(dear reader or readers, sergei neverin had a very critical comment to my previous article, so i decided that my response to him should actually be an entire blog article. i will always attempt to give similar courtesy to any persons in the future that would like to disagree or agree with what i have written)
Dear Sergei,
Firstly, I would like to thank you for reading my blog and for taking the time to respond in such depth to my article. I am not a professional writer and so I do not have all of the technical and support resources available to me that many large blogs or web pages do. However, I do endeavor to speak from the heart and compose lucid arguments and essays.
You said you are typical Belarusian, but 86% of your countrymen voted for Lukashenka in the election. Perhaps your political preferences are "typical" for only 14% of your countrymen.
Your English language skills are also very good. Perhaps typical Belarusians are fluent in American English and have regular enough access to the internet to be current in the English Language Blog world.
Sergei, small businesses in America have a giant failure rate. The business climate for the little guy is very difficult here. You will have to be more specific about your complaints over persecution of small businesses. As I didn't reference small business issues, I don't know whether to agree or disagree with you.
I take GREAT OFFENSE and OBJECTION to ANYONE stealing the peoples assets. Do you have proof of your accusations against Lukashenka?
I am sure that Lukashenka has a budget of between 5-10 million USD to manage his entourage of media and security and support staff. He proably also enjoys some luxuries not common to the population.
But by "modern" or "current" global presidential standards, amounts like this are modest and don't meet the benchmarks of modern state theft or excess.
The Union-State has taken a long time, and this is proably because there are many fluid points to be negotiated during the process. I am not an expert.
I am happy that you conceed that Lukashenka was elected three times based on promises he made to the people. Your acknowlegment of his election negates many of his detractors accusations of his being a dictator, because we both agree dictators don't hold elections.
Russia's "pulling the Gazprom strings" as you say is not a result of Lukashenka's "empty promises" to Russia as you suggest. I believe that Gazproms decision raise prices is simply an incorrect decision made with the motivation of a variety of reasons from helping the Russian people, to corporate greed. As I said in my article, there is no ONE bottom line in this matter.
Perhaps during Soviet times such a decision would not have been taken against the people of Belarus.
The premise of my article is that the Union-State should move forward regardless of the Gazprom price hike. I do not propose that my opinion is synonmous with the Belarusian popular opinion, rather I believe this is what SHOULD happen for the good of both Russia and Belarus. I am not on the ground in Minsk as you are, but I do have my opinion.
It is my opinion that the Lukashenka administration is not the only party in the Union-State negotiation process so they are not the only ones responsible for the timely completion of the project. But, where Lukashenka has slowed the process, I believe he has done it for the good of the People of Belarus and he has very likely been correct in his methods.
Gazprom didn't raise prices because of Lukashenka. Lukashenka might have stalled the Union-State over Gazprom however. This would be reasonable for him to do.
I saw an old Soviet era propaganda poster (maybe circa 1936) that was advertising caviar and trains and factories and the poster said " SOVIET MEANS QUALITY" To me this was a clever and somewhat accurate catchphrase. I am impressed with Soviet items of quality, planes, machines, cars, weapons, education, foreign aid to needy countries to be a few.
I am sorry you do not think that Soviet means quality. Many people in the world would disagree with you.
Sergei, you have a nice command of English, were you trained in Belarus? If so, then you demonstrate the results of a quality Soviet education, and regardless of your like or dislike of Lukashenka, you are obviously worldly and well spoken. Are these traits not still promoted in modern Belarusian education? Is this not evidence that SOVIET MEANS QUALITY?
Belarus is not Romania, but it would be interesting to take a poll of all Belarusians and all Romanians and ask them if they would like to trade countries.
Morover Sergei, if you are so interested in democracy and liberty, maybe you should know that sometimes democracy deteriorates the overall quality of life for the general population. It is almost a maxim in the mind of most english speakers that Democracy equals a high quality of life, but this is not actually true in all cases.
English speakers would be more precise to consider Democracy as a tool to POTENTIALLY and MAYBE achieve a high quality of life as oppossed to fantasizing it is some mythical Valhalla to be achieved at all costs, including the destruction of valuable assets and systems that are operational and producing good results.
For example, how many Russians today would prefer life in the USSR to their current conditions?
Democracy and Liberty are just words, frequently misused for evil purposes.
I am sorry you don't like my article Sergei, however I would like to ask you a question about Belarus. What % of the Belarusian population can fluently understand written Belarusian? If one can read written Russian, then can one also fluently understand written Belarusian?
You are welcome to submit an article or essay to my blog. You may submit an Anti-Lukashenka article or essay if you wish, but I must warn you that I will harshly critique your essay in my next posting.
Mikes Vacation is about freedom of expression and debate and new ideas. I would hope that submissions to my blog are pro-Lukashenka, but they don't have to be.
Again Sergei, I encourage an essay from you- but if it is Anti-Lukashenka, I will attempt to harshly confront it in my next essay. Also, I will not headline all of your comments, but I will try to publish your essays for the purpose of logiclly defeating anti-Lukashenka positions and thus helping the common people of Belarus pursue happiness and prosperity.
Very Sincerely Yours,
Michael Miller
Sunday, December 24, 2006
Saturday, December 23, 2006
THE UNION STATE and GAZPROM
The complicated issue over Gazprom raising the prices for gas to Belarus has clouded the already multi-diminsional issue of the future Union-State between Russia and Belarus.
There is no ONE bottom line in the Gazprom debacle, rather there are several viewpoints that should be considered.
The Russian Federation is the rightful owner of its natural resources and ultimately the Russians can sell their property to whomever they choose, and for whatever price they wish. Most people agree with this.
The increased prices of natural gas to Belarus will hurt her and cause her a financial setback. The west, and mainly the United States government will attempt to exploit this injury sustained by little Belarus and drumbeats of these impending attacks can be heard even now.
The Belarusians will survive this economic downturn, this increased expense will cause injury, misery, and general suffering, but these problems will be overcome with Belarusian perserverence and thrift and industry. The Belarusians will survive our/US conditional offers of economic assistance, and they will survive our/US ingenuine democracy cloaked provocations.
A giant portion of the Gazprom natural gas product is sold at cost to the citizens of Russia, this severely limits Gazproms available product that can be sold at a "retail value".
This decision to injure the Belarusian economy by raising gas prices is wrong, and I personally would take an alternate course, but let us examine some of the facets to this decision that aren't widely spoken of.
The Russian economy and Russian people have been suffering and have been trajicly injured by the fall of the USSR. Russian social and economic problems are pandemic and exist as a constant cancre on the Russian Federations gums.
Belarus has preserved her Soviet assets and infrastructure and is not in dire jeopardy of the same types of abscesses gimping Russia.
Belarus is the metaphoric ant that has been saving for winter, and Russia is like the grasshopper who has played all summer. We all agree Russia has not played, but there has been waste and theft in Russia that hasn't taken place in Belarus. (thanks in no small part to Alexander Lukashenka)
It is not fair for Belarus to pay a Western European price for natural gas when she finalizes the Union State with Russia, and it is not absolutely needed for Russian survival, but it is what Belarus must now do.
President Putin understands that The Russian Federation must heal herself, and a very large issue is, where is the Gazprom money going? Does this money go overseas to America or Germany, or does the lions share of Gazprom profits ultimately go to the general welfare of the Russian people.
Yes, Belarus will pay more, but where will this money go? What percentage of the Belarusian increase will go towards the bottom line of American/Western businesses, and what percentage will ultimately strengthen the bottom line and long term health and welfare of Russia herself. It is my opinion that a very large portion of this price increase will ultimately go to the care, maintenence and welfare of the general Russian population in that Gazprom is largely owned by the state, and that Gazprom is heavily hamstringed by low prices to Russian citizens and Russian businesses.
Is it fair that the Belarusians should suffer for the Russians? No, it is not only unfair, but it is trajic and heartbreaking. But it must now be done, AND the Union State must progress.
The Russians and Belarusians must now continue to move forward to their mutual destiny. They must bring the strengths of Soviet Belarus together with the advantages of a modernizing Russia.
There is much talk about a new Soviet Union. People debate about whether or not this is a good idea. Don't forget that even if the Soviet Union had not dissolved, today it would have a markedly different face than the face it displayed in 1986. American has not dissolved, but we have drasticly changed in 20 years. I believe it is correct that the Soviet Union would have also dramaticly morphed had it stayed together. It would have HAD to morph to remain prosperously together on some levels.
I believe it is correct to salvage good ideas from the former Soviet Union and try to bring them into the modern world. It is correct for Belarus to now become a modern Soviet country. By modern, I mean that Belarus should become a clear leader in the world and again remind the world that SOVIET MEANS QUALITY. Belarus is presently very modern by many standards, but now they need to move quickly to the future and allow their investments from the USSR (social and economic) to pay dividends. They must do this without compromising their soverignty or their economic future.
The Union State will not compromise Belarusian soverignty, rather it will offer Belarus some measure of consolidating its global influence with that of Russia to the mutual benefit of Both parties. This is why the US government and the west is oppossed to such a union. It has nothing to do with Belarus' internal level of democracy. American just wants Belarus and Russia seperated so they will not join their collective political, military, and economic capital.
Belarus must guard her economic future in part by not incurring a giant national debt that can never be paid, similar to what we have in the United States.
For example, after WW2 Germany was obviously in terrible condition, but today they are a modern and comfortable country. Their present success sould be partly credited to the post WW2 German governments refusal to accept giant loans that would have to be serviced or paid in the future.
Belarus and Russia need to work together and build a Union State that brings pride to all their citizens. They will have to work through their problems and envision a future that all the world will envy and look to for example.
The precurssor elements are in place for the proposed Union State to be successful far beyond what each country could accomplish on its own.
Clearly the question of Belarusian gas prices should not be considered finally settled by any party. This problem could be cleverly addressed in the future and it is possible that all parties could agree on solutions not visible at this time.
It is also possible that the future increased trade generated by the Union State will more than compensate Belarus in the long term for her immediate financial setback.
Furthermore, there is also the possibility for creative solutions to the Gazprom price dilema that could be authored by third party countries such as Iran, or Venezuela who have ample petroleum reserves and are friendly to Belarus.
The biggest questions on the horizon of the new Union State should be not who pays what for natural gas, but how to bring all of the social and economic resources of these two countries to bear for the purpose of making high quality, and prosperous futures for ALL of the citizens of Russia and Belarus.
The benefits of this future Union State should not be denied because of Russia's incorrect decision about natural gas prices to Belarus.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
There is no ONE bottom line in the Gazprom debacle, rather there are several viewpoints that should be considered.
The Russian Federation is the rightful owner of its natural resources and ultimately the Russians can sell their property to whomever they choose, and for whatever price they wish. Most people agree with this.
The increased prices of natural gas to Belarus will hurt her and cause her a financial setback. The west, and mainly the United States government will attempt to exploit this injury sustained by little Belarus and drumbeats of these impending attacks can be heard even now.
The Belarusians will survive this economic downturn, this increased expense will cause injury, misery, and general suffering, but these problems will be overcome with Belarusian perserverence and thrift and industry. The Belarusians will survive our/US conditional offers of economic assistance, and they will survive our/US ingenuine democracy cloaked provocations.
A giant portion of the Gazprom natural gas product is sold at cost to the citizens of Russia, this severely limits Gazproms available product that can be sold at a "retail value".
This decision to injure the Belarusian economy by raising gas prices is wrong, and I personally would take an alternate course, but let us examine some of the facets to this decision that aren't widely spoken of.
The Russian economy and Russian people have been suffering and have been trajicly injured by the fall of the USSR. Russian social and economic problems are pandemic and exist as a constant cancre on the Russian Federations gums.
Belarus has preserved her Soviet assets and infrastructure and is not in dire jeopardy of the same types of abscesses gimping Russia.
Belarus is the metaphoric ant that has been saving for winter, and Russia is like the grasshopper who has played all summer. We all agree Russia has not played, but there has been waste and theft in Russia that hasn't taken place in Belarus. (thanks in no small part to Alexander Lukashenka)
It is not fair for Belarus to pay a Western European price for natural gas when she finalizes the Union State with Russia, and it is not absolutely needed for Russian survival, but it is what Belarus must now do.
President Putin understands that The Russian Federation must heal herself, and a very large issue is, where is the Gazprom money going? Does this money go overseas to America or Germany, or does the lions share of Gazprom profits ultimately go to the general welfare of the Russian people.
Yes, Belarus will pay more, but where will this money go? What percentage of the Belarusian increase will go towards the bottom line of American/Western businesses, and what percentage will ultimately strengthen the bottom line and long term health and welfare of Russia herself. It is my opinion that a very large portion of this price increase will ultimately go to the care, maintenence and welfare of the general Russian population in that Gazprom is largely owned by the state, and that Gazprom is heavily hamstringed by low prices to Russian citizens and Russian businesses.
Is it fair that the Belarusians should suffer for the Russians? No, it is not only unfair, but it is trajic and heartbreaking. But it must now be done, AND the Union State must progress.
The Russians and Belarusians must now continue to move forward to their mutual destiny. They must bring the strengths of Soviet Belarus together with the advantages of a modernizing Russia.
There is much talk about a new Soviet Union. People debate about whether or not this is a good idea. Don't forget that even if the Soviet Union had not dissolved, today it would have a markedly different face than the face it displayed in 1986. American has not dissolved, but we have drasticly changed in 20 years. I believe it is correct that the Soviet Union would have also dramaticly morphed had it stayed together. It would have HAD to morph to remain prosperously together on some levels.
I believe it is correct to salvage good ideas from the former Soviet Union and try to bring them into the modern world. It is correct for Belarus to now become a modern Soviet country. By modern, I mean that Belarus should become a clear leader in the world and again remind the world that SOVIET MEANS QUALITY. Belarus is presently very modern by many standards, but now they need to move quickly to the future and allow their investments from the USSR (social and economic) to pay dividends. They must do this without compromising their soverignty or their economic future.
