change the world

not a bad idea,

what a mess, today i ran into the predictable angry woman against assange, if you do not know how the case went in sweden it is all very suspect indeed, besides sexcases are creapy anyhow.

apparently the kind of libel never fails to work,
contemplate it, he had sex with two women in sweden.

ok perhaps a bit distastefull to so much enjoy your righteousness,
one was a parlementarian, an active person in wikileaks according to some sources, that is however if you concern her political background slightly implausible, a small-wrongwing political stream that is ostentiously courting usia. for favor apparently.

what that has to tell us about usian favors:S

money if no worse, we know they party the usual islamist.

it is a very smelly case, the other plaintive redrew to be only few days later redrawn in the case, it seems also there was some art of foreknowledge, that was mostly an impression, it is not a likeable job to dig through articles about sexcases, soon i found out it smelled truely i was satisfied to my knowledge.

we never hear of her, she stays out of the picture , ofcourse 'to spare her feelings' and i care.. but on the other hand i am so informed she was no alien to the practice of having sex with relative strangers.

what an awfully weak case, what is it for major swedish political forces want to push an awfully weak case contrary to the wish of prosecuters?

nuf about it, but that was nerving.

then there is turkey, merkel will notice, in greece it is no surprise,
does not she know the turks have century old cannons along the bosporus that still beat the english in the first world war?

is there any surprise they fire their rounds in every direction, and does she see how right the greek were in spending massively on french and german weapons?

she ought to know greek, sorry turkish, are like that, did not they allways bombard innocent kurd villages, might not what happen, if we are serious about alexander here, if they get through and at the israeli?

assad must seem a blessed man to her today, wonder if she gets von rumpey to smile.

finally convinced of her true german identity that she ofcourse knows of she will have to return from the akropolis and it's desperate decendents,

having changed little but answered the local desire for a show off she had the most painfull experience of her life, if any ueber german really exists it is her, nobody went through that, the woman do all the suffering.

in that sense remarkably greek suddenly remind turks, you see what that occupation did to them, even merkel is needed to save them.

and.. they don't have icons in greece, noone is holy there, so what to do with a woman like that?

we will see tomorrow, greek man are reknownedly attractive.

so on with the turks, i think they are stubby, well the not the ones i like, but if you say: i like turks, i think you mean : i like man stubby.

hardly anyone dares to admit aloud they like turks, it's like saying ' i like big man', a bit odd and people can think something of it.

perhaps that is the problem with the greek, greek are fond of grace, young girls, okay they have their escapades, but not especially with stubby man, certainly not with turks, well unless in greece perhaps.

the greek turks slowly disintegrate, or so we hope, it is what they deserve, you would almost hope they would end greek orthodox in 2300.

it is a beaurifull tradition, we europeans underestimate it, but if you do one step inside greek orthodoxy it is really as if you step into a very old version of the middle ages, pittoresque to no end.

bit like tibet. religion also dictates who gets in hell and who gets a bankaccount in nations like that. usually.

greek orthodox turks would obviously rise higher than a falling star can fall, i must hope not straight into martyrdom, but i do not think greek are greedy.

except perhaps with money, what a farce, people here paying, what they can afford and the greek buying german weapons, ok nuf said.

i suppose that is the problem with the turks? hypnotised by the greek, and northsyrians now have to hear the result, let's hope at least it relieves the kurds in irak and elsewhere.

typical how carefull syria, uh turkey has allways been with artillery and foreign territory, oh well, would it have a do?

the law they have for bombing syria does.. weird that,

what would that law say? alawites are for this year considered damned kurds?

so that is where we are, obama would like to be glad with the escalation, everyone understands, rasmussen talks utter gibberish, for the informed it means, the military don't give a damn, they never, he couldn't be a general, s'pose he is.

if they don't want to give a damn, it's quite a contigency, it means they want the succes , wether for obama or the syrians or mostly theirselves, and they will not probably wait very long to become involved in any escalations.

