There is plenty of topics, i guess the alJ yourviews forum is so slow because it got to hear it serviced as a spokes channel of the maffia or some such, in any case it is not hurrying to satisfy my eager for international discourse.
Perhaps i should blog more, but blogs tend to depress me as much as anything.
I love them for actuality check, reality check, and sometimes i abuse a friend online who blogs, just to cheer up.
The forum is more clear, it got at least two kinds of visitors, those who think and try to use the maximum nr of parameters, and those who hate and make propaganda and try to use the maximum nr of lies.
AFter a while you get used to it, and you can just skip 90% of the hate posts by looking at the hateposters name, and still have acces to all these diverse insights that sometimes pop up.
A few times they may even be interesting, whats the introverted hate guy saying about this or that? What say the 'believe everything bush said' usians?
whats the zionist prop people ranting?(a lot of that on alJ)
such things can be usefull even if they waste the pleasure of reading through all more often.
well this is boring. it may be relevant to a lot of us, if we are looking for a forum kind of exchange.. like me, i wish i knew more multicultural forums with topical focus, that can also be read by people of every nationality.
love alJazeera there. Love a load of it's contributors.(and some of it's moderation)
I think i just post this and restart another.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
20 billion pillars of economy , g20
(3 big meetings at once btw at least, doha g20 the hague afghanistan)
hi ppl. this must be a special day. i mean, i am the kind of person that would doubt should i protest around the hypokrit krisis at all? because that is just natural, what else had you expected from kapitalism? going there and getting told you are all about finances , no thanks.
It is about peace only. what does it cost not to have peace?
The people on the G meeting will want to appear generous afterwards. Scarely often that means just another, sometimes very obvious, rip-off. However there is some light.
there is china, that calls for monetairy regulation but still wishes to abide social principles, human standards. (prolli they use the word standards traditionally over rights).
There is latin amerika that found quite some internal solidarity and prefers a social and carefull economic course over a wild and adventurous capitalist hunt for the top.
There is Russia that maintains a luxuruous set of anti-interventionist aproaches.
Well afrika might just not be there, or perhaps the ANC is. The ANC is quite a modernist movement. There could be a clue even here, because that is a lot at the same time, when you also cope with pan-african attempts, i love what i see from there usually. They are not allways left and then sometimes wrong ofcourse, but they are pretty ok informed and think about a lot of things.
ok. pluche seats also there. Why don't take people democracy a bit more anarchist?
democracy is there ONLY to be ruled by different people all the time.
so take care you do that whenever you can, just allways keep putting other people in these pluche seats, in the end we will get used to it and it will work.
( that is why they invented blackboxvoting, power to the people!)
Really true, all of us, the real people, the ones not in pluche seats, or in magistrate position, we took care for change, blindfolded and mislead sometimes,
all we did was take care for change. That is why they invented blackboxvoting, and a system that guarantee's they are the ones that count the votes.
So whatever corporate interests these 'G20"s represent, it is usually not :
our "legitimate" government.
sad but true.
From my mal-educated western pov. i know that people like the pakistani, or the chinese, even a lot of the russians, can also be fooled by fake 'democracy'.
so that is why i am never safe with anything.
structural support for chavez here who has to fight election after election under the strongest scrutiny of a prejudiced world-opinion. well chavez is nto there perhaps, though he sits on rather a lot of oil. I just say it because a it would immediatly be their propagandist course.
mh. problem is, what could i say more. I have been bleating the obvious solutions all the time,
perhaps point by point.
get out of afghanistan,
problem : how are we going to interfere with anything we want to interfere in the future.
pluche seat solution: like the african union(USA) does.
how do we cope that we will loose our pluche seats?
ntty obama, natm.
well throw out hillary first my first thought still, who wrote that dumb text?
get rid of him as well.
Find someone with decent intentions to write your texts hillary.
my thought was, she is nothing smarter then my brother.
okay the intentions may be okay, but the brain to settle peace and humane solutions is not really there and you have to influence the 'thing' with complicated means to do the right thing. with insecure and obscure results.
