what do you think will be the leakout of this?
i still have high hopes. mostly that everything gets published. however, this is a sour planet indeed. you cant make a joke, bc ppl will take it serious, and you can't be serious, bc ppl will make a joke out of it.(so i have my informers in the chinese parliament??)
i quit reading the cables for now, if really only the way to get to them will be the encrypted file, i can jump to what interests me at that point, and worse, if i dont get it working i have a lot of time to look at the remaining ones, so some of the fun is gone.
however i want to write about ivorycoast. in hindsight i am curious what dutch tv showed and said, for fun value mostly. i can guess.
the point is it feels like ivory coast is the hostage of usia.
for starters i think and wrote my suspicion is the western world wanted gbagbo to win, well with the cables still forthcoming they all decided to support Qattari.
however there is no follow up. i think ivory coast is the cia's hostage inhere.
i wonder if i say something they don't like, will they light the fire of war?
if something happens in relation to these cables they don't like, i don't mean as a result really, more in terms of continued pressfreedom..
i know how it feels to be blackmailed by machinations, and i feel like that.
so i watched when aljazeera had a topic. quality journalism i say, you don't usually see a discussion as revealing on tv. not here.
the best thing about gbagbos ambassador was his sense of humor.
basically he said, if usia can use a republican constitutional court to fraudulently elect bush it is legal. why not here? he didnt use the word fraudulently ofcourse.
next he said, the guys from the north (sorry to say for all the secret loving diplomats but my opinion their collegues are trashy when it comes about justice) come and kill.
an argument with an impact, however it lost him the debate.
a refugee, woman, pointed out he came to power through deathsquads, through intimidation, and through a coup with no elections.
i think only one thing, when will we finally start respecting african lives and people.
free the hostage, open the secrets that put dictators in charge.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Monday, December 6, 2010
leaks
something like this tells a lot about the whole of the message ofcourse.
(C) The Qatari government's appreciation of U.S. training and technology presents numerous prospects for U.S. engagement. We know that Qatar will need trainers, assistance on selection of physical security equipment (such as delta pop-up barriers, fences and anti-vehicle berms), nonlethal weapons and tactics, and other technological equipment (CCTV, etc). Offshore protection is an area with the greatest potential;
it's diplomatical language or so it says and what sticks behind really,
let's start with GOQ 'appreciation', what if they hate it? (they don't like the claim on foreign equipment and facility usia are making)
prospects is golddigger language. engagement is: we do what we want and do that with weapons if we like. so it says, despite that qatar doesn't like our weapons programs, we see a splendid opportunity to make money, if they like it or not.
well at that point i am still curious, golddigger language okay, militairy terms for economical claims, well you have to see it even in the papers.. reads on, fences barriers:S? if they think they don't need them what is wrong with you, you might think.
they don't want qatar to look like the average muslim or qatari is an insane, certainly when the only thing really dangerous to be around tends to be the people offering to roadblock qatar.
at least i guess so. except for the ppl selling the TV's most people are not really enthusiastic to bodyscan the whole world for the sake of a misleaded christmas terrorist or the next weird story.
if its so easy to catch the craziest guys for wanting a thing like that actually you should start the therapy immediatly. if on the other hands there are no such people and only such storys, by creating a roadblocked world with gunpoints all around we are sure to get it.
incidents have allways been, and however we squirm they will as a matter of scales become larger. so even if the GOQ does like it, there might be plenty of people opposing the odd theory.
with less police on the street i like it better. i even feel safer, people are different. usians have a preoccupation with putting out stuffed up militias everywhere in nations that have never proven to cope in a political way with a normal militia. or cops or whatever.
senseless. back to the topic. selling arms. so i wondered still a bit.. after the row of prospected sales. offshore protection has the greatest potential..
potential. riot. if you blow a well they buy a vessel? potential is not anymore golddiggerlanguage.
it's explosive expert language, it's also if you put battery's into something. the machine is there, and you know it is going to work. and economically what it means is , even more money.
it's not an area to deserve attention, it's one with potential, and with CCTV they would be the only ones to enjoy the views of what really goes off.
(C) The Qatari government's appreciation of U.S. training and technology presents numerous prospects for U.S. engagement. We know that Qatar will need trainers, assistance on selection of physical security equipment (such as delta pop-up barriers, fences and anti-vehicle berms), nonlethal weapons and tactics, and other technological equipment (CCTV, etc). Offshore protection is an area with the greatest potential;
it's diplomatical language or so it says and what sticks behind really,
let's start with GOQ 'appreciation', what if they hate it? (they don't like the claim on foreign equipment and facility usia are making)
prospects is golddigger language. engagement is: we do what we want and do that with weapons if we like. so it says, despite that qatar doesn't like our weapons programs, we see a splendid opportunity to make money, if they like it or not.
well at that point i am still curious, golddigger language okay, militairy terms for economical claims, well you have to see it even in the papers.. reads on, fences barriers:S? if they think they don't need them what is wrong with you, you might think.
they don't want qatar to look like the average muslim or qatari is an insane, certainly when the only thing really dangerous to be around tends to be the people offering to roadblock qatar.
at least i guess so. except for the ppl selling the TV's most people are not really enthusiastic to bodyscan the whole world for the sake of a misleaded christmas terrorist or the next weird story.
if its so easy to catch the craziest guys for wanting a thing like that actually you should start the therapy immediatly. if on the other hands there are no such people and only such storys, by creating a roadblocked world with gunpoints all around we are sure to get it.
incidents have allways been, and however we squirm they will as a matter of scales become larger. so even if the GOQ does like it, there might be plenty of people opposing the odd theory.
with less police on the street i like it better. i even feel safer, people are different. usians have a preoccupation with putting out stuffed up militias everywhere in nations that have never proven to cope in a political way with a normal militia. or cops or whatever.
senseless. back to the topic. selling arms. so i wondered still a bit.. after the row of prospected sales. offshore protection has the greatest potential..
potential. riot. if you blow a well they buy a vessel? potential is not anymore golddiggerlanguage.
it's explosive expert language, it's also if you put battery's into something. the machine is there, and you know it is going to work. and economically what it means is , even more money.
it's not an area to deserve attention, it's one with potential, and with CCTV they would be the only ones to enjoy the views of what really goes off.
likified
ok i think either there are a few more of yesterdays cables then yesterday, or perhaps i was utterly fascinated by one or two (i was actually rather interested in some).
the note taking system didnt' work, i don't take notes(yet). i think of them sometimes.
4-12-2010 was an interesting day there because so many of the docs confirmed positions taken.
for example i started out with the document on chinas press freedom. the one about coverage of the partycongress specifically. perhaps without notes it is actually better btw. less of a danger to any kinds of sources. (not only theirs or the chinese)
but thats like scaremongering. these people managed to function very often on high levels for many years. the usual autocrat regime will definitily keep an eye on whatever contacts of their keypersonal. "do they talk with an ambassador" and next.. about what have they been talking.
even if i don't trust usian reports and perhaps 'would-be' reports, they show very well that the usual official meeting gets registered and reported. i am somewhat convinced it is hardly feasible to be a regular contact of say the consulate in beijng and have noone noticing.
it may also be in causal relation that relatively many of their contacts are relatively senior. outside a less precise insight in chinas prioritys usual people don't have so many excuses to meet.
the document about reporting of the congress didnt manage to make a very credible impression. to much of the 'press freedom rhetorics'. that besides, i would guess the content about the partycongress coverage is somewhat correct. if i am not mistaken aljazeera wrote on the same line about the event. (it was a bit boring and supported to little the public discussion)
that might not mean much ofcourse, except that aljazeera has many very professional journalists that do have a professional interresse in coverage.
in so far that part of the information is also an open door. it confirms for anybody to read it that has been interested in the event what i assume several papers wrote.
generally i think what all our papers write about such an event is screened. allthough perhaps not allways. i also wondered if the subjects didnt raise the attention of more chinese then doc . suggested. at some point the chinese informer himself seems to be relating exactly the kind of stuf usia wants to hear, and i must say the doument made a quite insincere impression on me.
it's a bit hard to guess if perhaps at top level they are also confirming their own biases here.
yet the document is revealing.
it's so full of supposed western pressfreedom that it strongly suggests wikileaks shouldn't be any problem at all.
next i read some about google in china, 1 percent of the links gets censored, now i would hate to know 1 percent of my links to be censored, besides probably way more actually are , that is.
of what remains to have 1 political percent censored would never be a help ofcourse. it depends then what is actually being censored in china except pornography.
stuff like chen a minh square is. ok surprising, and crazy i admit. but stuf about violent incidents through the police here gets routinely censored to the extent hardly anyone has an idea what kind of things go on and can go on. the very subjects of a demonstration, or arrests, let alone an activist campaign are routinely smeared and misinformed about, and very lousily documented through the somewhat more official and financially strong media.
so besides ofcourse killing people and driving over them with tanks is an extreme case even in a nation with a billion people, a similar or very similar incident might well be censored. theres no webpages about the heroism of the french urban resistance recently, and if there are any they are surely not easy to find or government sponsored.
don't want to say it is the same, but its damn similar. take for example haiti. if i understood the papers well there will be a change of power (however relative in some of the possible outcomes.)
i hope there will, the past ten (20 maybe even by now) years it has been painfully obvious haitians don't trust the governemnt they have. and want another, and that the capitalist proprietary class is kept in charge over the "silly black people".
