Friday, March 28, 2014

Civil war in Ukraine

Lubrication not necessary...

Ukraine is still newsworthy for several reasons – none of them good. 

Since the people of Crimea voted to leave the poverty stricken and nazi-infected Ukrainian state things have gone from bad to worse and now the country is only two steps away from an all-out civil war.
The basic problem is that the political elite having constantly refused to implement good capitalist reforms. Instead they´ve done what politicians always do; they´ve robbed the people and given more power to themselves and their friends.
But there are also other reasons for the debacle and western leaders should be ashamed of their actions that have led to this point. Although the in-house leadership created a bad situation western support of the neo-Nazis, the NATO and EU pressure to join those organisations and several other outside interference's are the torches that lit the fire. The direct financial support (about $10bn) that poured in via western countries to practically arm extremists were not only morally questionable, no matter how bad the previous regime was, it was also in violation of previous signed agreements.

In the west journalists (useless as always) and politicians alike have blamed Russia for “invading” Ukraine – of course ignoring that the Russian speaking, Russian supporting, mostly Russian employed population in the historically Russian area of Crimea voted to be free of the Kiev mess. Western leaders also blame Russians to be in violation of the Budapest agreement. The thing is however that the mentioned agreement not only guaranteed Ukrainian boarders - it also clearly states that none of the signers would use economic coercion to subordinate Ukraine and that no one should use political pressure to incorporate Ukraine into their own sphere of interest. Consequently even IF Russia can be said to have violated the agreement, west did it first and for longer and as a result directly impacted the events that followed. The €11bn bailout (loan) offered to bribe Ukraine to join the European Union, the $10bn in direct aid to protesters and rioters, and of course the by NATO paid for military “exercises” together with Ukraine to show them how great it is to be a part of NATO, are all violations of that agreement. The continuous support of the coup government, even more “exercises” planned and the EU´s pressure to sign over to the western fold are also in grouse violation of that agreement.

As per usual anything blamed on the Russians the EU/US/NATO has already done, only a lot worse.

Without this support the coup would not have been successful. Without the money and political pressure there would not be such animosity whereas half the country leans towards EU/NATO and the other half don´t. Without the western support of neo-Nazis they would not be such a huge problem today. Without NATO pushing for influence on Ukraine and planned military drills, which both broke the mentioned agreement and upset Russians; it would be far less likely that Putin would have pressed for Crimean annexation.

In CIA speak this can be referred to as “blow-back”; it created unintended consequences by meddling. Or; they put their noses where they did not belong.

Not only should western leaders have known where this would end up, they should also have been fully aware of any potential Russian response. If they were, they fully intentionally incited what has to be regarded as a pending civil war and they knew fully well that Russia would incorporate Crimea regardless of the cost. I am not giving our western politicians enough credit to understand such things so I regard the entire spectacle as yet another ignorant foolish meddling of those deemed better.

I also do not understand what EU(SSR) and NATO would do with Ukraine anyway. It is not like NATO need more members, the current squad of misfits and soul-sucking entities are more than enough to take on any foe. The ONLY reason why NATO would try to incorporate Ukraine into their sphere is to encircle and piss off Russia even more. For the European Union it is even stranger. Even today, with the current membership, things are not going well. As things stand now it seems more likely that a country (or five) would leave EU rather than new member states would join. The Euro zone is a complete fiasco with riots, sky-rocketing unemployment and growing poverty as a result. What would the EU(SSR) do with 40 million Ukrainians out of which 10 million are unemployed? Give them cleaning jobs? Hire them as Mediterranean guards fighting off African refuges?

The same thing happen with Georgia. EU and NATO tried to influence Georgia and the Georgians thought they had their backs covered when they started the war against Abkhazia and South Ossetian. The minor states in turn thought they had western support since the west previously supported and encouraged Kosovo independence. But as per usual western hypocritical two-timing meddling fucked things up. Russia saw no other choice then to step in since the UN did nothing.

Ukraine however is a far bigger mess then the Georgian-Russian crisis. In Ukraine we have different nationalities, different languages, and completely diverging political agendas. The oligarchs have stolen a lot, the politicians have stolen even more, and the Nazis have yet to lay down arms.

Of course the western powers, highly responsible for the mess, do their very best to make it even worse.

Since the money lenders want their so called “investments” (loans) back the IMF has practically forced Ukraine to a 50% gas price hike, which will seriously hurt a people already living on the brink. But, of course, the IMF and the new coup government do not stop there; they´ve now also issued that pensions will be cut in half, practically condemning millions of elderly to dirt poor starvation. The “austerity plan” also includes deep cuts in social services, education and a devaluation of the currency.

It is like Greece all over again, only worse since the Ukraine is already in a complete mess.

I am not against the so called “austerity measures” as long as the root causes are addressed and the people responsible for the mess pay a hefty price both in terms of monetary retributions and jail-time. I also believe that a majority of the people can understand and excuse cuts as long as the high-and-mighty and those responsible get what is coming to them. However, as we´ve seen, that is and will not be the case.

The cash flow from the Ukraine will not go to anyone other than the big banks. The looted people will lose their homes, their land and their dignity – presumably also taken by banks and by certain western businesses seeing opportunities in buying up the country.

If Ukraine does not end up in a bloody long civil war I will be very surprised. Of course the group siding with the west will get monetary support and perhaps arms to fight off those opposing the looting. Again I see no other choice for Russia then to step in and, at the very least, protect the border areas filled with Russian speaking, Russian supporting, and mostly Russian employed population living in historically Russian areas.

Since many western leaders have already issued that “Russia is not done” and stating that Putin is the new Hitler, they will of course build on this to vilify and cast shadow over the only country seemingly caring what happens in the area. And if NATO steps in the situation may escalate quickly.

I am not pro-Russian or in love with Putin, but it is a seriously messed up world wherein the Russians seemingly are standing up for what is right and correct while the West continues to fuck up.

As for the Ukrainian people I feel very sorry for them. They made the same mistake as everyone else has done; they trusted western siren songs and were stupid enough to borrow money from the four-winged beasts of the large banking conglomerates.
Sadly hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, will die as a result – and so the EU(SSR)´s member states will get a lot of Ukrainians just as they wanted, only they will be refugees.
I wonder; will that lead to barriers put up in border areas with armed guards as in the Mediterranean?
Would be the ultimate betrayal…

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Deafening propaganda and the next war

ssh, do not pay any attention - American idol is on

I do believe that the Powers That Be (PTB) are starting to move on from their Russia bashing.
They´ve now firmly established that Putin is the reincarnation of Hitler, that Russia “invaded” Crimea, and that the, in part, neo-Nazi regime in Ukraine is in fact democratic and not at all a coup government supported with billions via U.S. in order to “make the correct decisions” to join EU and NATO.

Even more important is that PTB and their media friends have completely ignored the background story – they simply lifted out the Crimean referendum and Russian responses out of context and only argue and complain about those with no regard whatsoever to anything else. The Ukrainian Nazis; ignored. NATO´s incursions and planned “excises” together with Ukraine; ignored. NATO/U.S. constant bombing and actual, and factual, invasions of country after country; ignored. The murder of families and slaughter of kids by drones; ignored. Russia’s important naval base; ignored. History, the majority of Crimean’s and safety concerns; ignored.

I could go on but the image packaged and sold in the West is that of a hyper aggressive Russia seemingly invading countries on a whim in total disrespect of international laws and that both the Crimean referendum and the potential voting process of Transnistria are both equal to “invasion” by Russia.

It is an anti-intellectual repetitive rant of western politicians and western media.