Rice never lied about ducking a bullet is the problem. Ya know, that is quite so military.
there is only peace and war, there no such thing as peace and still war.
if there is civil war in afghanistan? there should be civil war, and once again you should not train army's when you want to be credible about how to duck the bullet.
so that is terrible.
The G-20 should declare a complete embargo on weaponseports.
see where is the real obsession with all that export??
weapons. if there would be limitations on exports, how about weapons?
Usia (united states in america) is lost there, before they get rid of saying "weapons aid" , any of them in a pluche seat is an utter disgust.
poor obama , he still has to clear his name. (I think maybe he can.)
done with weapons exports. all. in principle.
it is about speaking the truth.
none from israel.. so we can finally liberate the hyacked palestinean harbours.
none from Usia. no new weapons.
better support your draglines with that.
well i am done.
no weapons.
no.
no extra army's.
civil works.
thatchers money..
get the international finance working
do the (my) international standards of justice.
get that dope regulation round.
we have ourselves so much more damaged by medicins and pollution then drugs and even alcohol it is really not your thing to worry about, bunch of illiterates.
And that is about our children, not ourselves.
rule in the profit based pharmaceutical industry as well,
make sense
it is not that hard.
oh,
you can go to any of my friends for a bunch of the details.
hi ppl. this must be a special day. i mean, i am the kind of person that would doubt should i protest around the hypokrit krisis at all? because that is just natural, what else had you expected from kapitalism? going there and getting told you are all about finances , no thanks.
It is about peace only. what does it cost not to have peace?
The people on the G meeting will want to appear generous afterwards. Scarely often that means just another, sometimes very obvious, rip-off. However there is some light.
there is china, that calls for monetairy regulation but still wishes to abide social principles, human standards. (prolli they use the word standards traditionally over rights).
There is latin amerika that found quite some internal solidarity and prefers a social and carefull economic course over a wild and adventurous capitalist hunt for the top.
There is Russia that maintains a luxuruous set of anti-interventionist aproaches.
Well afrika might just not be there, or perhaps the ANC is. The ANC is quite a modernist movement. There could be a clue even here, because that is a lot at the same time, when you also cope with pan-african attempts, i love what i see from there usually. They are not allways left and then sometimes wrong ofcourse, but they are pretty ok informed and think about a lot of things.
ok. pluche seats also there. Why don't take people democracy a bit more anarchist?
democracy is there ONLY to be ruled by different people all the time.
so take care you do that whenever you can, just allways keep putting other people in these pluche seats, in the end we will get used to it and it will work.
( that is why they invented blackboxvoting, power to the people!)
Really true, all of us, the real people, the ones not in pluche seats, or in magistrate position, we took care for change, blindfolded and mislead sometimes,
all we did was take care for change. That is why they invented blackboxvoting, and a system that guarantee's they are the ones that count the votes.
So whatever corporate interests these 'G20"s represent, it is usually not :
our "legitimate" government.
sad but true.
From my mal-educated western pov. i know that people like the pakistani, or the chinese, even a lot of the russians, can also be fooled by fake 'democracy'.
so that is why i am never safe with anything.
structural support for chavez here who has to fight election after election under the strongest scrutiny of a prejudiced world-opinion. well chavez is nto there perhaps, though he sits on rather a lot of oil. I just say it because a it would immediatly be their propagandist course.
mh. problem is, what could i say more. I have been bleating the obvious solutions all the time,
perhaps point by point.
get out of afghanistan,
problem : how are we going to interfere with anything we want to interfere in the future.
pluche seat solution: like the african union(USA) does.
how do we cope that we will loose our pluche seats?
ntty obama, natm.
well throw out hillary first my first thought still, who wrote that dumb text?
get rid of him as well.
Find someone with decent intentions to write your texts hillary.
my thought was, she is nothing smarter then my brother.
okay the intentions may be okay, but the brain to settle peace and humane solutions is not really there and you have to influence the 'thing' with complicated means to do the right thing. with insecure and obscure results.