The Union State will not compromise Belarusian soverignty, rather it will offer Belarus some measure of consolidating its global influence with that of Russia to the mutual benefit of Both parties. This is why the US government and the west is oppossed to such a union. It has nothing to do with Belarus' internal level of democracy. American just wants Belarus and Russia seperated so they will not join their collective political, military, and economic capital.
Belarus must guard her economic future in part by not incurring a giant national debt that can never be paid, similar to what we have in the United States.
For example, after WW2 Germany was obviously in terrible condition, but today they are a modern and comfortable country. Their present success sould be partly credited to the post WW2 German governments refusal to accept giant loans that would have to be serviced or paid in the future.
Belarus and Russia need to work together and build a Union State that brings pride to all their citizens. They will have to work through their problems and envision a future that all the world will envy and look to for example.
The precurssor elements are in place for the proposed Union State to be successful far beyond what each country could accomplish on its own.
Clearly the question of Belarusian gas prices should not be considered finally settled by any party. This problem could be cleverly addressed in the future and it is possible that all parties could agree on solutions not visible at this time.
It is also possible that the future increased trade generated by the Union State will more than compensate Belarus in the long term for her immediate financial setback.
Furthermore, there is also the possibility for creative solutions to the Gazprom price dilema that could be authored by third party countries such as Iran, or Venezuela who have ample petroleum reserves and are friendly to Belarus.
The biggest questions on the horizon of the new Union State should be not who pays what for natural gas, but how to bring all of the social and economic resources of these two countries to bear for the purpose of making high quality, and prosperous futures for ALL of the citizens of Russia and Belarus.
The benefits of this future Union State should not be denied because of Russia's incorrect decision about natural gas prices to Belarus.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
THE DALT EQUATION
The DALT Equation -- Democracy, hAppiness, quaLity, poverTy.....
A NEW INSTRUMENT FOR MEASURING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT/HUMANITY/QUALITY OF LIFE/PROSPERITY
Mission Statement:
The mission of the DALT EQUATION is to acknowledge the multiple ambiguities and abstractions of the word "DEMOCRACY".
Many Times in recent history one country has persecuted or attacked, even befriended and shielded another country based on a perceived excess or lack of "Democracy". These comparissions to the elusive and imprecise notion of "Democracy" have proved imperfect and malleable to say the least.
The DALT Equation endeavors to quantify many indicators of a high quality, prosperous life and evaluate these factors as they relate to the political system that governs them.
The DALT equation recognizes that the benchmarks of a full and happy life, governed by a benevolent political instrument, are not clearly evident, by a primary and superficial examination of a country's political system. Thusly, the DALT equation seeks to numericly and accurately quantify these many variables, to produce a series of numerical values that can be measured and compared quickly and efficiently to avoid the syntaxial ambiguities and imperfect descriptions associated with the word
"democracy" and its close alliterations.
In a modern global economy, with all of its assets and resources, if there is one poor man, then we are all truly poor.
If a functional and humanity conscious government is cast off, for sheer empty rhetoric, then no man is completely free. If this same government is driven to extinction, only to be replaced by one less competent, less honest and less humane, then all the world is still effectively oppressed.
Let us all strive to avoid these sad outcomes. Now to this goal, my fellow humans, I present the DALT equation.
Please note before we go forth with the actual DALT instrument, that there has not been actual math applied to this equation. The DALT equation is still only in its infancy and will need input from multiple parties to bring it to its most effective future state.
Please also note, that for the DALT equation to be valid and accurate, it must be administered to a portion of a population that is sufficiently diverse enough for the equation to properly represent all of a countries citizens.
Proper ethics must be used in the collection of DALT responses, or the DALT equation will become another useless piece of propaganda to be wielded by the haves, to control the have nots.
Now on to the actual questions of this instrument.
POVERTY- All poverty is relative. What one man may consider rich, could only be survival to another. When answering this section, be thoughtful, but describe/answer what is in your heart.
1) Do you often go to sleep hungry?
2) Do you have enough potable water?
3) Do you wear clean clothes every day?
4) Do you have access to clean bathing and toilet facilities?
5) Is your modesty protected when using your bathing and toilet facilities?
6) Do you have adequate supplies of Toilet Paper and Tooth Paste and Soap and Feminine Products?
7) How many days living expense do you have saved after paying all of your bills?
8) Is your rent (or morgage) to low/appropriate/to high?
9) Are you forced by financial neccessity to share living quarters with persons you do not love?
10 If all of your fixed expenses remained the same, what % income increase would you need to comfortably live in a manner you deserve?
11) Do you have reasonable access to a Doctor for routine health matters?
12) Do you have easy access to a Doctor for emergency health matters?
13) Do you have access to a Dentist for routine dental matters?
14) Do you have access to a Dentist for emergency dental matters?
15) Can you afford the transportation expenses to visit a national park which is free to enter?
16) How many times last year did you visit such a national park?
17) Do you own a pair of dress shoes that would be appropriate to wear to a wedding?
18) Is your wardrobe appropriate for you to meet both important and humble members of your community?
19) Do you need drugs you can not afford?
20) Do your children have a proper amount of toys?
21) Do you have enough money to pay for your childs college tuition expenses?
22) If your child asks you for some money to buy candy at the store, do have enough?
23) Does your childs health suffer for lack of money?
24) How many children "6" years years of age could you afford to properly take care of?
25) Can you afford to not work for 3 months in order to take care of a sick family member?
26) Do you own a TV?
27) Do you own a Radio?
28) Do you own, or do you have the use of any of the following:
A refridgerator? A car? A motorcycle? A bicycle?
29) Do you have a bank account?
30) Do you own stocks in a company?
31) Do you own a pet? ( includes a fish,mouse,cat,dog,horse,bird etc)
32)Do you have a decorative live plant?
33)Do you have carpet anywhere in your home?
34) Does your roof leak?
35) Is your heating and air conditioning operational?
36) Can you afford a movie ticket?
37) Is there a bottle of unopened wine in your home?
38) Do you have either 100grams butter or 100 grams cheese in your home now?
39)Do you have adequate kitchen facilities available to you?
40) Do you have any unopened toiletries in your home?
41) Do you have a home computer?
42) Is the internet available to you?
43) Can you afford Tobbacco?
44) Can you afford Chocolate?
45) Can you afford Alcohol?
46) Can you afford Caviar?
47) Can you afford a ticket to the ballet?
48) Do you own a camera?
49) Can you afford to buy your husband or wife a birthday present that will make them express genuine joy and happiness?
50) Will you be able to retire at a age 70 or below?
51) Will your health suffer when you retire because of lack of money?
52) Will your happiness suffer when you retire for lack of money?
53) If your baby was deathly ill and needed antibiotics to survive, could you somehow obtain the following amounts of money in 24 hours? 1.56$ , 3.12$ , 6.25$, 12.50$, 25$, 50$, 100$ ?
54) Are you financially restricted to eating only staple foods?
55) Can you afford to make reasonabl dietary choices that vary from day to day?
56) Could you afford to spend the following amounts of money purchasing a luxury dinner for 2 in a fine restaurant? 1.56$, 3.12$, 6.25$, 12.50$, 25$, 50$, 100$ ?
57) How would you classify your economic status? Very Poor, Poor, Below Average, Average, Almost Rich, Rich ?
58) If you accused of a crime do you feel the public defenders office in your country will properly represent you?
59) Could you afford proper legal representation if you were accussed of a crime carrying the following penalties? 1 year, 2 years, 4 years, 8 years, 16 years, 32 years, Life in prison, The Death Penalty ?
Democracy- Well, as you may have guessed, this is a very important part of the DALT equation. You will answer the questions as you see fit. They are designed to be timly and appropriate and as scientific as I could make them. However, I will introduce this personal bias. Just because your country's government is elected with votes, doesn't make your leaders honest, it doesn't even make them competent. Just because your coutry is run by a King, doesn't mean you will have no rights, or even a bad life. You see, in my opinion "democracy" is just a word. Words are cheap, it is the end of the day results that count. They people of a country are the in the best position to feel and see these results, or lack of them. When I am asked to give my opinion of a leader or a government, I use the condition of the people relative to the peoples available assets to judge the credibility and talents of a given leader. For a signifigant world power to fling accusations ,or give accolades on less than tangible, measurable, honestly acquired scientific data is not only incompetent, it is cruel, selfish, and in some cases downright criminal. You now have my opinion, so give me yours.
1) Do you support your highest government official?
2) What % of your country is genuinely happy he is the leader?
3) What % of your country absolutely hates him?
4) What % of your country absolutely loves him as a leader?
5) Does he steal or embezzle money from the people?
6) Do you want your son to look to him as an example to live by?
7) Are the people of the country better off because of him?
8) Are there cruel and unscrupulous plots against him that come from other governments?
9) If your country was suddenly attacked by Facist Armies, Armies having the same nature and goals and methods as Nazi Germany, or Imperial Japan, would you consider your leader the best man "alive today" to lead your country's defense?
10) Is your president guilty of "war crimes" ?
11) Is your president guilty of "crimes against humanity?
12) Is your president guilty of murder for the pursuit of vanity, greed, or passion?
13) Is it very likely that your leader has been involved in the murder of foreign controlled spies on your country's soil?
14) Is it very likely that your leafder has been somehow involved or linked to the murder of persons working with foreigners that are attempting to effect terrible economic trauma against the peoples assets and financial stability?
15)Has your leader displayed an even temper and avoided unnessary war or armed conflict with foreign countries?
16) Is your president/government likely involved in the murder of less than 10 people for the purpose of defending the interests of your nation?
17) Has your leader conducted himself properly and in the spirit of protecting the physical and financial assets of the nation?
18)Did he steal, or engeneer the theft of large monies from the people to keep for himself or to give to his colleages?
19) All powerful leaders are in a position to "sell out" their people for financial gain and an easier tenure with world opinion. Did your leader "sell his people out"?
20) Has your president been "forced" to divert public assets away from constructive projects ( ie-education, arts, health care etc) for the purpose of combating "actual subversive foreign influences" ?
21) Has the public standard of "happiness" been lowered in any way due to a "subversive foreign influence" ?
22) Do you believe the word " democracy" is too general and ambiguous to be used "by itself" and without any collateral data for " general political comparisons" ?
23) Do you think your leader is a dictator?
24) Do you think your leader is a criminal?
25) Do you think your leader is a patriot?
26) Would you take a bullet for him?
27) Does your president possess a sense of general humanity and care for the weakest and most helpless of his fellow citizens?
28) Imagine a scenario where there are no subversive foreign powers or organized crime forces working to alter and effect your next election. If your president is voted out of office, defeated, would he resign professionally in a proper manner?
29) Are there agents of a foreign government seeking to artificially tamper with the public opinion of your president in a negative way?
30) Are there forces of organized crime that seek to steal money , value, or property from the people of your country if your president is defeated in his next election?
31) Will many people suffer if yuor president loses power?
32) What % of your countries material assets will be destroyed or dissapear in the the next 5 years if your president is defeated? 0, 5, 10, 20, 40, 80 ?
33) What % of your countries material wealth/assets will be increased if your president is defeated? 0, 5, 10, 20, 40, 80?
34) Do you approve of the methods your country uses to deal with political dissenters?
35) Does your country employ torture against its citizens?
36)Does your country employ torture against foreigners domesticly or abroad?
37) How many deaths is your government responsible for in the last 50 years? ( This includes war, peace, negligent accidcents, and internal police matters) 0/0-5/5-10/11-20/21-40/41-80/81-160/161-320/321-640/641-1200/1201-2400/2,401-5,000/5,001-10,000/10,001-20,000/20,001-40,000/40,001-80,000/80,001-160,000/160,001-320,000/320,001-640,000/640,001-1,280,000/ greater than 1,280,001 deaths.
38) Does your government attempt to respond to the wishes of the nation?
39) What % of the people in your country feel the government tries to protect them and better their lives?
40)Does your government have plans to sabatage foreign governments that disagree with them?
41) Is there a sincere attempt by senior members of your government to better the lives of the common man?
42) Does your government practice some form of racial, sexual, or political prejudice that is injurious to YOU?
43) Does your government properly administrate and allocate public monies?
44) Are you reasonably satisfied with the present economic system you live in? ( communism, capitalism, socialism, free market economy, etc ) ?
45) Are you reasonably satisfied with your current form of government? ( Ie- monarchy, dictatorship, anarchy, democracy, failing corrupt democracy, true effective democracy, bad king, good king etc ) ?
46)Does your government represent the vast masses of the people?
47) Does your government closely conduct itself according to the wishes and trueest hearts desires of the people?
48) Are there signifigant portions of your country that have been "tricked" or "brainwashed" by foreign agents, or criminally subversive powers into being disgruntled?
49)Does your government return prisoners to countries that employ torture?
50) Does your government act and conduct itself in accordance with your most precious religious ideas?
51)Is your leader as religious as you would like?
52) Do you often speak poorly of your president?
53) Would you like to keep the same president for the next 50 years?
54) If your president was assasinated, would you laugh and throw a big party?
55)If your president was dying, would you pray for his recovery?
56) Are you scared to criticize your president publicly?
57)Does your country employ a "secret police" to physically harm political dissidents?
58) What % of your standard police force have committed outright murder against an unarmed man?
59) Does your country currently employ a " secret police" to harm non-violent foreigners on foreign shores?
60) Does your government violate the laws of other countries abroad?
61) Does your country financially or otherwise support brutal dictatorships in foreign countries?
62) Does your country have normalized business dealings with dictatorial regeimes?
63) Does your country have friendly relations with any countries guilty of some form of Economic Repression of very poor people?
64)Does your country automaticly extradite fugitives to other countries, or is there a CREDIBLE process to ensure they are treated fairly even sometimes avoiding extradition?
65)Does your countgry encourage you to raise your children in a moral fashion?
66) Are parents in your country punished by the state for properly punishing their children?