I do not believe such anti-Russian propaganda is primarily for now. They are setting this up for later. The western PTB´s know that if they continue to provoke and do more later, a couple of years from now, Russia will, again, respond in the same way. Russians are predictable, they think logically from their perspective, and they have no intention of getting bullied around by NATO. Consequently there will be more clashes in the future, however not now.

Right now they are only setting this up in your brain, indoctrinating you. Later on, when the same thing happens again, they will repeat the rants and propaganda and that time, if not already, you will be much more inclined to agree.

For now though they will, more then likely, move on and focus on Iran and/or Syria.

Lately we´ve been informed that Iran had something to do with 9/11, that they most likely were behind the Lockerbee disaster, and we´ve heard that the Malaysian plane was boarded by Iranians with false passports. If we put all this together with earlier exaggerations and lies Iran is a primary target. Sooner or later the Israeli will convince U.S. and/or a false flag attack will occur and more lies will sell the war against Iran.

However it is also likely that they will launch a new barrage of propaganda against Assad and Syria. Before the Russian debacle they firmly established Bashar al-Assad as the Hitler of Syria, the user of chemical weapons (weapons of mass destruction), the murderer of his people, a dictator with grandiose dreams of a nazi-commie-Muslim Grand Syria, and that he, of course, is the sworn enemy of Israel.
Conveniently hiding the, by CIA and MI5, flown in mercenaries and al-Qaida forces that make up the bulk of the so called “opposition”. An opposition to Assad that, among other things, continue to slaughter Christians and teach kids how to chop of heads of those that do not obey. Of course they also hide that the NATO-leaders are letting Turkey (and Israel) to constantly fire into Syria to provoke further violence. And, of course, the evidence that it was (mainly) the "opposition" that in fact used chemical weapons is thrown out as nonsense.

Syria is home to the second most important Russian naval base (the Crimean one NATO tried to steal away is the most important) and Putin has previously thwarted U.S. attempts to bomb and invade with nice diplomatic moves. Now with Putin´s “invasion” of Crimea and him being the new Hitler, any support for the Syrian Hitler coming from Kremlin will be sold in the west as two dictators hell-bent on destroying the world.

I of course laugh at the entire thing – it is so ridiculous and so transparent.

However I´ve seen a lot of my friends and even libertarian minded people giving support for NATO and the U.S. against the horrible Soviet Union 2.0. Very weird. I do not expect people in general see through the propaganda, why would they? Never did before. I do however expect that intellectual people accept reality, but apparently not all of them do. Some probably blinded by historical events, but mostly I believe they too have bought and swallowed the mindless rhetoric.

The most obvious of all lies and very easy to find out the truth about is the claim that 123% voted in Sevastopol. Even Wikipedia has debunked that crazy idiocy long ago, but it is still sold as truth by many and I´ve seen plenty of my libertarian-minded friends do the same. Ever heard of Google people? Fact checking? Before you write editorials or put forward weird claims, perhaps you should check the validity? Just a suggestion…

I do laugh all the time but there is one thing that pisses me off in this story and that is how they treat Russia and Russians. The moronic sanctions for one; not only are they pointless, they are also mainly aimed at folk that had nothing to do with anything. And however bad western media say those sanctions are, they are in reality, at the most, an irritating fly.
But the worst thing is that they do this only against Russia. Not against Ukraine that has just as much (or more) to blame for the events, and certainly not against NATO/U.S.
Apparently U.S. invading and occupying countries while protecting drug-smuggling warlords and butchering entire families via drones or military hotheads is not enough to be sanctioned.
It seems that only accepting a democratic majority is something to be imposed with sanctions.

War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, referendums are invasions, and bombs are democracy.
Kids murdered by drones = democracy and freedom. 

This world has really turned into a crazy place.

Recently the Nobel Prize winner (oh the Irony!) Obama visited The Hague (oh the irony!!!). Playing war-games with his bloodthirsty (and listen to by NSA) allies while, more than likely, drawing up plans for USA´s next peaceful, freedom loving and democratic war. 

The only question is where it will be and what societies soon to be swimming in democracy.
My money is on Iran; Syria will probably come as a bonus or be attacked later after 3-4 millions of Iranians are dead and millions more starving.  
It is amazing what freedom bombs and peaceful slaughter can do to the world – wouldn´t you agree?

... do not pay any attention to these Pakistani kids to the left, they were killed by drones but that is all good and need to sanctions or condemnation whatsoever. 


Monday, March 24, 2014

I am a paedophile and a rapist

I was talking to a friend of mine today. We discussed her ability to avoid gagging when having objects in her mouth and throat. An interesting subject during working hours as you can imagine.
However the discussion soon pored over into feminism and what a politically correct person would say to her in case the topic spilled over a coffee table. A woman should of course never enjoy giving a man pleasure. Especially not while performing a job usually associated with stimulating movies.

Now, this friend of mine she is loathes porn of all kind and is very strong as a person doing whatever she wants with her life. When I (or anyone else) tell her she should do something, she brushes it off and goes her own way. I admire that in a person, and even more so in a woman because today it is not easy being a woman having an own agenda, the feminazis has seen to that.

Contrary to popular feminist belief most men want a confident intelligent woman to whom he can both talk to and, on occasion, also enjoy while she is acting out her fellatio skills. There is no contradiction in being a strong woman and wanting to look beautiful. There is no contradiction in being a independent woman and love the act of sex. However this, that should be the feminist creed, is not accepted by the politically correct and it is not the proper way to behave. In essence the agenda of the high and mighty is to reduce females and men to mechanical beings in need of a government approval stamp.

Sadly this also spill over into how we behave towards each other.

In case you missed This Story it is a sad tale of how the righteous politically correct have transformed people into mindless automatons afraid of everything from the terrorists hiding in every bush to be afraid of getting accused of paedophilia at every turn.

As a man I know this all too well.

If I were to take a job at a daycare center people would whisper behind my back and take out their kids to put them at another center or outright ask me why the hell I love working with kids. As a man I know that I am a rapist in the making - eagerly I stroll about wondering how to best find a dark damp basement where I can put my female victims. As a man I know it is just a matter of time before I hit my girlfriend/wife (or a random woman) and perhaps give her HIV in the process. As a man I know that holding up a door, offering my seat at the bus or when showing politeness towards women I am actually asserting my dominance and furthering the patriarchate agenda.

I know this isn´t so in all countries or cultures, but in Sweden definitely and apparently also in the UK. A few may argue that I am exaggerating, and the politically correct and their feminazi horde would certainly state that I am a bigoted fascist caveman out to destroy their beautiful dream of love and cute puppies, but the road is now frequently traveled and THIS is one clear result.

Not that the feminazis with friends are solely responsible, we also need to factor in government and the statist agenda whereas anyone, but especially kids, trying to be self-sufficient or trying to assert control over their own lives; is a horrific person – a person needed to be corrected, or perhaps incinerated? 

Everyone know only the government can help. Anyone loose from the herd need to be re-educated and told what correct behavior is, and anyone uttering words like “home-schooling” or “self-determination” or say "I want to eat whatever I want" is clearly a person deeply troubled. Such a male individual is labelled with the government disapproval stamp of anarchist, fascist, conservative thug, and is told that he simply do not understand – in many cases he do not understand because he is not a woman. A woman is treated even worse. A woman stating she wants to be a house wife or wants to be a stay-at-home mom or, worse of all; if she says she love pleasuring her man then she is clearly delusional and need of pills: Time to go to the doctor Missy, keep gobbling those pharmaceuticals and for God´s sake stop shaving your armpits! Don´t you know that shaving off body-hair is only a way of making you look younger so your paedophile of husband can fuck a child? 

The future is already here, and it is a poorly dressed hairy woman screaming “rape” as soon as you hold up the door.