Rice never lied about ducking a bullet is the problem. Ya know, that is quite so military.
there is only peace and war, there no such thing as peace and still war.
if there is civil war in afghanistan? there should be civil war, and once again you should not train army's when you want to be credible about how to duck the bullet.
so that is terrible.
The G-20 should declare a complete embargo on weaponseports.
see where is the real obsession with all that export??
weapons. if there would be limitations on exports, how about weapons?
Usia (united states in america) is lost there, before they get rid of saying "weapons aid" , any of them in a pluche seat is an utter disgust.
poor obama , he still has to clear his name. (I think maybe he can.)
done with weapons exports. all. in principle.
it is about speaking the truth.
none from israel.. so we can finally liberate the hyacked palestinean harbours.
none from Usia. no new weapons.
better support your draglines with that.
well i am done.
no weapons.
no.
no extra army's.
civil works.
thatchers money..
get the international finance working
do the (my) international standards of justice.
get that dope regulation round.
we have ourselves so much more damaged by medicins and pollution then drugs and even alcohol it is really not your thing to worry about, bunch of illiterates.
And that is about our children, not ourselves.
rule in the profit based pharmaceutical industry as well,
make sense
it is not that hard.
oh,
you can go to any of my friends for a bunch of the details.
Monday, March 30, 2009
The long march
If i don't write here i will clog alJazeera with comments. Not that i would be unique in doing that, some people severely exploit the option to be heard by posting repeatedly, even to the extend they apparently feature a bad memory even for their own words.
Aljazeera discussions are fascinating for their topic choices, then.. madagaskar is not one..
One could ask why, but for me it's obvious, african leaders fear the solidity of their pluche seats diminish, and actually so do nato leaders. How childish, all these people knowing hardly anything of madagaskar holding up advances for fear of their own positions.
k, on with the good news. The UN finally found wisdom on drugs by looking at the statistics instead the pope's, establishments and the mullah's.
It means there is some hope for at least those destutes in our society for a life with some human quality. This is in the long run very promising, because it remains an option that society's will find out you need to work at the causes.
The causes are social, and the drugs item is not the only case where prejudice long overruled righteousness. So emancipation of drugs might just mean emancipation of the precarious, emancipation of crime even.
Altho the 'penal systems' are still in need of major make-overs, it could be a start.
Since complete regulation will be impossible we probably head to a situation where drugs related crime becomes comparative to youth related crime. In the end, if you bore people to death they will do wicked things , and if you don't allow them to party they still will.
Myself i am not so convinced of crime. Money is a resource, if one judges crimes for money, the bigger money the bigger crime. The reality is quite the opposite, the smaller the money involved in the crime, the relatively higher the punishments.
rich people, (look at eg. the one who attempted to kill ronald reagan) come off easily. Fraud that counts into the millions is considered a gentlemans right, yet poor people are locked up for years over a few 1000's.
The control on poor people's finances is very close to 100%, you can't just emigrate and put the loot of a bankrobbing on a foreign account if you are poor, but you can if you are rich, so the solution is plain. Control the rich as well.
unfortunately the tools of control are in the hands of the rich, so it never materialised and will probably never happen. Shimmery constructs called 'legal formulas' will remain in place to protect the establishment if the people don't act up.
Aljazeera discussions are fascinating for their topic choices, then.. madagaskar is not one..
One could ask why, but for me it's obvious, african leaders fear the solidity of their pluche seats diminish, and actually so do nato leaders. How childish, all these people knowing hardly anything of madagaskar holding up advances for fear of their own positions.
k, on with the good news. The UN finally found wisdom on drugs by looking at the statistics instead the pope's, establishments and the mullah's.
It means there is some hope for at least those destutes in our society for a life with some human quality. This is in the long run very promising, because it remains an option that society's will find out you need to work at the causes.
The causes are social, and the drugs item is not the only case where prejudice long overruled righteousness. So emancipation of drugs might just mean emancipation of the precarious, emancipation of crime even.
