Fejlfortolkning i et tillæg om at vesten "vil tvinge de fattige til at gøre noget ved klimaforandringer.
Fra http://information.dk/151017
"På vore breddegrader og i vor generation kan vi klare os ved at bygge diger og installere aircondition. Jeg har også boet i Holland - de ved godt, hvordan man skal bygge diger, de skal nok klare at tilpasse sig. Men hvad med mennesker i Bangladesh, i Vietnam og mange andre steder? De har ikke vore ressourcer. De har ikke skabt klimaændringerne, har intet med problemets årsag at gøre, men de er allerede ofre for det. Der vil komme til at bo en milliard mennesker i kystnære områder, der er sårbare over for klimaændringer, oversvømmelser og storme. Jeg er helt enig med biskop Desmond Tutu, der i en tekst til rapporten taler om 'tilpasnings-apartheid'."
Mvh. Frank Dukz
PS. Jeg har lidt travlt i tiden, men håber på at komme med indlæg lidt oftere.
tirsdag den 27. november 2007
tirsdag den 13. november 2007
torsdag den 8. november 2007
Stop idiot-kulturen! Vi (the majestetic we, the royal pluralis :)) er trætte af den journalistiske standard, vi er trætte af sensationsjournalistik med lavest mulige fællesnævner kombineret med, at man efterhånden bruger mere og mere plads på at behandle "kendte" end på at tage sit journalistiske ansvar alvorligt. Journalister burde bekymre sig om at finde sandheden, nu handler det om at tjene penge og det er således blevet manipulerende artikler/nyheder der ser dagens lys i vore dage - Det er nederen og skidt vej - det er kapitalismens skyld! Så er det sagt...
mandag den 22. oktober 2007
Globale klimaforandringers forbindelse til en fredspris
Først vil jeg lige sige hej, inden vi begynder at blive diskutere:-)
Med det af vejen, så påbegynder jeg mit første indlæg, som bliver en kommentar til John Gringos indlæg om fredsprisen til Al Gore. Det indlæg dukker op i morgen eller i overmorgen.
Med det af vejen, så påbegynder jeg mit første indlæg, som bliver en kommentar til John Gringos indlæg om fredsprisen til Al Gore. Det indlæg dukker op i morgen eller i overmorgen.
fredag den 12. oktober 2007
Så faldt Nobel også i kampen mod populisme og er gået i sort
Så skete der noget som ikke kunne gå min næse forbi uden, at få en kommentar med på vejen. I dag (den 12. oktober), har den tidligere amerikanske vice præsident fået nobelsFREDSpris for, hans dokumentar film "An unconvinient truth" med følgende begrundelse:
"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"
Hvorledes hjælper Al Gore's film os mod en mere fredelig verden?
De seneste 15 års vindere, tæller personligheder som Nelson Mandela, Yitzak Rabin og mange andre som alle har det tilfælles, at de har kæmpet mod en reel farlig ting (såsom landminer og arbejde mod atomare våben) eller har ydet en ekstraordinær indsats for, at løse en konkret konflikt (såsom Israel-Palæstina, afskaffelse af Apartheid og retfærdighed for østtimonesere). Hvorledes man kan få Al Gore til at passe ind i den kategori, er for mig svært forståelig og jeg måtte ty til at læse den officielle begrundelse for denne hæder til denne mand. Begrundelsen er som følger:
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 is to be shared, in two equal parts, between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.
Indications of changes in the earth's future climate must be treated with the utmost seriousness, and with the precautionary principle uppermost in our minds. Extensive climate changes may alter and threaten the living conditions of much of mankind. They may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the earth's resources. Such changes will place particularly heavy burdens on the world's most vulnerable countries. There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states.
Through the scientific reports it has issued over the past two decades, the IPCC has created an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming. Thousands of scientists and officials from over one hundred countries have collaborated to achieve greater certainty as to the scale of the warming. Whereas in the 1980s global warming seemed to be merely an interesting hypothesis, the 1990s produced firmer evidence in its support. In the last few years, the connections have become even clearer and the consequences still more apparent.
Al Gore has for a long time been one of the world's leading environmentalist politicians. He became aware at an early stage of the climatic challenges the world is facing. His strong commitment, reflected in political activity, lectures, films and books, has strengthened the struggle against climate change. He is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted.
