policing syria

how is syria doing?
like a test tube should..

it's incredible, mind boggling, what happens in syria. i have never seen a thing like it in my life. never.

how and what way i look at it, the nr of air missions, the extensity, the damage, lethality, the mess, the resistance, anything, it is sort of incomparable.

i think it beats every other conflict on the excentricity index.

the events are strange, the whole nation rises up peacefully, assad refuses to leave, why should he, europeans still have their medieval kings and queens.

next they resist the european violence, and still assad does not resign peacefully, the european example has taught him in the long run one can frame and fool a populace.

the usians meanwhile are jealous at the emirs' wealth. discrimination is a full-time job there.

the russians, chinese and iranians are desperate, who's next to fall for this mormon bigotry?

the population is caught in between.

and we, the europeans? all we can do is buy, buy the radioactive produce and hope noone will be running out of tungsten.

syria unhappy aniversary

its been a year, since the protests started, and a year since i saw the eager hawks eyes fall on syria, it annoyed me to no end then and now. ghadaffi starting a military campaign, provoked the armed response the nato had for many years been anticipating..

in alternative circles the question was if i could not prevent ghadaffis fall and promote assads.

i wouldn't, basically because syria is more geostrategically relevant for peace in the world,
but ofcourse i could not speak my mind in that, so i explained that whatever the lack of difference between ghadaffi and assad, ghadaffi was not actually improving a lot and went to side with the the elites of the west and nato, and assad no matter he also had to leave at least did better than his dad.

really speaking my mind i could not, i know by now they are allways listening, what i really thought was : libya is to attractive for the corps, all that oil, and to easy. 3 million people.

syria would be a damned bit more massacrous, and not as much in the eye of the vultures.

but now i said that after all, and see it worked. noone is seriously convinced even the syrian uprising would perform any better than say badr in irak ( a terror campaign), or the loose contraption in libya. a show of backwardness.

that was a serious worry ofcourse also because even if it was kept of the screens i was well aware assad garnered 100000s of militant supporters. quite probably more than ghadaffi because tribal struggle is hardly comparable with the bitterness of religious vengeance.

so i was acting for waht i could, and did not want to show, against intervention in syria where the deathtoll would probably not stay under 2 million. or like in libya 200k.

not that i think syria would be worth 200000 dead. but had i believed it had worked at that unimaginable cost, i might not have protested so much.

not only is assad of the dynastic throne seater kind, syria does have a rather lousy name of reaction and repression. now that is partly due the bias of western monitoring, we don't hear the same about saudi arabia eg. allthough that can be said, but it is still annoying.

so all the year i have been hoping with all my heart he would wisen up and at least leave.
he didnt. actually he instigated a military offensive against the restive populace.
with terror campaign, arrests, torture, disappearings, revenge taking on familys and family homes, but

in the fog of war and nato interests not so much was said about arrests, i am quite sure they try to keep that tool of repression unblamished as much as they can.

what is perhaps worse is not much was said (after the first 3 months) about people disappearing after arrests.

only now, yesterday i read the nr of 50000 ppl arrested and disappeared. why no stress on that in our media? unfortunately it is simple, it is what they still have in mind for us. and like assad, if people get killed in the proces in a visible place, they would call us, the populace, terrorists.

because in between the considerations about arming groups, foreign influence and the people disappeared in israel, (or at least i dont understand what happened to all those arrested there, i once checked and since 1969 when they had some 70k official prisoners every year 3-5k were added, ending a tally of i think 9000 in 2011. so that was to weird for words, and appears to show the missing persons problem is regionally compounded)

that is what happened start off, and clichee as ever, the opposition were called 'terrorists'. wich they were not, only after many arrests, many people tortured, many disappeared, and many shot, they took up arms and at first started to, carefully, react.

that does not show the resistance is peacefull, according the gandhi's myth. neither was india. the peacefull take was a convenient ending basically. see we gave them what they want when they asked it how we want it to be asked.

they would never hand us aything for asking it peacefully. i have my experiences with activism, and socalled democracys have one excruciatingly exercised answer to it: repression.

including allways torture. usually in the light form of ' common' police harrasment and violence
but really the limit i have not seen. maiming 500 dutch or so was when i stopped counting the ill will of the repression against peacefull activity.

so i dont believe in that. i think the english left india because they got killed. by the hindu followers of kali, (the deity of occcupied populations) or by the sicks or just by their own indian housekeeperslaves.

but they don't want us to know, that you can only beat terror on equal footing. rather they have you believe a myth of peacefull resistance and whack on you for all the time still to come.

and so it is the same for assad in syria. just like turkey blames the kurds, spain the basques, and russia the chechnyans, usia the afghans in short everyone the civilians they like to kill, assad called the citizens: terrorists.

scary. normal.