that climate will be conductive for an ongoing turkish firework wich can be expected to now and then provocate a new mortar round.

since turkish are the most advanced of all ottoman people, they will enjoy the fireworks if for no other reason than to make sure, or at least convince themselves of the enlarged security assad will not have time to think over countermeasures, besides they are sunni.

that is a point, but anyone can be a wahabi anywhere and what is with sunni?

it's a start.
oh yes, it would be nice to follow ban ki moons course and just put a silent end to this very much much to noisy affair. for one thing noone and not assad should get away with calling huge parts of the population terrorist.

please?

time to think about the children

it is usual to sacrifice the innocent, just to get a war going.

no matter i think martha wellhorn , names:S, a tad naive, she surely has influenced usian public opinion so much it is hard to distinguish where she is carbon copy and where she is original, this happened in vietnam,

refugees where made to have an ugly live, just so people would not want to be refugee.

as if anyone wanted that. yet the bombs still drove them out.

now we see outrages like: lebanon tells syrians they can only stay for two weeks, reminds me of how the dutch monarchy send the jews back into germany,

or turkey 'turkey does not have any more capacity' , preparing the turkish to project their own wealth gap on the syrian victims of a some dictator wannabe monarch.

so what is behind? simple, the many thousands in fear for their lives will add to the 'inhumane suffering in assads syria', because.. well they just can't escape..
it already happened that turkey send back 1000s.

and then? then it is time to blame assad..

oh i support obama, don,t go chemical or biological on them putin, uh assad,
i promise i cry wolf. then again, we will not get that verified will we? (in between a 1000 images i did not see a verified statement or count)

it remains obscure to me why assad still can't be droned.. well obviously they do not want the association on their own skins, the hill-billy,s.

elections? we see a lot of illegitimate (what a word) interference here, as much as the clandestine interference obviously from and too the con's.

similarly to that ron paul got no media attention whatsoever, so that nobody will have to wonder if he would get "his" votes, and similar to that i have not seen anyone in their sane minds support santorium or wosname,ron should have known , it happened exactly last time.

i still really wonder if it is obama who thinks he needs a timeout.
i could allow him so much if he had that in the open, not like ,they need the farce for me next, though it could be exciting to see if he, the big o, would live to see that better day , when the realitys of ecocatatstrophe will finally dismantle the fraudulent banking mechanism and squandering profits of ecologic destruction.

the people give small rise to worry.. what worrys me most is.. the blame game.

however if marihuana is legalised at least the people of the future have a chance not to be complicit in the pharmaceutical destruction, even if the sp projects the case like if they are addicted to cocaine.

(everything is ok if just it remains to blame)

but, it is simple, i made clear in the national elections of the dutch, not coincedentually ofcourse coinciding with the overly brazen fascist-wing campaigns of the billionaires, saving a dollar in a dime, would very probably have no better option than this: sp, and as it still not allowed a war, still not prescribed murder, disrespect and agression, nothing very much changed,

since i am the publisher, i wonder: what about the children?

and since i quite agree chaos is the creative principle, adriaan will have to wait,

but it is fascinating. the face of truth in the absence of fear, and how i would work hard but not to any sudden sacrifice, behind those fogs of war.

sp. let's not get deluded that we are hoovering, anywhere but in the public eye, the tv cameras.
to make a protest count we have to make it heard.

Kurdistan, turkey, pkk , oil , M-E.

This will be an untypically specific posting. Somehow i think all the fuzz over the kurdistan-issue is hardly warranted, whilst media persist in desinforming. If we don't stick to facts, and exchange these unbiasedly, nothing much will be gained, and kurdish again will become the victim. As well as quitte possibly some turks.
In general terms escalation might poison an alredi autoritair atmosphere in turkey. It would raise problems for irak and iraki kurds, and most importantly invites unnecessary death and destruction. On the background plays that every party might hallucinate an economic interest in oil by desorganising the kirkuk regions.