(if you dont vote quietly you will all get cholera, is the central slogan of every recent government- public interaction in haiti. note that sth like that would show up in diplomatical correspondence, and that thus far stuff like that remains remarkably absent and out of view. allthough not in the wider application , of projected morality and problems).
thats intimidation and probably worse. blackmail. noone wants their children to get cholera, not even if you are in a hopeless position in a camp after centurys of oppression. it might rather make more of an impression. you know afterall what they have been doing to your people for century's.
the good news is that since today (would wikileaks have made a deal..) international organisations support a some transition of power. theres bad news there as well, one of the 2 other candidates is thoroughly rooted in the current political climate, and my guess is their cards are on her now. then you get a sweeter toned voice with the same political content.. but the other candidate is apparently young and alternative, and usually they will play it in a way as to make people belief the next representative of the (an) establishment is an alternative.
simply put, if they get her in that position, and looks like they plan that, in another 5 or 10 years somewhere a heap of documents might turn up that show her as a trustee informer.
ofcourse i am not sure about it, but it is with oppositions in suspect systems a lot and it is with elections that bring for the outside corporate world unwanted change , a lot.
to this and also cote 'divoire i still have the following to say. i am basically against people staying in charge of ill understood things like political entity's. even if they don't intend to , the longer they stay the more they settle, and perhaps even worse, the more this settling takes a materialist direction. it is more so when the nation is less informed. ie. poorer and less educated.
that is because in such societys more rather simple routes to power are open. not uncommonly there is some great reference for authority, and even when people are not corrupt they are very much used to bargain for their needs and wishes with material means. its easier to be corrupt in a poor nation.
as a result i have a great distrust for any kind of establishments in poor nations.
personally i think about ivory coast it is good when gbagbo leaves. he is there for some time now, and my impression is the phase of constructivity for him is over, and the phase of entrenchment
has already arrived. he will not only entrench his own position, but might be entrenching whole social layers. that would go to christians and as a result society would actually be polarising.
however if he remains the support of the army, my impression is there is nothing the ic ("international community") will do. they want to 'sit around one table' with him, to write contracts etc. still, would he win the next 'elections'.
hes not even a nice man to sit around tables with him i understand. its more about the contracts then the table.
but it's also safety , if some kind of rebels with a remotely islamic background fight a dictators army we know who's side they will choose, and who will still be safe in ivory coast then.
must note to this that in so far i know he isnt among the very meanest of potentats, and in how far he tried to make ivory coast a better place is also a question unanswered for now.
however it is obvious he hasnt been able to breach the division. it is also obvious neither the international climate nor the circumstance of having a split muslim christian population to africa itself, are very conductive to that.
last but not least it is obvious doing so in westafrica is not necessarilly easy.
on a sidenote elderly woman and children, (few and thus mostly rich ones btw), are allowed to flee even if so far things are somewhat calm. it doesnt mean much except there is still some freedom of movement. ask palestineans about what freedom of movement menas, or iraki, it's not nothing. it's not a typical muslim thing either if i am fair.
in a cultural way, but also literrally muslim society is predictably more restrictive even then a re-restricting european society not uncommonly.
it stands for the social immobillity also, physical mobility promotes and facilitates social mobility.
you have to look at it with some courage, then it is even worse, people staying all their lives in one village, one region, are socially immobilised and easily can be used as an obstacle for social advances. (being old fashioned and narrowminded they tend to vote way more conservative then their interests lay, for example.)
that is nothing muslim of trikont, it's essential in maintaining status quo everywhere in europe and all over the united states exactly and not coincedentually so.
ok. ill do the next bit, that got me so wary i quit all the reading for a while,
dadis cammara.
you remember the guy from guinee? the guy that made the increasingly less impressive media appearances? ofcourse there have been some exceptions. although guinee is not a great mess after he left, wich should be surprising in the light of the many complaints and reproaches.
if you read their reports that is certainly surprising. btw the question arrives why do these reports that are essentially medical make such a job out of portraying him (negatively).
no matter what contempt he met in morocco he was still welcome in burkina faso, it suits everyone, and that in turn suits burkino faso that is in the hands of some coup takers that killed the hero of the people for more then 10 years now.
note, gbagbo has them as an allie.
camara himself is a sad case, with part two of the report missing, and him receiving an old bullet in his head in the betweens, the conclusions that can be drawn is pervert pleasures are common to the projected readers of these documents, and that sth. is the matter with the whole case.
allthough i feel pitty for him, perhaps undeserved, it is not completely clear to me what is his condition. not suit to rule.. so much is made painfully obvious.
meanwhile back in connary the people still shiver from fear for him. and voices to bring him back magnify their fears enough that renewing the nations dealing has so far proven illusive.
i again wonder if that is so much a bug as really a feature.
however if he really set up militia "everywhere" things would be a bit scary.
you can perhaps guess why it made me stop reading. a very distastefull story and full of insecuritys i can hardly expect to be reported on by 'diplomatic cables' (released to army personal).
ok.. on with the reading, i am glad new things arrived. in between all that aljazeera published some detail i haven't yet read and will btw not be specifically looking for allthough i will be interested if it happens to be between my picks) about... aljazeera.
rotfl. you know, i publish there a little, and certainly love to be critical about them. however the accusation (that for Qatari political interests they be a willing tool and would even shut down for a year) seems either farfetched or strongly exagerated.
aljazeera is somewhat of a political tool, (like all media) and very often on the exact lines of usian propaganda, pressfreedom, but also in choices and picks. only if the public opinion is aware of the discrepancy you can be very sure aljazeera will also be critical, they don't usually steer in the nato's soups.(1)
in one case i noticed their reporting was strongly influenced by arab prejudice. sth about oceania it was. but i reacted to it and an example as extreme i havent again seen. in a few cases individual reporters , contributors, bloggers, whatever, do the same, but they are far and between.
topics that are in the news get a decent and impartial coverage compared to other newsoutlets.
(allthough you could interprete the sympathy with the underdog as partial in a statistical way,
there should be no surprise that opinions of for example muslims and indigenious people are better represented then elsewhere.)
besides that if there is one agenda they are serving it is the nato's. if nato decides to waste every article with a few standard agiprop phrases (like everything about northkorea endlessly repeating about the boat sunk without questionmarks) al jazeera loyally joins in.
i guess ppl will say : you see!? but there are just to many examples of endless repetition of known "facts", to leave that credible. another one is every article about haiti mentioning that a some official said "otherways everyone will have cholera". alltho that one did not go unnoticed either, it is mentioned everytime and not critisized explicitly.
i see no practical possibillity they would stop broadcast for a year. well maybe that was 12 years ago or so. when they didnt have this much of a regular and broad service.
but what was long ago, and when things were different then now, should not be the light we put things in.
1) it is indeed on the positive side about qatar, although even there renewing. in the least in cases, maybe over the whole. and to be honest, qatar (and bahrein, dubai, uae) are somehow part of the nato soup.
the note taking system didnt' work, i don't take notes(yet). i think of them sometimes.
4-12-2010 was an interesting day there because so many of the docs confirmed positions taken.
for example i started out with the document on chinas press freedom. the one about coverage of the partycongress specifically. perhaps without notes it is actually better btw. less of a danger to any kinds of sources. (not only theirs or the chinese)
but thats like scaremongering. these people managed to function very often on high levels for many years. the usual autocrat regime will definitily keep an eye on whatever contacts of their keypersonal. "do they talk with an ambassador" and next.. about what have they been talking.
even if i don't trust usian reports and perhaps 'would-be' reports, they show very well that the usual official meeting gets registered and reported. i am somewhat convinced it is hardly feasible to be a regular contact of say the consulate in beijng and have noone noticing.
it may also be in causal relation that relatively many of their contacts are relatively senior. outside a less precise insight in chinas prioritys usual people don't have so many excuses to meet.
the document about reporting of the congress didnt manage to make a very credible impression. to much of the 'press freedom rhetorics'. that besides, i would guess the content about the partycongress coverage is somewhat correct. if i am not mistaken aljazeera wrote on the same line about the event. (it was a bit boring and supported to little the public discussion)
that might not mean much ofcourse, except that aljazeera has many very professional journalists that do have a professional interresse in coverage.
in so far that part of the information is also an open door. it confirms for anybody to read it that has been interested in the event what i assume several papers wrote.
generally i think what all our papers write about such an event is screened. allthough perhaps not allways. i also wondered if the subjects didnt raise the attention of more chinese then doc . suggested. at some point the chinese informer himself seems to be relating exactly the kind of stuf usia wants to hear, and i must say the doument made a quite insincere impression on me.
it's a bit hard to guess if perhaps at top level they are also confirming their own biases here.
yet the document is revealing.
it's so full of supposed western pressfreedom that it strongly suggests wikileaks shouldn't be any problem at all.
next i read some about google in china, 1 percent of the links gets censored, now i would hate to know 1 percent of my links to be censored, besides probably way more actually are , that is.
of what remains to have 1 political percent censored would never be a help ofcourse. it depends then what is actually being censored in china except pornography.
stuff like chen a minh square is. ok surprising, and crazy i admit. but stuf about violent incidents through the police here gets routinely censored to the extent hardly anyone has an idea what kind of things go on and can go on. the very subjects of a demonstration, or arrests, let alone an activist campaign are routinely smeared and misinformed about, and very lousily documented through the somewhat more official and financially strong media.
so besides ofcourse killing people and driving over them with tanks is an extreme case even in a nation with a billion people, a similar or very similar incident might well be censored. theres no webpages about the heroism of the french urban resistance recently, and if there are any they are surely not easy to find or government sponsored.
don't want to say it is the same, but its damn similar. take for example haiti. if i understood the papers well there will be a change of power (however relative in some of the possible outcomes.)
i hope there will, the past ten (20 maybe even by now) years it has been painfully obvious haitians don't trust the governemnt they have. and want another, and that the capitalist proprietary class is kept in charge over the "silly black people".
(if you dont vote quietly you will all get cholera, is the central slogan of every recent government- public interaction in haiti. note that sth like that would show up in diplomatical correspondence, and that thus far stuff like that remains remarkably absent and out of view. allthough not in the wider application , of projected morality and problems).
thats intimidation and probably worse. blackmail. noone wants their children to get cholera, not even if you are in a hopeless position in a camp after centurys of oppression. it might rather make more of an impression. you know afterall what they have been doing to your people for century's.
the good news is that since today (would wikileaks have made a deal..) international organisations support a some transition of power. theres bad news there as well, one of the 2 other candidates is thoroughly rooted in the current political climate, and my guess is their cards are on her now. then you get a sweeter toned voice with the same political content.. but the other candidate is apparently young and alternative, and usually they will play it in a way as to make people belief the next representative of the (an) establishment is an alternative.
simply put, if they get her in that position, and looks like they plan that, in another 5 or 10 years somewhere a heap of documents might turn up that show her as a trustee informer.
ofcourse i am not sure about it, but it is with oppositions in suspect systems a lot and it is with elections that bring for the outside corporate world unwanted change , a lot.
to this and also cote 'divoire i still have the following to say. i am basically against people staying in charge of ill understood things like political entity's. even if they don't intend to , the longer they stay the more they settle, and perhaps even worse, the more this settling takes a materialist direction. it is more so when the nation is less informed. ie. poorer and less educated.
that is because in such societys more rather simple routes to power are open. not uncommonly there is some great reference for authority, and even when people are not corrupt they are very much used to bargain for their needs and wishes with material means. its easier to be corrupt in a poor nation.
as a result i have a great distrust for any kind of establishments in poor nations.
personally i think about ivory coast it is good when gbagbo leaves. he is there for some time now, and my impression is the phase of constructivity for him is over, and the phase of entrenchment
has already arrived. he will not only entrench his own position, but might be entrenching whole social layers. that would go to christians and as a result society would actually be polarising.
however if he remains the support of the army, my impression is there is nothing the ic ("international community") will do. they want to 'sit around one table' with him, to write contracts etc. still, would he win the next 'elections'.
hes not even a nice man to sit around tables with him i understand. its more about the contracts then the table.
but it's also safety , if some kind of rebels with a remotely islamic background fight a dictators army we know who's side they will choose, and who will still be safe in ivory coast then.
must note to this that in so far i know he isnt among the very meanest of potentats, and in how far he tried to make ivory coast a better place is also a question unanswered for now.
however it is obvious he hasnt been able to breach the division. it is also obvious neither the international climate nor the circumstance of having a split muslim christian population to africa itself, are very conductive to that.