but what is the realist outlook? for one thing the allawites and shias and the settled minority in charge of the reeling of the syrian republic, do fear the religious zealotry of the generally sunni resistance. that also explains why so many arab nations want to invade or arm the syrians. they are sunni if not in majority then at least as a ruling class. iran and nowadays irak, and syria are the exceptions.

it reminds me for no reason at all at the week before the european union became a transbordering reality, the week before we became one nation : european.
in the accolades about teh development guess what, we were served a logo , and guess what was in: (not in europe but in the logo) israel.

hadnt even been a signatory of teh treaty, so i raised great alarm, i dont want any arabs in my european federation, and that besides they are not in europe and not even bordering it.

so i realised it was to put up europeans against palestinians in that way facilitating those new arms industry markets of genociding muslims.

to my untold surprise it worked. hesitatingly european officials admitted israel had never been in the eu. had never signed a thing, and they would know of no great excuse, except that they like to feel the people of europe, to tell.

in hindsight i assume the treshold of hidden anti-semitism worked for me there. but i was so sick of the israeli manipulations of the day it didn't occur at that point. with so much they let pass how was i to assume antisemitism was a real thing in them.

it was a great surprise, but the logo was done with, changed, and israel became admittedly not a member. i also wish they'd never asked me about my opinion about turkey's joing the eu.

my opinion was : it was not in europe, and provocative, it was culturally alien (except perhaps the army) and seemed much ado with the western corps encrouchment of the middle eastern oil.

again in hindsight i wonder if i should have taken the risk and allowed the great landwar to happen. it is not that much different now.

what does it tell about syria?
well it tells in what i sympathise with assad, that the ones that shouted the most against him are quite ready and apt to cheat everyone and each (except me that is not as easily fooled) in europe.

a lonely position.

what else do i now think about syria? two things that are still important. the first is (and how heroic are the initial advanced guards?) that the resitance is willing to abolished armed struggle the moment assad leaves,(we dont hear that to often, maybe it is not the corps planning) the second, that the regime is not willing (well just like ours but on some scale these days) to give up violent repression and control. oh yes and that 50000 people went missing with indications of torture, for some reason islam apparently promotes torture. it is a very common thing in every theatre in the muslim world. irak , post war, i associate it with torture, mubarak? torture. ben ali? torture. ghadaffi , same, the new libya? torture.

oh i think locking women up and veiling them consists torture, so it simple to see how islamic folklores (aka sharia) promote torture and dehumanising treatment, they get it with the breastfeed so to say.

it is easy to understand. start or mid april there are supposed to be elections in syria. i would not hold my breath for surprises, it is not what elections are for.

you know what is the weirdest in this whole story? that when my main concern was geopolitical, and peace, and the end to perpetrating an ongoing attrocity of cold war with china and russia, and also to set free the yemenites, bahreinis, maroccans , saudis and other clients of the west, not only the ones not as cosy with capitalist theft and extortion through speculation and misinformation, would really chnange regime.

well they didnt, and maybe that is what keeps syria in limbo. set them free!
astarting with bradley manning. all my kind regards, and thx for the amazing influence wittingly or unwittingly attached to my thought.

cheer up syria, if the elections (need the time come) don't show a thing it is allways a good moment to rise again...

keep in mind, we are the borg , all your bases belong to us.

that will allways be with the military fighting a populace, no matter if it is internal or the nato doing the mudering.

the revolution will live, assad will leave, only... not yesterday ..



oh yes talking about unhappy, this made me cry, no words for it, and i would love to do to bush what he did to the forestpeople.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2012/03/201231483446653151.html

(in case of broken link the title is: Green: Death of the Forest.)

a permanent chill

europe got cool, i dont think it is a great sign of changing times, or any guarantee the lack of ozone wont burn a million or more people the coming year. it is actually soemwhat nice, the songs about white christmasses making sense for once, people now in their twenty's peering quite amazed out of their windows at the face of father winter.

people here, where its been cold and snowy and the whole year was rather moderate, in temperatures, at least partially and probably wholly caused by icelands vulcano. THe very obvious challenging and interesting fact is however not brought mainstream, rather that the rich europeans don't shape a definite opinion about climate change after all.

envertheless talk on the street is that , climatechange goes with extremes, and they are right. alltho i have been doubting in the past the curves would depart from an only heating direction, i never doubted at least locally it might leas to less expected effects. well we see droughts were there never were, and floods where there never were. even though they dont represent a meter of ice, they represent the indication that catastrophes in climate swing to two sides.

i am curious to what else this winter will bring. actually i am kind of hoping prolonged wintery weather will kind of bring this fueldriven roadracing madhouse that is europe to its knees.

teach m some repect for good crops, irrigation and drinking water. teach them you cannot endlessly tax the ecosystem for personal profits. it may be a disaster , but icould be the kind of disaster that teaches people something.