Altho the 'penal systems' are still in need of major make-overs, it could be a start.
Since complete regulation will be impossible we probably head to a situation where drugs related crime becomes comparative to youth related crime. In the end, if you bore people to death they will do wicked things , and if you don't allow them to party they still will.
Myself i am not so convinced of crime. Money is a resource, if one judges crimes for money, the bigger money the bigger crime. The reality is quite the opposite, the smaller the money involved in the crime, the relatively higher the punishments.
rich people, (look at eg. the one who attempted to kill ronald reagan) come off easily. Fraud that counts into the millions is considered a gentlemans right, yet poor people are locked up for years over a few 1000's.
The control on poor people's finances is very close to 100%, you can't just emigrate and put the loot of a bankrobbing on a foreign account if you are poor, but you can if you are rich, so the solution is plain. Control the rich as well.
unfortunately the tools of control are in the hands of the rich, so it never materialised and will probably never happen. Shimmery constructs called 'legal formulas' will remain in place to protect the establishment if the people don't act up.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Hypokrit Krisis
I guess it needs an update, my critics to the current approaches focus on 3 points atm.
being:
preoccupation with loans
obsession with export
lack of ecological vision
The first point i think is critic because it provides the illusion that by forever making guilts you would add value to an economy.(in the national corporate or personal sense)
the second point has a similar problem, the "crisis" is one of the world as a whole,
export as such allways means someone else is creating a deficit. Perceiving exports as balancing in that sense in this crisis would be also farfetched. They are hugely part of the problem because they can spread this illusion of growth, to the cost of some (far away and out of sight).
The third point is that what we use and 'borrow' are mostly the available natural resources. The depletion of these, that is more often a matter of destruction then one of limitation, is as predictable as can be.
for example we face leaders that promote population growth as another means to exploit the margins. yet the time that such kinds of "economical theory's" earned (the militairy-industrial complex) their place on the platforms should be thoughtfully considered part of the problem and actually longgone.
being:
preoccupation with loans
obsession with export
lack of ecological vision
The first point i think is critic because it provides the illusion that by forever making guilts you would add value to an economy.(in the national corporate or personal sense)
the second point has a similar problem, the "crisis" is one of the world as a whole,
export as such allways means someone else is creating a deficit. Perceiving exports as balancing in that sense in this crisis would be also farfetched. They are hugely part of the problem because they can spread this illusion of growth, to the cost of some (far away and out of sight).
The third point is that what we use and 'borrow' are mostly the available natural resources. The depletion of these, that is more often a matter of destruction then one of limitation, is as predictable as can be.
for example we face leaders that promote population growth as another means to exploit the margins. yet the time that such kinds of "economical theory's" earned (the militairy-industrial complex) their place on the platforms should be thoughtfully considered part of the problem and actually longgone.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Madagaskar
I strongly support the new president , Rajoelina, in madagaskar. I hope a lot of room is given so they can steer ahead. For him personally i hope he will never be overcome with the ambitions we see so often in heads of states of small underdeveloped nations.
Madagaskar as an island and a source of quite some wealth should be a wonderfull nation and among the very greatest on earth to live in, that it is not we owe to the western interference in the past, colonialism.
not only that after decolonisation even a beautifull and incredible nation like madagaskar didn't get to bloom but remained a suibject of profit and supression.
In fact it is long due a revolution, a detail i think AU overlooked. Ofcourse AU has other reasons to bother, in terms of credibility it should naturally support the most stable courses. Not always a change of power comes to no harm at all.
However pay attention how much and how calm and reluctant all the time the army of madagaskar played its role. After the initial bloodbaths they have maintained peace forever. without even provocating the former president. rili quite professional.
In that sense i think we should not worry about democracy, teh army at least lives up to the promise of independence and good fortune the island offers, and actually, so do the people and they allways did. The madagaskar population has long showed signs of political awareness.