last but not least it is obvious doing so in westafrica is not necessarilly easy.
on a sidenote elderly woman and children, (few and thus mostly rich ones btw), are allowed to flee even if so far things are somewhat calm. it doesnt mean much except there is still some freedom of movement. ask palestineans about what freedom of movement menas, or iraki, it's not nothing. it's not a typical muslim thing either if i am fair.
in a cultural way, but also literrally muslim society is predictably more restrictive even then a re-restricting european society not uncommonly.
it stands for the social immobillity also, physical mobility promotes and facilitates social mobility.
you have to look at it with some courage, then it is even worse, people staying all their lives in one village, one region, are socially immobilised and easily can be used as an obstacle for social advances. (being old fashioned and narrowminded they tend to vote way more conservative then their interests lay, for example.)
that is nothing muslim of trikont, it's essential in maintaining status quo everywhere in europe and all over the united states exactly and not coincedentually so.
ok. ill do the next bit, that got me so wary i quit all the reading for a while,
dadis cammara.
you remember the guy from guinee? the guy that made the increasingly less impressive media appearances? ofcourse there have been some exceptions. although guinee is not a great mess after he left, wich should be surprising in the light of the many complaints and reproaches.
if you read their reports that is certainly surprising. btw the question arrives why do these reports that are essentially medical make such a job out of portraying him (negatively).
no matter what contempt he met in morocco he was still welcome in burkina faso, it suits everyone, and that in turn suits burkino faso that is in the hands of some coup takers that killed the hero of the people for more then 10 years now.
note, gbagbo has them as an allie.
camara himself is a sad case, with part two of the report missing, and him receiving an old bullet in his head in the betweens, the conclusions that can be drawn is pervert pleasures are common to the projected readers of these documents, and that sth. is the matter with the whole case.
allthough i feel pitty for him, perhaps undeserved, it is not completely clear to me what is his condition. not suit to rule.. so much is made painfully obvious.
meanwhile back in connary the people still shiver from fear for him. and voices to bring him back magnify their fears enough that renewing the nations dealing has so far proven illusive.
i again wonder if that is so much a bug as really a feature.
however if he really set up militia "everywhere" things would be a bit scary.
you can perhaps guess why it made me stop reading. a very distastefull story and full of insecuritys i can hardly expect to be reported on by 'diplomatic cables' (released to army personal).
ok.. on with the reading, i am glad new things arrived. in between all that aljazeera published some detail i haven't yet read and will btw not be specifically looking for allthough i will be interested if it happens to be between my picks) about... aljazeera.
rotfl. you know, i publish there a little, and certainly love to be critical about them. however the accusation (that for Qatari political interests they be a willing tool and would even shut down for a year) seems either farfetched or strongly exagerated.
aljazeera is somewhat of a political tool, (like all media) and very often on the exact lines of usian propaganda, pressfreedom, but also in choices and picks. only if the public opinion is aware of the discrepancy you can be very sure aljazeera will also be critical, they don't usually steer in the nato's soups.(1)
in one case i noticed their reporting was strongly influenced by arab prejudice. sth about oceania it was. but i reacted to it and an example as extreme i havent again seen. in a few cases individual reporters , contributors, bloggers, whatever, do the same, but they are far and between.
topics that are in the news get a decent and impartial coverage compared to other newsoutlets.
(allthough you could interprete the sympathy with the underdog as partial in a statistical way,
there should be no surprise that opinions of for example muslims and indigenious people are better represented then elsewhere.)
besides that if there is one agenda they are serving it is the nato's. if nato decides to waste every article with a few standard agiprop phrases (like everything about northkorea endlessly repeating about the boat sunk without questionmarks) al jazeera loyally joins in.
i guess ppl will say : you see!? but there are just to many examples of endless repetition of known "facts", to leave that credible. another one is every article about haiti mentioning that a some official said "otherways everyone will have cholera". alltho that one did not go unnoticed either, it is mentioned everytime and not critisized explicitly.
i see no practical possibillity they would stop broadcast for a year. well maybe that was 12 years ago or so. when they didnt have this much of a regular and broad service.
but what was long ago, and when things were different then now, should not be the light we put things in.
1) it is indeed on the positive side about qatar, although even there renewing. in the least in cases, maybe over the whole. and to be honest, qatar (and bahrein, dubai, uae) are somehow part of the nato soup.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
leaky
finally a post about richard leakey... well no, he wasn't a very meticulous scientist. allthough he did have the creativity to look at the right place, that might well have been a result to classified acces to definite informations..
I have been taking some more peeks at the cables, and it feels like a responsability to write about the things. sometimes i can't even put a finger on why they make me think certain things, about a conspiracy. like this or like that.
it's a bit like the elections in ivory coast i guess, notwithstanding hillarys patronage, they had to scrap the result in the 7 northern (muslim? well usually northern equals muslim in westafrica) provinces.
so its all in the balance of power. to put it openly, i am not even against it. it may be the result of propaganda, but i am under the impression that in the 21st (and late 20th probably) century so far muslims are safer under christians then the other way around.
nothing absolute, just a development gap i am sure. before another 400 or so years, there wasn't the slightest difference, and that we have gbagbo may well be a result of that circumstance.
that besides gbagbo is a bit of a despot i think, but i am not sure, it's just that every westafrican longstanding leader falls into that category with me. so maybe the west is betting on the wrong horse. in the long run then. in the medium term i think their contracts will be pretty safe, with him needing extra training of security troops etc. now.
actually i even think of him as probably corrupt, however if it sticks to what i already mentioned, bussiness contracts with the western multinationals, well then it isn't as bad as it can get.
some dark place in my memory suggests otherwise, but i will not be trying to compile a short history and impression of that nation. i am trying to write about the leaked cables.
i find it hard to say the right thing, for one thing it is quite a heap even if only 667 had been released yesterday, for another thing it touches on very many very relevant subjects.
(although perhaps some of them don't deserve to feature so prominently)
a third problem is i can deduce some things, i can guess a few more, and my instinct tells me there is something the matter about still more, but doubts allways remain.
people have their personal biases to name one, some of these biases you even need to get higher up in this world. (and i think that is what makes politics so stupid sometimes).
economy to name one, you have to have a holy belief in economy and it's 'laws' (more or less complicated versions of " i want more") to talk all day as if it makes a difference if you rule capitalist or good.
i have a personal bias against people invoking 'economics' as a result. so even my observation could be clouded by bias.
nonetheless i have fought bias my life long and i am aware that such is helpfull.
so the biggest problem is the mass of material, i read through a doc. or 2 or 3 or 4. and in the march i have my ideas, and sometimes analyses.(meaning i could support the idea by eg. quoting from the document) the problem is even bigger because i dont trust the documents very much let alone completely, so perhaps it is interesting to touch on that.
i am not going to generalise , i don't even have the tools for it;) but every document i have seen so far received some personal attention, with the view of not telling to much, not confronting the existing ideas in the usian military, not giving an ineffective impression (allthough i think usia has quite some smart diplomats as a result of reading it)
so on the first desk it may be selfcensored, partly from reports that might be censored in someone or somewhats interesses, next it goes somewhere, to a usian ministry usually, and it gets cleared(censored) for sipnet.
perhaps it got screened in between, condoleeza you could bother with some awfull detail about woman, (she definitily hated it), but clinton?
(not sure if it worked like that but you get the idea)
there are cases that intelligence services go for the censored versions of the storys. and there are cases that usian diplomats suffer from wishfull thinking themselves.
all in all it makes a credible impression as huge pile or worked documents that , and that is the real historical point of them) made their impact , in this version or a (slightly) more elaborate, informative, dirty, one.
some documents also appear as credible as complete fabrications. one stood out, but i havent memorised wich one. probably i didnt read it as thoroughly, if i think, oh crap, this is crap and the next paragraph i think,... only crap. i rather go for the next doc then annoy myself more.
ok those are subjects i have seen crapped about more then this so np. is what i think than. it's a bit like reading the commercial newsoutlets (confirming that same thing so the check is pretty much in that i know the newsstory didn't hold ).
to give a current example, initial reporting mentioned that the korea incident followed on usian exercises, well not anymore , not after 1 day or so after the incident. then all news got censored.
so if i would see a doc that would confirm that circumstance,(there was no usian exercise going) i know it is crap.
however that a part of a document serves to convince the lower echolonned readers, doesnt mean the rest of it could not be carrying a kernel of reality somewhere.
yes i stay cynical for a long time before jumping into conclusions.
next many of them appear rather genuine. perhaps doctored, but the conversation took place, and ,although cleared, some of the detail was really mentioned. (i think not allways all)
i think i saw one that was really from the hand of clinton. well a thing like that is very fascinating to begin with. whats the personality as a professional, do i see a personal approach?
it left an ok impression. smart, rather some personal focus, but perhaps a bit stubborn, you don't get what you want by repeating it , even to your servants.
in that sense she should try to be a tad more flexible. won't be easy, it is the hardest thing there is, changing yourself, and her ways have amongst things led to the succes of obama getting elected. she deserves the plume there.
that besides, it is just my impression, it is well possible that a more pragmatical attitude is quite unworkable in the usian political scene.
however i wouldn't favour that to extend into my correspondence,
you may wonder if it is coincedence, the army and as a result much of the secret services (and by extension the diplomatical corps) are a typical republican thing (the nuke m mentality is, selling guns is, and most of the recent presidents were, there is why.)
so you have to account they will portray hillary in a less favourable light then would the original author have been mccain. (i dont think palin would have the quality).
gosh it might even be funny, oh well, she must have some merits, being smarter and more human then huckabee for one thing is something that is not so hard to do.
(i thought butchers were not allowed even in usian jury's, man can you be wrong)
i acknowledge i think he is a psychopath for coming up with nothing more creative and constructive then he did, worse even, a sociopath.
there's so many observations to make, israel eg. so far is remarkably absent, oh yes there is one i read, an assesment of how eagerly israel would attack iran somewhat on their own iniative.
must say usia shows some restraint, no matter they appear to leave the option to support that open. take me litterally, some restraint is some restraint, not hardly any, not a lot, but it means they are not riding their chairs for exceitement by the idea, and so maybe the iranians and the world will be spared this next greatwar project.
on some occasions it gets pretty sinister. these usually involve armstrade, when armstradedeals are subsubject (meaning they are majorly part of the subject but usually indicated before explicated, and touched upon before described precisely) it can get really very sinister.
to be sure about if armstrade and war are not regarded an asset with it's own value i'd have to read a bit more. and to erase the impression it should actually be rather different. meaning
i think it is sinister, when i read parts with armstrades in (or left out) i get uncanny. sometimes i think it is selling arms and faring war for the sake of the industry and that diplomacy is for the sake of that as well. such parts can be real challenges, especially when the impression is strong but the indications very meagre.(1)
"reading between the lines" .
i allways considered it an art, and childoff i am used that the socalled free media, had no other means to express. as a result i assume some diplomats and politicians also have the capacity to write and read between the lines.
uncanny.
i get back on topic soon, perhaps ill take notes and give examples to all in my next post.
however i am quite used to working with no archive but my mind, it is a big step.