By awarding the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 to the IPCC and Al Gore, the Norwegian Nobel Committee is seeking to contribute to a sharper focus on the processes and decisions that appear to be necessary to protect the world’s future climate, and thereby to reduce the threat to the security of mankind. Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond man’s control.
Oslo, 12 October 2007
Den afgørende forskel mellem Al Gore og de andre er, for mig at se, at Al Gore får den for at sætte fokus på et problem der POTENTIELT kan skabe et sikkerhedsproblem, men globalopvarmning er ikke et sikkerhedsproblem på nuværende tidspunkt.
For mig virker det som et knæfald og endnu et propaganda signal fra det politisk korrekte miljø, for man kan jo ligeså godt vende debatten om og påstå (med rette), at kravet om mere vedvarende energi etc. netop øger uligheden på verdens basis, da afrikanere og andre udviklingslande nu har ringere mulighed for, at gennemgå industrialisering, for ikke at sige ingen mulighed. Øget ulighed ulighed den vej igennem er potentielt ligeså farligt for verdensfreden, så hvad får han den for? Så kunne man også have givet nobels fredspris til de mennesker der opstillede dommedagsteorier i forbindelse med nytåret (hvor computere ville gå ned og vi ville blive angrebet af dræberbier), de satte jo også fokus på et potentielt problem som (hvis det var sket) kunne skabe et stort pres på sikkerhedssituationen via migration.
Så skete der noget som ikke kunne gå min næse forbi uden, at få en kommentar med på vejen. I dag (den 12. oktober), har den tidligere amerikanske vice præsident fået nobelsFREDSpris for, hans dokumentar film "An unconvinient truth" med følgende begrundelse:
"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"
Hvorledes hjælper Al Gore's film os mod en mere fredelig verden?
De seneste 15 års vindere, tæller personligheder som Nelson Mandela, Yitzak Rabin og mange andre som alle har det tilfælles, at de har kæmpet mod en reel farlig ting (såsom landminer og arbejde mod atomare våben) eller har ydet en ekstraordinær indsats for, at løse en konkret konflikt (såsom Israel-Palæstina, afskaffelse af Apartheid og retfærdighed for østtimonesere). Hvorledes man kan få Al Gore til at passe ind i den kategori, er for mig svært forståelig og jeg måtte ty til at læse den officielle begrundelse for denne hæder til denne mand. Begrundelsen er som følger:
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 is to be shared, in two equal parts, between the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.
Indications of changes in the earth's future climate must be treated with the utmost seriousness, and with the precautionary principle uppermost in our minds. Extensive climate changes may alter and threaten the living conditions of much of mankind. They may induce large-scale migration and lead to greater competition for the earth's resources. Such changes will place particularly heavy burdens on the world's most vulnerable countries. There may be increased danger of violent conflicts and wars, within and between states.
Through the scientific reports it has issued over the past two decades, the IPCC has created an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming. Thousands of scientists and officials from over one hundred countries have collaborated to achieve greater certainty as to the scale of the warming. Whereas in the 1980s global warming seemed to be merely an interesting hypothesis, the 1990s produced firmer evidence in its support. In the last few years, the connections have become even clearer and the consequences still more apparent.
Al Gore has for a long time been one of the world's leading environmentalist politicians. He became aware at an early stage of the climatic challenges the world is facing. His strong commitment, reflected in political activity, lectures, films and books, has strengthened the struggle against climate change. He is probably the single individual who has done most to create greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted.
By awarding the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 to the IPCC and Al Gore, the Norwegian Nobel Committee is seeking to contribute to a sharper focus on the processes and decisions that appear to be necessary to protect the world’s future climate, and thereby to reduce the threat to the security of mankind. Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond man’s control.
Oslo, 12 October 2007
Den afgørende forskel mellem Al Gore og de andre er, for mig at se, at Al Gore får den for at sætte fokus på et problem der POTENTIELT kan skabe et sikkerhedsproblem, men globalopvarmning er ikke et sikkerhedsproblem på nuværende tidspunkt.
