dynastys

this is about egypt,
egypt is a complicated problem, really somewhat complicated, there is no majority in the electorate to support the army, and hopefully and probably not anyone else,

so there is an ancient technique to solve difficult geopolitical problems and basically every kind of problems, it is probably called directionairy logic, and it goes like this,
(i am not sure if i can do this aloud)

the germans are to blame,

lemmesee, am i still correct?
yes.

ok.

what did they do and who did it for them?

am i still correct?

yes, the germans are to blame, and yes, they make other people do everything for them, ok

they burned the churches, no, that is actually a good idea,
so alltho the germans are to blame they probably did it by accident,

and still had someone to do it for them, so they in turn can give someone the blame, and don't have to do the work.

am i still correct? they burned the churches by accident and someone didnt get payed,

wait...
the poor people in egypt didnt get payed....
aha..'
that fits the theory just finely,
the germans had the poor people in egypt burn the churches and didnt pay them,

am i still correct,
who else would do such a thing? i am still correct.

so why did the germans cause this to happen?

that would be to steal everything,

germans do that for a reason.

correct? passes.

there must still be something left in egypt,
germans like camels, maybe it is them.
no that is not it, it need to be something other people also like to promise to the egyptians they won't pay.
only germans would like one,

(yes that is correct but a state secret)

state secrets help to solve problems,
what do germans have to do with state secrets?
oh that is a stupid question..

so it's not those.

something else.

ah i get it, the germans are jealous that the copts don't like that

so the copts are not the germans.

aha
the copts are innocent, someone else did it.

you are not going to believe

salafism takfiri wahabbi had rather nothing to do with an umbrella?

the coffee

there's a nice new show on aljazeera, the cafe. watching the first episode i dont get to understand every single line of the participants discourse, but that is mostly because i get distracted by my thoughts on the whole egyptian events, or the participants or what associates to either,

i would almost hope to see the same people again, in like a week , but i guess it is not the idea of the show.

close to how the overall performance of the egypt staterun media rate, the cafe may be bound to move to another capital.

it's not a matter of concept but of formula's. nevertheless this episode is accurate.

http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/thecafe/

it is a at least to me very inspiring video in what a lot of young people express a valuable list of priority's. so i want to write about it.

I'll start with the most significant remark,

"but what is happening in libya now is ofcourse much worse."

an eyeopener, perhaps not for everyone but for me, the man to make the remark blogs,
he is expressed. his remark has a credible messenger.

ok. there is discussion about scaf , organisation, bill of rights, secular law and constitution, it is all very interesting, utterly lovely material for me to write,

there are problems with old cadre's, police, the current denial of the older that what brought the revolution was the inspiration hope and lucid apreciation of free values, values of freedom.

completely to the point. sometimes there are alarming sounds, about repression, once again (and the muslim bro's despite all intends do the old political complicity dance there), preexisting institutions and artefacts playing their trumps of "arrivedness".

a lot to say. but these things i wont forget;)

but... libya is much worse, so now libya.

tough. i published an idea on it, that is kind of original, revolutionairy, unconventional and even to me unexpected.

i am aware the man of the remark may well be aware of the proposal/concept so here comes.

what we see in africa is a long history of repression , occupation and divisions made by 'former' colonial authority's.

even what is perhaps a succesfull and usefull example of division, north and south sudan, you cannot say it was not the policy of the 'former' colonial powers with what they complied, nor that it was definitily not the oil behind it.

taken things into consideration i suppose bashir should find a new job, it would be helpfull, and lend his effort and political line the credibility it may still need to survive the aspect of oil.

the great question may be , is democracy a nice or an equally awfull aspect of oil?

now you may say what does this have to do with libya, there is no oil there, there are hardly any muslims, let alone you can divide them along the tenth paralel.

this is true, for reasons of recognition i propose we call eastern libya southern libya, tripoli we call eastern (for reasons of nostalgia), and let me take the map. gawt, tharaji, awbari and murzuq (except the trees on the square and the big mosque that will go to eastern libya, will be south libya.

just like berlin and brussels saabha may best be an enclave , this forces an unnatural alliance with north sudan.