(1) it is worth spending a few words to elaborate on this. in some cases i have the impression all of it is luggage, except the most farfetched implications of 'reading between the lines' and that they indicate they are actually plotting wars / armed violence. even in documents that stress democracy etc. a lot, so that it would mean they are consciously faking such messages, and that a (probably small?) part of recipients would still, i can't think of another expression, find pervers pleasure.
i hope i am paranoid and oversensitive there. The picture of an all dominant political entity (for example they are the boss of the EU and the nations therein) with at least some good intentions (and trying to trade arms) is less scary then this. will try and pay attention.
I have been taking some more peeks at the cables, and it feels like a responsability to write about the things. sometimes i can't even put a finger on why they make me think certain things, about a conspiracy. like this or like that.
it's a bit like the elections in ivory coast i guess, notwithstanding hillarys patronage, they had to scrap the result in the 7 northern (muslim? well usually northern equals muslim in westafrica) provinces.
so its all in the balance of power. to put it openly, i am not even against it. it may be the result of propaganda, but i am under the impression that in the 21st (and late 20th probably) century so far muslims are safer under christians then the other way around.
nothing absolute, just a development gap i am sure. before another 400 or so years, there wasn't the slightest difference, and that we have gbagbo may well be a result of that circumstance.
that besides gbagbo is a bit of a despot i think, but i am not sure, it's just that every westafrican longstanding leader falls into that category with me. so maybe the west is betting on the wrong horse. in the long run then. in the medium term i think their contracts will be pretty safe, with him needing extra training of security troops etc. now.
actually i even think of him as probably corrupt, however if it sticks to what i already mentioned, bussiness contracts with the western multinationals, well then it isn't as bad as it can get.
some dark place in my memory suggests otherwise, but i will not be trying to compile a short history and impression of that nation. i am trying to write about the leaked cables.
i find it hard to say the right thing, for one thing it is quite a heap even if only 667 had been released yesterday, for another thing it touches on very many very relevant subjects.
(although perhaps some of them don't deserve to feature so prominently)
a third problem is i can deduce some things, i can guess a few more, and my instinct tells me there is something the matter about still more, but doubts allways remain.
people have their personal biases to name one, some of these biases you even need to get higher up in this world. (and i think that is what makes politics so stupid sometimes).
economy to name one, you have to have a holy belief in economy and it's 'laws' (more or less complicated versions of " i want more") to talk all day as if it makes a difference if you rule capitalist or good.
i have a personal bias against people invoking 'economics' as a result. so even my observation could be clouded by bias.
nonetheless i have fought bias my life long and i am aware that such is helpfull.
so the biggest problem is the mass of material, i read through a doc. or 2 or 3 or 4. and in the march i have my ideas, and sometimes analyses.(meaning i could support the idea by eg. quoting from the document) the problem is even bigger because i dont trust the documents very much let alone completely, so perhaps it is interesting to touch on that.
i am not going to generalise , i don't even have the tools for it;) but every document i have seen so far received some personal attention, with the view of not telling to much, not confronting the existing ideas in the usian military, not giving an ineffective impression (allthough i think usia has quite some smart diplomats as a result of reading it)
so on the first desk it may be selfcensored, partly from reports that might be censored in someone or somewhats interesses, next it goes somewhere, to a usian ministry usually, and it gets cleared(censored) for sipnet.
perhaps it got screened in between, condoleeza you could bother with some awfull detail about woman, (she definitily hated it), but clinton?
(not sure if it worked like that but you get the idea)
there are cases that intelligence services go for the censored versions of the storys. and there are cases that usian diplomats suffer from wishfull thinking themselves.
all in all it makes a credible impression as huge pile or worked documents that , and that is the real historical point of them) made their impact , in this version or a (slightly) more elaborate, informative, dirty, one.
some documents also appear as credible as complete fabrications. one stood out, but i havent memorised wich one. probably i didnt read it as thoroughly, if i think, oh crap, this is crap and the next paragraph i think,... only crap. i rather go for the next doc then annoy myself more.
ok those are subjects i have seen crapped about more then this so np. is what i think than. it's a bit like reading the commercial newsoutlets (confirming that same thing so the check is pretty much in that i know the newsstory didn't hold ).
to give a current example, initial reporting mentioned that the korea incident followed on usian exercises, well not anymore , not after 1 day or so after the incident. then all news got censored.
so if i would see a doc that would confirm that circumstance,(there was no usian exercise going) i know it is crap.
however that a part of a document serves to convince the lower echolonned readers, doesnt mean the rest of it could not be carrying a kernel of reality somewhere.
yes i stay cynical for a long time before jumping into conclusions.
next many of them appear rather genuine. perhaps doctored, but the conversation took place, and ,although cleared, some of the detail was really mentioned. (i think not allways all)
i think i saw one that was really from the hand of clinton. well a thing like that is very fascinating to begin with. whats the personality as a professional, do i see a personal approach?
it left an ok impression. smart, rather some personal focus, but perhaps a bit stubborn, you don't get what you want by repeating it , even to your servants.
in that sense she should try to be a tad more flexible. won't be easy, it is the hardest thing there is, changing yourself, and her ways have amongst things led to the succes of obama getting elected. she deserves the plume there.
that besides, it is just my impression, it is well possible that a more pragmatical attitude is quite unworkable in the usian political scene.
however i wouldn't favour that to extend into my correspondence,
you may wonder if it is coincedence, the army and as a result much of the secret services (and by extension the diplomatical corps) are a typical republican thing (the nuke m mentality is, selling guns is, and most of the recent presidents were, there is why.)
so you have to account they will portray hillary in a less favourable light then would the original author have been mccain. (i dont think palin would have the quality).
gosh it might even be funny, oh well, she must have some merits, being smarter and more human then huckabee for one thing is something that is not so hard to do.
(i thought butchers were not allowed even in usian jury's, man can you be wrong)
i acknowledge i think he is a psychopath for coming up with nothing more creative and constructive then he did, worse even, a sociopath.
there's so many observations to make, israel eg. so far is remarkably absent, oh yes there is one i read, an assesment of how eagerly israel would attack iran somewhat on their own iniative.
must say usia shows some restraint, no matter they appear to leave the option to support that open. take me litterally, some restraint is some restraint, not hardly any, not a lot, but it means they are not riding their chairs for exceitement by the idea, and so maybe the iranians and the world will be spared this next greatwar project.
on some occasions it gets pretty sinister. these usually involve armstrade, when armstradedeals are subsubject (meaning they are majorly part of the subject but usually indicated before explicated, and touched upon before described precisely) it can get really very sinister.
to be sure about if armstrade and war are not regarded an asset with it's own value i'd have to read a bit more. and to erase the impression it should actually be rather different. meaning
i think it is sinister, when i read parts with armstrades in (or left out) i get uncanny. sometimes i think it is selling arms and faring war for the sake of the industry and that diplomacy is for the sake of that as well. such parts can be real challenges, especially when the impression is strong but the indications very meagre.(1)
"reading between the lines" .
i allways considered it an art, and childoff i am used that the socalled free media, had no other means to express. as a result i assume some diplomats and politicians also have the capacity to write and read between the lines.
uncanny.
i get back on topic soon, perhaps ill take notes and give examples to all in my next post.
however i am quite used to working with no archive but my mind, it is a big step.
(1) it is worth spending a few words to elaborate on this. in some cases i have the impression all of it is luggage, except the most farfetched implications of 'reading between the lines' and that they indicate they are actually plotting wars / armed violence. even in documents that stress democracy etc. a lot, so that it would mean they are consciously faking such messages, and that a (probably small?) part of recipients would still, i can't think of another expression, find pervers pleasure.
i hope i am paranoid and oversensitive there. The picture of an all dominant political entity (for example they are the boss of the EU and the nations therein) with at least some good intentions (and trying to trade arms) is less scary then this. will try and pay attention.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
leakage
it's crude, it got published, my mum said clinton did not enjoy her transparancy role. dunno about that, i mean if you don't like to be as corrupt as to do sth you rather just not do it isn't;)
'higher' diplomacy ..
that's all very fine and i know little less. in the personal my impressions are not implausible, that's also helpfull. It's weird with ideas, like a famous russian neonazi explained, a jewish mum helps, and blessings and curses work for 7 generations do they?
bugger, people will stop reading, nah that is biases for, to autocensure the biased. as the saying goes, they allways say it themselves;)
funny again intelligence tried that, to have their covers better under by being informed, but it trended to turn the coppers, so they are more easy to catch again.
whats it to be a slave of a system, of any of the intrinsically corrupt policeapparatus, eg.
like hillary, instead of saying the republicans in congress i fear, she plays the masculin hero calling for rudeness and vengeance. the "bad man" to everyones robin.
obama was down for signing (his first? yes i guess) deathpenalty, or so the story goes.
got used to it i guess. in the stronger terms. the clichee, the things you find in dispatches.
okay should i explain what makes a secretary state compromise on her feelings? except money i mean? maybe, but i am not gonna. not interested.
it's not i am gay or sth? you cant be carefull enough with the witchhunt on blowers of every tune. Odinga did that today, and it was enough to tell uganda is seeking that witchhunt as well. go figure what bloodlet is left in the education they lusted. oh well they are in usian peacearmy now so its allright.
it's not the topic, tho, just making a game out of it.
topic is feminism. hillary suits as an intro.
i have been a feminist for as long as i can remember.
i don't know if i have to thank my father for it, he used to shout unreasonably about me, and so did he about feminists (not even sure he did, he did about plenty of people) maybe it wasnt that, but for the idea, so i thought, , hey this is the unreasonable thing. they must as much as me be right to be the target of such rude abuses.
maybe it wsnt it, but maybe it was, my mum was sorttoff a latent feminist for all her life, she went on to be really emancipated, but in familys with jewish roots afaik that is nothing unusual, or at least, she needn't be a feminist for me to be a functional adult in the centre of our cosmosses.
i don't think she sympathised with feminism loudly, but i guess somewhiles she contradicted the big bad dad on the subject, so i knew what it was at. i am not sure, i have no clear emmory on any of this, perhaps i could read before they used the word, in wich case i probably read it in the paper when i was 6, 7 maybe. 6 i bet, i remember the 69 war from the papers.. (the 6 day war in israel, heh i talked about cairo with people, didn't know noone understood that yet. wonder what they thought:D. i understood it:) (believe it or not most people these days probs dont have an idea the two relate or have anything to do with no matter what, dutch politics adults would not usually understand when i was a kid, at home they would, dad to get angry:D)
you see this hasnt much to do with feminism atm, that is because it is a difficult subject.
