Possibly the impossible?

Very short one today, but I thought I should let everybody know.

So for everybody, especially those who think fascism and dictatorship or a governments dictatorial behaviour is impossible, I really recommend reading the guardian, in particular the articles of Rob Evans and Paul Lewis who wrote about how the police saves and takes pictures of demonstrators, how the police uses these so called spotter cards and why you are not a demonstrator but a domestic extremist!

Please read the article and once again I have to state my mantra: Open your f***ing eyes. It is just a matter of time until this mode of control will be used EVERYWHERE.

So now: The Link to the Guardian and so on.

Advertisements

Solitude or Solidarity?

A few words about solidarity.

As we live and work we learn that there is nothing like justice. Not only in the law kind of sense, but also in regards of society.

It seems like the richer the country the more it lacks the ability to show solidarity. The rich are always afraid of their income being wasted on the poor while they have to stop buying more cars, more houses, more swimming pools and so forth. From their point of view, the poor don’t deserve the money, the rich are working for.

But: Who works for the wealth of the rich? How did they become rich and why are they unable to share?

Most of them have workers in their companies, organisations and corporations. These workers produce value by producing something that can be sold to others (no matter what level of producing we’re talking about). So the value is made by those who work. They have their income and accept that it is reduced, year in year out, because of economic reasons, like the now ongoing crisis or because the company they’re working for doesn’t ‘effort enough’. (Which in fact could never be enough, could it? Even the billions they earned weren’t enough before the crisis. So I think the scale is open-ended.)

But are those reasons real or are they just a way of holding the money back? Most of the money flowing out of the market into the pockets of rich people, never finds its way back into the economy because it is hoarded for whatever purpose (most of the time leading from none to stockpiling!).

And who has to pay? Well the so-called middle class. Not only has the existing middle class to pay for the poor and needing, it also pays for the rich and richest. Take a look at the financial crisis. Where did the money our so-called leaders pumped into the banking system come from? From the tax payers! And whose money did they lose? The tax payers’ money. So, how are they supposed to get everything going, when their incomes are decreasing and they always have to pay more and more?

Seems like monetary first aid for a dying, old-fashioned and broken system, that is not made for humans, never was interested in the people but to let people bleed to death.

But this very same system has nothing whatsoever against solidarity when it comes to preventing banks and the richest of all from falling apart. Then very well so be it, they take the tax payers money and pump it into a system which is irresponsible, criminal and completely insane.

So, where do we go from here?

We should refuse OUR solidarity with the rich.

We should increase our solidarity with the poor and needing and those left behind.

We shouldn’t believe the lies about how the survival of the fittest is a natural law, how we should only fight and live for ourselves.

Why is solitude the very thing they all want from us?

Because when you’re alone, you’re helpless, hopeless and don’t have a pressure group/lobby.

When you’re alone, you won’t stand up and fight.

When you’re alone you’re easy to overcome.

So what shall it be: Solitude or solidarity?

The World is my proband!

Just a small one today.

The global pharmacy companies seem to be quite sensitive when it comes to the truth about their interests and their behaviour.

They’re standing in question not only because of the swine flu vaccines but also because of products they’ve been suppressing for decades. That was shown by french and german TV. In the discussion that took place on TV they implied that the Author of a book (which is about a medicine against neurodermatitis and eczema, which no company wanted to buy and produce) had no evidence like independent surveys, which was in fact NOT true, regarding the effectiveness of the treatment (it is an ointment). They were quite aggressive and tried to weasel their way out of that not so convenient position they were in.

They also assumed that the journalist built the discussion up on lies and attacked him viciously. Of course the journalist had researched everything about the book, the medicine and so on and in addition the surveys are now online for everybody to see.

All pharmaceutical companies didn’t want to bring it to market because it ‘didn’t fit into the program’ of every company there is. (Take a look at the compnies’ names on the left hand side. It’s in german but every single company declined the offer from GlaxoSmithKline to Novartis and many more. See for yourself.)

So the denial goes on. They show themselves as THE benefactors of the world, dedicated to the health of the global public. But if you take a look at the history of Bayer, Aventis, Monsanto and so on, you will be able to make up your opinion. And maybe you will find out, that it is only about on simple thing: Money!