67) Do your courts give you wore treatment because of your sex?
68) Is your life bad because of your skin color?
69) Is your life harder because of your sex?
70) Does your government manipulate the media for the purpose of hiding bad foreign policy?
71) Will low rankig government officials be persecuted if they disagree with the present government?
Happiness- Happiness means many things to many people, but perhaps we can all agree that happiness can be sometimes described as a joy of living. If you can imagine all of the days of your life on a giant calander, how many days would have sad faces drawn onto them, how many days would only have check marks, and how many days would have honestly drawn happy smiles on them.
Happiness should be the goal of all peoples and all nations,, above wealth and democracy, above productivity and quality, but happiness cannot be attained as a singular goal itself, it is dependent on many factors to enable it. I will try to include some questions that indicate whether a man is happy or not, and for what portion of his life.
The DALT equation recognizes that during a mans lifetime he may live under many different governments, perhaps in different countries, so my questions will be Administration specific, meaning they will be constructed to evaluate a societies overall happiness in relation to the present government.
1) How many days during this year did you experience depression?
2) How many times during this year did you shake hands with a friend?
3) How many times during this year did you sleep alone, but long for the company of a loved one? ( can include a future loved one)
4) How many times did you help a friend in need?
5) How many times did a friend help you?
6) How many days this year did you long to be in another city, away from your present life?
7) How many times last year did you cry?
8) How many days this year did you laugh at something funny, even for a few seconds?
9) How many times this year were you happy to come to work?
10) Is your life being wasted?
11) Would your life be better if your government would help you? (not help you with money, but with influence, or support)
12) How many days vacation did you take last year?
13) How many days were you sick last year?
14) How many people in your personal life would take a bullet for you?
15) How many people in the world would you take a bullet for?
16) Do you sleep well?
17) Are you in chronic pain?
18) Are you in frequent physical danger from a violent attack?
19) Were you the victim of a violent assault last year?
20) Did you hurt anyone physically last year? ( includes attacking others and defending youself)
21) Do you have many friends?
22) Are your family members healthy?
23) Do you eat delicious food?
24) If you died tommorow, would you have many people mour your loss?
25) How many weddings did you attend last year?
26) How many parties did you attend last year?
27) How many gifts did you recieve last year?
28) How many presents did you give others?
29) Do you frequently feel too hot, or too cold?
Quality-- What defines quality of life, is it the monetary value of your possessions, or perhaps the number of satisfying moments you have? Is it your peace at home, or your physical surroundings? Here are some questions to try to identify what your quality of life is.
1) Do you like music?
2) Do you like art?
3) Do you feel optimistic about your future?
4) Do you need a bath but do not get one?
5) Are your teeth good?
6) Are your cohorts and companions quality individuals?
7) Are your companions honest and industrious?
8) Is your boss a good and just man?
9) Are your subordinates the type of people who you would like to live near?
10) Are you afraid to go out of your home at night?
11) Is your neighborhood dangerous?
12) Are you safe from crime?
13) Would you be safer if you had a bodyguard to walk with you throughout the day?
14) Do you respect the members of the opposite sex?
15) Of all the people you make eye contact with all day, how many of them would help you if you were injured in an accident and awaiting an ambulance.
16) Of all the people in the world whom you have met, and know their name, what % of them deserve to win the lottery?
17) How many people do you know that you wish would die a painful death?
18) How many people do you know that you would like to see suffering in emotional misery?
19) How many people do you know that are criminals and should be in jail.
20) How many people do you know of in jail that are wrongfully there?
21) What % of your police force are fair and just and good?
22) What % of your police force are only thugs in uniform?
23) Can you sing?
24) Do you tell jokes?
25) Do you hate many people?
26) Do love your spouse?
27) Would you die for your spouse?
28) Do you wish you had been born in a different country?
29) Are you satisfied with you life?
30) When you die, will you go to "heaven" ?
31) If your god is a good and just man, do you frequently make him very angry?
32) Is your god satisfied with your behavior?
33) Would you be embarrassed to have your grandchildren watch movies of all of yours days events for the past year?
34) Would you make a good president for your country?
35) Do the majority of your coworkers respect your work ethic?
36) Will your grandchildren love you and be satisfied you are their ancestor?
37) Do you hit your wife or husband?
38) Does your wife or husband hit you?
39) Should the world model itself after your country?
40) Would the people of the world be better off if your country was abruptly and magicly staffed and governed by American Indians suddenly brought forward through time? ( chief Joseph would be the president and the rest of your govenments 20 highest positions would be filled by random Indians from the American west)
The DALT equation is only in its infancy and prototype stage. It is intended for a this instrument to be administered in accordance with fair and scientific survey techniques. If the DALT equation were fairly utilized in multiple countries, then the world would have a Numeric value for a given countries "DALT number" . This would make it much harder for a country to be accussed of having poor democracy by a country with much democracy.
If the world were to adopt the DALT equation or a similar instrument that can be used to measure the DALT analagous subjects, then the problems of ambiguous terms such as Democracy being used to Label a country would be eliminated.
It is my opinion that a country should be judged by its DALT number, not by nebulous adjectives thrown at it by its friends or its foes.
A NEW INSTRUMENT FOR MEASURING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GOVERNMENT/HUMANITY/QUALITY OF LIFE/PROSPERITY
Mission Statement:
The mission of the DALT EQUATION is to acknowledge the multiple ambiguities and abstractions of the word "DEMOCRACY".
Many Times in recent history one country has persecuted or attacked, even befriended and shielded another country based on a perceived excess or lack of "Democracy". These comparissions to the elusive and imprecise notion of "Democracy" have proved imperfect and malleable to say the least.
The DALT Equation endeavors to quantify many indicators of a high quality, prosperous life and evaluate these factors as they relate to the political system that governs them.
The DALT equation recognizes that the benchmarks of a full and happy life, governed by a benevolent political instrument, are not clearly evident, by a primary and superficial examination of a country's political system. Thusly, the DALT equation seeks to numericly and accurately quantify these many variables, to produce a series of numerical values that can be measured and compared quickly and efficiently to avoid the syntaxial ambiguities and imperfect descriptions associated with the word
"democracy" and its close alliterations.
In a modern global economy, with all of its assets and resources, if there is one poor man, then we are all truly poor.
If a functional and humanity conscious government is cast off, for sheer empty rhetoric, then no man is completely free. If this same government is driven to extinction, only to be replaced by one less competent, less honest and less humane, then all the world is still effectively oppressed.
Let us all strive to avoid these sad outcomes. Now to this goal, my fellow humans, I present the DALT equation.
Please note before we go forth with the actual DALT instrument, that there has not been actual math applied to this equation. The DALT equation is still only in its infancy and will need input from multiple parties to bring it to its most effective future state.
Please also note, that for the DALT equation to be valid and accurate, it must be administered to a portion of a population that is sufficiently diverse enough for the equation to properly represent all of a countries citizens.
Proper ethics must be used in the collection of DALT responses, or the DALT equation will become another useless piece of propaganda to be wielded by the haves, to control the have nots.
Now on to the actual questions of this instrument.
POVERTY- All poverty is relative. What one man may consider rich, could only be survival to another. When answering this section, be thoughtful, but describe/answer what is in your heart.
1) Do you often go to sleep hungry?
2) Do you have enough potable water?
3) Do you wear clean clothes every day?
4) Do you have access to clean bathing and toilet facilities?
5) Is your modesty protected when using your bathing and toilet facilities?
6) Do you have adequate supplies of Toilet Paper and Tooth Paste and Soap and Feminine Products?
7) How many days living expense do you have saved after paying all of your bills?
8) Is your rent (or morgage) to low/appropriate/to high?
9) Are you forced by financial neccessity to share living quarters with persons you do not love?
10 If all of your fixed expenses remained the same, what % income increase would you need to comfortably live in a manner you deserve?
11) Do you have reasonable access to a Doctor for routine health matters?
12) Do you have easy access to a Doctor for emergency health matters?
13) Do you have access to a Dentist for routine dental matters?
14) Do you have access to a Dentist for emergency dental matters?
15) Can you afford the transportation expenses to visit a national park which is free to enter?
16) How many times last year did you visit such a national park?
17) Do you own a pair of dress shoes that would be appropriate to wear to a wedding?
18) Is your wardrobe appropriate for you to meet both important and humble members of your community?
19) Do you need drugs you can not afford?
20) Do your children have a proper amount of toys?
21) Do you have enough money to pay for your childs college tuition expenses?
22) If your child asks you for some money to buy candy at the store, do have enough?
23) Does your childs health suffer for lack of money?
24) How many children "6" years years of age could you afford to properly take care of?
25) Can you afford to not work for 3 months in order to take care of a sick family member?
26) Do you own a TV?
27) Do you own a Radio?
28) Do you own, or do you have the use of any of the following:
A refridgerator? A car? A motorcycle? A bicycle?
29) Do you have a bank account?
30) Do you own stocks in a company?
31) Do you own a pet? ( includes a fish,mouse,cat,dog,horse,bird etc)
32)Do you have a decorative live plant?
33)Do you have carpet anywhere in your home?
34) Does your roof leak?
35) Is your heating and air conditioning operational?
36) Can you afford a movie ticket?
37) Is there a bottle of unopened wine in your home?
38) Do you have either 100grams butter or 100 grams cheese in your home now?
39)Do you have adequate kitchen facilities available to you?
40) Do you have any unopened toiletries in your home?
41) Do you have a home computer?
42) Is the internet available to you?
43) Can you afford Tobbacco?
44) Can you afford Chocolate?
45) Can you afford Alcohol?
46) Can you afford Caviar?
47) Can you afford a ticket to the ballet?
48) Do you own a camera?
49) Can you afford to buy your husband or wife a birthday present that will make them express genuine joy and happiness?
50) Will you be able to retire at a age 70 or below?
51) Will your health suffer when you retire because of lack of money?
52) Will your happiness suffer when you retire for lack of money?
53) If your baby was deathly ill and needed antibiotics to survive, could you somehow obtain the following amounts of money in 24 hours? 1.56$ , 3.12$ , 6.25$, 12.50$, 25$, 50$, 100$ ?
54) Are you financially restricted to eating only staple foods?
55) Can you afford to make reasonabl dietary choices that vary from day to day?
56) Could you afford to spend the following amounts of money purchasing a luxury dinner for 2 in a fine restaurant? 1.56$, 3.12$, 6.25$, 12.50$, 25$, 50$, 100$ ?
57) How would you classify your economic status? Very Poor, Poor, Below Average, Average, Almost Rich, Rich ?
58) If you accused of a crime do you feel the public defenders office in your country will properly represent you?
59) Could you afford proper legal representation if you were accussed of a crime carrying the following penalties? 1 year, 2 years, 4 years, 8 years, 16 years, 32 years, Life in prison, The Death Penalty ?
Democracy- Well, as you may have guessed, this is a very important part of the DALT equation. You will answer the questions as you see fit. They are designed to be timly and appropriate and as scientific as I could make them. However, I will introduce this personal bias. Just because your country's government is elected with votes, doesn't make your leaders honest, it doesn't even make them competent. Just because your coutry is run by a King, doesn't mean you will have no rights, or even a bad life. You see, in my opinion "democracy" is just a word. Words are cheap, it is the end of the day results that count. They people of a country are the in the best position to feel and see these results, or lack of them. When I am asked to give my opinion of a leader or a government, I use the condition of the people relative to the peoples available assets to judge the credibility and talents of a given leader. For a signifigant world power to fling accusations ,or give accolades on less than tangible, measurable, honestly acquired scientific data is not only incompetent, it is cruel, selfish, and in some cases downright criminal. You now have my opinion, so give me yours.
1) Do you support your highest government official?
2) What % of your country is genuinely happy he is the leader?
3) What % of your country absolutely hates him?
4) What % of your country absolutely loves him as a leader?
5) Does he steal or embezzle money from the people?
6) Do you want your son to look to him as an example to live by?
7) Are the people of the country better off because of him?
8) Are there cruel and unscrupulous plots against him that come from other governments?
9) If your country was suddenly attacked by Facist Armies, Armies having the same nature and goals and methods as Nazi Germany, or Imperial Japan, would you consider your leader the best man "alive today" to lead your country's defense?
10) Is your president guilty of "war crimes" ?
11) Is your president guilty of "crimes against humanity?
12) Is your president guilty of murder for the pursuit of vanity, greed, or passion?
13) Is it very likely that your leader has been involved in the murder of foreign controlled spies on your country's soil?
14) Is it very likely that your leafder has been somehow involved or linked to the murder of persons working with foreigners that are attempting to effect terrible economic trauma against the peoples assets and financial stability?
15)Has your leader displayed an even temper and avoided unnessary war or armed conflict with foreign countries?
16) Is your president/government likely involved in the murder of less than 10 people for the purpose of defending the interests of your nation?
17) Has your leader conducted himself properly and in the spirit of protecting the physical and financial assets of the nation?
18)Did he steal, or engeneer the theft of large monies from the people to keep for himself or to give to his colleages?
19) All powerful leaders are in a position to "sell out" their people for financial gain and an easier tenure with world opinion. Did your leader "sell his people out"?
20) Has your president been "forced" to divert public assets away from constructive projects ( ie-education, arts, health care etc) for the purpose of combating "actual subversive foreign influences" ?
21) Has the public standard of "happiness" been lowered in any way due to a "subversive foreign influence" ?
22) Do you believe the word " democracy" is too general and ambiguous to be used "by itself" and without any collateral data for " general political comparisons" ?
23) Do you think your leader is a dictator?
24) Do you think your leader is a criminal?
25) Do you think your leader is a patriot?
26) Would you take a bullet for him?
27) Does your president possess a sense of general humanity and care for the weakest and most helpless of his fellow citizens?
28) Imagine a scenario where there are no subversive foreign powers or organized crime forces working to alter and effect your next election. If your president is voted out of office, defeated, would he resign professionally in a proper manner?