on that question i'd answer yes, i guess yes i thought my mum needed heaps of it, quite that rather emancipated.
then again i was on her side as a matter of cause wasn't i? i think i told him oncw i agreed with feminism, anyhow i was like that, if i disagreed i made it known in a substantiated perhaps even poetical way to the dad thing, it might hurt me, well i just didn't like injustice.
i flatter myself when i think about what followed, changed the whole parential concept for the freaking world:p
when i was a child, woman had as little to say about a child as in kosovo, fortress hillary kosovo ..
thats usefull to know, in the 1960s the civil codex for parential care was at the level of the sharia.
lol
yes i flatter myself about that. (picasso himself hints he gave away the paintings btw, and if he knew them so well he wouldnt have complained of missing them, screw you rich guys, hand the man his 300 million euro it is worth at least. (i guess tehy'd shoot him shortly after ..)
anyhow picasso tells us somewhere in a interview that he has a surprise waiting, in the sense of paintings of his, still after his death, that it would be good for a laugh:) except that i remember that, it shows i liked art and was apt at ebcoming sth like picasso (good sales, not to much of a job)
ended up i thought other things more relevant and that ended with being a critics and a freewheeling 'analyst'. so what with feminism.
i dont really think as a child i had a the feminist problem much, later it has been very important for me, and allthough my relations with girls were not splendid (wearing glasses being quite a nerd and uhm, i think my mums relgious persevrance of the antisexuality perhaps found fertile ground in the innocent child? my father wouldn't have been to much of a help, so what is callerd in netherlands "het gereformeerden syndroom". i guess, maybe it was even different.
after all i was quite right children dont have that great differences.
my first feminist memory that has made a great impression on me i was perhaps 10 or so, maybe a bit older, even 14, i never hurried in getting old, so i don't know for sure,
i used to sit sometimes in the village in public places, crowded places, in front of the supermarket eg. watching the people go by, it interested me, they knew i liked to do it i think, some asked me why i sat there and looked, i explained, everything was ok. being a boy and having what some boys have i payed some extra attention to girls, can't help it, sometimes i did. not very consciously i think, i just remember them more easily, one day
guess it wasn't the first time i recognised people i had seen before, i recognised the mothers with children, i must have been sitting there for a year :o not allways ofcourse.
they were the girls from past year, i was completely surprised, not that girls got babys, but that it went so quickly, i was shocked actually.
last year they were pretty fine young girls , really young and often really pretty, blond usually, bleeched i know now, some were really pretty, that i could easily remember them for a year.
and now, they were mothers. i wasn't against mothers, but there was a difference, girls had small noses, mothers big. quite a few such differences i had allways seen between girls and mothers,
i don't want to mention them, it would be a row. as i had observed there was nothing positive for the girls to become a mother, not for the girls that. but i had allways assumed it went slowly,
that it would take 6 maybe 10 years, the girls thought of me, i went home, thought of them, thought it exciting they thought of me. still don't know my age at the time 10-13 i think.
i spend time that time watching the people, i spend more time then ever paying attention to young mothers, after i was sure i went, i don't think i ever watched people in the same way again, hardly on the places, in no great amount.
for me it has allways been a part of my feminist inspiration, the idea that that was wrong, that pretty charming happy positive girls in one year were forced to get big noses.
they were not treated right, there really wasn't a way to achieve that without giving someone hardship, an incredible burden to girls wholly unprepared, and no very well treatment besides.
so much was medically obvious.
(i can be a bit quick with my judgements)
perhaps you think it has not been my inspiration but i have never forgotten it.
so when we got that in school it was old news anyway, i think it was mainly treated in the secondairy, 'feminism' i s'pose with it's functional applications it is now more often called emancipation in the compendium, and got changed over to history, that what we don't know about. can know but most don't.
it was in social education. maybe there is a term more close, social history. it told people that you can vote etc. why u can vote, who invented the voting, ofcourse that in netherlands you ended up with really little to say, and the history of that. usefull stuf allthough there is hardly a student , let alone a nut like me, waiting for an extra study.
i liked it. the teacher smelled, allways, someone else must have written that, he allways did.
nice guy btw, i really think i tried to support the ordre in his class, what will he have thought:S.
i stop here or i will become indiscrete. there is not much about that. and i doubt he would mind, i wonder what great job he is smelly at now, if at a school they must have either got him married or cleaned up another way? does it still exist? i wonder, teachers that really smell?
good way to get rid of a dumb job anyhow.
crazy, never thought about what forced him to do this kind of labour, or what allowed him so.
i think i once heard he's a history teacher now, but i am a terrorist you know, he was part of the authoritarian clique, idiots with syndromes like my fathers.
when i asked after him i may even have thought i was politically challenged (quite that),
i wonder whats his syndrome, i thought at some time perhaps korea, he never told, i think he said he hadn't.
i was so small i asked, also not once?
he would buy that kind of stuff you know.
i think perhaps he had'nt been personally active, he said so it correlated with stuff, he kept his uniform, oh i was a child and he explained how mostly for the russians there, he didn't like it, allthough it shaped his life, well it symbolised his failure as a scientist perhaps, because of poverty.
he disliked perhaps even hated weapons, i think he *didn't* carry a weapon. went through the war and all that.
oh yes i realise, his was a child abuse syndrome probably.
k terrible, my post about feminism will still have to wait for some time, will it?
gl so far,
hillary and obama should use the usual facistoid nice pictures a bit more for some reason, or is it to credible to have a crisis as a democrat.(time to do some real bad pictures else bush 'll win the next elections for the reps)
really the only recent nice picture was when the two looked so nice together in the sweet role of wonderfull coordination. glad to see you team yourself better then i do.
saw that picture? the two really being really togetherish over their governing role? hard to explain, obama is quite a great man with knowledge almost like a usual man.
nothing new about the us personal intelligence prop still being for the us personal really is it?
'higher' diplomacy ..
that's all very fine and i know little less. in the personal my impressions are not implausible, that's also helpfull. It's weird with ideas, like a famous russian neonazi explained, a jewish mum helps, and blessings and curses work for 7 generations do they?
bugger, people will stop reading, nah that is biases for, to autocensure the biased. as the saying goes, they allways say it themselves;)
funny again intelligence tried that, to have their covers better under by being informed, but it trended to turn the coppers, so they are more easy to catch again.
whats it to be a slave of a system, of any of the intrinsically corrupt policeapparatus, eg.
like hillary, instead of saying the republicans in congress i fear, she plays the masculin hero calling for rudeness and vengeance. the "bad man" to everyones robin.
obama was down for signing (his first? yes i guess) deathpenalty, or so the story goes.
got used to it i guess. in the stronger terms. the clichee, the things you find in dispatches.
okay should i explain what makes a secretary state compromise on her feelings? except money i mean? maybe, but i am not gonna. not interested.
it's not i am gay or sth? you cant be carefull enough with the witchhunt on blowers of every tune. Odinga did that today, and it was enough to tell uganda is seeking that witchhunt as well. go figure what bloodlet is left in the education they lusted. oh well they are in usian peacearmy now so its allright.
it's not the topic, tho, just making a game out of it.
topic is feminism. hillary suits as an intro.
i have been a feminist for as long as i can remember.
i don't know if i have to thank my father for it, he used to shout unreasonably about me, and so did he about feminists (not even sure he did, he did about plenty of people) maybe it wasnt that, but for the idea, so i thought, , hey this is the unreasonable thing. they must as much as me be right to be the target of such rude abuses.
maybe it wsnt it, but maybe it was, my mum was sorttoff a latent feminist for all her life, she went on to be really emancipated, but in familys with jewish roots afaik that is nothing unusual, or at least, she needn't be a feminist for me to be a functional adult in the centre of our cosmosses.
i don't think she sympathised with feminism loudly, but i guess somewhiles she contradicted the big bad dad on the subject, so i knew what it was at. i am not sure, i have no clear emmory on any of this, perhaps i could read before they used the word, in wich case i probably read it in the paper when i was 6, 7 maybe. 6 i bet, i remember the 69 war from the papers.. (the 6 day war in israel, heh i talked about cairo with people, didn't know noone understood that yet. wonder what they thought:D. i understood it:) (believe it or not most people these days probs dont have an idea the two relate or have anything to do with no matter what, dutch politics adults would not usually understand when i was a kid, at home they would, dad to get angry:D)
you see this hasnt much to do with feminism atm, that is because it is a difficult subject.
on that question i'd answer yes, i guess yes i thought my mum needed heaps of it, quite that rather emancipated.
then again i was on her side as a matter of cause wasn't i? i think i told him oncw i agreed with feminism, anyhow i was like that, if i disagreed i made it known in a substantiated perhaps even poetical way to the dad thing, it might hurt me, well i just didn't like injustice.
i flatter myself when i think about what followed, changed the whole parential concept for the freaking world:p
when i was a child, woman had as little to say about a child as in kosovo, fortress hillary kosovo ..
thats usefull to know, in the 1960s the civil codex for parential care was at the level of the sharia.
lol
yes i flatter myself about that. (picasso himself hints he gave away the paintings btw, and if he knew them so well he wouldnt have complained of missing them, screw you rich guys, hand the man his 300 million euro it is worth at least. (i guess tehy'd shoot him shortly after ..)
anyhow picasso tells us somewhere in a interview that he has a surprise waiting, in the sense of paintings of his, still after his death, that it would be good for a laugh:) except that i remember that, it shows i liked art and was apt at ebcoming sth like picasso (good sales, not to much of a job)
ended up i thought other things more relevant and that ended with being a critics and a freewheeling 'analyst'. so what with feminism.
i dont really think as a child i had a the feminist problem much, later it has been very important for me, and allthough my relations with girls were not splendid (wearing glasses being quite a nerd and uhm, i think my mums relgious persevrance of the antisexuality perhaps found fertile ground in the innocent child? my father wouldn't have been to much of a help, so what is callerd in netherlands "het gereformeerden syndroom". i guess, maybe it was even different.
after all i was quite right children dont have that great differences.
my first feminist memory that has made a great impression on me i was perhaps 10 or so, maybe a bit older, even 14, i never hurried in getting old, so i don't know for sure,
i used to sit sometimes in the village in public places, crowded places, in front of the supermarket eg. watching the people go by, it interested me, they knew i liked to do it i think, some asked me why i sat there and looked, i explained, everything was ok. being a boy and having what some boys have i payed some extra attention to girls, can't help it, sometimes i did. not very consciously i think, i just remember them more easily, one day
guess it wasn't the first time i recognised people i had seen before, i recognised the mothers with children, i must have been sitting there for a year :o not allways ofcourse.
they were the girls from past year, i was completely surprised, not that girls got babys, but that it went so quickly, i was shocked actually.
last year they were pretty fine young girls , really young and often really pretty, blond usually, bleeched i know now, some were really pretty, that i could easily remember them for a year.
and now, they were mothers. i wasn't against mothers, but there was a difference, girls had small noses, mothers big. quite a few such differences i had allways seen between girls and mothers,
i don't want to mention them, it would be a row. as i had observed there was nothing positive for the girls to become a mother, not for the girls that. but i had allways assumed it went slowly,
that it would take 6 maybe 10 years, the girls thought of me, i went home, thought of them, thought it exciting they thought of me. still don't know my age at the time 10-13 i think.
i spend time that time watching the people, i spend more time then ever paying attention to young mothers, after i was sure i went, i don't think i ever watched people in the same way again, hardly on the places, in no great amount.
for me it has allways been a part of my feminist inspiration, the idea that that was wrong, that pretty charming happy positive girls in one year were forced to get big noses.
they were not treated right, there really wasn't a way to achieve that without giving someone hardship, an incredible burden to girls wholly unprepared, and no very well treatment besides.
so much was medically obvious.