So next with the AU is they fear their own seats, most are undemocratic, or on the hands and in the hands of the west. The conclusion must be ravalomanani (or whatever the former president's name was,) was the stand in for the corporations that so long abused madagaskar.
Someone like menali in the AU ofcourse fears he has much to loose, he also had 100s of people shot in the street. So if that becomes a legitimate reason for a takeover, i think it is, he fears for his position. He is not the only one in that position in the AU.
If rajoelina is a good guy i will soon notice, the media will heckle him no matter what.. and a lot of foul air with a penetrating democratic perfume will be released on him.
otoh the international community's responisbility in such a case would be to actually guarantee fair and free elections in the 2 year term that is usually promised.
However, fair and free elections are rare and between. The population of madagaskar was obviously not waiting for another "fair" election.
so control of elections must be diverse and unbiased, to universal kriteria, and with no artificial counting.
Madagaskar as an island and a source of quite some wealth should be a wonderfull nation and among the very greatest on earth to live in, that it is not we owe to the western interference in the past, colonialism.
not only that after decolonisation even a beautifull and incredible nation like madagaskar didn't get to bloom but remained a suibject of profit and supression.
In fact it is long due a revolution, a detail i think AU overlooked. Ofcourse AU has other reasons to bother, in terms of credibility it should naturally support the most stable courses. Not always a change of power comes to no harm at all.
However pay attention how much and how calm and reluctant all the time the army of madagaskar played its role. After the initial bloodbaths they have maintained peace forever. without even provocating the former president. rili quite professional.
In that sense i think we should not worry about democracy, teh army at least lives up to the promise of independence and good fortune the island offers, and actually, so do the people and they allways did. The madagaskar population has long showed signs of political awareness.
So next with the AU is they fear their own seats, most are undemocratic, or on the hands and in the hands of the west. The conclusion must be ravalomanani (or whatever the former president's name was,) was the stand in for the corporations that so long abused madagaskar.
Someone like menali in the AU ofcourse fears he has much to loose, he also had 100s of people shot in the street. So if that becomes a legitimate reason for a takeover, i think it is, he fears for his position. He is not the only one in that position in the AU.
If rajoelina is a good guy i will soon notice, the media will heckle him no matter what.. and a lot of foul air with a penetrating democratic perfume will be released on him.
otoh the international community's responisbility in such a case would be to actually guarantee fair and free elections in the 2 year term that is usually promised.
However, fair and free elections are rare and between. The population of madagaskar was obviously not waiting for another "fair" election.
so control of elections must be diverse and unbiased, to universal kriteria, and with no artificial counting.
Monday, March 9, 2009
useless procedures.
perhaps you didn't notice, but these days there are bunches of procedures against high profile persons. Annoyingly most take place here, in this nation, netherlands,
the credibility is low , even here. If anything is shown on tv (i dont watch it much), its poche people having almost overtly poche opinions and a very 'liberal'
(rightwing cryptofascist) talk, that say stuff. Obviously making a heap of money there.
whats obvious is they neither want to loose their job nor their relevance, tho importance is a better word here perhaps.
Apart from that incidental pro- pro- propagation, there is none said about it here. People don't follow the provedures, papers don't publish them. What i get to hear comes from international sources.
A lot of the guys that end up in these new procedures (supposedly for human rights),
die in the dutch prisons. charles taylor, karadzic? and others still alive, one wonders how they will be dealt with.
So from that perspective it seems these procedures serve an international purpose. Noone here appears to really care more then me. And i don't care much about show trials.
Apparently this kind of use of the tool of justice gave satisfying results before.
Otherways why would the show go on? But it is humiliating, justice is not served.
partial pocje people with partial poche opinions and motives judging partially not so poche people. A krap show.
Lately i saw a comment calling it the zionist the hague. It struck me, i think it is so, so that the hague will never say a thing anti israel, like they won't conclude anything against western multinational corporations.
For me it doesn't appear zionist that much, i am used to poche people promoting targets that will only serve the very rich. The whole thought hadn't even occured to me.(i think)
so it struck me, perhaps you know it's a hot itaem at the moment?