29) Are there agents of a foreign government seeking to artificially tamper with the public opinion of your president in a negative way?
30) Are there forces of organized crime that seek to steal money , value, or property from the people of your country if your president is defeated in his next election?
31) Will many people suffer if yuor president loses power?
32) What % of your countries material assets will be destroyed or dissapear in the the next 5 years if your president is defeated? 0, 5, 10, 20, 40, 80 ?
33) What % of your countries material wealth/assets will be increased if your president is defeated? 0, 5, 10, 20, 40, 80?
34) Do you approve of the methods your country uses to deal with political dissenters?
35) Does your country employ torture against its citizens?
36)Does your country employ torture against foreigners domesticly or abroad?
37) How many deaths is your government responsible for in the last 50 years? ( This includes war, peace, negligent accidcents, and internal police matters) 0/0-5/5-10/11-20/21-40/41-80/81-160/161-320/321-640/641-1200/1201-2400/2,401-5,000/5,001-10,000/10,001-20,000/20,001-40,000/40,001-80,000/80,001-160,000/160,001-320,000/320,001-640,000/640,001-1,280,000/ greater than 1,280,001 deaths.
38) Does your government attempt to respond to the wishes of the nation?
39) What % of the people in your country feel the government tries to protect them and better their lives?
40)Does your government have plans to sabatage foreign governments that disagree with them?
41) Is there a sincere attempt by senior members of your government to better the lives of the common man?
42) Does your government practice some form of racial, sexual, or political prejudice that is injurious to YOU?
43) Does your government properly administrate and allocate public monies?
44) Are you reasonably satisfied with the present economic system you live in? ( communism, capitalism, socialism, free market economy, etc ) ?
45) Are you reasonably satisfied with your current form of government? ( Ie- monarchy, dictatorship, anarchy, democracy, failing corrupt democracy, true effective democracy, bad king, good king etc ) ?
46)Does your government represent the vast masses of the people?
47) Does your government closely conduct itself according to the wishes and trueest hearts desires of the people?
48) Are there signifigant portions of your country that have been "tricked" or "brainwashed" by foreign agents, or criminally subversive powers into being disgruntled?
49)Does your government return prisoners to countries that employ torture?
50) Does your government act and conduct itself in accordance with your most precious religious ideas?
51)Is your leader as religious as you would like?
52) Do you often speak poorly of your president?
53) Would you like to keep the same president for the next 50 years?
54) If your president was assasinated, would you laugh and throw a big party?
55)If your president was dying, would you pray for his recovery?
56) Are you scared to criticize your president publicly?
57)Does your country employ a "secret police" to physically harm political dissidents?
58) What % of your standard police force have committed outright murder against an unarmed man?
59) Does your country currently employ a " secret police" to harm non-violent foreigners on foreign shores?
60) Does your government violate the laws of other countries abroad?
61) Does your country financially or otherwise support brutal dictatorships in foreign countries?
62) Does your country have normalized business dealings with dictatorial regeimes?
63) Does your country have friendly relations with any countries guilty of some form of Economic Repression of very poor people?
64)Does your country automaticly extradite fugitives to other countries, or is there a CREDIBLE process to ensure they are treated fairly even sometimes avoiding extradition?
65)Does your countgry encourage you to raise your children in a moral fashion?
66) Are parents in your country punished by the state for properly punishing their children?
67) Do your courts give you wore treatment because of your sex?
68) Is your life bad because of your skin color?
69) Is your life harder because of your sex?
70) Does your government manipulate the media for the purpose of hiding bad foreign policy?
71) Will low rankig government officials be persecuted if they disagree with the present government?
Happiness- Happiness means many things to many people, but perhaps we can all agree that happiness can be sometimes described as a joy of living. If you can imagine all of the days of your life on a giant calander, how many days would have sad faces drawn onto them, how many days would only have check marks, and how many days would have honestly drawn happy smiles on them.
Happiness should be the goal of all peoples and all nations,, above wealth and democracy, above productivity and quality, but happiness cannot be attained as a singular goal itself, it is dependent on many factors to enable it. I will try to include some questions that indicate whether a man is happy or not, and for what portion of his life.
The DALT equation recognizes that during a mans lifetime he may live under many different governments, perhaps in different countries, so my questions will be Administration specific, meaning they will be constructed to evaluate a societies overall happiness in relation to the present government.
1) How many days during this year did you experience depression?
2) How many times during this year did you shake hands with a friend?
3) How many times during this year did you sleep alone, but long for the company of a loved one? ( can include a future loved one)
4) How many times did you help a friend in need?
5) How many times did a friend help you?
6) How many days this year did you long to be in another city, away from your present life?
7) How many times last year did you cry?
8) How many days this year did you laugh at something funny, even for a few seconds?
9) How many times this year were you happy to come to work?
10) Is your life being wasted?
11) Would your life be better if your government would help you? (not help you with money, but with influence, or support)
12) How many days vacation did you take last year?
13) How many days were you sick last year?
14) How many people in your personal life would take a bullet for you?
15) How many people in the world would you take a bullet for?
16) Do you sleep well?
17) Are you in chronic pain?
18) Are you in frequent physical danger from a violent attack?
19) Were you the victim of a violent assault last year?
20) Did you hurt anyone physically last year? ( includes attacking others and defending youself)
21) Do you have many friends?
22) Are your family members healthy?
23) Do you eat delicious food?
24) If you died tommorow, would you have many people mour your loss?
25) How many weddings did you attend last year?
26) How many parties did you attend last year?
27) How many gifts did you recieve last year?
28) How many presents did you give others?
29) Do you frequently feel too hot, or too cold?
Quality-- What defines quality of life, is it the monetary value of your possessions, or perhaps the number of satisfying moments you have? Is it your peace at home, or your physical surroundings? Here are some questions to try to identify what your quality of life is.
1) Do you like music?
2) Do you like art?
3) Do you feel optimistic about your future?
4) Do you need a bath but do not get one?
5) Are your teeth good?
6) Are your cohorts and companions quality individuals?
7) Are your companions honest and industrious?
8) Is your boss a good and just man?
9) Are your subordinates the type of people who you would like to live near?
10) Are you afraid to go out of your home at night?
11) Is your neighborhood dangerous?
12) Are you safe from crime?
13) Would you be safer if you had a bodyguard to walk with you throughout the day?
14) Do you respect the members of the opposite sex?
15) Of all the people you make eye contact with all day, how many of them would help you if you were injured in an accident and awaiting an ambulance.
16) Of all the people in the world whom you have met, and know their name, what % of them deserve to win the lottery?
17) How many people do you know that you wish would die a painful death?
18) How many people do you know that you would like to see suffering in emotional misery?
19) How many people do you know that are criminals and should be in jail.
20) How many people do you know of in jail that are wrongfully there?
21) What % of your police force are fair and just and good?
22) What % of your police force are only thugs in uniform?
23) Can you sing?
24) Do you tell jokes?
25) Do you hate many people?
26) Do love your spouse?
27) Would you die for your spouse?
28) Do you wish you had been born in a different country?
29) Are you satisfied with you life?
30) When you die, will you go to "heaven" ?
31) If your god is a good and just man, do you frequently make him very angry?
32) Is your god satisfied with your behavior?
33) Would you be embarrassed to have your grandchildren watch movies of all of yours days events for the past year?
34) Would you make a good president for your country?
35) Do the majority of your coworkers respect your work ethic?
36) Will your grandchildren love you and be satisfied you are their ancestor?
37) Do you hit your wife or husband?
38) Does your wife or husband hit you?
39) Should the world model itself after your country?
40) Would the people of the world be better off if your country was abruptly and magicly staffed and governed by American Indians suddenly brought forward through time? ( chief Joseph would be the president and the rest of your govenments 20 highest positions would be filled by random Indians from the American west)
The DALT equation is only in its infancy and prototype stage. It is intended for a this instrument to be administered in accordance with fair and scientific survey techniques. If the DALT equation were fairly utilized in multiple countries, then the world would have a Numeric value for a given countries "DALT number" . This would make it much harder for a country to be accussed of having poor democracy by a country with much democracy.
If the world were to adopt the DALT equation or a similar instrument that can be used to measure the DALT analagous subjects, then the problems of ambiguous terms such as Democracy being used to Label a country would be eliminated.
It is my opinion that a country should be judged by its DALT number, not by nebulous adjectives thrown at it by its friends or its foes.
A PERCENTAGE OF AMERICANS WILL SUPPORT THE UNION STATE
Americans are intelligent and perceptive people. Most Americans are hard working and honest. Sadly most of us have to work so many hours to afford to have decent lives that we don't have time to do dilligence on what our diplomats abroad are saying, and most of us don't have time to pay close attention to what our foreign policy actually is around the world.
It is obvious the people of America have allowed our perverbial "goat" to get loose and eat the flowers of our neighbors on several occasions. Ultimately the people of America are responsible for what our "goat" or government is doing with our money and our good name.
Perhaps we need to more closely examine the facts surrounding our foreign policy in regards to The Republic of Belarus and her president Alexander Lukashenka.
Upon examination of the facts of this case, many Americans will recognize the right of Belarusians to pick a president, and join their country in a union-state with Russia.
Many Americans would proably vote for Lukashenka in a mock vote if given the chance to pretend to vote as Belarusians and live with the consequences of our vote.
American foreign policy is complicated and sometimes abstract, but Americans understand that frequently unscrupulous and dishonest parties come to power here in America.
Americans also know that our foreign policy is often engeneered to benefit the short term goals and interests of our Washington burocrats and not the American population in general.
We also know that often our "official foreign policy" is not just wrong but criminally wrong.
Most Americans don't earn their living from being an "Ambassador" to another country.
Karen Stewart is misleading the world when she states " the United States will not recognize a Union State between Russia and Belarus. "
Believe me, If America recognizes present day Iraq, or Sudan, or Likme-Dikme, we will clearly recognize a union state between Russia and Belarus.
Perhaps there are some War Criminals and xenophobes that ultimately will have their monpolar influence dulled by this proposed Union State, and they may continue a Mafia-like strangelhold over the state dept, thus controling its official statements and press releases.
But the conscience of America will recognize the reality that Lukashenka is the rightfully elected president of Belarus, and we will also recognize that if Belarus wishes to form a union state with Russia, she clearly has this right.
Ambassador Stewart should be a little more precise with her statements about what America will and won't do, and what we won't recognize. Perhaps she will be big enough in the future to begin to acknowledge that many or at least some Americans are supporters of Lukashenka, Putin, Belarus, and Russia, and of a future Union State if both of these two countries desire to do this.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
It is obvious the people of America have allowed our perverbial "goat" to get loose and eat the flowers of our neighbors on several occasions. Ultimately the people of America are responsible for what our "goat" or government is doing with our money and our good name.
Perhaps we need to more closely examine the facts surrounding our foreign policy in regards to The Republic of Belarus and her president Alexander Lukashenka.
Upon examination of the facts of this case, many Americans will recognize the right of Belarusians to pick a president, and join their country in a union-state with Russia.
Many Americans would proably vote for Lukashenka in a mock vote if given the chance to pretend to vote as Belarusians and live with the consequences of our vote.
American foreign policy is complicated and sometimes abstract, but Americans understand that frequently unscrupulous and dishonest parties come to power here in America.
Americans also know that our foreign policy is often engeneered to benefit the short term goals and interests of our Washington burocrats and not the American population in general.
We also know that often our "official foreign policy" is not just wrong but criminally wrong.
Most Americans don't earn their living from being an "Ambassador" to another country.
Karen Stewart is misleading the world when she states " the United States will not recognize a Union State between Russia and Belarus. "
Believe me, If America recognizes present day Iraq, or Sudan, or Likme-Dikme, we will clearly recognize a union state between Russia and Belarus.
Perhaps there are some War Criminals and xenophobes that ultimately will have their monpolar influence dulled by this proposed Union State, and they may continue a Mafia-like strangelhold over the state dept, thus controling its official statements and press releases.
But the conscience of America will recognize the reality that Lukashenka is the rightfully elected president of Belarus, and we will also recognize that if Belarus wishes to form a union state with Russia, she clearly has this right.
Ambassador Stewart should be a little more precise with her statements about what America will and won't do, and what we won't recognize. Perhaps she will be big enough in the future to begin to acknowledge that many or at least some Americans are supporters of Lukashenka, Putin, Belarus, and Russia, and of a future Union State if both of these two countries desire to do this.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
Monday, December 18, 2006
AN OPEN LETTER TO CONGRESSMAN FLAKE
Dear Congressman Flake,
My name is Michael Miller and I would like to congratulate you on your wise vote against the Belarusian ReDemocracy Act. (HR5948)
I am writing to you because I care about the long term best interests of both the American people and the Belarusian people.
The Belarusian Democracy act was and is simply nothing more than a way for Washington to attack the legitimate presidency of Alexander Lukashenka by using trumped up issues such as Democracy, Human Rights and Religious Freedom.
The money this Act allocates for Democracy in Belarus is intended to do nothing more than insight conflict in this otherwise stable and potentially prosperous post soviet country.
This Bill amounts to nothing less than a US License to attack Belarus.
I am sorry to say that both you and Dennis Kucinich of Ohio have been harshly criticized by the magazine Transitions Online. This is an offshoot of Transitions Magazine, a publication funded by George Soros.
I have a small and new editorial blog called Mikes Vacation and I am frequently published on the Being Had times. The Being Had Times is an online news source published by my friend Adam Goodman.
HR 5948 is a dangerous bill on several levels, but allow me to share some of my viewpoints on this continued legislation.
This Bill hinders the constitional and civil rights of many American citizens because Belarus has recently authored a UN resolution calling multiple American problems to light. In this UN proposal, Belarus initiates discussion on the subjects of police brutality, the mistreatment of pows, the electoral system, the continued effacement of media liberties here in the United States.