we seen all kind of extremes in the graphics, the statistics, but noone yet bothered to plot the incidence of them. oh now they will, and probably lie. but the incidences are amazing. except for meteorites hitting earth and like extreme occurances, i think we have never seen a thing like that, in eg. oxygen metabolism of stromatolites, to name an outpost.

indeed strange effects can already be felt. wether it is on arctic shrimps, whales, or something as essential as the whole amazone region. the good news is that the effords to reforest europe are apparently made, and do have some, but not enough yet of an impact on precipation.

netherlands was rather dry again, someone rooted here and with a climatological interesse, that means as much as half of the planet was to dry, possibly more. this i think is corroborated by the not all to transparant statistics.

there is a long standing theory that developing india and china would lead to so much emission
climate change would accelerate. that this is indeed true is predictable. however i supported still tehir development for many reasons. like egalitarism, but also my belief a technologically developed society has more chances to counter the effects and vices of the climate change we were anyhow inducing.

next came the theory that developing china would actually lead to global cooling. so much dust to get into the atmosphere, that a blanket of dust would hinder sunlight from warming the planet.

i considered that plausible, but where others were still in full swing of denial, i happened to be convinced of the reality of climate change, and ozone damage, and the farfetching implications of each of that, not in the least in the not so moderate climates.

so i actually thought, if developing china gives us an ice age, that is only a bonus.
at least frozen water doesnt depart into outer space at the same pace.

when i look at current weather trends with the same sincerity i have been watching the past decades, yes tehre is a trend. before three years we wouldn't see snow hardly. not in any measure, in the walk of twenty years ice and frost all but parted from our nation, and with that from most peoples short lived and not educatedly critical memory.

thats what you get if you bother about sexarrests and real or purported attacks on old ladys.
20 years of that and evrything you think is vile, coloured and shamefull.

how the media uses the individuals psychology against them.

so having described the current state of affairs, i am wondering what will the next two months bring for europe, and less of my responsability perhaps, the whole of eurasia.

my impression is that altho climate curves tend to be tangentially hyperbolic, and extremes to either side (drought flood, heat cold) are among the possibillity's over the whole the picture can be graphically described with just a few curves.

so allthough we seem to witness a dust impaired iceage, (where saddam, china , the industrialist past and vulcano's all contribute) the heating curve, that is perhaps overly contributed to carbon emissions (i myself think desertification and deforestation are way more prime in that then physics is prepared to recognise), will continue to rise for now. only when there are no major incidents of droughts and excessive heat we may assume the dust is winning.

the next factor as underestimated as it is underreported (i think some of the history of that rests in this blog and perhaps other censored publications of mine) is the ozone layer.

if people think that by censoring the mainstream media this phenomenon has become innocent, they couldn't be more wrong.
it will be a major factor in our climate, our being outsides, our crops and lives and health, for in the very least 70 years to come. and probably only be possibly repaired completely in the ordre of 300 years.

nevertheless a lot of people bought the story and now speak crap about the ozone layer.
not very helpfull if you want a somewhat complete picture of how to deal with climatological effects of industrialisation and population expansion.

not very helpfull where we actually now know that most of what is left to us can only still be obtained by crowdsourcing.

generally however we can just add the vulcanoes and india, china to the trend and assume a 2-3 degrees drop in temperatures this winter over the last is probable.

how that translates into ice and snow cover i dont know. it would also depend other factors, a chilly northerner wind over russia, eastern winds, in short the atmospheric conditions will define the precise outcome.

for example it is quite possible that when scandinavia are heading towards the heaviest winter almost in living emmory, enthrlands and eg. france remain greatly spared from that. where both are less influenced by the continental eurasian climate as by the atlantic. its actually quite probable that will be and it is a valuable indication about the way the trend is working this year, what will happen.

hypothesis for the next years and wether the trend towards cold winters (like past 2 years) , is a definite. or even if it is a freak, how the next hils and valleys of the amplitudal sinusses will shape. (for example perhaps we get cooling and heating in intervals, allthough my personal impression is the whole of matter that consists the earths impact on its own climate is to overwhelming to allow for that much irregularity.)

so what we probably get is hotter summers , at least in many places, (not in netherlands eg, a hotter summer for the rest of europe translates in a better chance for cloudcover here).
people in teh rich nations should be made more aware what disaster this constitutes for poorer people in poorer nations. it is also another unpleasant fact neglected mainstream, for many reasons of control.

next it seems the dust really manages to get us colder winters, (for me it is rather a hopefull event) that means in the rainier seasons we will have opportunity to collect water.

water btw, should in every case be allowed to soak the soils. there is no better protection
against droughts then soaked territory.

we will have to prioritise watering our continents soils over simple luxurys like a winter without snow. in many cases over other human requirements almost akin to humanrights, like housing, settling, recreation or abstract notions like a GNP.