For mig virker det som et knæfald og endnu et propaganda signal fra det politisk korrekte miljø, for man kan jo ligeså godt vende debatten om og påstå (med rette), at kravet om mere vedvarende energi etc. netop øger uligheden på verdens basis, da afrikanere og andre udviklingslande nu har ringere mulighed for, at gennemgå industrialisering, for ikke at sige ingen mulighed. Øget ulighed ulighed den vej igennem er potentielt ligeså farligt for verdensfreden, så hvad får han den for? Så kunne man også have givet nobels fredspris til de mennesker der opstillede dommedagsteorier i forbindelse med nytåret (hvor computere ville gå ned og vi ville blive angrebet af dræberbier), de satte jo også fokus på et potentielt problem som (hvis det var sket) kunne skabe et stort pres på sikkerhedssituationen via migration.
torsdag den 11. oktober 2007
Nedenstående er min onkels teorier (min mors søsters mand) Ganske underholdende - skal nok sørge for, at forfatte noget selv :=
Bin Laden’s Resurrection
On February 11, Raw Story [1] quoted an American general for saying that the “Bin
Laden trail has gone cold,” to which Michael Rivero added, “Along with Bin Laden!” Rivero
has collected an excellent amount of evidences, proving Bin Laden’s death at Tora Bora
in Afghanistan in December 2001 [2]. In 2004, the Pentagon-Al Qaida Study presented a
new “confession-video” with an actor who, apart from a white cap and a long beard, had
nothing in common with Osama Bin Laden [OBL]. The Mainstream Media [MM] then
swallowed the story without reservations, but then followed, from the same study, the Al
Zarqawi video with another actor, who lacked the peculiar hints of the late terrorist. This
actor was himself killed some months later – a security precaution or had he raised new
demands?
But back to the old ghost, OBL:
suddenly a new confession video was
presented – with a new actor, who neither
resembled his predecessor, nor OBL. Of
course, it was all there, the white cap and the
long beard, but the grey strains, plentiful in
2001 and scarce in 2004, were now
completely gone, raising the question what
had happened to the former actor (apart from
that no Moslem would colour his aging beard black). My recommendation to the male
reader must be not to accept any offer, no matter how much money is promised, to
assume the role of any terrorist for this study; it is probably very and acutely unhealthy.
As usual, the pseudo-OBL held his speech to the Americans in Arab language,
disregarding the fact that the real OBL spoke fluently English.
To the MM, however, such
considerations were unimportant.
Regardless the cited photographic
evidences, they all presented the
allegations that OBL had returned,
often with the added statement that
the Pentagon [to you: the producer
of this video] thought it was
authentic. They were grateful for a
new story in a rather lethargic
summer season in which we all ‘in
vain’ waited for new wars. How much bigger would the story be, when the Emperor’s
nakedness was finally exposed [3]? To me, this story, complex in reality, showed how we
have been buried in massive propaganda where nobody dares expose the evident. This is
the really remarkable detail about the new video-tape.
OBL, or precisely Osama bin Muhammad bin Awad bin Laden was born on March 10,
1957 as the 15th of 55 children to Muhammad bin Laden from his 10th of 22 wives – to
that, at least, the MM agrees. With support of the CIA, he founded Al Qaida (Am. Al
Qaeda) in the 1980ies as part of the Arab support to the Afghan Mujaheddin fighting the
Soviet occupation, but controversial descriptions exist whether this remained a kind of
social organization (as Hamas originally was and partially also remains) or was indeed
involved in terrorist activity. Today, I have the feeling that Al Qaida does not exist
outside the Western ‘Intelligence’ allegations and own terrorism plots – and, of course,
MM’s ready quotations of predominantly anonymous sources.
OSB had a kidney failure and was dependant on dialysis. It is difficult to imagine
that a dialysis dependant patient can survive the fresh life in the field for long. After the
American’s (initially) successful Afghanistan adventure, OBL retracted with many Taliban
fighters to the caves of Tora Bora, at the border to Pakistan. Suddenly, as the American
1 http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/General_Bin_Laden_trail_has_gone_0211.html
2 http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osama_dead.html
3 Hans Christian Andersen: The Emperor’s New Clothes
Osama bin Laden, C shortly before his death in 2001
troops were ready for the final fight, they were ordered to stop. Two helicopters were
permitted to land in the area and for the commoners, a corridor was kept open to
Pakistan. What exactly happened is not clear, perhaps the helicopter in reality contained
family who had come to the funeral of Osama. Here, at least, we lose his track forever.
Afterwards, it was not particularly difficult to conquer Tora Bora.
To well-informed readers, there were no Arabs involved in 9/11 outside the official
fairy tale (‘M. Atta and the 19 hijackers’) and no place for OBL who never admitted any
complicity in the American-Israeli terror event – but if that is too complex for you
presently, just study the pictures of OBL and his posthumous characters. At least, that
hoax is easily exposed to everybody – except the Mainstream Media.
