Showing posts with label hate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hate. Show all posts
Saturday, August 25, 2018
About conflicts in Middle-East and use of under-age combatants
https://metsantarinoita.blogspot.com/
Kimmo Huosionmaa
One very traumatic thing in the Middle-East conflict is using children as soldiers in those conflicts. When ISIS or some other terrorist organization would deliver their propaganda, they introduce under-age persons, who are armed with assault rifles. And that version is probably in use at another side. The sultan's personal soldiers, Janissary have chosen in very young age, in Ottoman's Empire, and those warriors tradition have been transferred to modern Emir's special forces in Oman and other Middle-East countries.
There is one very interesting transformation about the Janissary training. The Sultan of Turkey claimed to those persons, that their parents were Christians, who have delivered their children as slaves to Sultan. That guaranteed the loyalty and hate against Christianity of those troops, what was known as their fanaticism and brave in the battle. The modern version of that political training could be that there would be that the children whose parents have been dead claimed that the terrorists or Islamic terrorists have caused the death of those persons, and that can cause hate for rest of that child's life.
Hate makes them the good target for the special forces recruiters, and if the death caused by the terrorist attack, would that increase the hate. In this version, the real reason for the death of those parents could be driven in drunk or overdose of heroin. The story, what will be told about that incident could motivate that person to take recruiting in some special units or mercenary companies could be surer than without that kind of motivator. Have you ever thought that maybe somebody would guide the laser-guided bombs against civilians on purpose?
One of the most important purposes of showing child combatants is provoking the opponent to open the fire against targets, where are children. And then introducing those victims, would that terrorist organization want to get people sympathized their side. Smart weapons are very effective against tanks and hardened shelters. The use of those weapons is that the laser-guided bombs would be pointed to target, what is marked by the laser designator. The designator can be installed to the aircraft or it can use the operator, who might sit on the ground and point the laser designator to the target.
That person can be the regular combatant, special forces operator or agent. The use of those weapons has become more common because they give aircraft very effective tank busting capacity, and they help avoid the civilian casualties. But if the laser-guided weapon is targeted to the civilians, would the result be more deadly than making this strike by normal free-fall bombs. Sometimes smart weapons are criticized because they allow the assassination missions, where is used aircraft.
But the answer to critics has been that behind it is Russia or the Soviet Union, what wants to deny those bombs because they danger the tank-base tactics. But that might be only the propaganda of the CIA. And today is created very small size (1-10 kg) guided bombs, what can destroy any tank or cannon on the ground. And they can be used by F-15 or other fast attack aircraft, and they are created to replace cluster bombs in those anti-tank missions.
Thursday, May 17, 2018
Working life is not self-evident and kicks off from work doesn't mean the end of the life.
https://pimeakronikka.blogspot.fi/p/working-life-is-not-self-evident-and.html
Kimmo Huosionmaa
Racism is always mentioned as the European phenomenon, but this is not true. There is racism also among other ethnic groups like Arabs and Black Africans. Also between African tribes like Hutu and Tutsi. When we are talking about slavery, we always forget that hunting of the slaves was handle by Arabs and members of black tribes, who sold people to European slave markets for getting guns and other weapons. When slavery was officially prohibited in 19th. century, transferred European businessmen their cotton plantages to Africa, and that was, of course, needed men, who have guarded those places. The hate between Hutu and Tutsi is from that age because owners of the cotton plantages used another of those tribes for guarding the slaves.
That was because Europeans didn't want anybody knows, what was going on in those places, what could be called as near slavery. Slavery was officially prohibited because priests were justified the trade of humans very clear, but the slavery continued everywhere, where public eye didn't look. Europeans choose the tribe, what was used as guards, by using one method: they must be the minority in their area. That made them addicted to European firearms, and this was caused hate between people of Africa. Those plantages were like some concentration camps, and everywhere were only black persons, who worked in there. The guns were explained to be against predators, and if somebody would become suspicious, could that person shot and left to savanna, where scavengers would terminate the body in a couple of hours. We are living in the world, where every man should be free, and we wish to believe that the time of slavery would be over. But there is still marketplaces, where people are sold for work without payments. And now we are not talking about sex-slaves. There are a million of people in the world, who are working as the cleaners and other works, but they ever see their payments.