This so called civilization cannot dissipate fast enough – where the hell is that enormous comet that will end it all? Hopefully that comet will be shaped as a penis penetrating the space between the two balls of the Moon and the Earth and then piercing our lands with loud sigh, now that would be irony.

Friday, March 21, 2014

Sex, lying and videotapes

Is he putin it to them or not? 

I hope you´re really paying attention what is going on in media at the moment. I am of course referring to the Crimea-“crisis” as they are calling it.

Let´s do a small recap.

First we have an agreement between NATO and Russia that certain areas or states should not be persuaded to join with NATO. Secondly we have a defense agreement between Russia and Ukraine. Thirdly Russia’s most important naval base is station on a leased area of Ukraine/Crimea. Got that?

Okay, then we have a situation in the world whereas NATO/U.S. occupies Afghanistan and practically still occupies Iraq -all based on lies. During the last years NATO/U.S. has also invaded or bombed countless of countries. Libya of course comes to mind, but Sudan, Yemen and constant drone attacks on Pakistani soil cannot be ignored either. All of these conflicts (and more) occurred without a declaration of war, without UN approval, and without any form of legal right or casus belli. Basically they just decided to bomb a few countries, invade, slaughter a few hundreds of thousands, rob the area of riches and then set up puppet governments.

Where are those fucking sanctions!? 

Now, afterwards, they of course site humanitarian reasons and blame the previous dictatorial regimes lifting up the occupational forces to a higher pedestal. And yes, Iraq can do better without Saddam and Libya can do better without al-Gaddafi, but so far the growing terrorism and horrific poverty in the wake of NATO-bombs haven´t made the situation better, on the contrary.

The point here however is not whether or not Iraqis or Afghans have it better today or whether or not there was some kind of justification, no the main point is that it happen. The acts themselves speak volumes to the violent nature and aggressive policies of NATO. If they find a reason to act, bomb and invade, they will do so.

If you belong to a country that historically been the main antagonist of NATO and you see their bases start popping up all around you in violation to previous agreements, wouldn´t you feel like you need to enhance your defense capabilities?
NATO did not however feel content with signing agreement after agreement with nation after nation - most of which are pointless since the U.S. and its main allies are fully capable to withstand or invade whatever country they so wish – no, they of course also felt the need to setup “exercises” together with and within the boarders of Ukraine and without hiding their intent seek to incorporate Ukraine in both EU and NATO. The consequence could not only be that Russia will have an even more difficult defense position; they would likely also forfeit their very important naval base. In addition the reach and power of the western allies would be strengthening while Russians weaken.
This, alone, only what I´ve written here, should make you feel sympathetic towards Putin and Russia. And with a history of French, German, Swedish and Polish invasions which killed millions upon millions of Russians, can you really say that it is weird or illogical for the Russians to say “Njet” and show some forcible attitude?

Personally I believe the Russians, so far, have been very timid, very relaxed and very understanding.

Above was a geopolitical and historical background that cannot, in any form or way, be ignored. If you hear anyone, regardless of this person is Journalist, politician or neighbor say that Russia is evil and wants to steal land with no reason and this person do not take above into account, that person is most likely lying or, at the very best, is totally ignorant.

But of course things are a lot worse.

The coup in Ukraine occurred with western support - according some this included direct action. The coup government now in place, legal or not, house several prominent neo-nazis. You can complain and argue against the previous administration, as you should, but the one in place now is not better – only more west-friendly. So when you (and Russians) see things like in THIS clip, is it so strange that Putin refuses to back down?

As I wrote in my previous post I believe Russia to be the only direct military threat to my birth nation of Sweden, but I cannot sit still and let the warmongering thugs of U.S. or their ass-licking allies get away with this crap. This entire situation is due to NATO/U.S. and is not anyone else’s fault. NATO/U.S. is also the entity, together with the soul-suckers of the EU(SSR), who continuously throw fire on an unnecessary situation.

I have also seen a lot of commentaries in papers and politicians in the west say that Russia won´t be satisfied with Crimea and they will either attack Ukraine with force or go further in another part of the world. To this I first say; Duh!!! But then I also need to state that this is the “war” of information they are perpetrating. Consequently they keep saying that Putin is the new Hitler, Soviet 2.0. is here, Russia is the aggressor, and the fully lawful opinion of Crimean’s should not count since… well, because!

The anti-intellectual banter and the horrific history revisionism now enacted in west is far beyond anything seen since the grandiose days of the Manmade Global Warming stupidity.

This dangerous scale of lying and exaggerations can only be interpreted as pure warmongering. They want war, or at the very least they want a new Cold War. That´s the only way to look at it.
Of course they will soon find a new bogeyman; probably Iranian terrorists with Syrian passports will be behind the Malaysian aircraft hijacking or some such made up story, but sooner or later they will get back to Putin and Russia with a new repartee of lying embellishment.

Why you may ask?

Because what I´ve been writing on this blog and screaming about for many years now, because when they have exhausted all other options and the people are starving; what will they do? They take us to war! 
This is the end game of the financial apocalypse that statists and the banksters have created. You´ll be a fool to believe otherwise.

Next up on the agenda; Iran?
They too are very nastily close to U.S. military bases, must be a reason for it...

Thursday, March 20, 2014

Suicide, bitches!

If you haven´t noticed yet there is a wave of suicide among banksters.

Although not yet statistically “out of the norm” since the total number of these parasitical thieves numbers in the hundreds of thousands (if not millions). Still, this wave is decently sudden and they are piling up on the pavement so it is not hard to see conspiracists having a field day with this one.

Perhaps related is another wave of suicides going on in the Froggy business of Orange?

Or perhaps this is a unconscious reaction to where this world is going?

Regardless I am appreciating the effort and have consequently bought a nice bottle of Smirnoff and a few Russian pirogues for the weekend. I am also hopeful that this trend will make its way into the EU-parliament and get a hold of journalists across the world.

Oh, and just so it is perfectly clear: I would never, ever, for any form or reason, commit suicide – so if you see an article about a Swede jumping from a tall building in Barcelona; I was murdered.

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Unified Scandinavia – important for so many reasons

These beautiful flags can be morphed into this?:

I´ve previously on this blog mentioned that I believe that we should unify Scandinavia into one entity, with one monarch, one capital and one army. In the light of world events, I feel the urge to stress this idea once again.

NATO/U.S is a disgusting entity responsible for several wars and millions of dead only during the last decade and Russia can certainly not be trusted either, and the EU(SSR) is a horrific mega-bureaucratic shithole filled with sycophants.

A unified Scandinavia would work, and probably work well. This since our history and culture is so similar.

With Finland and Iceland the total population would be circa 27 million and GDP $1600bn (higher than Australia). New roads, airports and national stadiums would be needed to be built and since parliaments and politicians should be focused around the Copenhagen/Malmö area (as I suggest to be new capital) that would save a lot of money. With this in mind and with armed forces (outside of NATO) a unified Scandinavia would have a lot stronger voice in the world. Far stronger then each country by itself put together today.

Of course there are a lot of problems. The Norwegians will be reluctant to join and the Finns will probably have some issues with it as well. Another problem will be the struggle for where to put new entities of Government and how to unite the royal houses and purely administrative political issues of that kind. If this can be handled by a proper committee without too much political involvement I do however think that such issues can be solved.