on a sidenote, allthough nothing exceptional, even netherlands a nation of rain and frogs(that btw all died through a pollution related skininfection). was drier again last year. perhaps not an absolute record, but in the least showing the trend towards droughts is strongly apparent.

what we can do about a winter like that? not so much, adapt our consumption, take care heating gets delivered, and take care foodreserves will be adequate. all the rest is in the hands of fate. powers greater then us will decide. where the extremes get more extreme, there is no way to predict avalanches, snowed in isolation or traffic incidents. they will just depend on local circumstance, coincedence and the irks of winds and atmospheric phenomena.

in some 5-10 years we may (if the trend becomes a definite one) be better able to prevent some damage by mere interference. (like: russia snowed in after a hot summer last year, and so it will this year)

although russias climate is better predictable then northwestern europes, however, nothing is certain.
otoh if poland stays frozen over from now untill januar we know both russia will be very cold, and the winter will last rather long.

because with all this hassle about those 'cold' winters, we tend to forget this is the first to show signs of prolonged duration. earlier in the case, what would theoretically hint at into februar (instead of mostly januar) as well.

i am quite curious when and what the spring will bring.

shoring up Afghan war support in europe

as a result of a leaked video i looked into the wikileaks website once again. (http://file.wikileaks.org/file/cia-afghanistan.pdf)

i read a couple more and the publicity is about a helicopter attack on iraqi civilians and reuters journalists. the radio communications tell there are armed persons, but i actually didnt really see any. even if some were armed, that was really it, most weren't.

the video is revealing because it shows the deliberate killing of the journalists, or at least that is the impression i am stuck with. it is also revealing in that it shows you can get killed for picking up dead and wounded. the killing of the journalists is not explicit altho the pleasure in killing is.

all in all i would say the pictures are not to damaging for the usia forces. it might be easy (i am not sure of that) to make a point about the rules of engagement, they were with a group, a few of them were carrying something (camera's) its rather similar to some of the machismo youtube helicopter films i saw a year ago, when i was looking what of that kind of material could be found.

so you could say it is the kind of views you'd expect.

typical is that there is no mention of the cameras, that are pretty visible, but there is of guns, that i havent positively confirmed. also typical is it appears the journalists are specifically targetted, and killed. its not a nice thing to look at, and i dont feel like going over it and the radiomessages 10 times in the hopes of digging up an indication that they consciously target journalists. a peculiar detail is that the helicopters actions and presence don't seem to induce a reaction in the people moving about on the street. unsuspecting is the word, for the aftermath the same goes, the helicopter being there doesnt stop people from trying to pick up the wounded.
wich gets them shot. so it should have stopped them. how i interprete it is that the activity they were undertaking wasnt expected to invite fire, the recuers that appear aware of the journalists status before they are getting shot form no exception in this hard to understand show of naivety.

it makes me think the group of man was actually doing something they expected to turn into no harm, well perhaps one should wonder if that is weird, it might just have been they were accompanying the journalists to an interview, and i assume you can walk even through baghdad without being shot from the skies usually.

so its a bit of a puzzle but i expect it not to greatly support reuters or anyone in making claims about undue violence, no matter that it is just what the camera registered.

now for getting to the subject of how to influence european opinions, i must tell i first read the 'confidential' informations on the icelandic politicians. except for that the cia wants them to start a homedefence (or something) militia, that is not a very revaling document. if anything it is the focus with general anti-violent attitudes that is telling. it is almost as if they don't matter what people do as long they support usian wars and military violence. funny is the detail how one advisor covered for the usian 'diplomatical' effort to keep things out of the public icelandic domain.
good to know that kind of attitudes can be expected from european politicians and are more the rule then the exception..

so on with the topic.

my first remark is i am not absolutely the report is genuine, it's a bit to easy on the topic or sth.
a bit to much out to pose certainty's that need not be imposed on the official classified agents to have acces to them.

furthermore i'd guess its a genuine ofshoot of a more explicit report and intended if not for wikileaks, for some european readers, like perhaps eg. merkel, and sarkozy.

what i learned from the report is obama apparently can be made to say anything the cia wants to "shore up support" for war in afghanistan. at least it treats his statements as a token.
it is somewhat typical that such happens in a context of woman liberation (in afghanistan) wich is supposed to make an impression on the french but, surprisingly, not on the germans. perhaps because they tend to watch television with less sexual preference's , or otherways because they assume that for some reason (some information or way of looking into the matter) the germans can't be 'turned' that way.

so what it has in mind for the germans is national pride.
in making a comment about that i can end my treating of the matter, the germans will be turned by positively contrasting them with nations (the dutch) that make no such nato effort.

so thats next to expect, a whiny uncle sam that is ranting about the dutch in an effort to acces more german and french soldiers. of that indeed we have seen a shortlived example when usia started saying the dutch are an actually very discriminating (against muslims) society.