Major players... Maliki, he is a policeman and does not understand what is happening.
I don't know how people of limited scope become presidents, but Mailiki has only a simple and straightforward way of coping. The presidential quality to always seek solutions and negotiate he does not posses in matters of military calibre.
All he said is .. blah blah, attacks, terrorists, forbidden, allies, security.
Nothing in depth. But certainly nothing comforting kurds.

Jalabani: Jalabani opted to support the obviously somewhat justifiable turkish intend to get done with intrusions from without irak. This is a prokurdish statement, a general kirkuk statement, an obvious sign of negotiability, but also a bit of the easy way out, Jalabani may be aware like noone else, how unrealist it be that refugee (turkish) kurds, a 30 or more year history of the region, would suddenly shut down all activity aimed at turkey, let alone find way to disappear back into turkey and not be confronted with persecution and violence.

USA: usa opened the ball, by making a huge affair of the armenia case.
For me it misses relevance because it is considered as a single case, at no point in a year anyone but me pointed out what scarcity of food was abound over the region in these years, and other great deeds of inhumanity of that age are not related or mentioned.
A damnification like this can only be made after a complete and unbiased historical assesment and in a supra-national context. Things we can only dream of for now. Also when the USA blames the turkish over armenia, it does not dare to speak truth about the current turkish terror. Mostly i suppose because they use all the same methods, apparently they also exterminate villages in independish areas. People in the usa have no clue what is going on. (Not one coherent USA right wing posting on al jazeera). Apparently at the moment USA politics supports the turks , (something i can't understand well outside USA being an imperialist repressive state). USA public is crying outright evil over the kurds.("wishlist of terrorism" on the menu)
We should perhaps realise that a shared interest with the turks as a loyal nato partner gives promising perspectives having to do with oil. Something for wich you need no strong kurdish unity and certainly not a powerfull PKK. That would not support turkish or usa interests in irak and that would fight the destruction of kurdish prosperity in northern irak.

PKK: The more representative element of the resistance against turkish repression of Kurds. (like PLO used to be and Hamas may be a representative for the resistance by palestineans). Unfortunately for the PKK they are modern. They have no ambition to set up an archaic state, or some odd califate, they also have a marxist ideological background, apparently , since i myself never much noticed, and as such they remain under the coldwar protocol for terrorism (is that the reason?). The PKK has, i don't know how, managed to contribute to the fall of saddam and fight the turkish army,
for decades. At one point i think in the early 90s, it became absolutely obvious that the turkish army applied genocidal politics to kurdish areas, and what all turks apparently manage to overlook: that the kurdish culture was severely repressed and prosecuted in all it's aspects.
Discrimination on schools, no kurdish language allowed, and the ongoing campaigns to neutralise ever more of the areas inhabited by kurdish. Harsh punishments of prison and even torture in huge scale prisons for (kurdish) activists, and... in turkey you can also be prisoned for saying things the state generally dislikes. So the typical shapes of political prosecution and destruction of freedom of expression have been decade long elements of the turkish strategy. What probably is the reason for the militance of the PKK is that turkey manages to keep providing new levy's of embittered, scared and angered kurds.
Obviously by counteracting the genocidal composure of the turkish tenure the PKK has over the years actually helped the kurdish population a lot, or at least shown to try her utter for only that. I must say i suspect the last few years (through the irak adventure) the turkish attitude has become a bit less destructive, although i fear the repression of the individual may remain almost similar. I am not sure since i heard kurdish could have their own language at schools again, that would mean also the individual perspective of a kurd in turkey improved a bit. (a kurd would have like 60-70% more energy for schooling and education in other subjects, its hard to keep up your professorates if you have to be a complete autodidact in your major language)
Anyhow that and modern times , in the sense of non religious politics eg. are the facts behind the PKK. One reason people would not vote pkk inside turkey is it would be dangerous to openly sympathise, voting means you would usually also publically defend a such opinion(pkk in this case), wich would endanger your life. As such the
link that pkk is to radical/militant (to vote for) became subconscious. Elections show the will for peace of kurdish people, but when the kurdish vote something outside pkk they still vote for their independence. In that sense PKK is only living up to procedures more then other representatives, wich i suppose is why they have such great sympathy despite their non-conformism.