Of course merging all states into Scandinavia mean less grants needed then compered to all the governments of today - hence less total money thrown at politicians comes to administration, bureaucracy, but to pay for the merger and costs of changing currency to a Scandinavian Krona and the communications needed to be built we should sell off publicly owned businesses. Sweden alone has the possibility to sell off government entities to a value of around $70bn. The Norwegians can keep the current oil fund “in-house” but I would suggest that the money coming in as of the merger should be used for military and defense purposes. Rail-road investments, new airports, bridges and other communications will bring the different countries closer together but are also much needed investments that will benefit all in the long run.
A standing professional defense force of around 200 000-250 000 men with the very latest in technology and equipment will be second only to a very few other countries and would be deterrent enough to discourage any attacker.
The number of embassies, consulates and customs can be cut with 70-80% around the world. With Finland out of the euro and since Sweden, Finland and Denmark would be out of the EU(SSR) there are as much as $8bn to be saved each year on this alone - money that should be used to cut taxes to equal level in all countries. Again the lowest common denominator should be the target, not the highest.

Safety, a better economy, new investments and a strong voice in the world – there is no downside.

The only “downside” is for politicians. Not only will there be fewer of them, they will also be outside of NATO and outside of EU(SSR) which means far fewer seats, less income and less nepotism. I do however think we can live with that… This is however the last danger.
My main point of creating and advocating a unified Scandinavia is so we can skip any military alliances and leave the EU(SSR). If we do not leave such entities, there are much fewer benefits and the general idea sort of dissipates. Politicians will fight dirty to keep their alliances and keep their seats in Brussels so that is something that need to be handled.
As a solution, as I´ve already mentioned; all things related to this unification should be handled by normal people. A few university scholars, a few judges, a few business folk and a few union folk. Perhaps even a few from the outside who have no real stake in this – a few savvy people from, for example; England or Brazil would probably be a good idea. Very few with political affiliations and as many people of the common crowd as possible.
Scandinavia should be the opposite to the EU(SSR) - it should be a unification of the people and for the people and consequently created from below and not something that is dropped upon us with decrees. We probably also need a few referendums to make this viable, although I would prefer that we also keep those to a minimum.

With the government we should keep the monarchy as it is a great tradition and have a lot of history. We should keep the Danish crown as our new head of state. The other royal families can be given this or that task. I would suggest a two parliament system with the first house directly elected via personal vote (not party) - elected from each region i.e. around 59 people, equivalent to Governors (6 year terms). The second house is elected as per usual in the Nordic countries via party bills and would make up 289 politicians (5 year terms) – if my suggestions come to pass, imagine the uproar and screams of politicians around the realm... I would here fire over 1000 politicians and since I would also suggest that we cut their salaries in half, oh my, they will send assassins after me soon…

We also need a constitutional court and certainly a few other new or merged entities, but we can handle that with no problem. Our new constitution should of course be based on what we have today, although I would suggest a few alterations to mimic the American one and other great documents from history.
Mind you this is not exactly what I would like or want, I would personally go for a more libertarian Scandinavia, others would like to see a more socialist society, others will be against the monarchy etc. I do however feel like what I´ve suggested here, and earlier, is more viable and can be accepted by the majority. As long as this means that we leave NATO and the EU(SSR) and that we go for the lowest common denominator comes to all things economic, I believe this to be a great solution for all.

Monday, March 17, 2014

Ukrainian/Crimean crisis and Sweden

A bit furry, but only pussies crimea river...

As a Swede and history buff it is very hard to circumvent the 33 wars Sweden have fought against Novogorod/Moscowy/Russia throughout the years. Although fighting wars against all countries of Europe at one point or the other and although the Swedish-Danish wars probably were the most destructive, for both countries, I would still argue that if you would appoint one main antagonist of Sweden it would be Russia. Going back hundreds of years Sweden’s defense policies have been aimed at protecting the country against the Eastern threat - further enhanced during the cold war this sentiment is very hard to evade also today.

Although NATO/U.S. is, by far, a much larger danger to world peace then Russia, the risk of any U.S. lead alliance to invade and take over my birth nation is non-existent. None of our neighbors have any reason to take up arms and hoist their flag on Swedish soil. Consequently the only latent military threat to Sweden is, also today, Russia.
With this in mind you can sort of understand or excuse those Swedes gasping appallingly when Russia is well on its way to annex Crimea.

Also the comparison to Hitler and the Nazis is not too farfetched. Germany had pretty valid reasons to incorporate Austria (also via popular vote), and the Germans even had a reasonable motivation of taking over their previously owned areas filled with Germans. Until they invaded and took over the part of Czechoslovakia they did not have any claim on, the western world took, and excusably so, the back-seat and allowed Hitler´s “peaceful” conquests. Russia and Putin is today pretty much using the same argumentation and have the same pretty reasonable claims.

However with all of this said NATO/U.S. has no credibility whatsoever. After invading country after country and committing war crimes on daily basis and still occupying several countries today – all occurred with no claims and no reason whatsoever which certainly make the Russians and their reasoning look like Vulcan logic. Personally, the only thing surprising me is that not more countries claim to see terrorists everywhere and consequently go to war – if the U.S. can slaughter millions and invade on a whim, why cannot others do the same?

Secondly we do have a democratic referendum in Crimea now. Even if the Kremlin manipulated the votes, which is claimed regardless of what international observers say, it is very clear that a vast majority of Crimean’s want to leave Ukraine and join Russia. Not surprising. Ukraine is poverty-stricken and nowadays there are neo-Nazis in the Ukrainian government. Also the Russians in Ukraine have felt, rightly or not, to be second class citizens. Crimea also has much stronger ties to Russia then Ukraine.

From the Russian standpoint it is even more obvious and logical. They have historical claims, the majority of the population is Russians, and they have both security reasons and economic reasons to incorporate the area. Although most of the Russian argumentation, one by one, is mediocre at best, put them together and you´ll have a hard time discarding them. NATO/U.S. posturing does nothing to help either, it actually escalate and strengthens Russian resolve, not the opposite.

NATO/U.S. has encircled Russia with bases and military agreement from the Baltics to Kazakhstan, from South Korea to Turkey, from Romania to Norway, so you cannot really see Russian actions as illogical. It is the constant expansion of the constant aggressiveness of NATO/U.S. and their willingness to go to war (all the time) that prompted Russian intervention in Georgia and it’s also a main driving force behind the Crimea-crisis.

Thus Russian reaction and Putin´s words do not surprise me one bit. Very expected.

It is the western response to the crisis and the blatant and obvious lying that surprise me; Putin is apparently the devil, Russia has no claim whatsoever, a popular vote should not count, and neo-Nazis in a government neighboring Russia is ignored. The people of Crimea and their opinions be damned.

Also we cannot ignore the fact that the coup was against a democratically elected government and that the coup would never have succeeded without western support. Yes the previous government was horrific, but nevertheless a democratically elected one.
In essence the West is supporting a bloody coup but is condemning a democratic referendum. When did that become western policy? This is terrible news for Scots and Venetians since they too should, logically, be threatened by Obama. Will NATO bomb Glasgow soon? Seems increasingly plausible for each day that passes...

And, as mentioned, even if you somehow sidestep what is actually going on and ignore all the Russian/Crimean reasoning and ignore the referendum; what about Afghanistan? Iraq? Libya? What about all the drones flying over sovereign states murdering families and butchering children? What about the war crimes?
What about the fact that drug production in Afghanistan flourishes like never before? Whatever NATO/U.S. and the west countries argue or say it automatically becomes hypocrisy. Whatever Obama or Kerry say about Russia they´ve already done and proven to be a lot worse. Whatever western countries, including Sweden, argue about the Crimean crisis their words fall flat since they only now, suddenly, only because it is Russia, complain and argue humanitarian principles. 

It really takes a lot of me to say it because I do see Russia as a threat to Sweden, but I cannot ignore the facts and the duplicity and I have to, at least to a degree, rather support Russia and the Crimean people than any insincere hypocritical notion coming from the West.