we do have the rightwingers supported by the media, but on the whole in the streets the atmosphere is still relaxed. that is not to say incidents dont happen, or the anti constitutional attitudes of the dutch parlementarians are not to blame for that, just that explicit discrimination is less a trait of 70-80 percent of the dutch underclass then it ever was.

the discrimination we witness is caused through the anticonstitutional attitudes of parliament and for the rest typical rightwingers tapping in to their cruelty, prejudice and latent xenophobia as it exists evrywhere.

nevertheless i think usia was right in so far the atmosphere has been significantly worsened through the rulingclass efforts (of selfenrichment). their most serious followers generally belong to the category hopeless, and did even in nazism not find a job outside deathsquads etc.

then again, usia is just the same, where we sink boats with refugees they dehydrate them in mexican deserts, wich is also deadly.

interference (europe)

i wonder what should i do, make some points about the dutch situation perhaps? otoh. there are enough things going on on the international stage that deserve attention.

more attention perhaps, about the dutch situation what you can say depends very much what you still "believe". and in my case that is not so much. every time i feel like discussing the dutch situation i encounter that point that i have to say.. if things were as they should, if representation represented what it says, if opinions were not mostly predominantly shaped by media interference..

etc. so, i am willing to say a couple of things about the dutch situation, but people need to keep in mind the dutch "democracy" isn't a real 'democracy'. dutch national policy's are subservient to international (and often corporational) interests, people haven't (and probably will never ) been directly (or truely) represented..

for many long years many dutch, often around half of them, refrained from voting. obviously (and nearly always explicitly) because there was no trust in the whole political parlementary and.. corporational elite. for as long as i remember dutch politics has been a play on and with the people, and that impression was shared by (often) a majority of the dutch.

what i see dutch politics isn't at all independend, it depends on at least 3, 4 or 5 foreign interests,
and decissions are more often a result of interference through one of these interests then not.

so i will list the interests that take precedence over the workings of a 'dutch parlementary democracy' as i meet them.

the first and most important influence for our own legal systems and fundamental rights, is twofold, the planetary aspect is that of "western democracy", and there is the european aspect,
i would call, european centralism, but it doesn't say all, it's got notable touches of 1984 like "bigbrother is watching you" policy and authoritarism.

the european interference

this european backdrop, in fact makes it hard to say anything about dutch politics, since it leaves it hardly a serious matter. we can have dutch traditions of tolerance and freedom, but they are subordinate to the european aspect for the whole of the national politics picture.

now to an extend they should. the simple link is that human rights, fundamental liberty's and rights, and international cooperation deserve a more central place in politics then national interests.

that is certainly true for the european federation, and probably the better model for any (sub)continental federations, since in unifying europe part of the consideration is economical, that trade is facilitated by a more simple model, and for example distribution and building activity are way more effective when they are coordinated. however it is also politically (or geopolitically) true, in matters of human rights, like peace, the whole of europe will anyhow deliver a clearer standpoint then (with a blink of the eye to wiki) endless lists of individual states governments and their opposition statements.

so that's the pro's. economy and diplomacy.

logically my opinion here translates into that europe should be so central to european politics only for these two reasons.

practically that means in terms of infrastructure europe has a territorial say over the memberstates . no matter i may disagree details and projects in that context, in principle here i support a larger say of "europe". to an extend trade is an extension of this, as you need infrastructure only for distribution.

i think it is logical that the limit to europes authority here must be found in scale, on a very small (eg. communal) scale obviously europe does not have the expertise (or informations) to make the more responsible decissions. also in terms of sustainable development smaller entity's should take precedence over europe. that is a two way story and more important then it may seem.

firstly sustainable developments tend to be smaller scaled, (and probably then need protection for not being outscaled (or overshadowed by larger projects)). secondly sustainable developments permit win-win situations. altho they cannot be really "concurrent". it will really allways be cheaper for an industry to pollute, but the cost to society is enormous.

all that does not happen with sustainable developments, wich is the win win aspect and why they need to take precedence over the usual economical megastructures although it will probably complicate matters.

anyway, if europe gets healthy it will apply such regulation, and in the longer run it will become more easy to adapt to requirements for sustainability. (ranging from eg. nature reserves to fishing rights)

so it is funny that in the item that europe should have it's biggest impact (sustainability) it will also end up with the least of a say, since the small scale of many such projects would render them subject to national and regional iniative. this also means that nations in europe could spend a lot of their efforts in the sustainable sector, as it will be the one were they keep most of the say.

basically sustainability takes pecedence over european economical policy's in burokratic terms,
so when a nation wants to underline it's identity or preferences (for eg. use of land and labour) their best platform would be the sustainable one.(1)

however that is still dreaming, the pragmatical reality of europe is one strongly influenced by monopolism and corporate gigantism. (interference)

ok so after the realisation dutch politics is largely subservient to european i follow up with arguments why it should.