everything south of ghadanis and over 111 miles to the east of Qaryat, and evrything over 439 mtr of altitude in the atlas we can call north libya (becus it can be so cold).

i dont know what to do with the area south east to al kufrah. equatorial egypt appears a proper name.

is that an idea?


or perhaps we should go for 'federation of libyan nations and souvereignity's that would be most except eastern libya and the zebra territory along the northern coasts, don't forget the federally allied zones and their specific standards.

that way there will be a lot of employment, and still not much control, cus that would render the road useless.

speaking about employment.. (trumpets, dummy shots in the air) the army needs real man.
we the unreal man at the sideline don't mind, its close to a never ending jobopportunity.

where's the reward?

ok thats just jokes, you know, i could want political stuffs, bill of rights or so, but i thought i'd take it on a lighter note and split up some territory's everywhere first, make a real mess.

June

so, back to politics. the greatest news of the day? brazil has a female chief of staff. that is,

there are no words for that,

something has changed. at the best time, (i read a feminist writer is one of her rolemodels..),
to change something.

brazil has recently been one of the more unifying factors in the world. so, that it goes with the fiction or story of a much greater brazil (i agree brazil is great , but that's not much necessary, or perhaps it is), is in one word : great.

she is a woman with a position to change things, like the feminist education of the egypt army,
such stuf.. is plainly juicy. no that is not bad news.

in egypt, i hear.., police and by extension (they are rather a lot more in charge atm.) the army,
in egypt have been prosecuting democrats. well so i hear, other voices say it is not that bad, but i would insist you cannot have any political prosecution in a state like egypt in a time like this.

first you have to regard critically your moral, next you have to make do with the false picture as it was shaped through the regime's forces before, the media haven't hardly dared to give much of the auditing to the public really, the brothers, despite their choosen words, is also a bunch of polarised traditionalists with no great perception. come or go, you don't want your emancipatory forces to burn 'places of worship' or the clients in for therapy.

just like, yeah yesterday i was promoting my freedom, now i am picking on someone else's.

i don't expect this explain anything to anyone, and i wonder how traditionalism would apply any much more this time of the year to shia than to sunni.

even that, is not of much interest, the whole subject of religion, is much like that of sexuality.
the dispute when hardly or mis-understood, has no guarantee to succeed in emancipating a person.

i find that kind of funny.

well i think i need to say that.


----------------
post.
----------------

i tried to publish a small thing on libya on aljazeera (that apparently is under enough of a dos to see favourites whiped and show provider/actually also police screens.

crazy. most of it happened before, for it and a few. wonders about his..

similarly i cant log in to a game i play through a usian server..

anyhow, it's not really the topic.

the piece i posted , i liked it, so here goes:

this seems like a good place to reopen the discussion about revolutions and control. khadaffi is a revolution, a coloured tory(1) in a state of madness, P.E.plenty reason to that, and the grip on infinite fear and incredible fortune. 1 oil for the other, you would wonder who decides for geology. the sneers clichees don't impress anyone ever, and isn't the story of egypt that the eu wants snipers on the roofs to protect her facade of cryptofascists? freedom has a price, i suspect it is called equality.

, now that discussion, allthough 'unclosed' has been dead since 20th of april.
much like any discussion on alJ since they changed the format.

but it didnt get published, i read, well i read what usia had to say after that, and gates,
said "i belief he would have went door to door in benghazi to kill everyone".

well that may be so 'bombing irak to the stone age and stuff"

and it may be gates never saw enough of the news to know noone in the world ever took khadaffi serious, and it may or may not be why they actually have the opportunity to do what they do.