In some cases, the payment would go to those workers parents, and those workers would not even see their homes. Those parents have sold their children to the factories to get more money, and the under-aged worker's payroll goes to the pockets of the parents, who might live hundreds of kilometers away from that factory. There are also cases, where the company pays payments, but the money would get back to the pockets of the company owners. In those cases, the employer says, that they would pay payments, but the worker should live in some "hotel", and then all money goes to living. The idea of this kind of slavery is that the company takes their workers only from some "hotels", what are actually some warehouses, and then the rent of those places would get all the money, what that company paid. It's sometimes kept by the bosses of the company, but sometimes the keeper of those hotels is some labor union guy, who might be the cousin of the owner of that company. Also sometimes the payroll would get back to the pockets of company owners by the very nasty way. The owner or work leader of the company tells that employee have made damages in the work, and then the company can ask payment for those destroyed stuff.
This has been the fate of some young workers even in the Western world. But there is one model of slavery, what we might see everywhere. That is the psychiatric patients and handicapped people rehabilitation work. Those works are usually very dirty, and nobody wants to do them. And the payments of those works are poor, and they are under-ranked. Sometimes the attitude of those workers is, that their work is so bad, that they would need any payments. Also, their work has been delayed more often than normal workers, even if the quality of the work has been the same. The slavery, where payments would go to the pockets of the parents is the thing, what happens also in the western countries. In some cases, alcoholism or narcomaniacs would send their children for cleaning the roofs or delivering newspapers for getting drugs or alcohol. And those children even get food at home.
There is connecting the question of social media. When some employer claims that person would be kicked off because of the writings in social media, and if those writings were not made, that person would be kept in the workplace. But this thing is a little bit suspicious. Is it really so, that the employer would be kept the worker in the work if this person would leave the social media? if the employer has isolated the worker, they would ever be allowed those workers to stay in their places. And if the employee writes to social media, would the kicks off be more easy that if that person would be quiet. There are people who claims that it would be easier to keep the mouth shut, but then I must ask one question: would it really easier to keep the mouth shut? And when we are thinking about the situation, that employee has been kicked off, why must that person hide those things?
I have had many work relationships what have been cut for many reasons, and I would say that I'm not an easy person, who just wants to comply everything, what the boss wants. And that have caused problems for me, but when I'm thinking about those situations, that some proud man has said that I'm not suitable in their workplace, I must say that kicks off have been easier than if I was not written about this stories. Sometimes those bosses have not dared to say everything, what they wanted. And the kicks have been coming anyway, so, why should I feel that this situation is some kind of "stigma" for me? If that is the stigma for some work instructor, that is that person's problem, not mine. This has been the nice morning to think about those things and let's go to face the new day and new challenges.
https://pimeakronikka.blogspot.fi/p/working-life-is-not-self-evident-and.html
Kimmo Huosionmaa
Racism is always mentioned as the European phenomenon, but this is not true. There is racism also among other ethnic groups like Arabs and Black Africans. Also between African tribes like Hutu and Tutsi. When we are talking about slavery, we always forget that hunting of the slaves was handle by Arabs and members of black tribes, who sold people to European slave markets for getting guns and other weapons. When slavery was officially prohibited in 19th. century, transferred European businessmen their cotton plantages to Africa, and that was, of course, needed men, who have guarded those places. The hate between Hutu and Tutsi is from that age because owners of the cotton plantages used another of those tribes for guarding the slaves.
That was because Europeans didn't want anybody knows, what was going on in those places, what could be called as near slavery. Slavery was officially prohibited because priests were justified the trade of humans very clear, but the slavery continued everywhere, where public eye didn't look. Europeans choose the tribe, what was used as guards, by using one method: they must be the minority in their area. That made them addicted to European firearms, and this was caused hate between people of Africa. Those plantages were like some concentration camps, and everywhere were only black persons, who worked in there. The guns were explained to be against predators, and if somebody would become suspicious, could that person shot and left to savanna, where scavengers would terminate the body in a couple of hours. We are living in the world, where every man should be free, and we wish to believe that the time of slavery would be over. But there is still marketplaces, where people are sold for work without payments. And now we are not talking about sex-slaves. There are a million of people in the world, who are working as the cleaners and other works, but they ever see their payments.