the problem is, this is about all i think europe should take precedence in, and the opposite is happening.


obviously a centralist ambition is best served by power of law. and that is were i disagree with dutch politics being just a clown of the (corporate) european policy makers.
basically corporate europe thinks law should be a sum of restrictions, where i think it should be a sum of freedoms.

now you may think that genious, but it is anticipated within politics in europe (in the member states and centrally) the actual dutch politics over the past decades are occupied with restricting freedom to the point it appears obsessive. i don't feel like putting up a list, but the pattern is simple, media campaigns are the start. a couple of years long people are swamped with certain projections, allways usually based on 'traditional' values, that often are based on religious values beneath.

after that a campaign follows to extort punishments from 'guilty ones', not polluters, that are guaranteed to make 1000s of innocent victims or elites that grab the money of the individual states, but petty criminals or random black sheep, and certainly also politically wayward iniatives.

those campaigns in netherlands have a long history by now, and many people still don't realise how these ambitions of european centralism take precedence over realism in the media and in fact their national politics as a whole(2).

it would be terribly naive to assume this is only for netherlands(3), i never did. if you only realise that these mechanisms are in place in many or all european memberstates, it gets a bit easier to see how they love to turn 'national' politics in a comedy.

so assumed the legal implications would be regulated progressively, when i don't have a problem with european authority, i still disagree to this stealthy proces of disempowerment.(4)

even reacting seriously to this artifical concept of 'dutch policy's" is hard for me, by reacting seriously i would make it seem that i consider any of it credible.




(1) by extension culturally
(2) ofcourse they are not intended to notice
(3) in terms of promoting cryptofascism to me it is now obvious for at least 20 years, wether that comes in the form of promotion of the 'liberals' or plugging actual populism based on the underbelly sentiments.
(4) and i think answers can be found in 'grassroots democracy' allthough that term is also subject to the obligatory interferential distortions.

nada

i don't belief anything about these yurpean elections. what? 40% only voters? that can't be true, even in the 2 minutes i spend a percentage of the neighbourhood's electorate was visible, on one other occasion i was the only one not to have voted yet. so thats point one. question: why? answer SP (socialist party).
i bet all the 20 odd percent disappeared voters all voted SP, like last time.
Next the pvdd seems to have made a hit, not unthinkable, according the same logic the dutch vote Socialist Party ( a rather new socialist alternative over the neo liberal) they may opt to vote a greener , and even more obscurable party. (signals pointing to red here).

thats for nr's of voters. it explains sth to the results.

next the rascist party (a deliberate and most hyped conservative ofshoot among many),
is said to have got seats. On the one side obviously the campaign of the multinationals and media to promote rightwing extremism is succeeding in confusing more people, otoh. it is not at all credible such a high number would vote them. The last elections here only a couple of skinheads were willing to publicly celebrate this party's 'succes'. It's actually (sobs) a clear proof whatever signal the populace gives the extremist rightwing "majority" like eg. in italy spain and france, is what is in the make for the dutch.

so the next contemplation should be the counting. This time the vote was on paper.
it kinda cheered me up. but i have a question, is it still only conservative rightwingers with a high income are allowed to count?

next point. In this nation it appears migrant votes are disgarded. (i voted for a female migrant, so i spose i am disgarded for migrantness myself.) This is not a suspicion. It's an awfull certainty. The extend appears to be the full 100%....

i have a remark about this. Where this happens over all of europe, 100% of coloured people in europe have zero percent influence. I start to wonder, how extremely racist are the rich?

My suspicion is the zionist input is toward this trend to create a fake democratic
fascism. Not only for their own repressive values, but just for the fun of giving good people a bad time they are angling for a undeserved solidarity from the left.

I really hate it the public is as stupid as to not realise how impossible all of the results of any elections since 1948 (when woman started to vote wich indeed they don't do as much as man)really are.

I hate it even more , hardly any can be expected from the party's to fight this fight. The conservative ofshoots candidates must have been picked over the socialists
for just one reason. They can be trusted to be hardcore capitalists. next clue to the intentions of the elite.

then there are those prognoses, they are made based upon anonimous (small) towns,
that "have a great correlation to national results"). well that is a nice way to make it appear nothing ever changes!.. *not*

the only such town i ever saw mentioned was poche. extremely. Dutch electorate is very fluid. the jumps and dives have been in the ordre of 10 percent much more often then admitted: "counted".

