musharaf

musharaf looked pretty embarrassed recently, he knows i have a hell of an impression of him, and ofcourse next to his other worrys its not easy to get the extra ethical and emotional show going to show every such quality to everyone.

ANd then he is under severe fire. AlJ dont really liked my comments on the case,
wich must be because i have a strong admiration for the mans political (not so much diplomatical) skills. He is not a fortunate man for politics, because his skills are unevenly distributed, if he had a quarter of the charisma that he has compassion he would probably be fine, but he only has like a fifth. he is a military and civil organiser of high quality and great conscience, yet he is said to display quite some repression, (i didnt witness it so much, when i was more into pakistan, there was rili no indications of files of disappeared persons in pakistan, some repression must be expected in the destabilised region, i liked that they bombed the red mosque in a show, like i like russia made a deliberate win over georgia if u do it, do it fine and if u do it and do it fine, do it good, matter of being fair about things. Plays a role i distinctly disliked his 'young martyrs' and (perhaps naive, considering the general malreporting of the media his speeches, also the fact a big city and governmental stability was in play, (security issues) played a role.

nuf said, probs was me who cooked it up, not sure, usia agreed, mush was not left much choice, guess he had the fun as well. Great, fair. we are the killers, we have all the arms, but the right of the person on the person goes over everything.
even the right on freedom of belief.
A belief is not free when the person is not free, so that is just plain and logical.

The pakistani army has behaved up to every expectation, if musharaf needs and wants i think he can count on it. Not to forfill his ordres, but to save pakistan or his skin. The impulse to apply this compliment to russia concerning the methods and scales applied against georgia is strong, but let's say there is still alot of smoke over the battlefield to go that far. i think it is a great compliment although i am not always as happy with their deployment.

Musharaf is really a fascinating person. his military genius is more tactical and political then strategical tho, he's rather a strategic failure i think. But he well knows after a few mistakes, and also in the geopolitical respect he has been showing a lot of reason the past few years. His tactical and political military quality itself again is quite huge. i would trust him a mobile position over an offensive or perhaps even defensive. So even musharaf is a man of limited capacitys, when it is about pakistan, the region, or matters of more general international importance he can be trusted, when it is about the greatests of geopolitical questionmarks, indias position, nucleair capacity and probably about his actual methods of control but i am not sure, to some extend sharif and zardari already did everything else noone ever wanted, fire up the war in the north, i might prefer anyone else.
then again like i said he seems to have left militairy roads in huge geopolitical questions wich is the sensible thing to do.

For him more so because he can operate on the level he is best at.
Basically saving the pakistani nations. It's where the english analysts got now,
sheet he saved teh poor blokes past decade, and what else could keep sharif or zardari in check.. very outspokenly so, mh.. could have sth to do with some major bookkeeping of mine, fun that. thumbs up blokes that's pretty great.
Quite a feat really.

Perhaps i think it is an hallucination tho. Whatever, and they check on musharaf? well it makes sense, what else then an institute that can moderate military measures,
and prevent abuse of law could check such a situation, altho i doubt sharif or zardari should be considered for such great dignification.

That besides, and then? who of them will become president? Sharif knows his cards are well, he is identified with the muslim aspect. well perhaps musharaf doesnt rili have that ambition, and even perhaps sharif is not unsuit in that role, personally i think musharaf a better representant of the wahabi kind of moderate modern islam i like most. (i like the synthetic one) i also admit i dont rili care much about religion, but i insist i admire inspiration.

Zardari for his part would bet he wins because the international backers would have no options left, it means sharif would win because if the international backers weighted into the pakistani scales firstly westerners would have a very much fascinated and probably negative opinion about the lawyers, not just cheer because they protest musharaf over formalitys when so much is happening, it's a bit weaker perhaps because musharaf at some point claimed state of national emergency, wich constitutes to much of a wrinkle in the surface of procedure, untill that point the developments should have been evaluated, and it is hard to understand not all the world got interested ,(see there the reason btw. for the idiotic reporting and lack of fantasy)

so that old pakistani grudge at least has been solved..
its not for no reason i am so anti islam in this post, i almost included some dedicated declaration of non-islamism in this post, but there is no need, atheism and secularism should suffice.
i am as dedicated anti christian as china, probably more. And chinese are not supposed to waste food on dead people either.