Sept. 15, 2007
Bin Laden’s Resurrection
On February 11, Raw Story [1] quoted an American general for saying that the “Bin
Laden trail has gone cold,” to which Michael Rivero added, “Along with Bin Laden!” Rivero
has collected an excellent amount of evidences, proving Bin Laden’s death at Tora Bora
in Afghanistan in December 2001 [2]. In 2004, the Pentagon-Al Qaida Study presented a
new “confession-video” with an actor who, apart from a white cap and a long beard, had
nothing in common with Osama Bin Laden [OBL]. The Mainstream Media [MM] then
swallowed the story without reservations, but then followed, from the same study, the Al
Zarqawi video with another actor, who lacked the peculiar hints of the late terrorist. This
actor was himself killed some months later – a security precaution or had he raised new
demands?
But back to the old ghost, OBL:
suddenly a new confession video was
presented – with a new actor, who neither
resembled his predecessor, nor OBL. Of
course, it was all there, the white cap and the
long beard, but the grey strains, plentiful in
2001 and scarce in 2004, were now
completely gone, raising the question what
had happened to the former actor (apart from
that no Moslem would colour his aging beard black). My recommendation to the male
reader must be not to accept any offer, no matter how much money is promised, to
assume the role of any terrorist for this study; it is probably very and acutely unhealthy.
As usual, the pseudo-OBL held his speech to the Americans in Arab language,
disregarding the fact that the real OBL spoke fluently English.
To the MM, however, such
considerations were unimportant.
Regardless the cited photographic
evidences, they all presented the
allegations that OBL had returned,
often with the added statement that
the Pentagon [to you: the producer
of this video] thought it was
authentic. They were grateful for a
new story in a rather lethargic
summer season in which we all ‘in
vain’ waited for new wars. How much bigger would the story be, when the Emperor’s
nakedness was finally exposed [3]? To me, this story, complex in reality, showed how we
have been buried in massive propaganda where nobody dares expose the evident. This is
the really remarkable detail about the new video-tape.
OBL, or precisely Osama bin Muhammad bin Awad bin Laden was born on March 10,
1957 as the 15th of 55 children to Muhammad bin Laden from his 10th of 22 wives – to
that, at least, the MM agrees. With support of the CIA, he founded Al Qaida (Am. Al
Qaeda) in the 1980ies as part of the Arab support to the Afghan Mujaheddin fighting the
Soviet occupation, but controversial descriptions exist whether this remained a kind of
social organization (as Hamas originally was and partially also remains) or was indeed
involved in terrorist activity. Today, I have the feeling that Al Qaida does not exist
outside the Western ‘Intelligence’ allegations and own terrorism plots – and, of course,
MM’s ready quotations of predominantly anonymous sources.
OSB had a kidney failure and was dependant on dialysis. It is difficult to imagine
that a dialysis dependant patient can survive the fresh life in the field for long. After the
American’s (initially) successful Afghanistan adventure, OBL retracted with many Taliban
fighters to the caves of Tora Bora, at the border to Pakistan. Suddenly, as the American
1 http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/General_Bin_Laden_trail_has_gone_0211.html
2 http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osama_dead.html
3 Hans Christian Andersen: The Emperor’s New Clothes
Osama bin Laden, C shortly before his death in 2001
troops were ready for the final fight, they were ordered to stop. Two helicopters were
permitted to land in the area and for the commoners, a corridor was kept open to
Pakistan. What exactly happened is not clear, perhaps the helicopter in reality contained
family who had come to the funeral of Osama. Here, at least, we lose his track forever.
Afterwards, it was not particularly difficult to conquer Tora Bora.
To well-informed readers, there were no Arabs involved in 9/11 outside the official
fairy tale (‘M. Atta and the 19 hijackers’) and no place for OBL who never admitted any
complicity in the American-Israeli terror event – but if that is too complex for you
presently, just study the pictures of OBL and his posthumous characters. At least, that
hoax is easily exposed to everybody – except the Mainstream Media.
Sept. 15, 2007
tirsdag den 9. oktober 2007
En sort dag i en mørk tid, epilog
Ja, så er der gået snart 2 måneder og anden del af teksten med den ildevarslende titel "En sort dag i en mørk tid" er endnu ikke blevet skrevet... det bliver den heller ikke. Jeg havde ellers lagt i ovnen til noget større, men nu har jeg 1) mistet gejsten for denne tekst og 2) tænkt lidt over bøddel-offer dikotomien, samt forestillingen om den moralske fascisme, jeg mener, der kommer snigende i disse tider.