That is for single towns as well. For citys even.

so its fake.

nada
doom.
100% pure centralist capitalist elite masquerade.
i swear they are trying to beat us into oblivion by humiliation.
no better proof of the intend to turn europe into one big concentration camp.
poor people.

now i hope european unification will not materialise.

oh yes the dutch high court agreed with me about this separation of powers i last mentioned. see how long untill he backs (forever) or gets fired.

klossovo

There are more important things going about then Klossovo, namely the climateconference at Bali. Basically however that is characterised by the absolute unwill of the proprietor class to commit to cost efficent economy, for mere short term private profit. Nations unwill to commit to a more tolerant population model is largely due to that. Unequality and pollution to a similar extend likewise. Attempts to make money out of every and even clean technology do the rest i suppose.

So instead of elaborating on unwill and profit destroying our planet, i would like to make a statement over the current european prospects. Hence this article's name "Klossovo". Klossovo is a very typical area somewhere in the balkans, traditionaly associated with the ever plundered serbia. People there; walk on clumps, have a very own religious hierarchy, shave, wear beautifull cloths, and are an overall joy for the eye ever since ivan the great.

Klossovo is the kind of place you'd like to stay a month or 2 to write poems , an excellent place for tourists. However recently Klossovo met tragedy, the Nato bombed this and that an god knows what, so perhaps there is not so much left. I think it also turned radioactive, so you can see it's concurrent position in the tourism market is taken serious.

Anyhow recently it turned into a US airbase, or two, and now it needs independance.
all these 00.3?00.000 people need exactly that , what the basques or the kurds in their millions would destabilise their belongings with. Presumably these nuts will be seated in EU parliament as well, and be in a position to help sabotage votes forever.

Nobody is going to notice anyhow.
Currently we have like 7 or 8 states around there, The one an even more pittyfull excuse of etnocentrism then the other. Theres just about enough "real" macedonians to fill one parliament... The only at them is that they are possesed. They own land, money or factorys and now people. Europe is choosing its voters in parliament with terrible sneakyness.

The nato killed a lot of people to get so far. Do you think they will let go of it?
Europe in a blind submission follows lead. Having nothing better to do each campaigner decides to campaign "liberation" ... it looks so nice.

prioritys for pakistan

Actually it is very hard to accurately judge every or even much detail of the human rights situation in pakistan for me. However the picture unnfolding has quitte the charactersitics as can be expected with the different interests that are most urgent in mind.

Obviously thinking on the lines that pakistan would not move the army into afghanistan or in the direction of kabul, the only reality is that the north of pakistan is already politicised. So that is not a surprise, every actual calm or rest for the afghan refugees and their relatives or even sympathisers is dependant of just having something like a region where they are free from control wich so easily turns into persecution.

Naturally musharaf has only 2 options, acting up, wich is insisting on more plain military violence inside northern pakistan, or letting go for now and hope that things don't turn to much out of hand. It appears to be a sour procedure, in so far that the taliban, so in effect the populace, of northern pakistan immediatly grabs after the formal characteristics of her 'talibanship' again a very politicised attitude.

Perhaps they think: it is now or never, the possibility that the west decides butto will be her man, and the next thing is f16's in the sky we better have some space around. Or perhaps it is: we just don't want to have to do with that silly musharaf and his english in afghanistan.

Literally spoken the swat valley immediatly took over policestations, and implemented their representation through sharia law:) Wich puzzles me about the different interests of pakistani lawyers again.

Anyhow, there is no immediatly obvious solution, so i thought of the following,
all the nations once conquered by greece could join greece, and as a side-effect they would be part of EU. Now inside eu war is not allowed, so that is settled
and the situation in pakistan also becomes awkwardly clear, with the option to compare these peoples rights with these of the basques.(no rights)

However, since it might scare russia we will also include the kaukasus, ukraine, and russia. That way at least when we bomb these guys we have a decent excuse and....
I will finally see greece develop a european constitution for the perspectives of many people. Although they are orthodox, the greek, perhaps they can't handle the very physical humanist attitudes from northern europe to wich all people are supposed to conform. The ukraine can easily be included, and once belorussia gets surrounded they will probably immediatly surrender to Merkel.

that would be nice:) with turkey in europe keeps its original shapes, only a bit bigger, ofcourse we also invite lebanon, becus it is such a mess with funny tourist perspectives, israel, to proof that we emancipated ourselves so much that even if we can't live with jews we still do, syria, to save them from future agression, the kurds, probably for the famous 'basque' argument . in short everything that once was with alexander except what is in africa. That solves a lot of voting problems in a future world community as well, when they all belong with greece:).

long hm. rulers are like mortargrenades, hardly ever one falls on exactly the same place. That is why a child of a promising ruler has little promise as a ruler as a rule. I feel this strongly over northern african nations and want to make the point secure that I include european monarchist institutes.

likewise i think over bhutto, i don't mean to say that she can't carry any of her fathers spirit or that any child couldn't. Just that it is not a very fair merchandise, and all one is left is to look critical at advertising.

