy it is the historical context and general attitudes that are most telling, however what is a difference, is i don't get that much of a check.
What is actually pictured on youtube about: myanmar, the murder of a joutnalist in gaza, or machinations in SA? etc. are matters i will not pick up in the going.

Well don't worry, youtube that is fascinating for its capacity to bear news, isn't
actually doing it as much, even with AlJ certainly being great in actuality.

Whats happening on the planet? simply put bush is doing its utmost to legitimise any kind of military agression, myanmar, china and iran are the focal enemy's, and perhaps zimbabwe. This is dangerous, and i point it out, because it is closing in to be actuality, have to mention russia, just to be sure, there is a real multipronged attack going on.

Also usia is trying to harbour bases on irak soil forever at this moment in time. For fun value.. you know how many airbases alone usia has there? over 30.

it is about.... oil, all of these nations have essential oilreserves. and somehwat about resources (zim) and regional influence (everywhere).
that means that after a few months of relative calmth the world is again in dangerous waters. Carter re-revealed the obvious israel having nukes, no surprise here, i thought that is known since about 1959.

Iran does have a right and a duty to promote independend nucleair industry, under threat of nucleair attack it will and probabaly has already, build atomic bombs.
It is not all as bad as it seems, Ahmadinajaadh nor the iranians are intend on using them, they are needed as a retaliation strike capacity since usia and its leaders have shown their illiterate capacity to threaten and even use nucleair weaponry.

That said i do underwrite non proliferation, and perhaps so does iran. I am not a muslim (and don't want to be one). The validity of the complaints is unobvious, but ruski will probably, being somewhat intimidated, only react in a pre-putinesque way, being under threat herself it wont give openess or informations since it probably considers itself safer with a strong iran then without one.

The myanmar crisis will play out in a possibly significant way, either help will be offered without the many strings attached, or neocons will seize the opportunity and march in after providing the myanmarese with hostage. The elections results there appear to broadly support the government.
Me, i don't trust elections, but i would guess the "undemocratic" aspect of the new constitution , that the nato-prospected new ruler of the myanmar and her elites, saung the english lady can't become president, didn't suffice as much as the unsubstanciated allegations had months been suggesting. In that sense interesting how this blackmailing through human suffering plays out. throw a coin.

martian exploration: depends. maybe still. concerning they still send no brush to clean the solar panels, nor a cable operated remote, and not expect to survive a winter, i guess not. If this mission is searching for life, i think it is actually ibentarising water resources mostly, it appears to be doing so in a strange location,
a suggested debris field of a waterbearing meteor, however i looked at the fotos, and it is more like a sedementary accumulation that eroded away then needed to be expected. perhaps the landing place was geologically more justified then i had expected. To me it seems they are looking for a relic of live where live could have been a relic, where i would have opted for a more mineral aproach , aiming for eg. carbon if possible, or looking for a relevant layer in a newer tectonic or impact area to find material that has not been exposed for these many millions of years and more. so about the top meter or a bit more of everything on mars can be expected to be completely sterile and chemically changed through cosmic bombardment. only really fresh exposures (of a few million years or so at most) would bear complex organic molecules. in the first 60 cm. anyway.

I don't like football. It's an economic waste and part of a ploy to have the labourers and slaves disregard their own body's and as such impregnate them with a negative vision of their value and quality of life, and as a result that of others.
Irak, important, some creepy thing is going on, usia is trying to push the greenzoners into signing an accord to have usian militairy on iraki soil for indefinite periods of time. Even had the iraki mp not yet been bribed the pressure on them to surrender their nation would be great. That besides usia always manages to get idotic strawman sign ridiculous accords so we can be severely worried about the follow up.

I hope irak shows unity in resisting this masquerade, that perhaps will save history from this next farce, since the green zone does have an interest in not being the legitimate target of every attack in irak.

Obama, obama is doing very well all, however he has to show the world he is willing to try to stop bush and his methods. Usually the democratic candidate, indeed being a malinformed usian, since they live with more lies then we the rest of the world, comes up with some rather crude and expressed geopolitical views that promise to be no great improvement on the situation, Obama is no exception. Fortunately politicians are not held to their promises a lot, but the effect of saying to much when u know to little can be disparaging. Bush has as much as 16 years experiences with promoting political goals quite contrary to mine, and he has not told anyone everything he knows. (nor has the republican administration informed the democrats or populace in every insight they got from the rest of the worlds minds, as an example bush could make a small concession or say a smart thing most ppl know, but not usians, that he has already done like twice and very strategically, (things i react on and have to support him)).
Don't underestimate this. Only when Obama has the nomination changing usia will really start and be important.
Remains to be said i expect clinton to be more of the same indeed. Altho she did campaign in a more politically correct way during bush , i seem to even have overrated her performance in that. The main problem is she is a member of the same clique, she is raised into interests very close to the ones of bush. Obama could offer sth newer and more different then that. If he errs here or there when we start this world anew, it need not be unovercomable, social sturctures are so bad these days the international world is on the risk of collapse. His humanism might easily turn that tide.

enough good advices for Usia.