Don't you think bush is a hypocrit?
You think you can be a "christian" in the 20th century? when ur the sun of a president???
i don't, yeah maybe in malaysia or Jemen, not in the usa. What bush thinks about the saakasvilli, is almost directly related to what i consider his perceptions of religion, he thinks: you would think , if you think it is mad what he is doing, it is the same kind of things in him that in me you think are mad i am doing. Well he's got some pretences, but as mad as he is doing over religion and indeed nationalist fears etc. , is exactly mad enough. The problem is despite i always disliked bush policy's, i always refused to consider him an outright madman, for the dumb reason that sometimes when i made sense it made sense to him. So what i think maddest at him is his war speeches etc. the idiotic comparisons, axes of evil, etc. allies..
and terrorists, being like that, always expressing a hypocrit picture of pittyfullness and hurt interests, and declaring the rest of the world is a collection of mediocre bastards, that i think maddest.

so he is mad, limited even, but to some extend he makes sense, i dont give a damn to bomb ppl that lock themselves up anyway and turn their kids into medieval persona, makes some sense. I don't give a damn about tribal and burocratic positions would have been nice to, but the west is a bit dumb, and thinks like : a servant is a servant and then it will be ok.

so despite he is not in ordre he's been trying to make some starts, he himself has probably been a greater levy on taxmoney then individual freedoms in usa, for his symbolic value.

He can be rather funny too, he is not very narrowminded like many people.
war on drugs..
hilarious
war on terror is plain sad from my pov.
mordor

we are the only ones allowed to terrorise...
insane
all the drugs are ours...
yeah some get that

that's with bush, sometimes you still agree, he would be as lousy a president for georgia as saakasvilli.

Censory daily bussiness

As usually i not only get censored but i also try to find out why and where i am censored. Its confusing. I send a test message at alJ on a subject that i had definetly been disallowed to post to them to. (by whom ofcourse you can't be all sure) One would say that if alJ moderation works so swift, a "test" message would not get a confirmation, (i send them to junk since if anything i check them between 4days), well teh ridculous and hard to understand text message..
test
(PR typo lviv)
alJ spam by subject,

a pun on their systems, did get through.... hesitatingly,
so thats suspect it is perhaps not alJ that is censoring so much of my opinions.

As a rule ofcourse i am under the impression the disappearing texts do still get used by the powers in question, and by media some. So it must be they are actually interesting. General subjects on wich my media acces seemed mangled were many,
especially political actuality is censored, wether that is olhmerts next PR stunt,
georgia, or musharaf, exceptionally positive comments appear to come through more often and there is a point in that the usual post that disappears would contain a few opinions about the democratical functionality of officials.

let me just, after telling what i can tell other ways, tell you what i have been thinking over these affairs.

Georgia. I support Russia over georgia. Thats more a matter of a non aggressive geopolitical reality i have an ambition for then the specific thing. Luckily now medvedev made the surprising move to put a straight hold on actions, I think that is diplomatically or in terms of PR the best decission. Some operational requirements needed to be met but with a georgia in panic and disarray (like the south ossetians a lot of them moved about against their wishees) reasonable negotiatians with the georgian side seem to be again more possible. I hope they will apreciate the russian gestures.
To my surprise nato (and israel, and even usian foreign advisors etc.) showed no direct interest to greatly escalate the situation.
I take it as a hopefull sign, it is a change, it is so the media reported the whole affair, here in netherlands, with a huge anti russian bias. But this unreal perception of reality is for once not the modus operandi of the diplomatical world, keeping it that way would make a big change, and i think the change the world needs.

The details against ossetians are pretty disgusting, to me it seems russia otoh has maintained a very limited and military operation, somewhat succesfully evading civil casualtys. The only thing against that is the scale, then again, actually did not do so much inside georgia, and the area of south ossetia must be considered another case for many reasons. That one of russias arguments to support such tiny nations may be they don't feel all secure against US and the Nato that keeps building bases around them is exactly the geopolitical matter that makes me side with them.

That means i can easily imagine this is a very scary event for the russians as well,
It would be a possible start to clear up much of the misplaced animositys of the world, much like the olympics could be a place where differences can be evaluated instead of accentuated.

In that sense the "usual persons psychology" for me is hard to understand, the mere spectacle, and location are supposed to have unmeasurable PR value for china, and indeed people are more interested in china then before.

The most annoying thing about bush lately was his talking about 2000? political prisoners in china, i think us has 15000 ppl in guatanamos only worldwide, then again i would again like to have an idea of what is a fair impression these days,
for me it is obvious poorer less developed nations have their rights issues.
If china somehow manages such problems on her giant scales i think it is a proof of it's governments good intentions.