Thats is because the assasination of harire is now also subject of a hagueish procedure, a very out of context one. The results of the initial inveestigation were not to the likes of usa and israel, so now the netherlands will be a tool to promote the lie in people..
well i have a weak interesse in justice, trials etc. so i did actually keep a bit up to date when milosevic was there. Tho it's kept out of publicity here, i think they fear protests. It was so shitty, so prejudiced , so anti-milosevic from the first second to the last it belongs to the great shames of history what is taking place in the hague now.
As a result i have the following problem: how and where will we judge guilt and complacity in cases where human rights are violated.
Because that human rights have been violated in any of the defendents nations is painfully obvious.
It's a classical dillema, the neurenberg trials did decide the indicidual was responsible for their deeds, even in the light of a militairy structure of ordres and represailles,, befehl ist befehl was not a valid excuse..
after a while (so abouts 1960) it became obvious however, befehl ist befehl was only not an excuse for germans, and a collective blame was sought (and found) in the mentality allowing the fascism. A collective guilt, one noone knows how to cope yet, in a world where ordre is still ordre, befehl ist immer noch befehl..
The very latest such fraude is the bashir case, for all you innocent who don't know i will try and explain, hasir is the president of sudan. I hope he leaves soon, no kidding, he has been president for many years, and personally i do blame him partly for the deathtoll that was the result.
Yet you cannot judge that really without a fair trial, an option there is not. The hague is a political tool, howver bad its victims have behaved it is allways only one side that is judged, where are the bushes and balkenendes in these trials, how do millions of iraki count less then 1000s of jugoslavs? and why is bombing 60k or more serbs to dead in a single event not a massmurder? not a crime against humanity?
The trial against bashir , and with him sudan , africa and the muslem nations, is only to get a hold on the darfur oil. If you know it, it is painfull to watch.
perhaps even worse is that this unfairness will not result in better human rights. These procedures socalledly promoting human rights, actually serve the opposite purpose.
what a waste, so i have been thinking, what then...
i like the cambodian trial more there. At least part of the case (it is an international incite once again) is fared through khmer themselves.
i think so long presidents can stay for years, so long nations can kill millions unhampered, thosse kind of trials are better of in the nations where the stuff actually took place. I don't think it will work much better or faster ( a bit tho),
but we dont become complicit in the destruction of the real meaning of justice.
ok a couple of rich blokes from a rich familys will loose a well payed, highly valued job, but it would be a good step towards human rights (and probably cheaper;)
the credibility is low , even here. If anything is shown on tv (i dont watch it much), its poche people having almost overtly poche opinions and a very 'liberal'
(rightwing cryptofascist) talk, that say stuff. Obviously making a heap of money there.
whats obvious is they neither want to loose their job nor their relevance, tho importance is a better word here perhaps.
Apart from that incidental pro- pro- propagation, there is none said about it here. People don't follow the provedures, papers don't publish them. What i get to hear comes from international sources.
A lot of the guys that end up in these new procedures (supposedly for human rights),
die in the dutch prisons. charles taylor, karadzic? and others still alive, one wonders how they will be dealt with.
So from that perspective it seems these procedures serve an international purpose. Noone here appears to really care more then me. And i don't care much about show trials.
Apparently this kind of use of the tool of justice gave satisfying results before.
Otherways why would the show go on? But it is humiliating, justice is not served.
partial pocje people with partial poche opinions and motives judging partially not so poche people. A krap show.
Lately i saw a comment calling it the zionist the hague. It struck me, i think it is so, so that the hague will never say a thing anti israel, like they won't conclude anything against western multinational corporations.
For me it doesn't appear zionist that much, i am used to poche people promoting targets that will only serve the very rich. The whole thought hadn't even occured to me.(i think)
so it struck me, perhaps you know it's a hot itaem at the moment?