As a final note I would like to, again, point out how much better it would be if Scandinavia would unite under one flag as one country with one army outside of both NATO and EU. If so we would speak with a stronger voice and could put more pressure on Russia as well as NATO/U.S. At the very least I hope that the much needed restructuring of Swedish armed forces is hurried up and that more funds is given for this purpose.

Saturday, March 15, 2014

conspiracies - fun, crazy, or reality?

Oh no! A pyramid! 

Conspiracy theories are fun and often contain a bit of truth. Conspiracy theorists are often people that question everything and this is a good thing because it will open up for alternative views and lead to a better end result. However there are also real crazies out there – and worse still, their crazy notions help out covering up what is really going on because the actual conspiracies that do exist will be overshadowed by lunacy.

For example we have the chem-trail theory. Supposedly airlines across the world are in cahoots with governments and shadowy cabals and they are trying to make us more stupid, give us cancer or other diseases. As proof of this the conspiracist theorist show us a few weird looking airplane trails in the sky...
Even if we ignore how all of those thousands of ground personnel, crews, businessmen, politicians, and suppliers who, apparently, are able to keep this quiet – we still end up with the question; why would evil folk make themselves stupid and give themselves the same diseases? Are they somehow immune? Do they have an alien antidote? It doesn't make sense, it has no practical use and there is no way a thing like this would not be on every news channel, no matter how much media and journalists are bought and paid for.

Another story circling is that of HAARP. More than 200 miles east of Anchorage, Alaska, is the Pentagon's High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program, officially an enormous experiment to heat the ionosphere with radio waves. But conspiracy theorists believe the project is a weapon to bring down aircraft and missiles by lifting sections of the atmosphere, cause earthquakes or even a huge weather modification machine. Although this is theoretically actually possible, Nicola Tesla proved that over 100 years ago, it is still not a very likely theory. At least not yet. Although I would not dismiss the idea completely we certainly lack any form of indication of HAARP being used as conspiracists theorists claim and I do not give government enough credit to be able to build, maintain and use such a apparatus without destroying the planet or, at the very least, give us evidence of its usage. The believers point to recent earthquake, certain tropical storms or whatnot as “evidence”. Like hurricanes and earthquakes never happen before. That is not evidence, its nonsense.
Feminism is so stupid and idiotic it do not even 
belong among the craziest of conspiracy theories...

Another weird one without any hint of proof is the theory about fluoride. Fluoride is commonly added to drinking water as a way to reduce tooth decay. However there has been some evidence that there could be some harmful side effects from fluoride and conspiracy theorists believe that this information is known and recognized by those responsible for adding the fluoride, but that they continue the practice regardless. Drug companies have been targeted as possible beneficiaries, as they will profit from a population with ill-health. Another motive is that fluoride lowers mental abilities thereby "dumbing down" the entire population. Although I have no problem seeing drug companies looking for alternative ways of increasing their profits, and there are of course governments that do not mind a dumber population, but again I see neither any direct evidence for it nor any indication of this being implemented. And again I have very hard time thinking that all of the thousands of involved would be able to keep it a secret. Perhaps this is a bad idea, just as with asbestos, smoking and DDT, and I would definitely agree that it is better with clean water without fluoride, but a conspiracy? Not very likely.

The same goes for the 9/11 theories floating around. There is simply no way the U.S. government was behind the attack. An inapt lack of proper response, the military drills, and the stupidity of FBI etc I simply see as normal government failure. Perhaps there was one or two partly or fully knowing and that such a person let it happen to get something out of it, but the idea that the U.S. government directly was behind the attacks is ludicrous. A few claim that Mossad could have something to do with it, but why would the Israelis so blatantly risk their relationship with their most important ally? With that said however there are a few inconsistencies and several questions not yet answered like why did the U.S. not attack the only nation that can be said to have anything to do with the attacks? Instead they attacked several that clearly and obviously did not have anything to do with it – and they still use it, today, as an excuse for murdering Muslims. I see 9/11 not as a conspiracy in itself, rather an excuse for the high and mighty to push their agenda of the police state and continuous wars. They definitely wanted something like that to happen, they are happy with it, and I would be surprised if they did not want more of the same. Going from that to planning and executing it is however a completely other story.

There are of course other theories that are way, way out there. The most idiotic one filled with complete lunacy revolves around Lizard people living beneath the earth living of our negative energy – apparently several royal families are lizards. The only so called proof of this hilarious theory is a few photos taken showing a weird glow in the eyes of certain monarchs and leaders. I too have a few photos of myself with glowing red or yellow eyes and I have never felt an itch to eat flies or whatnot...

With all of above, and many others, you may assume I am dissing all such theories, but then you would be wrong. There are conspiracy theories that do make sense and do come with reasonable proof.
For example the Manmade Global Warming madness - which is a proven scam! This stupidity has been scientifically proven wrong over and over again and, even more importantly; there is no proof of man having any form of significant impact on weather or the cooling/warming of the planet. The only reason, that I can see, for certain entities of government and “scientists” to promote this idea is for monetary gains. This is a new way of taxing us and it is a new way for government scientists to receive founding. Not sure if this constitutes as a conspiracy theory, rather a scientific scam, but I am certainly a firm believer that manmade global warming is one of the biggest hoaxes of all time.

Another conspiracy I hold for truth since there is plenty of evidence for it, is the way the U.S. was tricked to join both world wars. Before joining WW I Germans issued several warnings in U.S. papers about U-boats and shipping lanes, there were corporate interested in having the U.S. join up, and the British surely did everything they could to drag their American friends into the conflict. Before joining WW II President Franklin Roosevelt certainly provoked the Japanese to a degree that there was no way they would let it go. There are so many letters and communiques sent by so many different countries warning about the Japanese attack that it was impossible not see it coming. And again both the British and certain corporations had very “good” reasons to bring the U.S. into the fight against the Nazis.

Another theory I believe to be partly true is the idea of a North American Union. As with the EU there are strong forces looking to incorporate Mexico and Canada and the U.S. in one single entity. This certainly also goes for similar areas across the globe. There are plenty of officials, “thinkers” and the like that promote such entities and I believe that, long-term, such unification is the goal of many politicians. Not sure I would call this, in itself, a conspiracy theory. It is more the normal extension of normal affairs among the high and mighty. In earlier times this was achieved by royal marriages to avoid wars, nowadays it is promoted by bureaucrats and politicians looking to extend their power and importance. Bigger entities mean more power and more seats to hand out to relatives and friends – can you name one politician not interested?