England, england and teh netherlands are the among the more dangerous nations in the world at the moment. They have alredi a lot of the usian mindset. "we are innocent, starve the beggars". That besides they are the most surveillanced nations. a dutch or english can easily be filmed 8 hours a day and all their communications are tapped and screened routinely. This is called a guiding nation, but actually it is a experiment in control. The dutch are a favourite target in this.

Unfortunately the dutch are not aware they are so relevant, but our values of freedom and tolerance and our average intelligence are high, so what works on us , may also fool a french or italian and most western people.

English are scary, they are so isolated and bigotted i have no clue what they need these cameras for, probably to look what you can incite in crime in a future society of yurpean nitwits. Perhaps it got sth to do with "nobel-price winning peace accords".
(clintonette anyone?).

Censory, censory will continue and be worse the coming month, that is ill boding.
but, ill boding is what the current economical system is, it is not a reason for extra panic on its own. stop that war ppl. we need the precedent of peace.

worst enemy of peace, put an end to the nato

Maybe i am suspect, and maybe the nato is actually my favourite instrument of torture, sure they put a show for that. It's logical, nato is the greatest tool to make an impression. Anything wrong, send in the nato, bomb the scene, and everyone knows where we actually stand. Great material.. pah, i think i can destroy most of the worlds armies and airforces using just robots, through.... the nato.
Unfortunately every usefull tool gets abused.

The nato as it existed has always deprived us of the option to think or trade peacefully with the east. The sovjet union and china. However after the warshaw pact was abolished, the opposing army of the dark, remained.

Having outlived it's doubtfull purpose the nato shines as an instrument of repression, cruelty and injustice. It's conspirative nature made it a handy tool in the hands of ppl who think the world is a thing you can toll when you have the biggest gun.

After the first amazement, when it appeared the east was ready to lack animosity, soon nato turned an evil eye on new purpose, new tasks. We now see an organisation that existed to destroy a mythological enemy, bussy creating and destroying new, and obviously weaker ones.

Meanwhile the misty deals over weapons reel while i write, or talk to a friend.
Nato is the iron fist that shows us every time this world is not our own, and so are not our governments.

Missing Wayne Madsons Report

Blogosphere..
Apparently superdudes bush and putin's dinner methods have revolted puritan veteran america so much acute censoring took place, I'd be obliged for any information.

I am more in the mood for a light hearted story about the blogosphere, much like what i yesterday(sortta i spose) wanted to write and didn't.

About the precise information missing above i can do a good guess, it must have something to do with the yearly CIA meeting on the subject "is USA hated enuf to start ww3".

Anyhow we yurpeans don't come of well in the analyses, we misunderstand the usian noble intention for plain robbery and murder, and although we have been lieing about wether we like usian people, it clearly shows we misunderstand everything happening around the globe. Including in the states, were a relative huge population is utterly happy to be so settled.

Ivory coast and the maldives do better in the comparison, some statistics leave out certain countrys, apparently the dutch are such a desolate culture they could not be asked for an opinion over usian foreign policy.
However as long as the maldives agree justly and rightly with the whole concept of usian politics evrything must be ok.

I actually suspect a full 100% of the dutch actually disagreed with that US is ok in foreign policy concept because it uses such great words . And that it is the reason we don't count. Or perhaps we got left out because living our humble life in our hobbitland we actually don't even like the usian public.

I think that could be true. The dutch are the only ones sufficiently naive to admit to not liking the usian public. Very silly of us, i' ll show we are wrong.

We do like usian people, only we like their manners less, less then say , almost anyone else. Although maybe some cultures actually sometimes behave more silly.

Strange that eh? We don't like their manners, and we don't trust their doings.
Fortunately we are the only people in the world so stupid to admit that.
Probably because our manners are nearly as bad as theirs.

We have quit a few bad manners they might learn of perhaps. So i don't understand why Cia wants to underline this animosity.

Anyhow tomorrows problem tomorrows care, this is the story about the live of your children, perhaps they won't blame you if you fail to notice.

Other options i think are plausible.. WM uncovered the new london bombings beforehand, WM knows who delivered the plans to the brilliant arabs, or even he uncovered involvment of the famous asian weapon smuggle bussiness in the recent attacks.
The latter i think is not the case, but you don't ever know with nowadays security corporations.

Lastly perhaps he was in ibiza fotographing US service personal working for the spanish. But i fear it is mainly the fly in bush's lobstersoup,
or perhaps it was the carrots.

mh.

I think i write some more later.

ah ok.. mh, I found something, apparently he went commercial? I think it is still a bit strange, who would want to limit his views like that. He obviously wants to make a living through journalism and his blog, apparenltly enough usians are so rich they can pay to read a blog that trys to cover peaceactions:S This world is full off surprises.