Facts and Fiction

Just a small comment today.

So for everybody thinking that my posts are far too one-sided I recommend the links’ section, where info about the european union can be downloaded. These include the Lisbon Treaty as well as the 13th protocol, which adds a few interesting facts about how, why and when a death penalty is legal under european law.

So, for everybody believing that the european union would never agree with suppression regarding human rights, please take a look.

Again I say: Everything is possible. Why should a state enact a law, it wouldn’t want to use?

And another thing, which is worth thinking about: Why should every state, which contradicts this Treaty be forced to leave the union? Isn’t that what democracy is NOT about?

What has democracy become in this EU? If you’re not with us you’re against us? Isn’t that how all fascist states justified the exclusion of people who had different opinions?

Would it be so much harm to stop for a moment and discuss why so many people tried to stop the treaty? Wouldn’t a good old fashioned discussion about what might be negative about this treaty and it’s 14 additional protocols show that the EU really is interested in democracy and equality?

Why didn’t the politicians of the EU-states inform the public about the treaty in detail and why weren’t they willing to let their people vote, then? These are important questions.

What I really don’t get is: how is it possible to separate politics and real life? To me it seems the more someone knows about how politics and jurisdiction work in principle the less they seem to be able to transfer it to normal life. But that’s every specialits’ problem. They rise the subject onto a level of  escapism where it neither resembles reality nor includes any common sense.

But it influences our lives and even of those who can’t connect to it in matters of personal life. To me it seems as if they don’t see themselves as part of it but as spectators reviewing what will happen to others but will in no way affect them. But that’s not true. So I say: You are among us, never forget that you are part of our society. What ever is going to happen in the future you will be affected by it, too.

Though some may say that there is nothing like ‘common sense’ I really think there is, people just should make use of it. Just because nobody uses it, it doesn’t mean that is doesn’t exists.

And in case logic comes up – do you really think that logic is the impulse our world works on? Of course it is used in case of laws, social rules and so on, but everyone has to admit that depending on the situation logic changes as well when circumstances change. Logic depends as any other man made thing on the level of information you have. When the level of information changes, many things can change even logic.

The question of ‘meaning’ and ‘sense’ is never asked regarding laws, economy and politics. Most of the time everything that’s going on is justified with tautologies.

“Alas, that’s how economy/ politics works!”

But is it really that simple? I don’t think so. It is much simpler: it is all about money. So hello, global bottom line. And again: Nobody questions the sense of the monetary system as it is today, we all just accept it and see it as a necessary system that should neither be questioned nor needs improvement. But looking at how it is working, what ‘side effects’ it has now and had in history, I think there are a lot of points it would need improvement, not to say a change of ideals. And when economists (like O. Steiger) say that the worth/value of money depends on our belief that it has worth/value, there has to be a point.

As I was told, most european countries didn’t NEED to ask for the public’s opinion. But should decisions be made on the basis of need or on the basis of the right of self-determination, which is a fundamental right for everybody and shouldn’t be excluded from important decision making processes.

Of course not everybody is an Einstein or a Marie Curie, but shouldn’t we have the right to decide what we want? At least in such important questions like the Lisbon Treaty? Isn’t it possible to explain even the most complicated things in a way everybody would be able to understand them? I think so! But there has to be the political will to do so. And I think this is what we lack most.

I don’t like the thought that we are far too mentally or intellectually constricted to understand politics, that we are all sheep that have to be led.

I am not a sheep and all people I know are neither. We shouldn’t think so little of our fellow human beings. Because when is somebody’s opinion worth something? Is a person without a degree worthless? Has he or she no right to decide on his or her fate and future?

And what says logic? What says common sense? What does the law say? And what do politicians do?

Power to the people – ahm, the ones not being politicians…

Back again – not to say still here.

As always I wonder. I wonder about the world, about politics and about the system itself. Everybody who read my post ‘Believing is seeing’ should know about my opinion regarding people believing in the existing system with every fibre of their mind and body.