Thats is because the assasination of harire is now also subject of a hagueish procedure, a very out of context one. The results of the initial inveestigation were not to the likes of usa and israel, so now the netherlands will be a tool to promote the lie in people..
well i have a weak interesse in justice, trials etc. so i did actually keep a bit up to date when milosevic was there. Tho it's kept out of publicity here, i think they fear protests. It was so shitty, so prejudiced , so anti-milosevic from the first second to the last it belongs to the great shames of history what is taking place in the hague now.
As a result i have the following problem: how and where will we judge guilt and complacity in cases where human rights are violated.
Because that human rights have been violated in any of the defendents nations is painfully obvious.
It's a classical dillema, the neurenberg trials did decide the indicidual was responsible for their deeds, even in the light of a militairy structure of ordres and represailles,, befehl ist befehl was not a valid excuse..
after a while (so abouts 1960) it became obvious however, befehl ist befehl was only not an excuse for germans, and a collective blame was sought (and found) in the mentality allowing the fascism. A collective guilt, one noone knows how to cope yet, in a world where ordre is still ordre, befehl ist immer noch befehl..
The very latest such fraude is the bashir case, for all you innocent who don't know i will try and explain, hasir is the president of sudan. I hope he leaves soon, no kidding, he has been president for many years, and personally i do blame him partly for the deathtoll that was the result.
Yet you cannot judge that really without a fair trial, an option there is not. The hague is a political tool, howver bad its victims have behaved it is allways only one side that is judged, where are the bushes and balkenendes in these trials, how do millions of iraki count less then 1000s of jugoslavs? and why is bombing 60k or more serbs to dead in a single event not a massmurder? not a crime against humanity?
The trial against bashir , and with him sudan , africa and the muslem nations, is only to get a hold on the darfur oil. If you know it, it is painfull to watch.
perhaps even worse is that this unfairness will not result in better human rights. These procedures socalledly promoting human rights, actually serve the opposite purpose.
what a waste, so i have been thinking, what then...
i like the cambodian trial more there. At least part of the case (it is an international incite once again) is fared through khmer themselves.
i think so long presidents can stay for years, so long nations can kill millions unhampered, thosse kind of trials are better of in the nations where the stuff actually took place. I don't think it will work much better or faster ( a bit tho),
but we dont become complicit in the destruction of the real meaning of justice.
ok a couple of rich blokes from a rich familys will loose a well payed, highly valued job, but it would be a good step towards human rights (and probably cheaper;)
Monday, January 26, 2009
what's behind neocon cannabis paranoia.
It may be quite obvious from previous posts i am a fan of cannabis.
Recently there is a discussion to maximise the nr of prisoners and criminals by "reclassifying" cannabis.
The argument (it stays a bit vague, yet i think it is supposed to be the ratio),
would be that some people risk mental problems if they use it (as if they didn't risk mental problems if they don't).
That besides a few crimes have been perpetrated under influence of cannabis (and alcohol usually), i remind you, most crimes are done by sober people, does it mean
sober people should be locked up..? There has never been research to that. the incidents where someone still commits a crime under influence by cannabis are underlined in the media, but they don't have the guts to compare it with crime commited sober......
For me it is completely natural that when people anyhow statistically commit crime, they will commit some when using grass or hash.
Not so for the pharmaceutical industry and represion industry (prisons , "security" etc.), not so for right wing nutters, that like to see enemy's and relish in the power to lock others up.
So i think that is what it is about, impress more fascism on people.
---
Concerning the mental effects? The very few people that tend to have negative effects are people anyhow depressed. Not uncommonly suicidal, ofcourse it doesnt always help, yet i know of no case of suicide stoned, and i know of plenty sober.
However cannabis helps with one thing. If you think this world is rotten, that the innocents get locked up a lot, and that the weaponindustry's likes are more respected then human rights......
(all quite true,) Then indeed cannabis helps to relax and maintain your distance.
I think that is really what they have against cannabis, that users tend to take time to think and be critical.
It's a lifesaver, cannabis, unlike the military industry, unlike the psychofarmica,
unlike the prison industry , the policestate...
It's a lifesaver, and the truth should be known.