There remains a lot to wish for also in china, but there are so many nations a lot remains to be wished for and pressfreedom and freedom of expression are a farce at bush side as well.

mh next subject, whats olympics got to do with it?
Musharaf,
now what in pakistan, a clownesque situation, different accusations have been made against musharaf, however also plays a more official motion of distrust, that i suppose is the kind of measure that should dispose him. However how can you take that serious if the involved partys have locked another up in almost every way over corruption and seem to be out for no less then musharafs skin, using of all things, the war on afghanistan's finances. So that means like this there is no compromise or respect left for musharaf. I think it is a pitty because the man represented a progressive and even somewhat tolerant set of values, ofcourse that is only an impression but i hope pakistan with her current unrest won't return to the kind of underdeveloped and marginal state it used to be under musharafs opponents rule.

Zimbabwe, well about zimbabwe i wrote that if it hadn't been for all the international attention mugabe would have had less of carte blanche of many ppl on the world. In a situation were noone trusts any, you end up trusting what you had.
That there now are negotiations, for me, implies tsvangirai is getting ready to agree to mugabe on the matters of zimbabwe souvereignety (in the wider sense of economic politics etc. as well) and african unity, wether or not to allow political economical development that undermine the african unity and prosperity, very exciting and tense, a strange detail is to some extend with the 'brutal oppressor' picture in mind, mugabe must have always tolerated tsvangirai. That is not so exceptional, but it may tell something about minds or personality's. Mugabe might know rather precisely how he wants tsvangirai to guarantee certain developments. But also mugabe may have been 'not very afraid' of morgan, i must say when i compare the two and the few direct impressions they left on me, mugabe generally appeals to me more, and i think like that is perhaps one of those reasons. It may also be one of the reasons the other zanu faction is represented, don't worry a newer and still progressive africa then mugabe's also exists, and arthur could represent it.

So that are surprising developments to me, about the zimbabwe situation i get rather optimistic, about Pakistan i am not quite sure, but if the world will not eternally and deeply blame russia over something they hardly had a hand in, (and that appears like a premeditated nato PR trick with the Nato sponsored georgian army featuring as a sad excuse:-0), my sun will start shining. Perhaps its obama's good influences.

As a matter of factual also there was a russian not only de facto but UN mandated peace mission in the territory. Russia has done evrything i wished for to manage the situation, evacuate the civilians, degrade some of the toys, put a great statement, withheld from really compromising georgian territorial integrity, and the nr of victims even in both armys have remained somewhat limited, i think during all the operation great care has been maintained, considering that in a story about the eviction of gori, 7 wounded soldiers in a military convoy 15 miles away were worth mentioning.

i might have to add something to this.

only the right to exist

Ofcourse my contributions on israel remain unposted, or the one on olympics, despite of that the facts of the post are used for new reporting..
So i guess that the utterings that are acceptable in the forum, and really when it becomes personal, don't ask me why.. could also be influenced by my unpublished comments, it wud not be a first.. well what does it say??

zionism is only believing in the right of israel to exist.
That is strange, fascism in germany believed only germany had a right on more territory then it had, great excuse then. That beside it is not true, zionism is like other kinds of nationalism, and very old, excisting before palestine was cleansed, and inherently discriminating. ALso, when zionisms interests correlate with
neoconservative interests about china eg., about certain statements about human rights, and generally about destabilising the israeli neighbours or ME region, it rises over such a nationalist pretention.

So whatever is their clue, (it is capitalism), zionism has much more impact then what they pretend in the above statements.

zionism means to me: money over ppl except jews, because jews always have the right to judge other people, and call them holocaust deniers. Turning them into non persons for international justice. Well they use these mechanisms against me, and basically in the hope i say something they can judge. Meanwhile they are being mischieveous, and looking for problems were they never were.

Enough about it, if it didnt have so much impact on world politics and freedom of expression, i wouldnt pay more attention to the whole shit then to Belize.

And i don't care, there have been so many holocausts, that i consider most people deniers of holocausts daily. However that is well allowed. As long it doesnt contrast these zionist interests.

So rili i don't give a damn, israeli patriotism may or may not exist outside the discriminating jewish religion. A funny remark on that one was, can hezbollah remain armed? israel has 100000's of reservists allowed to hold and carry arms..

The comment that said that said: what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
Funny.

On with china. Because the big campaugn against china shall *not* be spoiled by... me. Does china have the right to exist? I think so, do i like olympics? not at all, do i like the way china is organised? i just dont know. Thing is , i still know some about china, and it often contrasts with the things her critics say. Actually i already spoiled the attacks on china by supporting her over Tibet before.