These genre of critiques are important for US leaders to face and deal with, and Belarus is in a good position to bring these problem areas to global public light without fear of retribution or undue US pressure because of these concerns. Travel restrictions against Belarusian government officials make it impossible for these Same Belarusian leaders to come to America and meet with minority and underrepresented Americans to discuss creative and benevolent methods to improve their conditions and circumstances.
Regardless of whether or not our President likes or approves of the current Belarusian Government, I believe it benefits the downtroden in America for countries like Belarus to continue to illuminate American problems simply because some of these problems are perpetuated in part due to certain special interest groups and political forces that find it disadvantageous to attempt to discuss changing the status quo.
The fact is that Belarus voted Alexander Lukashenka back into office by a margin of 86% and the elections were fair and transparent.
Regardless of whether or not you approve of Lukashenkas economic plans and policies, it would be very difficult for any new president to do anything differently and simultaneously protect the assets of the people from the kinds of pillage and missapropriation that happenned to the rest of the Soviet Union after the breakup of the USSR.
I do not claim to be an expert about Belarus or her issues, but I have been studying Belarus for several years and I believe I have insights about Belarus and many of her problems and triumphs.
I also consider myself a member of the media and the arts, because I wrote, produced, and directed a small budget documentary film called " 500 VOICES FOR BELARUS" . The purpose of this film was to document the feelings and opinions of Americans regarding the Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka and the manner with which our government has been dealing with the same.
This film was made with essentially no money, ( under ten thousand dollars) and it is my first completed film to date. Its running time is 1hour42minutes.
I have not found a distributor for this product and I am considering offering it for free or at cost over the internet for any interested parties.
I feel that because of my film " 500 Voices for Belarus" and the very interesting and revealing opinions captured in it, I am qualified to speak about The Republic of Belarus and her President , Alexander Lukashenka.
One of the concerns voiced in the recent Belarusian UN proposal was the continued effacement of media freedoms here in the United States.
I did not personally endure any official governmental persecution during the making of my film, however you can understand that I was aware I could have been a target by unscrupulous , and or possibly rogue US government persons during its production.
It is a shame that any American should even feel vaguely threatened when they try to produce an important piece of journalism or art that disagrees with the official US government position.
The Belarusian ReDemocracy Act HR5948 makes it a little more diffcult for Belarusian Leaders to effectively speak out against what is potentially wrong in the United States. Unlucky, persecuted, and at risk persons here in America need the benefit of an outside party bringing their problems to the global public attention so they can be dealt with and discussed. Realtime appearances of Belarusian leaders could be very helpful to parties that have fallen through the cracks of our imperfect system.
Our most dear and beloved "allies" aren't very likely to author such UN resolutions and attempt to bring our problems out for public discussion.
Modern Belarus could play an important role in helping the persecuted and mistreated of our country to find the justice they have not yet received.
Congressman Flake, there is a terrible irony involved with the Belarusian Democracy Act, let me explain. I believe that the best way for the world to achieve true democracy is for the same true democracy to first be achieved here in America. The American population as a whole is not aggressive about monitoring finite details of our foreign policy. I believe that some of the reason for this is that the common man here in America feels distanced from his government and feels like his opinion doesn't matter. It is not unreasonable to say that we live in a state of broken or infirmed democracy here. For example, if I don't like my governments attitudes towards Belarus, there is really nothing short of making my own blog, or producing my own movie that I can do about it. The average person on the street isn't able to go to these extreme measures so they just give up and ignore matters abroad. If we want to increase democracy abroad, we must first achieve it here. We must first involve all of our countrymen in the political process by making sure their voices are heard, and their concerns and needs are somehow entered into our collective multiple political equations. We must take the time and expense to educate them about what we are doing abroad and allow the collective brain trust of our nation to begin to have an effect on our policies. So the irony in the Belarusian Democracy Act is that it in effect helps to squash the most important factor affecting global democracy, that would be the American perception of our own domestic democracy. If the Belarusians were to be able to help bring a voice and thus increased democracy to a few of our less fortunate ones, they would have in effect, assisted democracy in every country from Antigua to Zaire. Global democracy is regulated by the level of democracy we have here.
I believe that we as Americans need to begin discussion about our own future Glasnost, and our own future Peristroika. We need to move far beyond Cold War era prejudices and hazardous ideas.
The people of America and Belarus should come to know each other as brothers and sisters, not adversaries. This will be a slow and sometimes frusterating process, but I believe we can achieve it in our lifetime. But this process must not only be initiated by Politicians, I think that the general public can play a part in this also.
Thank you very much for your consideration in this matter,
Sincerely,
Michael G Miller
My name is Michael Miller and I would like to congratulate you on your wise vote against the Belarusian ReDemocracy Act. (HR5948)
I am writing to you because I care about the long term best interests of both the American people and the Belarusian people.
The Belarusian Democracy act was and is simply nothing more than a way for Washington to attack the legitimate presidency of Alexander Lukashenka by using trumped up issues such as Democracy, Human Rights and Religious Freedom.
The money this Act allocates for Democracy in Belarus is intended to do nothing more than insight conflict in this otherwise stable and potentially prosperous post soviet country.
This Bill amounts to nothing less than a US License to attack Belarus.
I am sorry to say that both you and Dennis Kucinich of Ohio have been harshly criticized by the magazine Transitions Online. This is an offshoot of Transitions Magazine, a publication funded by George Soros.
I have a small and new editorial blog called Mikes Vacation and I am frequently published on the Being Had times. The Being Had Times is an online news source published by my friend Adam Goodman.
HR 5948 is a dangerous bill on several levels, but allow me to share some of my viewpoints on this continued legislation.
This Bill hinders the constitional and civil rights of many American citizens because Belarus has recently authored a UN resolution calling multiple American problems to light. In this UN proposal, Belarus initiates discussion on the subjects of police brutality, the mistreatment of pows, the electoral system, the continued effacement of media liberties here in the United States.
These genre of critiques are important for US leaders to face and deal with, and Belarus is in a good position to bring these problem areas to global public light without fear of retribution or undue US pressure because of these concerns. Travel restrictions against Belarusian government officials make it impossible for these Same Belarusian leaders to come to America and meet with minority and underrepresented Americans to discuss creative and benevolent methods to improve their conditions and circumstances.
Regardless of whether or not our President likes or approves of the current Belarusian Government, I believe it benefits the downtroden in America for countries like Belarus to continue to illuminate American problems simply because some of these problems are perpetuated in part due to certain special interest groups and political forces that find it disadvantageous to attempt to discuss changing the status quo.
The fact is that Belarus voted Alexander Lukashenka back into office by a margin of 86% and the elections were fair and transparent.
Regardless of whether or not you approve of Lukashenkas economic plans and policies, it would be very difficult for any new president to do anything differently and simultaneously protect the assets of the people from the kinds of pillage and missapropriation that happenned to the rest of the Soviet Union after the breakup of the USSR.
I do not claim to be an expert about Belarus or her issues, but I have been studying Belarus for several years and I believe I have insights about Belarus and many of her problems and triumphs.
I also consider myself a member of the media and the arts, because I wrote, produced, and directed a small budget documentary film called " 500 VOICES FOR BELARUS" . The purpose of this film was to document the feelings and opinions of Americans regarding the Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenka and the manner with which our government has been dealing with the same.
This film was made with essentially no money, ( under ten thousand dollars) and it is my first completed film to date. Its running time is 1hour42minutes.
I have not found a distributor for this product and I am considering offering it for free or at cost over the internet for any interested parties.
I feel that because of my film " 500 Voices for Belarus" and the very interesting and revealing opinions captured in it, I am qualified to speak about The Republic of Belarus and her President , Alexander Lukashenka.
One of the concerns voiced in the recent Belarusian UN proposal was the continued effacement of media freedoms here in the United States.
I did not personally endure any official governmental persecution during the making of my film, however you can understand that I was aware I could have been a target by unscrupulous , and or possibly rogue US government persons during its production.
It is a shame that any American should even feel vaguely threatened when they try to produce an important piece of journalism or art that disagrees with the official US government position.
The Belarusian ReDemocracy Act HR5948 makes it a little more diffcult for Belarusian Leaders to effectively speak out against what is potentially wrong in the United States. Unlucky, persecuted, and at risk persons here in America need the benefit of an outside party bringing their problems to the global public attention so they can be dealt with and discussed. Realtime appearances of Belarusian leaders could be very helpful to parties that have fallen through the cracks of our imperfect system.
Our most dear and beloved "allies" aren't very likely to author such UN resolutions and attempt to bring our problems out for public discussion.
Modern Belarus could play an important role in helping the persecuted and mistreated of our country to find the justice they have not yet received.
Congressman Flake, there is a terrible irony involved with the Belarusian Democracy Act, let me explain. I believe that the best way for the world to achieve true democracy is for the same true democracy to first be achieved here in America. The American population as a whole is not aggressive about monitoring finite details of our foreign policy. I believe that some of the reason for this is that the common man here in America feels distanced from his government and feels like his opinion doesn't matter. It is not unreasonable to say that we live in a state of broken or infirmed democracy here. For example, if I don't like my governments attitudes towards Belarus, there is really nothing short of making my own blog, or producing my own movie that I can do about it. The average person on the street isn't able to go to these extreme measures so they just give up and ignore matters abroad. If we want to increase democracy abroad, we must first achieve it here. We must first involve all of our countrymen in the political process by making sure their voices are heard, and their concerns and needs are somehow entered into our collective multiple political equations. We must take the time and expense to educate them about what we are doing abroad and allow the collective brain trust of our nation to begin to have an effect on our policies. So the irony in the Belarusian Democracy Act is that it in effect helps to squash the most important factor affecting global democracy, that would be the American perception of our own domestic democracy. If the Belarusians were to be able to help bring a voice and thus increased democracy to a few of our less fortunate ones, they would have in effect, assisted democracy in every country from Antigua to Zaire. Global democracy is regulated by the level of democracy we have here.
I believe that we as Americans need to begin discussion about our own future Glasnost, and our own future Peristroika. We need to move far beyond Cold War era prejudices and hazardous ideas.
The people of America and Belarus should come to know each other as brothers and sisters, not adversaries. This will be a slow and sometimes frusterating process, but I believe we can achieve it in our lifetime. But this process must not only be initiated by Politicians, I think that the general public can play a part in this also.
Thank you very much for your consideration in this matter,
Sincerely,
Michael G Miller
Thursday, December 7, 2006
GREENPEACE THREATENS THE BELARUSIAN FOREST
Greenpeace is threatening the Belarusian envroment when they attempt to thwart the future development of a Belarusian Nuclear Power plant.
There are many things the world should agree upon. All the world agrees that Nuclear power is very dangerous. The consequences of a nuclear disaster can be catastrophic! No country knows this better than the Republic of Belarus, the Bulk of the fallout from the Chernobyl disaster fell upon Belaurs, and she suffers to this day because of that 1986 disaster.
I consider myself to be an enviromentalist. That is why I believe that there are several important reasons Belarus should pursue the planned Nuclear power plant.
Belarus is the location of Europes oldest Virgin/primeval forest, also known as the "lungs of europe" . In a perfect world, a Belarusian Nuclear power plant would add an element of risk to this ecosystem. However, in todays world, where illegal logging and human encroachment upon the enviroment exist as ominous predatory risks to nature, a Belarusian nuclear power plant would actually help to protect the Belarusian enviroment.
Belarus is at a very challenging crossroads both politicly and economicly. Belarus as a whole desperately needs to stabilize her energy supplies and ensure a reliable energy supply for the population.
If the Belarusian economic condition deteriorates further, one can logicaly assume that the poaching of the Belarusian forests will increase also. If the Belarusian economy is not supported by the benefits of a nuclear power plant, is it not logicial that the countrys virgin forests will be needed to lend economic support in the form of "officially sanctioned harvesting" and in the form of "poaching trees" and "poaching animals" ? This phenomenon is seen globally in areas of severe economic need.
Greenpeace is correct to feel that Nuclear power is essentially a risky propostion that has the potential for negative enviromental impact. Most people, including most Belarusians could testify to this.
But Greenpeace should adopt more than a closed minded political posture where the subject of a Belarusian nuclear power is concerned.
The world in general will have to be decrease greenhouse emmissions. That is a pure and simple fact, if we do not, we will face the ire of an angry Earth's Gaia.
Belarus should be trusted to safely run a nuclear power plant. If any country in the world should be trusted to engeneer and run a nuclear power plant, it would be Belarus. Belarus posseses a large enough scientific brain trust that they will have no problem engeneering and staffing such a facility.
The Soviets could never be considered enviromentalists, however the economic and social anarcy of post soviet times has multiplied the demands made upon nature in Russia and other countries, just look at the illegal logging problems of Russia, and remember the condition of the Sturgeon before and after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
I would also like to point out to Greenpeace that as they are against nuclear weapons, Belarus willingly gave up her nuclear weapons after the fall of the soviet union, and it will not create such weapons with its nuclear power plant.
Greenpeace should adopt a more realistic political posture where Belarusian nuclear power is concerned, it is just not sound doctrine to unilaterally oppose ALL NUCLEAR POWER, no matter what. Yes, as I have agreed, Nuclear power is dangerous, but global warming is also dangerous, desperate economic conditions are dangeorus to natural resources, and if Greenpeace could come up with a more palatable and realistic plan than just to thoughtlessly oppose nuclear power, perhaps the world would be better off for it.
I almost feel guilty at adding this small sidenote, but the enviroment in certain Chernobyl affected hot zones has actually been helped because of the 1986 disaster. I have been studying the city of Pripyat and apparantly, nature has begun to take over this city and the surrounding countryside. When people are too afraid to enter a zone because of radiation, nature begins to heal herself, except for the obvious fact that there is a radiation problem, there are many species of animals now alive and flourishing in Pripyat and the sourrounding areas. I am not insensitive to the plight of the people of Pripyat or to the victims of Chernobyl as a whole, just the opposite, I feel very sorry for them, but it should be noted that nature in this radiation affected area has somehow beneited in some ironic way.