Jeg er ikke droppet alt dette, men vil helst ikke fortsætte, da det mangler noget substans/virkelighed, og dermed opstår faren for, at jeg begynder se moralsk fascisme og ofre og bødler overalt. Forankrigen mangler og tanken kan derfor løbe løbsk - og blive en helhedsforklaring, der umuligt kan falsificeres, for nu at lyde akademisk. Men en sådan betragtning skal droppes, eller også skal jeg ud og finde klarere grundlag for mine påstande; og det gider jeg sgu, rent ud sagt, ikke. Det lader jeg andre om... og du, kære læser (hvis der er nogen), er mere end velkommen.
Men når nu jeg lader en udmærket tekst, skrevet i en god rødvinsbrændert ovenpå tanker, refleksioner, samtaler som til sidst kulminerede i en uforståelighed og frustration over denne syge drejning vort samfund er ved at tage, blafre med vinden og måske forsvinde, er det slet ikke enden på denne blog.
I søndags fik jeg et par tømmermænds-klarsyn, og ét af dem, var at den kritiske journalistik, som er et ideal, og som jeg forestiller mig engang blev tilstræbt, nu er blevet erstattet med en over-jegs journalistik. Tanken er selvfølgelig ikke fremmed overfor tanken om den moralske fascisme, men måske nærmere det, der egentlig foregår derude. Medierne har påtaget sig rollen som over-jeg for vort samfund og individerne i selvsamme... ja, det var klarsynet, jeg fik i søndags. Mere kan jeg i skrivende stund ikke sige. Jeg har brug for at stene lidt over det på mit arbejde. Og så måske senere, i en mild rus af det ene og det andet, kan jeg polemisere over denne betragtning.
Derudover kunne jeg jeg også en dag tænke mig at give en sønderlemmende kritik af venstreføjen, som den agerer i dag... og også højrefløjen... og midterpartierne med... faktisk dem alle, det hele, mig selv, mine fjender og venner, mine allierede, hele dette lortesystem, og svenskerne... og, og syvende dags adventisterne :(
(sikke en cliff-hanger)
Jeg er ikke droppet alt dette, men vil helst ikke fortsætte, da det mangler noget substans/virkelighed, og dermed opstår faren for, at jeg begynder se moralsk fascisme og ofre og bødler overalt. Forankrigen mangler og tanken kan derfor løbe løbsk - og blive en helhedsforklaring, der umuligt kan falsificeres, for nu at lyde akademisk. Men en sådan betragtning skal droppes, eller også skal jeg ud og finde klarere grundlag for mine påstande; og det gider jeg sgu, rent ud sagt, ikke. Det lader jeg andre om... og du, kære læser (hvis der er nogen), er mere end velkommen.
Men når nu jeg lader en udmærket tekst, skrevet i en god rødvinsbrændert ovenpå tanker, refleksioner, samtaler som til sidst kulminerede i en uforståelighed og frustration over denne syge drejning vort samfund er ved at tage, blafre med vinden og måske forsvinde, er det slet ikke enden på denne blog.
I søndags fik jeg et par tømmermænds-klarsyn, og ét af dem, var at den kritiske journalistik, som er et ideal, og som jeg forestiller mig engang blev tilstræbt, nu er blevet erstattet med en over-jegs journalistik. Tanken er selvfølgelig ikke fremmed overfor tanken om den moralske fascisme, men måske nærmere det, der egentlig foregår derude. Medierne har påtaget sig rollen som over-jeg for vort samfund og individerne i selvsamme... ja, det var klarsynet, jeg fik i søndags. Mere kan jeg i skrivende stund ikke sige. Jeg har brug for at stene lidt over det på mit arbejde. Og så måske senere, i en mild rus af det ene og det andet, kan jeg polemisere over denne betragtning.
Derudover kunne jeg jeg også en dag tænke mig at give en sønderlemmende kritik af venstreføjen, som den agerer i dag... og også højrefløjen... og midterpartierne med... faktisk dem alle, det hele, mig selv, mine fjender og venner, mine allierede, hele dette lortesystem, og svenskerne... og, og syvende dags adventisterne :(
(sikke en cliff-hanger)
Abonner på:
Opslag (Atom)