From my standpoint, i am not at all interested in tensions with china, in antagonism or animosity, however the attacks on china obviously show there is a mainstream political trend that doesnt care about all this, and megalomaniacally thinks it can organise china better. Apparently another hot point of media politics atm.
time for another some warning.


Personally i dont equate zionism to anti-china-ism but i bet that zionism will think differently. china is a market. Politics will shout about human rights, but it is actually about money. Zionism considers money the basic requirement for the emancipation of jews(1), and maybe like pretended for the existence of the state of israel.

perhaps the idea is that china is so big that with a stigma of human rights the whole gaza situation pales.


(1) or so i think.

zionism reason of censoring

For me it is nothing new, i must admit, often when i turned anti israeli in a post somewhere suddenly the thoughts police appeared apparent , and my posts got manipulated or just remained unposted. i was wondering what was behind with alJ. apparently i am not allowed to publish in threads about israel.

Well apparently the israeli manipulation is bussy once again making the world population believe a couple of lies. I don't think their activitys are more deplorable then the usian or dutch, altho they are so on a large scale and sometimes quite different level.

Anyhowe be warned, my instinct puts it for preparation of a war to iran (something big), but it may also be a heightening of palestines repression that is their first most important interesse. I must add my posts get marked and unpublished even if i say no of the above things, and just neutrally and objectively describe what i see happening. (because predictably the whole distastefull list of accusations will be made against me, like antisemite, prejudiced, etc., well the only thing that got clear from that is that zionist and neocon are also the same)

Tactically it may still be usefull to consider it means israeli politics will basically not change under anyone else then olmert, like it didn't under him.
They will keep on blaming 'the other' palestine, lebanese, arab, shia. or iranian (atm.)

wow wat a lively place this is

Hello dear readers, i get into the habit of writing here about what is not allowed elsewhere, and that is pretty much the prediction for the coming month.
This turns me into an obamaniac, that might at least change something. sympathic comments about olmert unwanted? or is it he was the president when israel attacked lebanon? or that noone knows he pretty much collaborated on that war and the wall? or that he was a pessimist for international affairs? perhaps just that i dont trust anyone with his kind of income to be a near decent taxpayer.

Karadzic, appears a cover up operation to avoid media coverage on a procedure against british corporate government. Insanity, the man may be guilty, but that is not for the world to judge, guilty people are roaming everywhere, and it is doubtfull he is a fit example, even if he is, the political context spoils the case, "totally". Similarly i put the remark the perpetrators on bosnian and croatian side are now in charge.

Pakistan etc. the way usian international politics shifts her worrysomeness from one place into the other, irak to pakistan is not to my liking, It is alo not compatible or coherent or conform with desarmament.
It is much like the anti china campaign, the pashtun(chinese) really had no other options, still we blame them from the materially superior context of their previous exploiters, their predatory robbers , and their current slavesdrivers.
The "global economy" is actually based on such markets of slaves, and wants to shift labour globally continuously as a result.

Perhaps this anti-pakistan thing is basically a method to divide asia.
Or to impose the picture on pakistani's india is not really an enemy.
I looked around on pakistani blogs a little, and the intelectuals ebar a lot of rubbish, plain views are also discomfortingly prejudiced. But now i am talking Pakistan main, not necessarilly the outbounds, where politics is a grimm reality.

Nevertheless that pakistani context is discouraging, and with the usual appeal to populism extreme views are once again, just like here, mixed and married to this old fashioned prejudice. The easiest ways to incite violence or counterviolence.

A more apropriate reaction could only be to show the better example, take it for granted that every populace not yet long oppressed by our own hypocritic values will dislike the insincereity collectively and not like here when there is an individual basis to do so. AMEEN, so they shout.

(not that abd my sp.)

no smoking

These days in netherlands spending one month remote from daily life always becomes a shocking experience, every few weeks some new thing gets regulated, and you see it happening in hindsight,
I said it before and i still remain that the dutch politics is actually one of zero tolerance, i even wonder if the no smoking hadnt been directed at some dresscode before it got imperialised.
Whatever you would think might help society can be turned against it quite easily through the power of rhetorics,
for example the concept flexible labour, this used to be a way to direct the idea that people should be given leisure to do different jobs at times that they want it, however the great attraction of this idea created a need to introduce a new thing under this otherways usefull name, it used to be called availability, not anymore so..
flexibiliy,,, to be available when the bosses cry out for slaves.
how a good idea gets abused.
about zimbabwe.. yes great propaganda, suits 1939, but why didnt people cry out over 3 million deaths in kongo? Whats so special about zimbabwe now? that they never killed millions yet? I think wat makes it special is it is a huge area of land, with just that few inhabitants to conquer or surpress.