Perhaps the grandest and most persistent theory is that of the New World Order (NWO). This theory is linked to sects, sometimes to Illuminati, the Freemasons, the Bilderberg group etc etc. The basic idea is that most (if not all) of the other theories mentioned are promoted by and controlled by a certain clique of individuals looking to install a world controlling government. Although, as I alluded to above, I certainly see this as a goal for many (especially politicians) I do not see any real evidence for it as a conspiracy in the sense theorists claim. More importantly though is that the supposed financiers and shadowy figures behind the curtain probably wouldn´t have any interest in a worldwide all-powerful government entity. Why would they? The reason the big banks and their owners can continuously rob us and, more or less, control the world is due to differences and different countries animosity towards each other. They can control the board in part because they have the funds and power to do so and in part because governments need this external help to win over or topple another government/people/whatnot. With one single government and us having one single currency and one single interest rate and one single army, it is very doubtful banksters and shadowy figures would be able to continue. Of course this depends on how this single government entity will look like and how we will elect our representatives to it. But even if Blackrock, Vanguard and the other groups (that do exist!) would be able to take over and control a world government, their power to extract funds would be diminished and they would not rule from the shadows anymore, which is what they actually want.
Have you ever heard of Vanguard before? If not, I suggest you go look for them, you´ll be surprised over their reach and power. They exist in the shadows for a reason and I hardly see the benefit for them within the theoretic idea of NWO. Also, which cannot be ignored, politicians with that much power will rule and they will not let any other entity tell them what to do. Basically if we get to the point of a single world government the very first groups the politicians will get rid of will be their previous “friends” and financial backers. The people behind the scene are not stupid, they know this, they know how to best benefit and that is definitely not through any NWO-idea.
However, with that said, I still do believe that we´re heading in that direction. I believe that we in a not too distant future will start seeing more and more embryos of a single world government. Unified interest rates and a world police under the flag of the UN is already being discussed together with all of those trade- and political unions already mentioned. The path is clear, and we´ll probably end up there eventually, so in that sense I am in agreement with the New world order conspiracy theorists and I am likewise a stark opponent of such plans.
I would also like to point out that if there are any shadowy cabals out there I do not believe they are conjointly always working together. I rather see them as fierce opponents to each other, at least on and off, and many (all) of the important groups rather want more war, more conflicts and a more divided world then the opposite. In essence, in the future, we may have to pick a side; either with the NWO-politicians/bureaucrats that have no problem killing millions for their amusement and power, or with the people that have no problem killing millions to earn more money and more power. Not an easy choice.

The most interesting “conspiracy theory”, or rather alternative view of world history, is the one which have had plenty of proponents throughout the years; The theory that we do not know what happen in the past and that there are plenty of, albeit circumstantial, evidence for pre-dawn civilizations. You may call such a civilization Atlantis or Lemuria or put other names to it, but this persistent idea has plenty of backers and in several ways I am one of them.

I do not believe in the Ancient Alien theorem, although they too, sometimes, put forward interesting ideas. Neither do I have positive things to say about Zecharia Sitchin, and I find people like Graham Hancock to be a bit too much. I do however believe that there is something there. What, I do not know. There are too many coincidences, too many structures, too many relics and too many ancient religious stories to simply ignore it.

Something important has been forgotten about our own history, I am certain of it.

One by one most of the theories can be ridiculed and disproven. If you watch one single episode of Ancient Aliens or listen to a part of Hancocks ramblings, you might simply discard them – and rightly so. But if you look at the whole picture, not only put forward from the people mention, but also others, and they are plentiful, you start to ponder. Theories about the sphinx and the pyramids for example are interesting because there are few (none), real factual evidence in support of the mainstream view. I am of course not advocating that the pyramids were made as alien landing platforms or that the sphinx was built by Atlantians, I am only stating that there are holes in the Pyramids-are-tombs- and the supposed date of construction of the sphinx - theories. They do not add up, and if the mainstream theory is wrong, should we not look for alternative ideas? I am not saying that the mainstream view is wrong; I am stating that it can be wrong. That alone should be enough to prompt new and fresh research, but that is not the case.
Is there a conspiracy here? Perhaps, but I am more thinking that scholars and professors are lazy. It is much easier sitting in a dusty museum collecting government grants then to actually go out there and take risks. It is easier to write what others already pen down then to come up with new material. Also when a person with a decent theory about the sphinx in the very next breath state that the Nazca Lines are landing strips for Alien space ships, you cannot really blame the academic world for sneezing vehemently.

But even weirdoes sometimes get it right...

Telling is also how similar several ancient cultures developed. Here you can show plenty of religious icons, religious stories, and building constructions, mathematical and astronomical similarities and so on. Of course if you want to find something you probably will. And if you want to find a certain number you will definitely find it. Come up with a number, any number, and then look around you to try to find it and I promise you will. Same with religion and construction. Building pyramids for example was probably the only way for ancient people to build high lasting building. And is it very surprising that the sun and reptiles were worshiped across the world? Not really.
With the tools available of that time and with the darkness of the night seeing all those stars there is no real mystery why many ancient cultures have similarities. Nevertheless the entire spectra of “coincidences”, from art to astronomy, from math to boats, from God´s to pyramids, from sacrifices to science, from stories to religious iconography – if you put it all together and weigh in certain artefacts and flood myths and much more, then you will start to contemplate…
It has been proven that no ´great leaps´ of science from either an extra-terrestrial or any Atlantian source has occurred. We have plenty of pyramid buildings before ancient man perfected the art and pottery as well as much of what I´ve mentioned can be followed from one point in time to another. But we also thought that the city of Troy was a myth, and we never thought we would find any form of advanced construction from pre-ancient times, but we have. Also we cannot discard that the events of the end of the last ice-age that may have flooded countless of civilizations throughout the world since a landmass equivalent of Europe disappeared under water. Countless of islands and coastal areas simply vanished.
I also think we need to put ourselves in the shoes of any potential survivor of such a catastrophe. From human behavior we know that many would have seen the events as punishment from God(s), perhaps even abandoning their previous way of life and any technology they might have had.
Others may have committed themselves to a simpler life or merely tried to live with and under the same guidelines as other, less advanced, humans.
The few survivors with a knowledge more advanced than we gave them credit for today may also have been reluctant to share this knowledge. It may have been hubris, but could it not have been that they did not want to stick out and be targets? That it was a safety measure? People with advance knowledge would definitely have been accused of witchcraft, devilry, or whatever else uninformed easily duped ancient man could conjure up as a reason to kill someone for. The only people that would keep such knowledge safe and consequently use it to their advantage would have been religious and political leaders, but it would also have been very shaky business approaching any god-like leader with “magical” remedies and construction guides.

To consider the possibility that ancient knowledge therefore disappeared with the last ice-age is not far-fetched; it is rather a likely scenario. To simply look at pottery and the existing evidence may thus not be enough, you need the full whole picture, and if that picture tells us a story that may very well be much more exciting and interesting then mainstream scholars tell us, should we not pursue it?
Did any Atlantis-like society exist? More than likely not, but I rather have this proven and be ridiculed for thinking it is possible then to have scruffy old scholars stating that I am wrong just because.

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Review of Marvel´s Agents of SHIELD

A cast with no real enemies working for the most inapt organisation of all time 

Let me do something I rarely do and comment on and review a current TV-show. The reason for this is of course, at least in some minor way, the involvement of Genius Joss Whedon. The creator of Buffy, Angel and the fantastic Firefly deserve a comment now and again and although the very limited show Dollhouse was cancelled slightly prematurely - it actually started to show promise just as it was taken off the airwaves – I cannot help finding myself getting sucked into another show. Although Joss isn´t that much involved in Marvel´s Agents of SHIELD and although the show promises a lot but delivers little, I still see a lot of potential and this may very well turn out to be one of the best (sci fi) shows of all time.

So far 
But let me start with stating that things, so far, have been slow to develop and I am reluctant to accept a few of the characters. Even worse though is the lack of good antagonists because the cast, good or not, hardly ever get something to sink their teeth into. The evil organisation Centipede (Centipede...? Really?) doesn't really do it for me so far, and the lameness of the supposed villain Donald “Blizzard” Gill was not really a high-point, although far more so then the even lamer origin of Graviton. And don´t even get me started on the niceness of Ian Quinn. At least the last mention should die soon or start murdering babies for fun - when not even shooting Sky (twice!) do not do it then he should just die already. The recent guest appearance of the enchantress daughter Lorelei was a big step forward, but since she will not be coming back any time soon and more than likely has nothing to do with any form of future storyline it felt more like a tease then anything else.