Irak: Irak wants nothing to do with this. Iraki kurdistan as a political factor is no exception. However within kurdistan the turkish attrocitys are well known and sympathy for the resistance is a very natural thing, not in the least because kurdish identity in irak could be a scary one under saddam. In that context neither iraki president said much revealing.(i think it shows ambitions as well)


Turkey: The turkish public is very biased, single tv shows can make them all shout obviously propagandatory outrage at once, on the forum of al jazeera.
So why is the turkish public so very biased? It is really complex. Firstly i think they are awfully badly informed over the scales of the repression of kurds and the counteractions. They seem not even to realise kurdish get no kurdish language schools, or perhaps they are bloating on their succes in the destruction of kurdish identity. Some would. So.. next question, why are turkish so embittered? This pitfall of demologics must have been armed earlier. When the turkish media let out the turkish part of the violence it was not hard for a turk to become somewhat bitter, over the kurdish resistance, also turks planned to kinda abolish their headscarfs in public buildings to join the EU, now i decided it was better if turkey did not join the EU. Not for any economical reason, but because they had not raised their populace above the headscarf ideal, in other words powerfactors wished to cling to islamism, wich was the better reason to respect the middle east nations in their geopolitical aptitude (whereabouts). Also reluctant operating towards ukraine and belorussia from the eu, show the same geopolitical score, it is not in the interest of the eu to (directly or immediatly) intrude geopolitically to entitys that have a different historical position. Be it (imperial-sovjet) Russia , Middle-east or africa, in effect. Also Turkey has a moderate or modern islam since ataturk, and it is not necessarilly bad to allow the turkish ideals to influence the region. At least it is something slightly different and often indeed turkey acts as an intermediator, an umpire at her best moments. So the basic reason turkey fought the kurds, is turkey doesn't want to seize the (any) land. All the talk about terrorism is only rhetorics, and apparently the nato has been supporting the turkish in their attempts,
else there would have been no need for the militant factions (the all-too-often socalled terrorists) to become communist mainstream.

EU: Perhaps comes up with something soon. EU has always been a nato partner ,
as such it is indulged with turkish politics, EU supports the USA "wishlist of terror" labeling pkk amongst, outside the predictable humanitarian effort and statements, i expect nothing much as EG alredi tried to show her sympathy for hamas, i assume it will try to push the usa for her responsabilitys towards the kurds. One should not underestimate the political interest of once again attacking a "communist" group with the label 'terrorist'. The US apparently informed her public that "Koordum Turkam delendum esse ". so that is what we may most reasonably expect to happen.
(might need check but ianss.)endpoint of that reasoning, oil.

Erdogan: And as such, the turkish political circles. Firstly i don't like they move their populace through onesided mediamanipulation, wich is way to haughty an attitude for me to like. Secondly i think they are populist and have the populist aproach of security, that kind of securty always adds up to fascist repression, they show to be so by directing existential fears of turks to the kurds instead of using those to emancipate modernisation. Whence structural political turkish interests appear: to stay in power, to manoevre the populace, so the suspicion that the iraki kurdistan oil has to do with the affair easily rises.
Perhaps also they try to settle things 'once and for all' , stubbornly refusing to see the reality of a federal iraki kurdistan and as such the impossibility to completely destroy kurdish identity in turkey. In a way this asking for attention is perhaps a way to induce realist talks, but only if the world forces them to. If the world chooses to neglect the kurds, the turkish will be the last to complain.

Me: I just hope some of these old misconceptions get cleared up on a worldwide scale.
i know i have not said everything about turkish ideals and motivations, and i am as sorry for the family members of all involved as the parents of the turkish soldiers.
Like more pakistani got sacrificed for the socalled war on terror then coalitioners,
i must unfortunately assume turkish and kurdish lifes are counted similar by major powers involved.



























Erdogan