I love Greenpeace, but I am sorry to say that I don't agree with them about every little thing.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis,
2006
There are many things the world should agree upon. All the world agrees that Nuclear power is very dangerous. The consequences of a nuclear disaster can be catastrophic! No country knows this better than the Republic of Belarus, the Bulk of the fallout from the Chernobyl disaster fell upon Belaurs, and she suffers to this day because of that 1986 disaster.
I consider myself to be an enviromentalist. That is why I believe that there are several important reasons Belarus should pursue the planned Nuclear power plant.
Belarus is the location of Europes oldest Virgin/primeval forest, also known as the "lungs of europe" . In a perfect world, a Belarusian Nuclear power plant would add an element of risk to this ecosystem. However, in todays world, where illegal logging and human encroachment upon the enviroment exist as ominous predatory risks to nature, a Belarusian nuclear power plant would actually help to protect the Belarusian enviroment.
Belarus is at a very challenging crossroads both politicly and economicly. Belarus as a whole desperately needs to stabilize her energy supplies and ensure a reliable energy supply for the population.
If the Belarusian economic condition deteriorates further, one can logicaly assume that the poaching of the Belarusian forests will increase also. If the Belarusian economy is not supported by the benefits of a nuclear power plant, is it not logicial that the countrys virgin forests will be needed to lend economic support in the form of "officially sanctioned harvesting" and in the form of "poaching trees" and "poaching animals" ? This phenomenon is seen globally in areas of severe economic need.
Greenpeace is correct to feel that Nuclear power is essentially a risky propostion that has the potential for negative enviromental impact. Most people, including most Belarusians could testify to this.
But Greenpeace should adopt more than a closed minded political posture where the subject of a Belarusian nuclear power is concerned.
The world in general will have to be decrease greenhouse emmissions. That is a pure and simple fact, if we do not, we will face the ire of an angry Earth's Gaia.
Belarus should be trusted to safely run a nuclear power plant. If any country in the world should be trusted to engeneer and run a nuclear power plant, it would be Belarus. Belarus posseses a large enough scientific brain trust that they will have no problem engeneering and staffing such a facility.
The Soviets could never be considered enviromentalists, however the economic and social anarcy of post soviet times has multiplied the demands made upon nature in Russia and other countries, just look at the illegal logging problems of Russia, and remember the condition of the Sturgeon before and after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
I would also like to point out to Greenpeace that as they are against nuclear weapons, Belarus willingly gave up her nuclear weapons after the fall of the soviet union, and it will not create such weapons with its nuclear power plant.
Greenpeace should adopt a more realistic political posture where Belarusian nuclear power is concerned, it is just not sound doctrine to unilaterally oppose ALL NUCLEAR POWER, no matter what. Yes, as I have agreed, Nuclear power is dangerous, but global warming is also dangerous, desperate economic conditions are dangeorus to natural resources, and if Greenpeace could come up with a more palatable and realistic plan than just to thoughtlessly oppose nuclear power, perhaps the world would be better off for it.
I almost feel guilty at adding this small sidenote, but the enviroment in certain Chernobyl affected hot zones has actually been helped because of the 1986 disaster. I have been studying the city of Pripyat and apparantly, nature has begun to take over this city and the surrounding countryside. When people are too afraid to enter a zone because of radiation, nature begins to heal herself, except for the obvious fact that there is a radiation problem, there are many species of animals now alive and flourishing in Pripyat and the sourrounding areas. I am not insensitive to the plight of the people of Pripyat or to the victims of Chernobyl as a whole, just the opposite, I feel very sorry for them, but it should be noted that nature in this radiation affected area has somehow beneited in some ironic way.
I love Greenpeace, but I am sorry to say that I don't agree with them about every little thing.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis,
2006
Thursday, November 30, 2006
GEORGE BUSH EMBARASSES AMERICA AGAIN
The Charter '97 article was short, but ironic. At the NATO summit in Riga, Latvia George Bush met with Alexander Milinkevich, called by Charter '97 "the leader of the democratic forces of Belarus". Perhaps in Charter '97s eyes 14% of the popular vote makes you a leader, maybe 1% of the vote would have also made Milinkevich a leader by those standards.
Bush's flagship statement for this meeting was "we stand together with the Belarusian nation in its fight for freedom." I am sorry to remind President Bush of three important facts.
Number one, The October Revolution was a "fight for freedom".
Number two, The Patriotic War aka WW2 was a "fight for freedom".
Number three, There is no current fight for freedom going on in Belarus because unlike America, Belarus has a good president that the people are proud of.
If there is any fighting over Belarus right now, it is in the minds of the CIA and the State Department as they fight for ways to bring unrest and turmoil to this peaceful and self sufficient country. It must be a fight to devise ways of tricking 10.34 million people into destroying their collective assesets and adopting methods of life that are neither more economicly equitable for all people, or generally safter and better, such as our own methods in America, or the methods we have forced upon our newest friends, the Iraqis.
Perhaps that is the fighting Bush is referring to. This story actually takes a few more twists and turns when you consider the following ironic facts.
Apparantly, Milinkevitch was presented to Bush by Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga. Prsident Freiberga's claim to humanitarian greatness is that he at one time considered combining the day of the SS march with the national memorial holiday.
It seems Latvia is the only country in all of Europe to host annual SS vetran processions commerating the day the divisions were formed.
This isn't George Bush's first meeting with President Vike-Freiberga. On Bush's earlier visit his itenerary included a visit to the Freedom Monument, where SS Leigon Gruppenfuher Rudolf Bangerski's remains were CERIMONIOUSLY re-burried in 1995. I would encourage everyone to read Mark Ane's article entitled "BUSH'S BITBURG?" located at www.thenation.com/doc/20050523/ames
But back to Bush and Milenkevitch, since everyone at this tea party of gentle souls is so concerned with "democracy", I wonder if Milenkevitch questioned Bush about the fate of the POWs and kidnap victims in Iraq and Cuba? I wonder if Milenkevich asked Bush how he would have handle modern Belaurian partisans if he was to attempt a criminal invasion of Belarus similar to his invasion of Iraq? As Belarus is clearly a nation partisans this should be a logical question for Milenkevich to ask Bush.
I wonder if Milenkevich attempted to discuss with Latvian President Vike-Freiberga the civil rights and legal status of the 500,000 ethnic Russians living as stateless persons in Latvia? I would think this subject would be of interest to Milenkevich as he speaks the same language as the Russians, and does he not consider these Russians to be his breathern on some level?
I am comforted to know these quality friends have gotten together to discuss Belarusian democracy.
Lets go over this cast of characters:
1) George Bush - The man resonsible for the condition of the Iraqi people, and leader of the "free" world.
2) The good Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freberga, Proud protector of the stateless Russian Minority and nazi protector.
3) Alexander Milinkevich, Who recently lost the Belarusian presidential election by a landslide and then assisted by our own CIA attempted to start a revolution in his home country. When this CIA sponsored revolution didn't work, Alexander went on tour through Europe petitioning the EU to impose economic sanctions on his countrymen as a reward for their voting their conscience.
So, we have assembled the dream team of democracy here. Impressive.
There are some things the reader should investigate for themselves, such as where the Bush family got is money in the begining. If you are interested in learning about this I suggest reading "How Bush's Grandfather Helped Hitler Rise To Power" by Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,,1312542,00.html
I shouldn't inform the reader of the fact that 1,600 Belarusian Nazis were smuggled illegally into the US in the 50's, escaping war crimes prosecution.
http://www.afrocubaweb.com/assata4.htm
I will let you decide whether or not these characters have any influence over the modern republican party, and likely the Belarusian Diaspora in America as well. You can decide that for yourself.
But none of this should bother you, because in Riga, Latvia today, at the NATO summit, George Bush stated " we stand together with the Belarusian Nation for freedom".
Once again, I am embarrassed, mortified, and offended!
You the reader now know what a sickening, horrifying, and darkly ironic spectacle this must have been.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
Bush's flagship statement for this meeting was "we stand together with the Belarusian nation in its fight for freedom." I am sorry to remind President Bush of three important facts.
Number one, The October Revolution was a "fight for freedom".
Number two, The Patriotic War aka WW2 was a "fight for freedom".
Number three, There is no current fight for freedom going on in Belarus because unlike America, Belarus has a good president that the people are proud of.
If there is any fighting over Belarus right now, it is in the minds of the CIA and the State Department as they fight for ways to bring unrest and turmoil to this peaceful and self sufficient country. It must be a fight to devise ways of tricking 10.34 million people into destroying their collective assesets and adopting methods of life that are neither more economicly equitable for all people, or generally safter and better, such as our own methods in America, or the methods we have forced upon our newest friends, the Iraqis.
Perhaps that is the fighting Bush is referring to. This story actually takes a few more twists and turns when you consider the following ironic facts.
Apparantly, Milinkevitch was presented to Bush by Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freiberga. Prsident Freiberga's claim to humanitarian greatness is that he at one time considered combining the day of the SS march with the national memorial holiday.
It seems Latvia is the only country in all of Europe to host annual SS vetran processions commerating the day the divisions were formed.
This isn't George Bush's first meeting with President Vike-Freiberga. On Bush's earlier visit his itenerary included a visit to the Freedom Monument, where SS Leigon Gruppenfuher Rudolf Bangerski's remains were CERIMONIOUSLY re-burried in 1995. I would encourage everyone to read Mark Ane's article entitled "BUSH'S BITBURG?" located at www.thenation.com/doc/20050523/ames
But back to Bush and Milenkevitch, since everyone at this tea party of gentle souls is so concerned with "democracy", I wonder if Milenkevitch questioned Bush about the fate of the POWs and kidnap victims in Iraq and Cuba? I wonder if Milenkevich asked Bush how he would have handle modern Belaurian partisans if he was to attempt a criminal invasion of Belarus similar to his invasion of Iraq? As Belarus is clearly a nation partisans this should be a logical question for Milenkevich to ask Bush.
I wonder if Milenkevich attempted to discuss with Latvian President Vike-Freiberga the civil rights and legal status of the 500,000 ethnic Russians living as stateless persons in Latvia? I would think this subject would be of interest to Milenkevich as he speaks the same language as the Russians, and does he not consider these Russians to be his breathern on some level?
I am comforted to know these quality friends have gotten together to discuss Belarusian democracy.
Lets go over this cast of characters:
1) George Bush - The man resonsible for the condition of the Iraqi people, and leader of the "free" world.
2) The good Latvian President Vaira Vike-Freberga, Proud protector of the stateless Russian Minority and nazi protector.
3) Alexander Milinkevich, Who recently lost the Belarusian presidential election by a landslide and then assisted by our own CIA attempted to start a revolution in his home country. When this CIA sponsored revolution didn't work, Alexander went on tour through Europe petitioning the EU to impose economic sanctions on his countrymen as a reward for their voting their conscience.
So, we have assembled the dream team of democracy here. Impressive.
There are some things the reader should investigate for themselves, such as where the Bush family got is money in the begining. If you are interested in learning about this I suggest reading "How Bush's Grandfather Helped Hitler Rise To Power" by Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,,1312542,00.html
I shouldn't inform the reader of the fact that 1,600 Belarusian Nazis were smuggled illegally into the US in the 50's, escaping war crimes prosecution.
http://www.afrocubaweb.com/assata4.htm
I will let you decide whether or not these characters have any influence over the modern republican party, and likely the Belarusian Diaspora in America as well. You can decide that for yourself.
But none of this should bother you, because in Riga, Latvia today, at the NATO summit, George Bush stated " we stand together with the Belarusian Nation for freedom".
Once again, I am embarrassed, mortified, and offended!
You the reader now know what a sickening, horrifying, and darkly ironic spectacle this must have been.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
Sunday, November 26, 2006
BELARUS ILLUMINATES MORE THAN BROKEN DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA
When Belarus drafted the U.N. resolution "Situation of Democracy and Human Rights in United States", she illuminated evidence of broken democracy in United States, but perhaps the citizens of America and the world should notice more than a pervasive abhoration of American principles cataloged by Belarus.
It is true that Belarus has pointed to some problems in the United States, our electoral college system, our torture of POWs and kidnap victims, police brutality, the multigenerational oppression of the poor due to lack of effective social engeneering, capital punishment policies that would be embarrassing to most third world countries, all of this was important for Minsk to author against, because all of these are real and disturbing problems.
But the real evidence proving these problems exist came not from the primary Belarusian resolution itself, but from the vacuous response from the American government.
For example, when Belarus expressed concern over U.S. governmental control and interference with the media and the general atrophy of the freedom of the press, did the Bush administration ask for a public discussion of the matter to take place including the National Writers Union nwu.org ? No-obviously they did not!
When the Belarusians voiced concern over arbitrary , incommunicado and secret arrests and detentions, did the Bush administration proudly ask for the opinion of the ACLU aclu.org to make statements defending US policies? No- obviously not!
When the Belarusians authored their resolution to include concerns over the electoral system in America, specificly the electoral college system. Did the Bush administration proudly ask for help from Gary Parish- author of " The Electoral College: " Source of Inequality and Social Injustice in America" www.geocities.com/gparish2000/ ? No- they did not!
When Belarus via their reslolution initiated free and open discussion regarding U.S. capital punishment policies for minors and mentally ill persons, did George Bush desire to proudly tell the world about his own leadership as the govenor of Texas in relation to reasonable capital punishment leadership. I don't think so.
When Belarus voiced concern over the TENS OF THOUSANDS of of POW's and kidnap victims being held and tortured indefinetly, did the Bush administration desire to begin an open and public discussion with the families and loved ones these same kidnap victims? Did George Bush begin an open discussion with the countrymen of these same kidnap and torture victims regarding their wherabouts and conditions?
Of course not!
You see, the Belarusians had the national integrity to author a resolution to address these and more issues, but it was the response, or lack of a correct and reasonable response from Washington that extra-validated Minsk's concerns.