We viewers never really feel their fear and, except for a few moments, have they ever been in danger? Has anyone really got really hurt or killed? I have seen a lot of comments online complaining about that or that main character, but I feel it is more about bad scripting and specifically the lack of real, over time, threats. They are SHIELD agents for God´s sake! They should die or end up in Coma or something once in a while. We knew that Skye would make it; we knew that Agent Igot Rapedbylorelei would never let a little thing like a gunshot slow him down; we knew that Simmons would survive even when infected with the deadliest of alien viruses at the same time as falling from an airplane.

No dangers, no fear, no hard-core villains – shouldn´t those things be the priority of a show like this?

What really piss me off about the show though is how horribly ineffectual, inapt and stupid the supposed “secretive” organisation of SHIELD is. In every episode of the show we get more proof of how even an organisation of 14y old can-collectors would kick SHIELD ass from here to the next Tuesday. If the people on the “boat” are the best there is and if how SHIELD is portrait is really how the organisation “works” the Earth is definitely doomed.
For example the really crappy depiction of the SHIELD training facilities. How the hell are they supposed to work as a team when the nerds are kept to themselves with a “secret” disco in the basement while the macho fighters are somewhere else doing push-ups? Separate campuses with no tech training at all for mindless soldiers and not a cross-training course as far as the eye can see for the nerds. If that is how they train the “best of the best” on how to handle alien invasions?
And what’s with the guy trying to commit suicide? A highly trained agent who´s been able to hide from the entire world for two decades take out a pill he has inside his jacket, takes a moment with his hand stretched out while expecting his karate savvy opponent to NOT kick it out of his hand..? Is that the pinnacle of SHIELD training?
And when Agent Wardo McIdiot faces off against an Asguardian sorceress he stops to talk to her and let her get closer when he knows that her voice and touch is magical and he is holding a stun-gun pointing at her, then I just want to scream and have the moron die already. How the hell can that idiot be “one of the best” as May described him? And why the hell would SHIELD send in a lot of men trying to catch a sorceress who´s main power is to enthrall men? SHIELD is by far the worst and most unfit organisation even portrait on a TV-show.
SHIELD seems to be pretty good at marketing though putting their super-secret logo of their super-secret world protecting organisation on everything from coffee mugs to pool tables… Great job marketing team!!

What works
The idea of the show is amazingly great. A few “normal” folk digging deeper into the mysteries, origins and pantheon of superpowers, super villains and strange realms is fantastic. It is hard to think up a better premise for a TV-show. That they also take their time in building up the characters (yes, I know, I am contradicting myself) I also enjoy. The tech personnel of Fitz and Simmons is also a functional part of the storyline - especially comes to their dialog and their chemistry. The pilot and supposed kick-ass specialist Melinda May also, mostly, have it down delivering much needed extra points of view when Coulson do or say something stupid (once per episode). Even though the raised-from-the-dead Phil Coulson comes off as slightly two-dimensional the character is handled by such a good actor that he manages to pull it off.
The main premise and promise of the show however is what make it a good watch. Despite the writing and lack of good villains and regardless of what seem to be (although not mainly the actors fault) periodically bad acting, this is a show that has and probably will continue to deliver high quality entertainment.

We do need to remember that comics are not necessarily about great acting or a sensible approach to reality, it is an outlet for fantasy and an escape from boring reality. I always react when I see movie and TV-show reviewers do analyses about Sci fi (or porn for that matter) as if the point is to have the greatest actors acting out magnificent dialogs about global warming and puppies. It is about entertainment! If you want to be entertained it is the Stallone´s and Schwarzenegger´s you watch. If you want to huddle down and cry and see amazing acting then you watch something else. Kick-ass entertainment does not necessarily make a movie/tv-show worse or better, it’s just what it is. Mainstream reviewers in particular often forget this and consequently give really bad reviews to really great entertainment while praising paint-drying dialogues about menstruation.

What is missing? 
As already mentioned the storyline need better villains primarily and better writing/directing in general. Also a few more in the crew and a dark twist (May?) would make things more interesting.
What can also be addressed with additional squad members is the lack of skills which is highly noticeable in every episode (SHIELD "training" at its best I assume…). Okay, I do get that Fitz and Simmons are not martial art experts and that Agent Punch Toughsmack isn´t a computer expert, but SHIELD agents should have a wider range of knowledge no? And isn´t SHIELD supposed to be an international organisation? Why would the international community throw tons of money at big-ass flying carriers and allow the agents roam around their country´s backyard without asking for something in return like, oh let´s say, a Pakistani or French agent on the team?

The enemies so far have been jungle rebels, a couple of hackers, corrupt cops, a rich but pretty nice guy and a girl in a flowery dress. Oh wow, I feel so threatened… Yes, okay, they did have to fight a couple of super soldiers and a few berserkers (without backup and with only two people in the team capable to fend off worse foes then kittens), but I never felt like anyone was ever in danger and when soapy Agent Stuffy McBlanderson gets shot he is okay and able to fight off a bunch of police officers on a crashing plane… right…okay…

Consequently I would like to see more actors joining the crew – and that a few of the new or current ones die horribly without mysterious drugs to save them, if only to get the feeling of danger and feel more for the characters remaining. It feels very weird that they are so few and only two that actually can fight. Agent John Garrent did show up and hopefully will soon join on a permanent basis (take over the crew after the new super-villain Carson?), but I would love to see one or two more filling in the gaps. The problem here though (again!) is the writers and directors – they cannot handle the current, pretty limited, squad so how will they cope with additional cast?

Where is/should the show go? 
I do not agree with the conventional fan-base opinion that the team need a superhero or two in order to lift the show. I rather see them growing for themselves and fight with brains, wit and aid from the occasional outsider against superior and much stronger foes. I rather see “normal” people fighting against a billion to one odds then watch the current/extra cast put on spandex and fly about. Yes it is about the Marvel universe and yes we do need a few people throwing buildings lurking about on the show - like adding Lady Sif to the mix which was a great idea - but I rather see a bunch of great detectives with brains and a variety of skills taking advantage of a Super villain hubris then to see a hunky shampoo-commercial dude get enormous powers.

The story of Skye is a brain teaser and it can be a good origin story for her and something that can develop over time into something really great. Also feel like the character of Skye is the least developed with most untapped potential – and she has not even been enrolled at a SHIELD campus! I do have worries about this though, just as with Coulson´s little mystery. So far the writers and directors have not impressed so I am a little concerned that they will mess this up too and if so that would pretty much be the end of the show, at least for me.

I like the idea of SHIELD going evil or that Coulson got experimented upon with injected alien blood and that this experiment actually went horribly wrong and so he will be one of, if not THE main antagonist villain of the show.
BUT the crew need to get the hell off that stupid plane, preferably permanently, but at least more often. It is their transport and sort of headquarters so I get they need to have a few meetings and such, but it feels like 90% of the time they are flying or fighting on the “bus”. If that plane is such a villain-magnet and so comfy that they can stand around most of the time, what the hell do they do with the rest of the cash they throw at this show?
They can use the plane as their foe-trap and sit down and relax 40min of each show until the evil one show up. This show is like; plane flies, something is discussed on the plane, the plane fly some more, a few events happens outside, back on the plane they sort of solve the mystery, the evil one shows up on the plane and they fight on the plane and kill/trap the villain and then the plane fly off in the sunset. Someone is seriously skimming cash from this show or filming a plane flying is seriously more expensive than I thought…

Hopefully the first season will end with Coulson being an evil mastermind - revealed after they, sort of, defeat the main antagonist The Clairvoyant whom turn out to be Dormammu, Skye consequently turns out to be (of course) Clea. I also suggest that Hunky Mr fightsalot dies and I would also propose that one of the tech (preferably Fitz) also dies. This in a season finale of tears and lots of pain so the show, at least temporary, take a darker turn. Alternatively that Skye is Gamora (one of the most interesting female characters with lots of personality potential) and Coulson is the Clairvoyant. Although I assume, at this point, that Skye will be morphed into Abigail Brand (hm...) as the show goes on and that the Clairvoyant is that weird looking black/mulatto SHIELD agent with glasses that pops up now and again.