I’m planning on writing some posts about the topic of what our system consists of, why and how it works and why it is not a kind of  ‘natural law’ that is imposed on us. For many people it seems unimaginable to question the system. And if you question it they seem to think that it will end in anarchy and regionalization, chaos and terror. Though regionalization may not be the worst thinking of food supply, short routes of transport and so on, the real solution has to be global. Furthermore questioning a system doesn’t mean to dispose EVERYTHING our current system contains, but we have to start seeing the gaps in it, we have to start thinking of new solutions for society, politics, democracy, economy, ecology, the monetary system and so much more.

But today I want to send my thank yous and my solidarity to Greece again, because nothing is reported on the news (except of course about the violence and the ‘bad anarchists’), so propaganda seems to work very efficiently.

Yesterday the town hall of Nikaia was being occupied and the demonstrators (the occupation resulted from a previous demonstration) stated their call for freedom and showed their solidarity with Mohammad Atif Kamran, who died because of being tortured by the police.

I’m asking everyone to read the post wich can be seen here. Please take a look at the link section, there you can find more about Greece and it’s resistance regarding the fascism unfolding there for quite a long and at the time. So to speak ‘the history of violence against the greek people’.

We have to understand that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” as Martin Luther King said. And that is absolutely true.

Think global but start to create awareness local. Change doesn’t just happen, we have to decide to change things, we have to be brave not afraid, we have to be solidly united, we have to insist on our freedom in every area of our lives and, what may be the most difficult, we have to desire these goals honestly and unconditionally for every single person on this planet!

That is the true radicalism!

P.S. Please inform yourself about how the EU will be able to defeat every ‘unrest’ by shooting the demonstrators and why and how it reintroduces the death penalty. Please read about it, spread the word and tell the whole world, even when you’re not european because the threat we will have to face will tip toe into every  single nation, religion, region, generation and home.

We have to understand that this threat is global and that those developing it will be ready and willing to get you wherever and whenever they want, for whatever reason they make up, hiding behind the mask of (self-)righteousness.

Newclear Power

The world turns, people live and consume.

Most of all we need energy. When we put on a light, cook food, bake a cake, watch TV, drive our car, train or tram and so forth. It all needs an amount of energy.

After several years of fighting against nuclear power supported by many different organisation, the world and its view of nuclear power plants seems to have changed.

If not, why is it, that many countries are planning on building new power plants?

The argument goes like that:

First of all nuclear power is always said to be a ‘cheap’ energy source.

Secondly it is low on carbon dioxide.

Thirdly alternative energy sources, such as solar, wind, thermal and water could never be as efficient and produce as much as nuclear power.

Let’s take a look at some of those arguments.

To number one: Cheap? How can an energy, which produces nuclear waste can be cheap? They still have no idea whatsoever how to store this waste. Furthermore every time the ground water is affected, not to mention the millions of tons of contaminated water that are lead into the many oceans. Well, we don’t consider, that the contamination is irreversible, that it affects humans, plants and the wildlife in general and for a period of time unbelievable for the average human being – 100.000 to 200.000 years. How many generations are that? Like 6000 as I have heard.

So, how is that supposed to be cheap again?

To number two: Low on carbon dioxide? I have no official numbers but common sense makes me think, that the uranium has to come from somewhere and I know WE here don’t have something like a ‘uranium mine’. So the main producers of uranium are: Canada, Australia, Russia, Nigeria, Namibia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, South Africa and the US. So, how is it possible, that something is transported miles and miles and though is said to be free or low on carbon dioxide?

To number three: If we started to think differently, there would be a chance. People tend to centralize everything. What about decentralization? When we had a mixture of different energy sources, and maybe produced some of the amount we needed by ourselves like with little solar stations on our houses and buildings or differently (there are many ideas for that, which don’t come to the public) then there would be a way to change the way of providing and the medium it is produced by.

But you know, the thing is: when you decentralize something, the big companies can’t earn an immense amount of money. So that’s why they don’t want anyone to be independent. They’d lose money. And god forbid, we don’t want that, do we?