(well enough of an aircontrol situation, see how the opposition is really stronger??)

nope.

and why? because khadaffi is "emancipated" (they could indeed have taken him serious when they didn't that means).

he is not emancipated in every respect, and he is quite silly in his ideas of kings or emperors, he has even been a nato client, but, compared to god knows who and what not and whatever,
still

the kind of person you might want(2) to say: and yet, in a way, in things, he is somewhat emancipated isn't he?

and the thing is, i wonder if you can say that about this gates.

moi.



oh yeah on the down side, even more obscure and outrightly ridiculous administration, railways managing to implicate theirselves all over thoroughly, with their

"obliged" (that is fucking forbidden but they did that to me), automatic payment (for a friggin wrong number of coins, in two ways). that apparently they didn't get. for wich "they send me a letter" (that i didnt get).

and another.

completely unknown so far (and i had even forgotten it again) what for. wtf. i know i once went there with someone. fuck off.
well so i know the place , but i have no idea, what it could be about, perhaps usual things (that would be bicycle fines) go through places like that. they had been supposed to take me hostage , and never did (i guess cus it would clear up they did not pay me but stole or so) for a fine,
yet,

they didnt AND send me the letter that they must.

screw them, their own words mean nothing for them.
courts.

(1) didn't post that 'h' anyway.
(2) dunno how if i would overread first and last lines.

mubarakisation of sweden

a transcript

damn i am angry. the whole assange case is subject to a mis,- and des information campaign,
infos disappearing, storys changed and changing

all to put him in a more negative light and cover up the political aspects.
it's a completely bankrupt thing, a showtrial even now.

there is no mention of violence (as opposed to intimity's legally ) in the swedish case
and the whole fk based his prosecution on the term, yesterday and as i understand still in court,
and as i understand it they are still to understand this in court, i can think of that i would find a few things in todays article.

montgomery was yesterday featured on wikipedia as a swedish prosecutor, or where was it, names and context disappeared that were quite obvious,

wikipedia, that i looked into to see if i thought he was usian agent
/all to perfect cover, but independently very active, so probs not
not to sure for the ideal fit/and thereby somewhat probable/ aspects of his life i expected than
came to see him as quite ok
neway


a fake trial, it never bodes much good

wish i knew what to do

they do it to us all (the "activists") and me in person all the time, faketrials

altho there have maybe been some improvements, we regard many criminal trials and much of its detail also as fake trial ofcourse, me , plenty ppl i know, several distinct groups in society.

groups - treats so strongly persons have to label themselves with it to deal, basically
not to say they are all great persons, but the experience is the same in many areas

people should be responsible in person not to break a law, since most do, by having a job and signing conditions, they are far beyond in legal justification

is that behind?
beyond i think is behind

neway. to an extent this goes for julian assange as an independent

especially since eg. the swedish at first mentioned abandonment constitutes rape, and that was an argument, i think england should decide there is no possible credible procedure,

but since that also disappeared from public sight, at least mostly, and hard to manage, (as from internet), we see there is a censoring case being made, for a procedure that has once again been called explicitly(i think) not political

.
angry

twice before this court been referred as nonpolitical. under most doubtfull circumstances,(1) ...

ridiculous

But when asked what he would have done if faced with similar allegations, Alhem said: "If I was in his shoes then I would have gone to Sweden to give my version of events".

thats such bs!

if he had been julian assange, he would now not be his lawyer, but someone who escaped a double trial, under more, different, overtly political circumstances, and the rest.

.. so he wouldnt have gone ? obviously

but hes a fat lawyer, thats probably not even in a condition to have sex with two women
so he would have done it.. yeah right?

perhaps he could have proven he was not in sweden or sth

what a ridiculous notion in an international paper (and probs sth like reuters(2)) about an english court. don't even know immediatly who made the contempt for courtS:
rereads..
the guy making the question

it doesnt tell who that was.
...
judge allying with the prosecutor..

must say judges are absolutely great in finding their own stupid little pretences

and even still , if it was a trap ...

Alhem says: afaik i would be innocent, and not fear extradition, but its not if it was him..(3)

and probs julian assange might not fear extradiction, if he wasn't someone already under stress of an illconceived prosecution.(3a)

so its a silly lawyer also

cus that is in no obvious way bad for assange (4)
well thats what i think


look , if you would have been julian assange, would you have gone to sweden for the (same..?) next prosecution?
what do you think?

i could proof i was not in stockholm you thought ?