Sadly i am very sure all this is actually set up to divide the islam world and pakistan, politics get a bit shaky, turkey is reinvited in upon.. threatening the kurds, pakistan is (well i am glad it is) sufficiently modern to have a thorough discussion herself, and afghanistan? It's always been a part of europe, the greek never left, only recently they turned english. So for the afghan people the best choice as well is to join the eu.
That way the war need to be put to an end, since it is not allowed for eu members or foreign powers to have a war on eu territory.

This is a very light idea, but when i think of the nightmare it is for the average EU politian i get greatly happy:). Oh yes, oh barzir ... of the taliban yes.. i heard from my secretary.. how could that happen?
:D

It's a bit of a pitty for the parts of the ME alexander didnt reach, like that new bit of vulcanic island, that they will necessarily be excluded, however perhaps it is only the best solution that all these peoples of the books, get their stuf organised together for once. I am not so sure of that actually, i get reluctant to endanger india into invitee status, and i see how russia will have to say no.

well there goes belorussia:(
sobs;)
finally the nations of the kaukasus may rest to the heart of mother belgium.
(wich is falling apart:D, i hope they keep it that way, the eu is ruled from a nation that is falling apart:), good PR.

Constitutions of europe

A very hot item in europe is the organisational structure, some like covered by the concept of constitution. This item is deeply fascinating, it will not only describe europe's future culture, it may easily be the make or break of the whole planet.

It is nowhere a matter to set aside or simplify. Theoretically a constitution is the basic of justice, and once again; justice is theoretically the mechanism to control power.

Actually constitutions represent that. The wish to control power.
It should be point one, that political power can always be controlled, eg. a decission or position can never get unmutable. (this suggest you manage to underwrite human rights and other accorded true values (like those from constitutions) and still opens the discourse on interpretation.)(1)

The situation is, already the national political arenas loose the more ambitious yet more masked personalitys to european scheming, marginalised purposedly.
Likewise the out of control financial and economical powers represented through the european parlament have lost transparance already. Hugely due to the scale, but there is indication of less obvious transactions, getting stuck in usual circuits,
and pure neglect of issues.

The scale, and size of it all begins to impress and work, and the somewhat plain proto omni european structure seems to prefer to stay behind a curtain, building up huge reserves to spend on security for the ultra-rich.

(the privacy "case", privacy has untill yet always been: that for the rich. Equality is way more essential, or you would not be equal in your privacy and the constitution dumb.)

The european national constitutions excellently provide human values.
Ofcourse a new definition of the privacy concept is welcome, but definetly not in a way that makes it the argument for basicly all injustice.

(telegram style: don't be fooled ppl).


That said over the conceptualisation i don't see why the EU needs a very thick book for constitution. Honestly the EU should try and apply only (not exclusively) international human values, and has no excuse to just mess up things more.

In that case a more proper aproach seems to actually unify the existing constitutions. At least that way we can make sure civilians don't loose essential rights.

In some international cases jurisprudence may become inevitably more commisionairy.
That is no excuse for an acting commitee or several shimmery rooms with power of law.

These positions are also so ambitious they need public consideration.
It is definetly essential the eu stresses the roulation of lawmaking and highest courts of justice positions. I really don't care when my prime minister or anyone else does not want his dirty laundry on the table...(still angry, why do they want that anyway..).

That is another reason not to complicate matters, eg. the early rotations in even parlament will have a hard time adopting. It will predictably lead to inflexibility (practically and publicly) , when they can basicly work from the perspectives they know while the methods change the shock need not be bigger.
(actually i think quitte the opposite: by setting ourselves up with a doubtfull case
we spoil everything and that is my remark to the public, not so much to the politicians because for them it does not matter).

Some real guarantee can only be arranged by a concept close to that of (mh that would be al quada in arab..) democracy of the basis. People should definetly keep working public services on a level they can reach within a scope. (mostly a contemporary nation or region but perhaps a liguistical entity or a more artifical burocratic domain.) If people don't, the slavery will eventually be complete. And circumstances for the human dignity would from now on only worsen.

I must say we seem to do better then worsest, in the view of the last point, but i am serious about being precautious here.

Certainly most of the continents are emancipating and cooperating internally to a larger extend (australia, india and antartica the notable exceptions).
Even the others know industrial development.

stay strong.

(1) For this reason i like the idea of not having a european constitution at all,
the looser and also the less powerfull the centralist aspect of europe is the smaller the chance we get totalitair characteristics. Wich is a severe risk since we also can't have experience with the 'democratic' and undemocratic dynamics of such a big and prosperous (multi)state.(i don't like it much). The endpoint of it is that without the recognition of the authority of the state the whole subject would be moot, thus it is hardly a matter of authority.(things would perhaps speed up a bit when we incorporated our (so-perceived) 'marxist' neccesity's consciously).