(i can be a bit quick with my judgements)
perhaps you think it has not been my inspiration but i have never forgotten it.
so when we got that in school it was old news anyway, i think it was mainly treated in the secondairy, 'feminism' i s'pose with it's functional applications it is now more often called emancipation in the compendium, and got changed over to history, that what we don't know about. can know but most don't.
it was in social education. maybe there is a term more close, social history. it told people that you can vote etc. why u can vote, who invented the voting, ofcourse that in netherlands you ended up with really little to say, and the history of that. usefull stuf allthough there is hardly a student , let alone a nut like me, waiting for an extra study.
i liked it. the teacher smelled, allways, someone else must have written that, he allways did.
nice guy btw, i really think i tried to support the ordre in his class, what will he have thought:S.
i stop here or i will become indiscrete. there is not much about that. and i doubt he would mind, i wonder what great job he is smelly at now, if at a school they must have either got him married or cleaned up another way? does it still exist? i wonder, teachers that really smell?
good way to get rid of a dumb job anyhow.
crazy, never thought about what forced him to do this kind of labour, or what allowed him so.
i think i once heard he's a history teacher now, but i am a terrorist you know, he was part of the authoritarian clique, idiots with syndromes like my fathers.
when i asked after him i may even have thought i was politically challenged (quite that),
i wonder whats his syndrome, i thought at some time perhaps korea, he never told, i think he said he hadn't.
i was so small i asked, also not once?
he would buy that kind of stuff you know.
i think perhaps he had'nt been personally active, he said so it correlated with stuff, he kept his uniform, oh i was a child and he explained how mostly for the russians there, he didn't like it, allthough it shaped his life, well it symbolised his failure as a scientist perhaps, because of poverty.
he disliked perhaps even hated weapons, i think he *didn't* carry a weapon. went through the war and all that.
oh yes i realise, his was a child abuse syndrome probably.
k terrible, my post about feminism will still have to wait for some time, will it?
gl so far,
hillary and obama should use the usual facistoid nice pictures a bit more for some reason, or is it to credible to have a crisis as a democrat.(time to do some real bad pictures else bush 'll win the next elections for the reps)
really the only recent nice picture was when the two looked so nice together in the sweet role of wonderfull coordination. glad to see you team yourself better then i do.
saw that picture? the two really being really togetherish over their governing role? hard to explain, obama is quite a great man with knowledge almost like a usual man.
nothing new about the us personal intelligence prop still being for the us personal really is it?
wikileaks
for me intelligence is surprisingly simple often. it goes like this, something is happening in the world, at one or more places (most often one) i publish an opinion about the case.
if it meets the criteria of the secret services it is published.
these criteria are diverse, making some errors helps. not telling the truth outright may help, saying things that suit nato usia or israel works great. in actual cases of emergency i take pains to please those powers and still get a message out.
when the better opinion of the case is not a secret but not the peoples one, and it happens to be my perception, chances it gets through are great.
if on the other hand i say something they don't want known, or that hits a mark most people didn't even know was painted on them, i tend to get censored.
then my original idea turns into a case of reverse engineering, what is the thing that is not meant for you, the public.
my relation with media in general is similar the past so many years (ups and downs, but basically it got a tad worse over the whole and a tad less agressive in the personal).
not much perhaps. its not like i think it got better over the past 1o years or so at all, with freedom of expression or freedom of conviction.
the paranoia is also growing, there is some sort of imperialisation on ideas going on, that turns ideas that before say 5 years were all but unspeakable into newly made secrets.
the mechanics and intentions of this censoring, mediastrategy, control, you name it, seem to fertily breed new fears, so over the whole i think it is getting worse. it can be a tad misleading that wikileaks really means a thing to the secrecy circles on the planet, yet it is bound to happen on neigh every subject, so that is doubtfull.
Now that i feel the need to post, means intrinsically i have been censored in expressing my opinions and insights, wich in turn means i have something to think about, being :what is it that others are not supposed to know.
don't worry if you are an interested reader, it happens quite a lot.
very often it happens when it concerns actual mediatopics of the current moment, especially the ones that are made to be trending about 'terrorism'.
the reason for this is so much is secret about them. and the reason for that is that we are fed with what is mostly bullshit for an analyst result on a daily bases.
so it is strikingly common for me to find inconsistency's and propaganda items in current affairs. and it is as common to be made aware of the limit to what the public is allowed to know.
i think what explains my ease in collecting the impressions that are bound to be target of censoring is that i have a long history of critical research and observation of politics in the wider sense. (in actuality but also in theory, in practice, in experimental ways, pure facts, scientific analyses and on more social levels i am strongly interested , and have allways tried to stay somewhat up to date.)
personally i experience that as a historical interesse, because history repeats so many of the features but also because more often then not for what is going on now there are a lot of interesting historical examples. so wether i am right or not i experience it as historical work.
i take some time getting to the point, but the crude message that it is very hard to get opinions out, let alone get the opinions you want out, even as historical data, or objective sidenotes and observations must be made clear.
doubts are the sanest thing for everyone to have with the news we are fed.
so quite contrary to the last two times i delved a bit into the newest wikileaks,
militairy reports tend to be boring and superficial, mostly in abreviations, and many people studied the first two leaks with more interesse then me (it was all not very new to me).
also i had the idea that if great revelations ( as opposed to finetuned precise comparisons and statistical analyses) were in they would tend to be the focus for enough researchers without me.
people with way better (imo statistic) tools to extract some more information from the pile of rather raw data.
i also felt it was incomplete, as an example the team and unit involved with shooting the reuter reporter appeared to be both absent and prominent in ways that are only and best explained by interference.
nevertheless i had the idea the bulk of data was indeed what it said raw relatively undoctored data. reasoning there is just to much of it to just cook it all up i assumed the real catalogue would be the base for the release, no matter to what extend it would be (eg. mechanically by random generation) doctored.
that means i think atm, it was partly doctored partly screened, but still opened up data for interpretation, and unfortunately mostly for statistical analyses for wich i do have a talent even without the tools, but lack the inspiration to set out on so great a task.
however i read about what researchers and journalists found there when i could and for what i met. counting that as my statistical sample.
maybe i am cynical, because i tend to inform myself decently in as far as i can, and for many people it was the great eyeopener in some way, but for me it was hardly.
so with the new release upcoming i was still a bit sceptic. what now, well i can tell you there is every attempt to make it seem i take the stuf serious, wich i do only less as a result of that ofcourse.
i think of them in a similar way, an incomplete and interfered resource.
most probably taken from at least partly original files however and with the need to reflect actual diplomatic activitys and circumstance , for someone as suspicious as me, that is still more then the military files a trove indeed.
and even if for me acces to wikileaks is still blocked it was interesting to read what the great (and very loyal) newspapers published as their impressions.
especially the guardians raw documents be they few and select, i read with fascination, the ones i did. i was to convinced i was also fed information through their absolute say in my choice and its limitations to want to go through all, or more then i feel like at the whim.
i guess i think that whenever i am fed information it is unwise to absorb to much propaganda, and i think that is wiser also. this feels better, to reflect on the credibility before even giving statistic credibility for my appreciation of them.
so what do i think.
i dont have enough data to judge yet, from what i seen and read, i doubt slightly this is the real thing. otoh it is somewhat to complete in some aspects to be fully doctored and made up.
at least that seems the case to me atm. that beside a lot of the dispatches are historically interesting (typically like when mandela was released) wich would work fine to sweeten the case for the media and provide the right kind of interesting storys to grab peoples attention over some period and to be convincingly paralel to a history we know, so as to remain convincing.
so i am not interested in such cables (their virtue is mostly that nothing new can essentially be in so they form some rudimentairy check on the real setup of such diplomacy).
i am in no way connected sufficiently to the heap of documents to say anything definite about that unfortunately. (i try to find them all not for no reason, it is enough that i could get a long way in analysing quite some recent history perhaps to a point i could not before.
and its great for laughs:D. like predictable they all have their own agendas , the diplomats, and all of them evade the truths what they can. one example, bruns i think he is named, a vice to clinton produces fine reads that are food for thought because he is very reluctant to do much more then listen eg.
since if one thing is clear it is that there is a limit to the integrity of the documents (else there wouldn't have been a need for censoring me) i will now give you the most rational and secret reason why the documents are doctored.
these documents are taken from a network for loyal usian citizens, everyone with some security clearing (there are many different kinds and levels) had acces to them (at least theoretically).
that means they had been doctored to confirm the biases and wanted opinions of a innercircle of "secret bearers" that ofcourse need to stick close to the regimes policy's for security reasons.
i think that is one prime reason why these documents confirm most aspects of usian foreign politics so clearly. and i think it is the bigger secret (because it is a good thing to know when you work with the data) that had me censored.
i think ill get back to the topic soonish. but eh.. like you are not supposed to... keep in mind they were preaching for their own parish in publishing exactly (perhaps) that what we now all read
you wont find a positive report about ahmedinajaadh for example on sirpnet or a moderate opinion on northkorea, they just dont need their lower level officials to think that nuanced.
kind regards, hope to been of help
if it meets the criteria of the secret services it is published.
these criteria are diverse, making some errors helps. not telling the truth outright may help, saying things that suit nato usia or israel works great. in actual cases of emergency i take pains to please those powers and still get a message out.
when the better opinion of the case is not a secret but not the peoples one, and it happens to be my perception, chances it gets through are great.
if on the other hand i say something they don't want known, or that hits a mark most people didn't even know was painted on them, i tend to get censored.
then my original idea turns into a case of reverse engineering, what is the thing that is not meant for you, the public.
my relation with media in general is similar the past so many years (ups and downs, but basically it got a tad worse over the whole and a tad less agressive in the personal).
not much perhaps. its not like i think it got better over the past 1o years or so at all, with freedom of expression or freedom of conviction.
the paranoia is also growing, there is some sort of imperialisation on ideas going on, that turns ideas that before say 5 years were all but unspeakable into newly made secrets.
the mechanics and intentions of this censoring, mediastrategy, control, you name it, seem to fertily breed new fears, so over the whole i think it is getting worse. it can be a tad misleading that wikileaks really means a thing to the secrecy circles on the planet, yet it is bound to happen on neigh every subject, so that is doubtfull.