"i could not proof that i was not in a bed with her naked after having had sex already"
or with pyamas, lol

technically she was quite prepared with the condom, or so it appears
perhaps there was a camera in the room?

tjah
i think that dubious political persona with expensive habits like that should not be to much allowed to acquire such "evidence"

interesting point.

only means less
means..

you would have to raise the treshold for criminal not lower it., under this circumstance of observation.

lowering it in public constitutes a "rape" , against fundamental, human and i think even military justice

wich is obviously "political' (5)

thus
it is
a political trial (!)


and the problem is, i dont want to read prepared lies about evrything and all, all the time just to spare few some.

some of what they and moreso the others still get inflicted on them (6)


i dont think i have to much experience with honourclaimscases (lol)

sth. julian could explain about privacy here.(7)


egypt

suleiman has to go also, what keeps a guy like him going??

he should opt for baradei, step back from the secret service and police, be explicit that baradei is "just a democrat" for the us, and give his opinion on what he thinks, will be the consequences of what he now sees as a great need for (rather fictive) security. (8)
-,

in public so people know what would have been the things they could be controlled over
then..(8b)

we will find a woman for vice president. mubarak is gone, and elections in say 3 months,
or i think that is quite feasible, two, after that.

ofcourse people will want to spoof the parliament, more precise the "government(9)" circles

i hope we have a good case study to base us on in tunesia by now.

the parliament is probably completely illegal , imo also for international law,
and as such depriving the egyptian people of rights

like flexible interpretations of privacy indeed don't work in the same way as flexibel interpretations of labour policy.

flexible labour not labour"mobility", but weird working hours
flexible privacy indeed "weird working(sic) hours". not mobility of the legal development.

illegal representation can easily be disadvantaged because theirs is no true legal base.

go egyptians, legalise yourself! go europe reaffirm your laws!






(1)(in wich i would refer to wikileaks also)
(2) compare :"political"
(3) the trial is against someone with an entirely different background and an at least very annoying experience with swedish prosecution.
(3a)political
(4) and Alhem didnt manage to follow up on it
(5)technical infringement of laws is not only political, it is even the area of politics, and not of (show) trials.
(6) in terms of gross neglect of justice
(7) applications for and against privacy turned into a specialist area , that unfortunately is mostly represented by extrajural people.
(8) he didn't, he went for the cosmetic requirement of stopping the protests.
(8b) think moderating looting and destruction of property that has uses after the revolution also.
that does not definitily include property's with a strong symbolic value , before an actual change of power materialised.
(9) an illegal shape of government: dictatorship

the great pyramid scheme.

lol today i read sth. on mubaraks assets, so about half of everything in egypt. are they going to let him get away with his loot?

unshort interpretation of the events as they unfolded in egypt.

we are now where we got in tunesia 3 days or so earlier. and it takes long.
its like a revolution in slowmotion.

so i am going to shortly describe the things that made it last so long, so long that i as an activist start to wonder isn't it too long? repressive tolerance weighs in by minutes of violence, not by weeks.

the army was everywhere, and as i understand from the preparations the police out in power today. mubs and his fellows have been preaching the great egypt, over the past few days.

in all the tones of repressive tolerance 'peacefull manifestation' 'no disordre' (and a kick in the back of anarchism as usual). mubaraks definition of anarchism is apparently no police on the street.

i call that irresponsible government. 3 days long amidst growing reports of undercover police activitys all police was withdrawn from duty, in cairo, well.. from civil duty.

no wonder a starving mass might loot a bit more then nothing besides.

after knowing or even seeing people killed, by a police that is feared, people will even fear they have nothing to loose. and? what are they bound to loose now? later with all the juridical hocuspocus that declares human rights void, what does it promise for democray? quietude?

i am not in egypt, so i am not sure, after all facts on the ground matter, but i would think this is a setting for even deeper repression, if nothing comes of this.

okay the army declared it wouldnt kill civilians, and perhaps it didn't, but by being everywhere it also showed the people weapons are the tool that decides in 'democracy'.

a very lousy example.

to understand it we have to go back a few days. basically the situation erupted, half or whole of the world got to know about it before a severe attempt on media blackout followed.

internetservices closed, but also a withdrawn reporting in the west. no crying foul over tianan minh, for example, wich i think was less deadly even with many more chinese still then egyptians.