A truly democratic government, of the people and for the people would be motivated from their deepest marrow to root out even the faintest rumor of any of the above accusations, a legitimate leader would martyr his political career if neccessary to bring attention and fair resolution to even one of these troubling issues.
But alas, we the people of America have allowed ethicly hollow Texas oil mafiosi, and war criminals, to gain control of our precious and expensive government.
It is clear and obvious to the reasonable mind that if Minsk's U.N. resolution was not fairly grounded, and provable and realisticly arguable, Washington would have proudly and loudly initiated long and exhausting publicity to decry it.
It was in fact Washington's lack of a proud national response that lends any responsible observer to conclude that George Bush's war criminal decisions, and sophmoric domestic policies, have made the American Democratic Condition not only embarrassing and undefendable, but simply incriminating and oxidizing to Washington and Common America as a whole.
Our founding fathers would be so proud.
MICHAEL MILLER
INDIANAPOLIS
2006
It is true that Belarus has pointed to some problems in the United States, our electoral college system, our torture of POWs and kidnap victims, police brutality, the multigenerational oppression of the poor due to lack of effective social engeneering, capital punishment policies that would be embarrassing to most third world countries, all of this was important for Minsk to author against, because all of these are real and disturbing problems.
But the real evidence proving these problems exist came not from the primary Belarusian resolution itself, but from the vacuous response from the American government.
For example, when Belarus expressed concern over U.S. governmental control and interference with the media and the general atrophy of the freedom of the press, did the Bush administration ask for a public discussion of the matter to take place including the National Writers Union nwu.org ? No-obviously they did not!
When the Belarusians voiced concern over arbitrary , incommunicado and secret arrests and detentions, did the Bush administration proudly ask for the opinion of the ACLU aclu.org to make statements defending US policies? No- obviously not!
When the Belarusians authored their resolution to include concerns over the electoral system in America, specificly the electoral college system. Did the Bush administration proudly ask for help from Gary Parish- author of " The Electoral College: " Source of Inequality and Social Injustice in America" www.geocities.com/gparish2000/ ? No- they did not!
When Belarus via their reslolution initiated free and open discussion regarding U.S. capital punishment policies for minors and mentally ill persons, did George Bush desire to proudly tell the world about his own leadership as the govenor of Texas in relation to reasonable capital punishment leadership. I don't think so.
When Belarus voiced concern over the TENS OF THOUSANDS of of POW's and kidnap victims being held and tortured indefinetly, did the Bush administration desire to begin an open and public discussion with the families and loved ones these same kidnap victims? Did George Bush begin an open discussion with the countrymen of these same kidnap and torture victims regarding their wherabouts and conditions?
Of course not!
You see, the Belarusians had the national integrity to author a resolution to address these and more issues, but it was the response, or lack of a correct and reasonable response from Washington that extra-validated Minsk's concerns.
A truly democratic government, of the people and for the people would be motivated from their deepest marrow to root out even the faintest rumor of any of the above accusations, a legitimate leader would martyr his political career if neccessary to bring attention and fair resolution to even one of these troubling issues.
But alas, we the people of America have allowed ethicly hollow Texas oil mafiosi, and war criminals, to gain control of our precious and expensive government.
It is clear and obvious to the reasonable mind that if Minsk's U.N. resolution was not fairly grounded, and provable and realisticly arguable, Washington would have proudly and loudly initiated long and exhausting publicity to decry it.
It was in fact Washington's lack of a proud national response that lends any responsible observer to conclude that George Bush's war criminal decisions, and sophmoric domestic policies, have made the American Democratic Condition not only embarrassing and undefendable, but simply incriminating and oxidizing to Washington and Common America as a whole.
Our founding fathers would be so proud.
MICHAEL MILLER
INDIANAPOLIS
2006
AN AMERICAN AGREEMENT WITH THE BELARUSIAN POSITION
AN AGREEMENT WITH THE POSITION OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS REGARDING -- The recent draft resolution to the UN: "Inadmissability of human rights violations through the practice of secret detention and unlawful transfers while countering terrorism."
I am very proud to be an ardent supporter of the Lukashenka Administration, and of the Republic of Belarus as a whole under any circumstances, but very much so now that Belarus has drafted a resolution to the U.N. addressing Illegal U.S. detentions, transfers, and tortures of persons suspected of terrorism.
Belarus is very qualified to protest against modern war crimes such as illegal detention, kidnapping, and torture because she sufferred numerous and extreme textbook examples of these same offenses during WW2 at the hands of Nazi Germany.
Belarus sufferred the worst examples of these abuses, and therefore Belarus is clearly qualified to discuss what constitutues an illegal occupation, and what constitutes torture, and what constitutes a war crime. The definitions of these ideas are painfully burned into the general Belarusian psyche and thus, Belarus is PRECISELY THE COUNTRY that should be authoring U.N. resolutions against any activity in the modern world that is even remotely similar to the Nazi crimes causing Belarusian suffering , or even activities of the same Genre.
Any country such as Belarus that endures the violent death of 25% of its citizens because of a a criminal occupation is forever qualified to critique the behavior and policies of the United States when American troops illegally attack and occupy a smaller and weaker country such as Iraq.
I won't rewrite the Belarusian resolution to the U.N., but it contains some very important language and ideas.
For instance the resolution condems torture, illegal detention, and illegal transfer of suspected terrorists, but it also condems the use of CIVILIAN AIRPORTS to enable these practices.
Perhaps Belarus should have explained that the use of the same CIVILIAN AIRPORTS likely makes civilians more of a target for terrorists, but perhaps Belarus should also have explained that there is a moral and legal difference between a partisan fighter and a terrorist.
The use of civilian airports to help enable the U.S. criminal detention, and transfer to torture, of "suspected terrorists" hyper-endangers innocent civilians because perhaps now they can be accidently injured by legitimate partisan interests as well as by planned terrorist attacks.
As Belarus is a country that was liberated from her Nazi occupation in some signifigant part by "partisan forces", I believe that it would be intuitively obvious to most Belarusians, that the practice of using civilian airports to assist in the surpression of partisans or terrorists is dangerous to say the least, for the innocent civilian air traveler.
U.S. Lawmakers should demonstrate levels of personal and professional integrity that are equal to the levels held in the hearts and minds the of common U.S. citizens they represent, and acknowledge the qualifications of Belarus to offer such resolutions and critiques instead of resisting such humane ideas only to Kow Tow to the American War Criminal President George Bush and his cadre of stoolies and henchmen.
This will be immediately painful for the short term politicial future of any public figure that chooses to come forth and stand up against Bush era war crimes and dangerous practices, but the long term results will be exponentially beneficial for the future of the United States as a whole.
MICHAEL MILLER
INDIANAPOLIS
2006
I am very proud to be an ardent supporter of the Lukashenka Administration, and of the Republic of Belarus as a whole under any circumstances, but very much so now that Belarus has drafted a resolution to the U.N. addressing Illegal U.S. detentions, transfers, and tortures of persons suspected of terrorism.
Belarus is very qualified to protest against modern war crimes such as illegal detention, kidnapping, and torture because she sufferred numerous and extreme textbook examples of these same offenses during WW2 at the hands of Nazi Germany.
Belarus sufferred the worst examples of these abuses, and therefore Belarus is clearly qualified to discuss what constitutues an illegal occupation, and what constitutes torture, and what constitutes a war crime. The definitions of these ideas are painfully burned into the general Belarusian psyche and thus, Belarus is PRECISELY THE COUNTRY that should be authoring U.N. resolutions against any activity in the modern world that is even remotely similar to the Nazi crimes causing Belarusian suffering , or even activities of the same Genre.
Any country such as Belarus that endures the violent death of 25% of its citizens because of a a criminal occupation is forever qualified to critique the behavior and policies of the United States when American troops illegally attack and occupy a smaller and weaker country such as Iraq.
I won't rewrite the Belarusian resolution to the U.N., but it contains some very important language and ideas.
For instance the resolution condems torture, illegal detention, and illegal transfer of suspected terrorists, but it also condems the use of CIVILIAN AIRPORTS to enable these practices.
Perhaps Belarus should have explained that the use of the same CIVILIAN AIRPORTS likely makes civilians more of a target for terrorists, but perhaps Belarus should also have explained that there is a moral and legal difference between a partisan fighter and a terrorist.
The use of civilian airports to help enable the U.S. criminal detention, and transfer to torture, of "suspected terrorists" hyper-endangers innocent civilians because perhaps now they can be accidently injured by legitimate partisan interests as well as by planned terrorist attacks.
As Belarus is a country that was liberated from her Nazi occupation in some signifigant part by "partisan forces", I believe that it would be intuitively obvious to most Belarusians, that the practice of using civilian airports to assist in the surpression of partisans or terrorists is dangerous to say the least, for the innocent civilian air traveler.
U.S. Lawmakers should demonstrate levels of personal and professional integrity that are equal to the levels held in the hearts and minds the of common U.S. citizens they represent, and acknowledge the qualifications of Belarus to offer such resolutions and critiques instead of resisting such humane ideas only to Kow Tow to the American War Criminal President George Bush and his cadre of stoolies and henchmen.
This will be immediately painful for the short term politicial future of any public figure that chooses to come forth and stand up against Bush era war crimes and dangerous practices, but the long term results will be exponentially beneficial for the future of the United States as a whole.
MICHAEL MILLER
INDIANAPOLIS
2006
Monday, November 20, 2006
STUCK ON WHINE: A response to the TOL Blogs article: BELARUS- STUCK IN TIME
This article should have been called STUCK ON WHINE, not STUCK IN TIME.
Intravenous begins by complaining about the upcoming Minsk "Festival of Soviet Cuisine" but doesn't bother to attend the festival before passing a negative judgment on it and attempting to invalidate it.
The author continues to lament the presence of Lenin Statues, Stalinist Baroque architecture, Socialist Sculptures, the KGB, the soviet newspapers, and even complains that the Great October Revolution is still a holiday.
The author then goes on to attack the soviet identity documents and passport and travel regulations that are functionally analogous to American Drivers Licenses and Passports.
I was actually shocked at the nerve of Intravenous to complain about Belarus taking an interest in the clothing and fashion sense of its nation's youth. (Imagine the nerve of a country to want its youth to be properly and tastefully attired! -- LOL ) Now, I personally don't know what fashion choices are going to be promoted by Minsk, but they are most certainly going to be in better taste than what is being displayed by a giant percentage of our own countries young people. But perhaps Intravenous would prefer the youth of Belarus to take fashion lessons from what American young people are wearing, perhaps our young people here in American could also teach the Belarusian youth about MUSIC appreciation, and perhaps civics, and study skills and personal morality could be the next few international "in" services we could export to the youth of Belarus.
Intravenous closes his/her WHINE-A-THON by stating " This crumbling but still standing statue of Lenin's Pioneers in one of Minsk's courtyards made me think of a " Belarus Stuck in Time" . All readers should look at this photo and notice it is was clearly not shot in Minsk, and it was probably shot somewhere in an abandoned EXCLUSION ZONE, and not in Minsk at all.
So, Intravenous doesn't like Belarusian food, hates Minsk architecture, has no respect for the holidays, and enjoys making fun of the passport rules and employment laws. My big question for Intravenous is "What are you doing in Belarus at all?" You hate everything, you imply the country is terrible, why are you there?
Don't worry Intravenous, maybe your "EMPLOYERS" will "POST" you to
a destination more to your liking on your next "TOUR".
Intravenous begins by complaining about the upcoming Minsk "Festival of Soviet Cuisine" but doesn't bother to attend the festival before passing a negative judgment on it and attempting to invalidate it.
The author continues to lament the presence of Lenin Statues, Stalinist Baroque architecture, Socialist Sculptures, the KGB, the soviet newspapers, and even complains that the Great October Revolution is still a holiday.
The author then goes on to attack the soviet identity documents and passport and travel regulations that are functionally analogous to American Drivers Licenses and Passports.
I was actually shocked at the nerve of Intravenous to complain about Belarus taking an interest in the clothing and fashion sense of its nation's youth. (Imagine the nerve of a country to want its youth to be properly and tastefully attired! -- LOL ) Now, I personally don't know what fashion choices are going to be promoted by Minsk, but they are most certainly going to be in better taste than what is being displayed by a giant percentage of our own countries young people. But perhaps Intravenous would prefer the youth of Belarus to take fashion lessons from what American young people are wearing, perhaps our young people here in American could also teach the Belarusian youth about MUSIC appreciation, and perhaps civics, and study skills and personal morality could be the next few international "in" services we could export to the youth of Belarus.
Intravenous closes his/her WHINE-A-THON by stating " This crumbling but still standing statue of Lenin's Pioneers in one of Minsk's courtyards made me think of a " Belarus Stuck in Time" . All readers should look at this photo and notice it is was clearly not shot in Minsk, and it was probably shot somewhere in an abandoned EXCLUSION ZONE, and not in Minsk at all.
So, Intravenous doesn't like Belarusian food, hates Minsk architecture, has no respect for the holidays, and enjoys making fun of the passport rules and employment laws. My big question for Intravenous is "What are you doing in Belarus at all?" You hate everything, you imply the country is terrible, why are you there?
Don't worry Intravenous, maybe your "EMPLOYERS" will "POST" you to
a destination more to your liking on your next "TOUR".
Monday, November 13, 2006
MICHAEL MILLER'S RESPONSE TO GERMAN LAWMAKER MARILUISE BECK
This article references the BHTimes headline Belarus retaliates for travel ban
The Belarusian Foreign Ministry is completely correct to deny entry to
anyone they choose.
The civilized world should consider International Travel Bans on LEGALLY ELECTED Belarusian officials to be nothing more than a post-election provocation against both Belarusians and their chosen leaders.
Minsk INCREASES ITS LEGITIMACY by authorizing and demanding symmetric travel restrictions be placed on US and EU officials in response to Belarusian leaders being penalized for their popularity and success in the recent election.