So latest news from France and Germany show, that the Lobbies and the Lobbying are doing quite a good job. Media reported that both countries sell their radioactive waste to Russia, where it is meant to be ‘recycled’. That means the containers filled with this toxic waste are stored on a huge field under the blue Russian sky, free to be affected by weather and by all means by everything that is possible to happen. Ah, I forgot. The waste is explosive as well, as was demonstrated spectacularly 1957 when waste like that exploded and contaminated people, a huge area around it and the water and the plants and the animals and so on – and is still. (I don’t remember the name of the area, but I will research it and then give an update on that.)

What, you didn’t know that? Well, it was all hushed up, good and proper.

So in one of Germany’s ‘storage facilities’ – an old salt mine – which was said to be 100% save, they not only found far more waste than officially stated, but also was filled up with water to the rim which means that the ground water seemed to be affected. Similar in France, where they found more waste and uranium than was stated officially.

Thanks guys! We really know we can trust you.

So, examples – I have more than enough of those. And for not only the three but every good reason we should leave nuclear power behind us and move on.

And if not – well, ever played Fallout 3…?

Believing is seeing

Well, hello. It is interesting, what kind of reactions one gets, when one is writing a blog. So I got an e-mail from a friend of mine, which in no way ever would agree with me regarding the political and social progress taking place all over the world.

That’s why I chose this topic (as can be seen above). You know, I really don’t criticize my friend for believing, what my friend thinks is right. I just criticize the ignorance regarding some facts. Living in the believe that some things are impossible to happen, my friend ignores things that indeed do happen all the time. Most of them outrageous in their aim and their purpose.

I, otherwise, believe that there is NOTHING that can’t happen. So it’s a collision of believe systems.

And here we go again.

To me it seems like a general problem which stands in the way of the ‘wake up’ process, so to speak. The thing is, that most people, who went to colleges and universities and who are called (and sometimes call themselves) the elite are mostly aligned with official interests, preferred attitudes and political solutions. Many of them are a mirror of their education, not willing – and that’s the important point – to think out of the box. Important because they could think independently, but they do not do it because what they learned is what they believe and what they believe is what they see.

So their behaviour and their opinions are influenced – not to say mounted – by how they were taught to see the world and its political and societal development. So what they see is not what it is, but what they want it to be.

I, for myself, don’t claim to be all knowing or full of the world’s wisdom, but I claim to be informed, to look for news – mainstream and independent alike. I want to widen my political and intellectual horizon. Because I at least want to try to take a look out of the box, represented by my social and political environment, my education and personal interests.

I always thought that education should be used to or enable you to question the world and the processes taking place in it. But instead of doing this, they rather try to justify all of which is happening by their knowledge of international relations, official statements and mainstream media of which we know, don’t even report half of it.

They fall for what they learned, thinking that this is the optimum or peak of society, education, politics, science and so on.

But it is not.

Another friend of mine asked me: “Who should do that and why? Who would want a global dictatorship, at least a centralized world state?”

And I have to admit, I love this question because it shows one very important thing: The attempt to reduce the complicated net of political and economic interests which grew (and were built) for centuries and were always kept in the hands of only a few families, and still are handled this way.

So, when the answer is: The global organisations, corporations and companies in dependence with the political body – they think it is impossible, but still they try to simplify it to an unrecognisable state of being.

It is in fact not one person, they are a few keeping their interests from the public, but acting them out on a global scale, planning them behind closed doors, justifying them by good intentions for the poor, the hungry and human rights.

If there weren’t any references showing the calculated and deliberate misrepresentation of facts I maybe could understand their alignment. But after years not to say decades of lies, i.e. the ‘incubator lie’ (in the 1990 which was the justification for Daddy Bush to intervene in Iraq, which was exposed as a lie later) and the weapons of mass destruction lie (we all remember, so I hope), everybody should be aware of the possibility that we are lied to, because it is not only a possibility but has even happened many times, publicly without a rush of blood to the head by the liar, no matter who he or she was is and will be.

And among them the secret services, always glad to offer solutions and volunteer in the most difficult of decisions.

So, half of politics, media, economy and so on is a fraud and half of it is a scam. So we can choose between being lied to and realizing it or being lied to and playing along.

The world is not flat, it is round, the earth circles the sun and we don’t fall off when we’re at the bottom because of gravity…I think.

« Older entries