the double standard showed. next aljazeera that remained the most relevant bigger newssource,
did its step back, socalled 'moderate' opinions made the day. the right kind of stress on 'peacefull'
(ie. a policemonopoly on violence) and against anarchy (as if you can have anarchy with one guy getting half the money), and woooops, it worked, people became distracted.

mubaraks 'speech' for example received a load of not very critical attention.
i found it rather disgusting. didn't hold out through the great egypts, and great whatnots.
no wonder these islamists have it high in their head with such lacklustre rhetorics.

medieval rhetorics.

neway, next is the organisers, "the coalition" (of the chilling, in his time of year), sets up a million people demo, and.... a million people come, demonstrate, peacefull, and......
well i think then the elections got postponed again.

thats were we are today, mubarak didn't leave (yet), and before egypt will be safe, there are bound to be more victims, to the nr of mubaraks neglect.

more burocratic hurdles before the hoards of the pharaoh and his friends.

Suez

things like this make me think mostly of censorship

egypt. oh yesterday i hear and read a 100 dead on one day,
and it is out of the news.
see a live tien a minh, and cut.

mubaraks hypocrit speech. insulting the peacefull protests. attacking demos, life fire.
30 years of what? regressive taxes?

al baradei reporting in wikileaks on amr moussa, intimidated, i called it, but perhaps it clouds his (A.M.'s) perceptions.

intimidated, in reading 1 line of his, i notice.


like nelson mandela, called mandeba by a clans name, i dunno what thats supposed to mean, mostly i guess the word nelson is like a most painfull memory of past imperialism. well, clans names don't really sound that post modern either.
mandeba, i remember long ago i would write mandela and omit nelson, not so much becus of teh nelson, just becus he was a celebrity, bound to get abused with filling pages of rubbish.

mr mandela is a very good person, very little rubbish came from his.

even though i must say media tried forever, i seen quite a few useless attempts on paperfilling about him, fortunately, he didnt like to make that kind of profile.

a politically usefull man even, because his person stayed real.

i guess i am more crazy then he was at this age.

when nelson mandela speaks, it hardly ever took me a few minutes to get to robbeneiland.



suez.

suez is in africa, there shouldn't be so much doubt about that.
death and maiming, and why? to push the next gestapo to the top.
the more you get to know about egypt, the more horrible it all is.

imagine all those tourist marching eyes closed through the destution, horrific picture.

and now blaming the people, calling them looters for a whole day, i start to suspect the police from trying to loot cairo museum,
start to suspect....?

not very much a scary thought like that can't be convincing.

i hope it will be like tunesia, first the ben ali admits blame by blaming his corrupt clique,
next he gets kicked.

basically what we see is terrible repression and injustice, why??
suez, capitalism, and israel. i guess it is the israel thing mostly now,
such brutality knows but one excuse.:(

why cant people admit that accepting peace and tolerance is also jewish values,
whats wrong with it?
that they will overblow their claims?
only thing you can do is start doing science then.

and its not that it helps much to be scared, or actually think you are so much different,

ok so i cant buy expensive cloths and i get discriminated 3-4 times cus they are army dump
not even really sure if not often anyhow a joke.

should i care? i got discriminated by the dutch for every day in my life i so much think. and plenty of times without even trying,
ya know at the supermarket when they immediatly throw some small note down a machine to check it?

i think i haven't seen a note go down the supermarket in years without being checked.
that feels not only as if people are rather stupid, it also feels like the are plenty stupid at discriminating at all.

its also on the train, its with police, its not allways with the army. woman can be even less socialised then man, thats because at an iq of 70 they are left to roam where man tend to get locked at say 90 and bcause they are so much protected. the usual uniformed lady i meet isn't exactly bright at treating people equally, there's not much distinction in the stereotyping between the two.(man uniform, woman uniform)

a few woman that happen to be rather nice seem to do better, but i think that..
is my bias;)

some of the man are decent as well, usually they are quite touchy on their status aspects however (exposing plenty) and i dont like that kind of people.
in uniform i think it is macabre.

a police like that attacked the people in egypt, a police worse and more adapted to violence,

considering my experiences, it is hardly a surprise you see few woman on the street.

its allways worse for woman, the combination of violence and discrimination.
but it is nowhere near pretty to experience it as a man.


--