German lawmaker Mariluise Beck interestingly stated "This almost brings us back to STALINIST TIMES".
This is quite an interesting complaint coming from a German lawmaker.
Perhaps Beck has forgotten all of histories events that took place
During "STALINIST TIMES". Perhaps Beck wishes the former Soviet Union were to have had a weaker and less intelligent leader than Joseph Stalin during "STALINIST TIMES".
I believe it is within Beck's prerogative to assail the character of
Joseph Stalin if she wishes, but perhaps it would be better if she measured his value against another national leaders of the same ERA.
Beck also states "this is again a clear sign that Lukashenka's system seals itself off from any kind of critical dialogue."
Allow me to remind Beck that it was the EU and the US that instituted the policy of TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS AND VISA BANS -- and their motivation for these bans and restrictions against the current Belarusian leadership was that Alexander Lukashenka fairly WON a presidential election defeating the western puppet candidate Alexander Milinkevich.
Beck should carefully consider historical facts before assaulting the rightful Presidential Administration of the Republic of Belarus. Beck and her western cohorts should also consider the fact that in spite of 60 years of brainwashing and misinformation, the American people and the people of the world are becoming more and more geopolitically savy every day and we are not so easily mislead and propagandized as we were in "STALINIST TIMES".
The days of the common western man being easily tricked, being
politically robbed, being taken for a fool, and generally BEINGHAD, are quickly coming to a close.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
The Belarusian Foreign Ministry is completely correct to deny entry to
anyone they choose.
The civilized world should consider International Travel Bans on LEGALLY ELECTED Belarusian officials to be nothing more than a post-election provocation against both Belarusians and their chosen leaders.
Minsk INCREASES ITS LEGITIMACY by authorizing and demanding symmetric travel restrictions be placed on US and EU officials in response to Belarusian leaders being penalized for their popularity and success in the recent election.
German lawmaker Mariluise Beck interestingly stated "This almost brings us back to STALINIST TIMES".
This is quite an interesting complaint coming from a German lawmaker.
Perhaps Beck has forgotten all of histories events that took place
During "STALINIST TIMES". Perhaps Beck wishes the former Soviet Union were to have had a weaker and less intelligent leader than Joseph Stalin during "STALINIST TIMES".
I believe it is within Beck's prerogative to assail the character of
Joseph Stalin if she wishes, but perhaps it would be better if she measured his value against another national leaders of the same ERA.
Beck also states "this is again a clear sign that Lukashenka's system seals itself off from any kind of critical dialogue."
Allow me to remind Beck that it was the EU and the US that instituted the policy of TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS AND VISA BANS -- and their motivation for these bans and restrictions against the current Belarusian leadership was that Alexander Lukashenka fairly WON a presidential election defeating the western puppet candidate Alexander Milinkevich.
Beck should carefully consider historical facts before assaulting the rightful Presidential Administration of the Republic of Belarus. Beck and her western cohorts should also consider the fact that in spite of 60 years of brainwashing and misinformation, the American people and the people of the world are becoming more and more geopolitically savy every day and we are not so easily mislead and propagandized as we were in "STALINIST TIMES".
The days of the common western man being easily tricked, being
politically robbed, being taken for a fool, and generally BEINGHAD, are quickly coming to a close.
Michael Miller
Indianapolis
2006
MICHAEL MILLER RESPONDS TO TAMMY LYNCH ISCIP, BOSTON UNIVERSITY-
Lukashenka continues crackdown as EU rejects sanctions.
This article by Tammy Lynch should have been called the SAME TIRED PROPAGANDA
(with footnotes).
I was impressed by the amount of academic camouflage this particular
article has. Apparently Lynch is faculty at ISCIP, Boston College. ISCIP stands for Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology, and Policy. I encourage the reader to click on the ISCIP link and examine this web page and decide for themselves what branch of the US government supports and grooms and ultimately controls this "institute" at BU.
If you have now examined this link, I am sure we are in agreement
regarding Lynch's "academic" motivation to write this article.
Lynch attempts to invalidate the European Union's decision to not suspend Belarus from The Generalized System of Preference (gsp) by reminding the reader that Alexander Milinkevich recently won the Sakharov prize for freedom of thought, and 50,000 euros. Good job Sasha, you're buying tonight!
Lynch unskillfully accuses Belarus of weapons trading, and human trafficking by telling the reader that in addition to those concerns the EU has voted to freeze the assets of Belarusian Leaders. Never mind that "freezing the assets" of Belarusian Leaders was an American idea, and you need to just forget about the fact that no "assets" have ever been found, kind of like they never existed at all. Sort of seems like America demanded to have Lukashenka's "assets" frozen knowing there were no assets to be frozen, but never mind that, it was a nice attempt at slander.
However, Lynch fails to remind the reader that Belarus is a leader in thwarting organized crime and human traffic, and that in addition to adhering to international norms in weapons sales, Belarus has not actually USED weapons on any other countries, unlike our own recent and dubious history of violently and criminally attacking IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN. (however I agree with the attack of Afghanistan-mm).
Lynch also fails to remind the reader that the U.S. is a giant exporter of war weapons, as well as civilian weapons. Lynch also fails to discuss any American culpability in the global human traffic problem, but lets not dwell on details here.
Lynch promotes trade sanctions against Belarus, but forgets to recommend trade sanctions against the US for our criminal actions in IRAQ and our criminal kidnapping and torture of persons from in Afghanistan and other countries as well. Interesting.
Lynch also attempts to lampoon and invalidate Polish, and Latvian, and Lithuanian opinions that oppose the same sanctions.
Instead Lynch supports the opinion of Alexander Milinkivitch who has repeatedly asked the European Union to penalize Belarus for its domestic and foreign policies. Now we all agree that Milinkivitch would never ask the EU to penalize Washington for its policies at home or abroad, after all, how could he bite the hand that fed him?
But Lynch fails to remind the reader that Milinkivitch didn't campaign with a platform of "When I lose I will petition for sanctions against
Belarus".
This fact is conveniently forgotten.
Lynch goes on to say that Russia is behind Polish, Latvian, and
Lithuanian support of their neighbor Belarus in this matter. Lynch proposes that Energy Politics are behind Russian influence of these countries. I guess when all else fails, we can always blame Russia, why not? I am really sorry to point out the painfully obvious, that ENERGY politics might be a large motivator in US foreign policy, because that would be just a bit too obvious a jab. But what the hell.
Lynch closes by telling the reader about Milinkivitch's harsh penalty of 15 days for attempting to STAGE A REVOLUTION when he lost the election to Lukashenka. She conveniently doesn't suggest the number of days being served in torturous conditions by persons kidnapped by the US government in Iraq or Afghanistan or elsewhere, that fact would certainly be not relevant to Lynch.
Lynch has attempted to re-arrange some very loosely connected facts for the purposes of assaulting the Lukashenka Administration in Minsk.
But did I mention the footnotes at the bottom of the article? It gave this horseshit piece of propaganda a real intellectual feel.
Congratulations Tammy Lynch, The Genuine Academics and Intellectuals at
BU must be very proud of you.
MICHAEL MILLER
INDIANAPOLIS
This article by Tammy Lynch should have been called the SAME TIRED PROPAGANDA
(with footnotes).
I was impressed by the amount of academic camouflage this particular
article has. Apparently Lynch is faculty at ISCIP, Boston College. ISCIP stands for Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology, and Policy. I encourage the reader to click on the ISCIP link and examine this web page and decide for themselves what branch of the US government supports and grooms and ultimately controls this "institute" at BU.
If you have now examined this link, I am sure we are in agreement
regarding Lynch's "academic" motivation to write this article.
Lynch attempts to invalidate the European Union's decision to not suspend Belarus from The Generalized System of Preference (gsp) by reminding the reader that Alexander Milinkevich recently won the Sakharov prize for freedom of thought, and 50,000 euros. Good job Sasha, you're buying tonight!
Lynch unskillfully accuses Belarus of weapons trading, and human trafficking by telling the reader that in addition to those concerns the EU has voted to freeze the assets of Belarusian Leaders. Never mind that "freezing the assets" of Belarusian Leaders was an American idea, and you need to just forget about the fact that no "assets" have ever been found, kind of like they never existed at all. Sort of seems like America demanded to have Lukashenka's "assets" frozen knowing there were no assets to be frozen, but never mind that, it was a nice attempt at slander.
However, Lynch fails to remind the reader that Belarus is a leader in thwarting organized crime and human traffic, and that in addition to adhering to international norms in weapons sales, Belarus has not actually USED weapons on any other countries, unlike our own recent and dubious history of violently and criminally attacking IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN. (however I agree with the attack of Afghanistan-mm).
Lynch also fails to remind the reader that the U.S. is a giant exporter of war weapons, as well as civilian weapons. Lynch also fails to discuss any American culpability in the global human traffic problem, but lets not dwell on details here.
Lynch promotes trade sanctions against Belarus, but forgets to recommend trade sanctions against the US for our criminal actions in IRAQ and our criminal kidnapping and torture of persons from in Afghanistan and other countries as well. Interesting.
Lynch also attempts to lampoon and invalidate Polish, and Latvian, and Lithuanian opinions that oppose the same sanctions.
Instead Lynch supports the opinion of Alexander Milinkivitch who has repeatedly asked the European Union to penalize Belarus for its domestic and foreign policies. Now we all agree that Milinkivitch would never ask the EU to penalize Washington for its policies at home or abroad, after all, how could he bite the hand that fed him?
But Lynch fails to remind the reader that Milinkivitch didn't campaign with a platform of "When I lose I will petition for sanctions against
Belarus".
This fact is conveniently forgotten.
Lynch goes on to say that Russia is behind Polish, Latvian, and
Lithuanian support of their neighbor Belarus in this matter. Lynch proposes that Energy Politics are behind Russian influence of these countries. I guess when all else fails, we can always blame Russia, why not? I am really sorry to point out the painfully obvious, that ENERGY politics might be a large motivator in US foreign policy, because that would be just a bit too obvious a jab. But what the hell.
Lynch closes by telling the reader about Milinkivitch's harsh penalty of 15 days for attempting to STAGE A REVOLUTION when he lost the election to Lukashenka. She conveniently doesn't suggest the number of days being served in torturous conditions by persons kidnapped by the US government in Iraq or Afghanistan or elsewhere, that fact would certainly be not relevant to Lynch.
Lynch has attempted to re-arrange some very loosely connected facts for the purposes of assaulting the Lukashenka Administration in Minsk.
But did I mention the footnotes at the bottom of the article? It gave this horseshit piece of propaganda a real intellectual feel.
Congratulations Tammy Lynch, The Genuine Academics and Intellectuals at
BU must be very proud of you.
MICHAEL MILLER
INDIANAPOLIS
The first Blog
Hello, my name is Michael Miller and I live in Indianapolis. I don't know that I am particularly happy about living in Indianapolis. In fact, Like anywhere else in the world, Indy has its good and bad points. I came to Belarus on vacation in June of 2002. I came on a wife trip, that is to say, I came at the invitation of a marriage company. I was looking for a Belarusian Wife. I met many nice women, each one prettier and smarter than the last, and I would have been lucky to have married any of them, but things just didn't work out that way. When I cam to Belarus, I barely knew the name of the President, much less had any political opinions about him or Belarus. I tried very hard to stay out of any political discussions because I didn't really want to end up arguing with anyone or saying the wrong thing. And I didn't have anything to say. But I did observe my surroundings, I did look into the eyes of the people, I did discuss things with them, and I got a general idea of the "gestault" of the place. I formed most of my Belarusian opinions through independent reading and research, and also from my other travels to Moscow, Togliatti, Ryzan, Sochi, Warsaw and Bucharest. I speak horrible and non-functional russian, but someday I hope to only speak bad russian that sometimes can be understood by some people. Actually, I have been thinking about going to college in Belarus for a long time, and I would like to someday attend the Belarusian State University and study Economics and International Politics. That's right. No BS at all. And I have been thinking about this for so long, that I found I have a lot to say about how that little country has been treated by our country and the media. So this, and because I got involved with the BEING HAD Blog is why I have started this Blog. I hope that people will be interested in what I have to say and I am very interested in your opinions about this subject matter too. My main motivation in writing this blog is to somehow help the people of Belarus retain their physical assets and their way of life and not have thier socio-economic inertia squandered and destroyed by western forces motivated only by greed and prejudice and general intellectual piccaninyism. For a long time the people of America were taught to hate and fear all things Soviet, and all things Eastern European, we were taught with fervor to deal with soviet economic issues in an emotional fashion. That is how our minds were controlled during and to some extent after the cold war. We were not taught that Soviet styled socialism might have some merrits for the general population, rather we were taught it was pure evil, tantamount to slavery, or a living hell of some sort. This manner of thinking is very hard for the common man in America to overcome. And unless you have some experience traveling to Eastern Europe and seeing how people live, and meeting them and talking to them, you will proably never overcome the bonds of soci-academic slavery that have been placed on you by the U.S. government during the cold war. I think I have broken those chains in my own mind, I have been able to free my mind to think about issues from a multiple of different perspectives, and so I am able to construct ideas and arguments that the average person might understand, but that they proably don't have the time to build and publish on their own. I know I am not breaking any ground with this blog, I am not introducing any new ideas in principle, but hopefully the mission of my blog will be fullfilled in that perhaps some of the propaganda and lies about Belarus and the Lukashenka administration will be somehow neutralized and the people of Belarus will have a little more breathing space with which to build a great country and live safely and cleanly and with happiness and security. I am also building a web page do post and discuss the work of Jerzy Kosinski, specificily The Painted Bird. You can access that web page here http://thepaintedbirdpostulate.com/ . I apologize my html coding skills suck so badly on this site, please just copy this address and insert it to the address bar. I am earnestly and hystericly trying to learn code as you read this. More hystericly than earnestly.
So for now let's see how this goes.
Live from Indy
Mike Miller.
So for now let's see how this goes.
Live from Indy
Mike Miller.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)