Now that i feel the need to post, means intrinsically i have been censored in expressing my opinions and insights, wich in turn means i have something to think about, being :what is it that others are not supposed to know.
don't worry if you are an interested reader, it happens quite a lot.
very often it happens when it concerns actual mediatopics of the current moment, especially the ones that are made to be trending about 'terrorism'.
the reason for this is so much is secret about them. and the reason for that is that we are fed with what is mostly bullshit for an analyst result on a daily bases.
so it is strikingly common for me to find inconsistency's and propaganda items in current affairs. and it is as common to be made aware of the limit to what the public is allowed to know.
i think what explains my ease in collecting the impressions that are bound to be target of censoring is that i have a long history of critical research and observation of politics in the wider sense. (in actuality but also in theory, in practice, in experimental ways, pure facts, scientific analyses and on more social levels i am strongly interested , and have allways tried to stay somewhat up to date.)
personally i experience that as a historical interesse, because history repeats so many of the features but also because more often then not for what is going on now there are a lot of interesting historical examples. so wether i am right or not i experience it as historical work.
i take some time getting to the point, but the crude message that it is very hard to get opinions out, let alone get the opinions you want out, even as historical data, or objective sidenotes and observations must be made clear.
doubts are the sanest thing for everyone to have with the news we are fed.
so quite contrary to the last two times i delved a bit into the newest wikileaks,
militairy reports tend to be boring and superficial, mostly in abreviations, and many people studied the first two leaks with more interesse then me (it was all not very new to me).
also i had the idea that if great revelations ( as opposed to finetuned precise comparisons and statistical analyses) were in they would tend to be the focus for enough researchers without me.
people with way better (imo statistic) tools to extract some more information from the pile of rather raw data.
i also felt it was incomplete, as an example the team and unit involved with shooting the reuter reporter appeared to be both absent and prominent in ways that are only and best explained by interference.
nevertheless i had the idea the bulk of data was indeed what it said raw relatively undoctored data. reasoning there is just to much of it to just cook it all up i assumed the real catalogue would be the base for the release, no matter to what extend it would be (eg. mechanically by random generation) doctored.
that means i think atm, it was partly doctored partly screened, but still opened up data for interpretation, and unfortunately mostly for statistical analyses for wich i do have a talent even without the tools, but lack the inspiration to set out on so great a task.
however i read about what researchers and journalists found there when i could and for what i met. counting that as my statistical sample.
maybe i am cynical, because i tend to inform myself decently in as far as i can, and for many people it was the great eyeopener in some way, but for me it was hardly.
so with the new release upcoming i was still a bit sceptic. what now, well i can tell you there is every attempt to make it seem i take the stuf serious, wich i do only less as a result of that ofcourse.
i think of them in a similar way, an incomplete and interfered resource.
most probably taken from at least partly original files however and with the need to reflect actual diplomatic activitys and circumstance , for someone as suspicious as me, that is still more then the military files a trove indeed.
and even if for me acces to wikileaks is still blocked it was interesting to read what the great (and very loyal) newspapers published as their impressions.
especially the guardians raw documents be they few and select, i read with fascination, the ones i did. i was to convinced i was also fed information through their absolute say in my choice and its limitations to want to go through all, or more then i feel like at the whim.
i guess i think that whenever i am fed information it is unwise to absorb to much propaganda, and i think that is wiser also. this feels better, to reflect on the credibility before even giving statistic credibility for my appreciation of them.
so what do i think.
i dont have enough data to judge yet, from what i seen and read, i doubt slightly this is the real thing. otoh it is somewhat to complete in some aspects to be fully doctored and made up.
at least that seems the case to me atm. that beside a lot of the dispatches are historically interesting (typically like when mandela was released) wich would work fine to sweeten the case for the media and provide the right kind of interesting storys to grab peoples attention over some period and to be convincingly paralel to a history we know, so as to remain convincing.
so i am not interested in such cables (their virtue is mostly that nothing new can essentially be in so they form some rudimentairy check on the real setup of such diplomacy).
i am in no way connected sufficiently to the heap of documents to say anything definite about that unfortunately. (i try to find them all not for no reason, it is enough that i could get a long way in analysing quite some recent history perhaps to a point i could not before.
and its great for laughs:D. like predictable they all have their own agendas , the diplomats, and all of them evade the truths what they can. one example, bruns i think he is named, a vice to clinton produces fine reads that are food for thought because he is very reluctant to do much more then listen eg.
since if one thing is clear it is that there is a limit to the integrity of the documents (else there wouldn't have been a need for censoring me) i will now give you the most rational and secret reason why the documents are doctored.
these documents are taken from a network for loyal usian citizens, everyone with some security clearing (there are many different kinds and levels) had acces to them (at least theoretically).
that means they had been doctored to confirm the biases and wanted opinions of a innercircle of "secret bearers" that ofcourse need to stick close to the regimes policy's for security reasons.
i think that is one prime reason why these documents confirm most aspects of usian foreign politics so clearly. and i think it is the bigger secret (because it is a good thing to know when you work with the data) that had me censored.
i think ill get back to the topic soonish. but eh.. like you are not supposed to... keep in mind they were preaching for their own parish in publishing exactly (perhaps) that what we now all read
you wont find a positive report about ahmedinajaadh for example on sirpnet or a moderate opinion on northkorea, they just dont need their lower level officials to think that nuanced.
kind regards, hope to been of help
Saturday, October 9, 2010
nobel special
i held the subject last year didnt i? well that was when obama got his for only lipservice so far,
i am not sure if it rewarded.
geesh i never heard of the guy that wrote the book, but yes he ran for president of a center rightwing platform just like we would expect in norwegia, and eh.. after all it is an easy way out of the fujimoro debacle (you bet they supported him enthusiastically, he is neoliberal so even more right then centre)
so the next topic is easily liu. its a bit political i know i have to fear to admit, and apparently not enough for literature no matter the criterion of prolificence.
thats just kidding, i actually am quite sure his books deserve a better praise, chinese literature only started suffering the internet syndrome more recently.
talking about books, i am under the impression many boring books are sold these days, i could be wrong but most of the books i recently stumbled upon their existence actually originate from usia, thats surprising as the nation is famed for it's general unawareness for the worldy matters, like eg 47% "only" knows the koran is the "holy" book of islam. could be a sampling bias, screw holy i think, no books are holy, quite the contrary.
perhaps if they had asked whats the scripture base for that next outrage called religion everyone had known.
anyhow about usian books , the ones i recently stumbled upon (without btw reading or considering buying them) are mostly very political, 100's, or so is my impression, books with political analyses or it's mymics (didn't read them) appear overthere. i have almost been jealous.
many of the titles and perhaps more importantly authors however are less then appealing, and in cases i don't hardly expect them to be the writers behind even, and i have been wondering in how far subsidying plays a role in their conception. in one case, i never seen the actual book or heard anyone talk or chat about it, it sold 100000s of copy's or so they said, its an old trick to buy heaps of books to sell a political view.
thats so contrary to my own perceptions of the state of usia all, i really wonder what sticks behind it. i think , at least part of it is literary pretence, if you dont read you are less of an intellectual containder, so people read, they really appear somewhat of the base for consensus in the usian debate, those books, in some cases, warranted or , what seems even through the mere quantity of books about a subject like irak or afghanistan by people having some stake, not.
so it had me wondering this year more then ever, i thought about it before, who deserves the literature price, lets not talk about peace prices, thats so obviously political and having little to do with the explosives nobel was once worrying about he invented, he was familiar with the krimean war for your informations.
so i wonder about that one a lot, and i came up with lulu and erdogan in my prejudiced christian thinking pattern in that ordre.
not that i hold these two in extreme esteem, but at least they diplomatically vied for actual antimilitarist peace the last year.
about the chinese guy i am not that sure, actually i dare doubt it, if bhutto had been so really great for peace they would not have promoted her return to pakistan either.
i think , its just a guess ofcourse he is more of a darwinist then that. this liu.
on the one hand i know him only from the corporate media, otoh we hardly have another,
no not about peace prices this time.
its the literature i am wondering about. it used to be there was nothing, a talented writer in the old days would be surrounded by boredom and clichee, find an only outlet on the desk full of paper, you had to conform with desks, but you can hide stuff in them outside official papers so they have their uses.
i would dream of flying into my library, the huge fauteuil and a good stroke of reading every day, had i been so priviliged i remember, but writing in a fauteuil is hard, you need a desk.
so in the old days if it wasn't the 'fine arts' it was writing, the outlet, the forum and perhaps even the confrontation with negativity so commonly found among the usual people had their transcedent utopian place of their own. the book in becoming.
yes i can see how that produced a greater literature then even the mid 20th century. i strongly admire the singular, and usually older man, and perhaps woman that write the literature these days. years of study and hard labour to produce what can be recognised by abstract but familiar criteria as literature..
there's allways been a bit to much generality in what has been called literature for me to stay completely serious, but in a way it is a besides anyhow. it is not my times, and these people had to do with their own pool of impressions, getting worrying now, its the uncensored blog you know, but i try to move on with the subject because it is really fascinating whilst....:
listen up, these people did have their inspiration, and the statistical truth is such inspiration must be here still in people. why don't we see it?
yes ofcourse, wich we don't, we do have to look into other media, but overestimate me for once and imagine i considered; thats pretty hard :o
i mention a few media that promote total anonimity of the original produce, tv series (influential , commonplace and certainly attracting followers, don't explicate the scripters.
computer company's that sell software wich is a product of a sophisticated and nearly philosophical kind of "code writing" thoughts proces.
games i have seen mentioned, but correct code, pristine data, in very boring and unentertaining applications may be where our greatest talents hide, i just don't know, but i am sure it is something.
perhaps coders get the according depressions, noone ever notices but a species only to survive if the product becomes a part of the collective conscience, did nobel think of that btw?
thats against the peace price then, he is only a product of economical rationality and noone that isnt clustered to ever the same channels on tv recognises him.
i am only trying for a better standard, don't take it out on me.
well so coding i think is underestimated as a literary product and deserves sampling. if only for the personality's , i should say psychology's, of the whole class.
what else? suggestions are welcome. i thought of eminem, not that i admire him much but he did have the kind of impact remotely comparable with bob marley, that you would expect his music in the middle of the desert, in moskwa or beying, and since he is from chicago, in new york for starters.
in the polar circle. again i forgot the name of the winner of the literature price, i tend to not try to remember things that for me bear no significance. he lost a presedential election once, pitty that i guess, i have seen more often that political ambition and serious thought bite another.
in me for example.
apart from that nothing revolutionairy promissing in the program i see. so not a great loss, fujimori himself was somewhat of an obama avant la lettre, ow that could be it that obama read him, lol. i guess thats what behind but it is boring to know the answer, it is often more interestin to wonder what else moved those pieces over the board.
tutu has a do, as a farewell present they acclaimed (some of) his candidates, certainly a higher aspiration been recognised in the man.
he is some placcard for those higher aspirations indeed , say..
well maybe he is, i just don't know him and he is not my association with the victory over apartheid, just a bisshop that opted to be not inhumane in a (all too, i know that was also pragmatical) moderate way. he doesnt deserve this great role from my pov. i am not a fan of those eternal moderations.
but thats personal and at least he played some role in the whole affair.
ok so i turned to the people, i asked everyone i met the day that could, or perhaps might also not be able to, read to mention what they called the literary experience, explicitly not book, they thought would be the best candidate.
my own idea, eminem, was more of an example, his impact has not been the past year, nor do i consider him the great master of contemporary rap and literature, allthough he is something there for sure. even he is a white thief of a darker produce and in that sense to some extent literary despicable. must say it is something to want to own, rap as a white, i can hardly not blame him, but for his , why so similar, role he deserves not to be rewarded, you can only make the big bucks if you are white.. and that is why bob marley did not find recognition as the greatest musician of the 20th century. subjective.
heh, so had they nominated eminem i had also left a great complaint, think about it, it is not a resignation.
and thats with nobel prices. white judeochristian publicity. for whites, and indeed by whites.
it has been made explicit even by the anouncements to go with it.