The arguments against it are to ridiculous, 99% of the few cases i know that people react badly on it, it's only the first couple of times. It's by far not 10 or 20% that has negative effects.
Even people with a very negative background often like it, and despite their fears (that they also feel sober, but less overwhelmingly) the terapeutic effect often makes them still use it years later. The real world becomes less threatening when the fear is like a dream.
Personally it made me sane. Before i used it i used to think perhaps i was crap, because i could make naught of what the rest was doing, thinking.
After using it i was relaxed, my nervosity went, in slowing down my thinking?, it gave me time to contemplate the others positions and my own more calmly..? whatever,
i realised that me being different from a lot of people, didn't mean i had to be 'wrong'. It also helped against the nightmares i knew child off.
Why is nobody talking about the beneficial effects?
pharmaceutical industry.
Why is nobody talking about how it makes you settle with a reality more bitter then you'd want it?
Because they want people that want a better reality in prison.
And why don't they allow you the fun and relaxation?(especvially when ur some kind of nervous)
Because they don't want usual cheap people to be more happy then them.
Lastly why do they promote the hard drugs?? (because they get always easier to get when cannabis gets harder), why do they promote alcohol?
because they are capitalists, and there is money to be made.
Recently there is a discussion to maximise the nr of prisoners and criminals by "reclassifying" cannabis.
The argument (it stays a bit vague, yet i think it is supposed to be the ratio),
would be that some people risk mental problems if they use it (as if they didn't risk mental problems if they don't).
That besides a few crimes have been perpetrated under influence of cannabis (and alcohol usually), i remind you, most crimes are done by sober people, does it mean
sober people should be locked up..? There has never been research to that. the incidents where someone still commits a crime under influence by cannabis are underlined in the media, but they don't have the guts to compare it with crime commited sober......
For me it is completely natural that when people anyhow statistically commit crime, they will commit some when using grass or hash.
Not so for the pharmaceutical industry and represion industry (prisons , "security" etc.), not so for right wing nutters, that like to see enemy's and relish in the power to lock others up.
So i think that is what it is about, impress more fascism on people.
---
Concerning the mental effects? The very few people that tend to have negative effects are people anyhow depressed. Not uncommonly suicidal, ofcourse it doesnt always help, yet i know of no case of suicide stoned, and i know of plenty sober.
However cannabis helps with one thing. If you think this world is rotten, that the innocents get locked up a lot, and that the weaponindustry's likes are more respected then human rights......
(all quite true,) Then indeed cannabis helps to relax and maintain your distance.
I think that is really what they have against cannabis, that users tend to take time to think and be critical.
It's a lifesaver, cannabis, unlike the military industry, unlike the psychofarmica,
unlike the prison industry , the policestate...
It's a lifesaver, and the truth should be known.
The arguments against it are to ridiculous, 99% of the few cases i know that people react badly on it, it's only the first couple of times. It's by far not 10 or 20% that has negative effects.
Even people with a very negative background often like it, and despite their fears (that they also feel sober, but less overwhelmingly) the terapeutic effect often makes them still use it years later. The real world becomes less threatening when the fear is like a dream.
Personally it made me sane. Before i used it i used to think perhaps i was crap, because i could make naught of what the rest was doing, thinking.
After using it i was relaxed, my nervosity went, in slowing down my thinking?, it gave me time to contemplate the others positions and my own more calmly..? whatever,
i realised that me being different from a lot of people, didn't mean i had to be 'wrong'. It also helped against the nightmares i knew child off.
Why is nobody talking about the beneficial effects?
pharmaceutical industry.
Why is nobody talking about how it makes you settle with a reality more bitter then you'd want it?
Because they want people that want a better reality in prison.
And why don't they allow you the fun and relaxation?(especvially when ur some kind of nervous)
Because they don't want usual cheap people to be more happy then them.
Lastly why do they promote the hard drugs?? (because they get always easier to get when cannabis gets harder), why do they promote alcohol?
because they are capitalists, and there is money to be made.
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