Regardless of where the show goes, I would emphatically suggest that someone buy a lot of vodka to the writers and directors and lock them up in a room filled with 9254972 comics and do not let them out before they come up with better dialog and better development of the show. I may have it wrong here and we may be surprised that the people behind the show have a fantastic plan and is deliberately teasing and annoying us (not a bad idea, going for the gold straight off is usually a bad idea for TV) – if so I probably owe them an apology later. This CAN be one of the best shows of all time so please people; get it right!

I will keep watching, even if I cannot find any other reason than coming up with more nicknames for Buzz Rockgroin… Agent Grrr Joinfight, Slade Granitethighs, Chuch Headpunch, Dunce Lackwit… Muscles McHairgel… Stone Wallface.. Beefy McSlab… Agent Stump Chuckman… Clench Buttsheek…

Despite the flaws this is an entertaining show and they cannot mess up the writing and directing more than they´ve already done so I assume it will get better and better over time.

Oh, and one last thing. I see a lot of people online compere this show with that of Arrow. Except for the valid point that the fighting choreography is much better on Arrow, that show is not only based on a completely different storyline, it is also crappier and a big yawn. The only positive thing about Arrow is the main characters work-out sessions which are a big plus for women and gay´s across the world. So please do not take anything from that crappy story, there are plenty of great stuff from the Marvel Universe that is much, much better.

Tuesday, March 11, 2014

The Hatred of Libertarianism

There are plenty of misconceptions and weird ideas about libertarianism. 

The (socialists) left regard us libertarians as rich narcissists closely linked to fascism and that we constantly look for new ways of making people homeless and that we laugh at the poor and starving on our way to our mansions and yachts.
The (conservative) right believe that libertarian is another word for “hippie”; that we want to destroy family values while puffing on a cannabis pipe. And the right seem to think that we´re part of the gay agenda and that we have neither morals nor reached religious enlightenment.
The general populace may think that libertarians are behind everything from the privatization of day-care to wars, everything from poverty in Africa to violence against women. This mainly due to mainstream media taking every possible moment to blame libertarianism for all the wrongs in our world.

Is there any other group so hated? So despised? So misunderstood? Not even Nazis, and certainly not communists, are so reviled throughout the world.


Personally I believe it is because we libertarians piss off everyone at the same time...
A libertarian is a person that sees no problem with a black lesbian woman living together with a Japanese lesbian woman, having adopted white kids and while watching their kids they clean their large gun stash, and this lesbian couple, and their kids, main source of income is their large cannabis field in the backyard.

Did you notice it? In above sentences alone I managed to offend and piss off religious nuts, Nazis, communists, mainstream scholars, journalists and the politically correct.

Let’s try another one;

A libertarian is a person whom argues that all forms of corporate subsidies as well as all forms of government controlled social welfare should be abolished and he/she wants to end the wars and both stop the surveillance police state and the crony corporate hegemony at the same time.

Here I pissed of banks, big conglomerates, government officials, politicians, neo-cons, the intelligence community and everyone who wants to have a welfare state. All at the same time.

You cannot really put us in the right-left paradigm. Although we in many issues, especially comes to economics, belong to the right, we also promote and argue social freedoms and argue human rights both of the individual and of groups. If you with feminism mean equality before the law and that both genders should have the same rights and freedoms, all libertarians are also, automatically, feminists. We advocate sexual as well as economic freedom. We promote gay rights as well as gun rights.
We libertarians believe that people have been given from the Universe/nature/God(s) absolute human rights that cannot be circumvented, cannot be eroded or in any form or way be taken away. This regardless if those rights are being taken away by a single individual or by the majority. And herein lays another big reason why the mainstream and politicians of all colours hate us. If the majority (or minority) cannot take away rights, why even have politicians? Why even vote? Is voting even a legal premise within a libertarian society?

We libertarians are pro-democracy, but not necessarily pro-voting. Democracy is much more than just casting a vote every 4 years or so, it is also about freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press and so on. The voting process should never be allowed to become despotic or be allowed to infringe on our basic rights. The left in particular cannot understand this point of view since in their world, at least in theory, people should vote on everything that has an impact on their lives. In reality we know from a lot of socialist trial-and-errors that in a socialist country the (one) party controls everything and the party leader is, at best, a oligarchical figurehead, and at worst a 100% dictator.

Although most can understand that we should not allow the 51% to murder the minority 49% and consequently most also reject the notion of; voting decides all - people still have no problem to impose “minor” rules and infringements that are based on the very same premise.
A libertarian is a person that rejects the majority view/vote if this view/vote means forcible action taken against those that disagree. For example smoking; we know that smoking is bad for us, but it is my body, my life, my time and my money. If I want to smoke 57 packs a day it is my right to do so. No regulation, no tax, no law and no group, regardless if this group is the majority or the minority, has any right to tell me what I should or should not smoke. The same goes for sex and sexuality. If I want to sleep with a woman or with a man or with several at the same time, it is my choice. You may have your own moral objections if my girlfriend urinates on me while another man spanks my monkey, but that is your opinion and although you are entitled to it, you do not however have the right to tell me, by law and via threat of violence by the state, that such sexual activity is wrong.

And here we come to a final reason why people of all political views reject libertarianism; they see libertarianism lacking government rules and that the ideology is close to, if not purely, anarchism. Although there are anarchists within the libertarian movement, the so called anarcho-capitalists, the general consensus among libertarians is that there should be a government and that there should be a few central laws following the guide-lines of natural given rights. A government in a libertarian state would exist to uphold the law and provide military protection of the land. There might also be a little wiggle room for the government to have certain foreign and diplomatic tasks and perhaps even minor social ones. The key word here is however “voluntary”. A person should have the right to opt out of society in one form or the other and most (if not all) government actions should be founded via voluntary donations or via income derived from low/non-intrusive taxes such as voluntary VAT´s or lottery programs.

The rules/laws in a libertarian state are few and simple - easy to understand and easy to obey.

You, as an individual have, in a Libertarian society, an absolute right to do, think, act, say and work in whatever way you want until the moment you encounter another individual with the same right. In practice this means that you can own guns but not shoot anyone unless it is in self-defense; it means that declaring war will never happen, the government (and the people) will only act in self-defense; it also means that you can smoke weed but not force anyone else to do so; it means that you can hold hands with, have sex with and marry someone of the same gender but you cannot force a priest to wed you.

For conservatives and socialists these, what they refer to as “opposite duo-opinions”, are not compatible. How can you be for gay rights but not force a church/priest to marry them? How can you be for gun rights but against waging wars in foreign countries?
For a libertarian it is not only possible, it is required. You cannot claim to be libertarian and be for certain rights but not for others.

Liberals/socialists also have a problem with us libertarians refusing to rally together with them against NationalSocialists. Of course it is not only libertarians, also conservatives and pretty much anyone knowing anything about the red madness will refuse to go. But in the leftie mind-set not going in a demonstration against fascists and NationalSocialists is the same as being on the same side as such horrific ideologies. The left want us to ignore their blood-soaked red flags and the most evil symbols of all time; the hammer and sickle, and see it and them as something great and good just because they are against Nazis.

No, we libertarians are against totalitarian ideas and against any form of aggression against human rights no matter who utters them. We do not care if you are socialist, communist, social-democrat, neo-con or Nazis.

What we care about is basic human rights and civil liberties. Period.

Does that make us evil?