" no asians got the price recently" (if ever) and similar with literature, indeed i dont remember a single winner of my lifetime, maybe neruda was one. deservedly i would say. he did not follow an agenda, his were really books, not propaganda, it was even readible, something i tend to find in the usual 'literature' less then i ever expected.
we need a noble price winner for literature, neruda was from latin america, everyone will belief this, i can follow that, allthough what is really behind is he visits the church regularly.
and the chinese what would his religion have ado? as far as it is not obvious, every promotion of religious diversion in china is usefull in the eyes of western (would be) powerbrokers.
especially they must hope for more of a muslim reaction.
it besides liu has to much of a sentence, behind bars for ages for even reactionairy publicatairy activity is for me much to bear and hard to witness.
yet otoh, when you have those appearances of dissidency in netherlands you are at risk to be treated with chemicals that are illegal in international conventions, and if you protest it is kept out, and misreprented in, the media everyday. hard to proof ofcourse what is kept out.
strikingly so much that even an affront like ethiopia at times manages to look good in comparison. i will never again be impressed by the usual ' six arrests in (darfur, somalia, myanmar whatever they see resources) in our media after them spiriting away a hundred in our own capital.
thats over, credibility has died, there is only left to be fooled or not to be fooled.
and liu, i think he is naive. worse, i think he is that.. at best.
i fear i am giving to little credit, but i am not half as sure of that as i would indeed need to be to have it different. nice pricetag,
i am not sure if it rewarded.
geesh i never heard of the guy that wrote the book, but yes he ran for president of a center rightwing platform just like we would expect in norwegia, and eh.. after all it is an easy way out of the fujimoro debacle (you bet they supported him enthusiastically, he is neoliberal so even more right then centre)
so the next topic is easily liu. its a bit political i know i have to fear to admit, and apparently not enough for literature no matter the criterion of prolificence.
thats just kidding, i actually am quite sure his books deserve a better praise, chinese literature only started suffering the internet syndrome more recently.
talking about books, i am under the impression many boring books are sold these days, i could be wrong but most of the books i recently stumbled upon their existence actually originate from usia, thats surprising as the nation is famed for it's general unawareness for the worldy matters, like eg 47% "only" knows the koran is the "holy" book of islam. could be a sampling bias, screw holy i think, no books are holy, quite the contrary.
perhaps if they had asked whats the scripture base for that next outrage called religion everyone had known.
anyhow about usian books , the ones i recently stumbled upon (without btw reading or considering buying them) are mostly very political, 100's, or so is my impression, books with political analyses or it's mymics (didn't read them) appear overthere. i have almost been jealous.
many of the titles and perhaps more importantly authors however are less then appealing, and in cases i don't hardly expect them to be the writers behind even, and i have been wondering in how far subsidying plays a role in their conception. in one case, i never seen the actual book or heard anyone talk or chat about it, it sold 100000s of copy's or so they said, its an old trick to buy heaps of books to sell a political view.
thats so contrary to my own perceptions of the state of usia all, i really wonder what sticks behind it. i think , at least part of it is literary pretence, if you dont read you are less of an intellectual containder, so people read, they really appear somewhat of the base for consensus in the usian debate, those books, in some cases, warranted or , what seems even through the mere quantity of books about a subject like irak or afghanistan by people having some stake, not.
so it had me wondering this year more then ever, i thought about it before, who deserves the literature price, lets not talk about peace prices, thats so obviously political and having little to do with the explosives nobel was once worrying about he invented, he was familiar with the krimean war for your informations.
so i wonder about that one a lot, and i came up with lulu and erdogan in my prejudiced christian thinking pattern in that ordre.
not that i hold these two in extreme esteem, but at least they diplomatically vied for actual antimilitarist peace the last year.
about the chinese guy i am not that sure, actually i dare doubt it, if bhutto had been so really great for peace they would not have promoted her return to pakistan either.
i think , its just a guess ofcourse he is more of a darwinist then that. this liu.
on the one hand i know him only from the corporate media, otoh we hardly have another,
no not about peace prices this time.
its the literature i am wondering about. it used to be there was nothing, a talented writer in the old days would be surrounded by boredom and clichee, find an only outlet on the desk full of paper, you had to conform with desks, but you can hide stuff in them outside official papers so they have their uses.
i would dream of flying into my library, the huge fauteuil and a good stroke of reading every day, had i been so priviliged i remember, but writing in a fauteuil is hard, you need a desk.
so in the old days if it wasn't the 'fine arts' it was writing, the outlet, the forum and perhaps even the confrontation with negativity so commonly found among the usual people had their transcedent utopian place of their own. the book in becoming.
yes i can see how that produced a greater literature then even the mid 20th century. i strongly admire the singular, and usually older man, and perhaps woman that write the literature these days. years of study and hard labour to produce what can be recognised by abstract but familiar criteria as literature..
there's allways been a bit to much generality in what has been called literature for me to stay completely serious, but in a way it is a besides anyhow. it is not my times, and these people had to do with their own pool of impressions, getting worrying now, its the uncensored blog you know, but i try to move on with the subject because it is really fascinating whilst....:
listen up, these people did have their inspiration, and the statistical truth is such inspiration must be here still in people. why don't we see it?
yes ofcourse, wich we don't, we do have to look into other media, but overestimate me for once and imagine i considered; thats pretty hard :o
i mention a few media that promote total anonimity of the original produce, tv series (influential , commonplace and certainly attracting followers, don't explicate the scripters.
computer company's that sell software wich is a product of a sophisticated and nearly philosophical kind of "code writing" thoughts proces.
games i have seen mentioned, but correct code, pristine data, in very boring and unentertaining applications may be where our greatest talents hide, i just don't know, but i am sure it is something.
perhaps coders get the according depressions, noone ever notices but a species only to survive if the product becomes a part of the collective conscience, did nobel think of that btw?
thats against the peace price then, he is only a product of economical rationality and noone that isnt clustered to ever the same channels on tv recognises him.
i am only trying for a better standard, don't take it out on me.
well so coding i think is underestimated as a literary product and deserves sampling. if only for the personality's , i should say psychology's, of the whole class.
what else? suggestions are welcome. i thought of eminem, not that i admire him much but he did have the kind of impact remotely comparable with bob marley, that you would expect his music in the middle of the desert, in moskwa or beying, and since he is from chicago, in new york for starters.
in the polar circle. again i forgot the name of the winner of the literature price, i tend to not try to remember things that for me bear no significance. he lost a presedential election once, pitty that i guess, i have seen more often that political ambition and serious thought bite another.
in me for example.
apart from that nothing revolutionairy promissing in the program i see. so not a great loss, fujimori himself was somewhat of an obama avant la lettre, ow that could be it that obama read him, lol. i guess thats what behind but it is boring to know the answer, it is often more interestin to wonder what else moved those pieces over the board.
tutu has a do, as a farewell present they acclaimed (some of) his candidates, certainly a higher aspiration been recognised in the man.
he is some placcard for those higher aspirations indeed , say..
well maybe he is, i just don't know him and he is not my association with the victory over apartheid, just a bisshop that opted to be not inhumane in a (all too, i know that was also pragmatical) moderate way. he doesnt deserve this great role from my pov. i am not a fan of those eternal moderations.
but thats personal and at least he played some role in the whole affair.
ok so i turned to the people, i asked everyone i met the day that could, or perhaps might also not be able to, read to mention what they called the literary experience, explicitly not book, they thought would be the best candidate.
my own idea, eminem, was more of an example, his impact has not been the past year, nor do i consider him the great master of contemporary rap and literature, allthough he is something there for sure. even he is a white thief of a darker produce and in that sense to some extent literary despicable. must say it is something to want to own, rap as a white, i can hardly not blame him, but for his , why so similar, role he deserves not to be rewarded, you can only make the big bucks if you are white.. and that is why bob marley did not find recognition as the greatest musician of the 20th century. subjective.
heh, so had they nominated eminem i had also left a great complaint, think about it, it is not a resignation.
and thats with nobel prices. white judeochristian publicity. for whites, and indeed by whites.
it has been made explicit even by the anouncements to go with it.
" no asians got the price recently" (if ever) and similar with literature, indeed i dont remember a single winner of my lifetime, maybe neruda was one. deservedly i would say. he did not follow an agenda, his were really books, not propaganda, it was even readible, something i tend to find in the usual 'literature' less then i ever expected.
we need a noble price winner for literature, neruda was from latin america, everyone will belief this, i can follow that, allthough what is really behind is he visits the church regularly.
and the chinese what would his religion have ado? as far as it is not obvious, every promotion of religious diversion in china is usefull in the eyes of western (would be) powerbrokers.
especially they must hope for more of a muslim reaction.
it besides liu has to much of a sentence, behind bars for ages for even reactionairy publicatairy activity is for me much to bear and hard to witness.
yet otoh, when you have those appearances of dissidency in netherlands you are at risk to be treated with chemicals that are illegal in international conventions, and if you protest it is kept out, and misreprented in, the media everyday. hard to proof ofcourse what is kept out.
strikingly so much that even an affront like ethiopia at times manages to look good in comparison. i will never again be impressed by the usual ' six arrests in (darfur, somalia, myanmar whatever they see resources) in our media after them spiriting away a hundred in our own capital.
thats over, credibility has died, there is only left to be fooled or not to be fooled.
and liu, i think he is naive. worse, i think he is that.. at best.
i fear i am giving to little credit, but i am not half as sure of that as i would indeed need to be to have it different. nice pricetag,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
wanted terrorist: name silencer aka stealotron
Through lies and fraud this one is managed to rob 1000000s of the fruits of their work and their voice