In some cases, the payment would go to those workers parents, and those workers would not even see their homes. Those parents have sold their children to the factories to get more money, and the under-aged worker's payroll goes to the pockets of the parents, who might live hundreds of kilometers away from that factory. There are also cases, where the company pays payments, but the money would get back to the pockets of the company owners. In those cases, the employer says, that they would pay payments, but the worker should live in some "hotel", and then all money goes to living. The idea of this kind of slavery is that the company takes their workers only from some "hotels", what are actually some warehouses, and then the rent of those places would get all the money, what that company paid. It's sometimes kept by the bosses of the company, but sometimes the keeper of those hotels is some labor union guy, who might be the cousin of the owner of that company. Also sometimes the payroll would get back to the pockets of company owners by the very nasty way. The owner or work leader of the company tells that employee have made damages in the work, and then the company can ask payment for those destroyed stuff.
This has been the fate of some young workers even in the Western world. But there is one model of slavery, what we might see everywhere. That is the psychiatric patients and handicapped people rehabilitation work. Those works are usually very dirty, and nobody wants to do them. And the payments of those works are poor, and they are under-ranked. Sometimes the attitude of those workers is, that their work is so bad, that they would need any payments. Also, their work has been delayed more often than normal workers, even if the quality of the work has been the same. The slavery, where payments would go to the pockets of the parents is the thing, what happens also in the western countries. In some cases, alcoholism or narcomaniacs would send their children for cleaning the roofs or delivering newspapers for getting drugs or alcohol. And those children even get food at home.
There is connecting the question of social media. When some employer claims that person would be kicked off because of the writings in social media, and if those writings were not made, that person would be kept in the workplace. But this thing is a little bit suspicious. Is it really so, that the employer would be kept the worker in the work if this person would leave the social media? if the employer has isolated the worker, they would ever be allowed those workers to stay in their places. And if the employee writes to social media, would the kicks off be more easy that if that person would be quiet. There are people who claims that it would be easier to keep the mouth shut, but then I must ask one question: would it really easier to keep the mouth shut? And when we are thinking about the situation, that employee has been kicked off, why must that person hide those things?
I have had many work relationships what have been cut for many reasons, and I would say that I'm not an easy person, who just wants to comply everything, what the boss wants. And that have caused problems for me, but when I'm thinking about those situations, that some proud man has said that I'm not suitable in their workplace, I must say that kicks off have been easier than if I was not written about this stories. Sometimes those bosses have not dared to say everything, what they wanted. And the kicks have been coming anyway, so, why should I feel that this situation is some kind of "stigma" for me? If that is the stigma for some work instructor, that is that person's problem, not mine. This has been the nice morning to think about those things and let's go to face the new day and new challenges.
https://pimeakronikka.blogspot.fi/p/working-life-is-not-self-evident-and.html
Wednesday, February 14, 2018
Why somebody hates artists and especially painters?
 |
| "Scream" Edvard Munch 1893 (Picture 1) |
Kimmo Huosionmaa
All of us have different opinions, about the art. And we will not normally shoot those artists because of their work. If somebody will send artists to prisons because they paintings will not satisfy those persons, that will wake the investigators interested in those works. The reason for arresting of somebody because of some paintings seems quite small and strange for our democratic society. And if the painting is some kind of the political manifest, we must ask what makes it the political manifest?
Why the picture cause reaction, that some police-officers will come to artists home with sub-machine guns. Are those pictures some kind of danger for national security, and another question is, what means term "national security?". Is that the security of military industry? Or is it the national leader's personal security? And are the arrests made for hiding some leaders personal secrets, that they were in some places, where they were not? When we are observing person like Lev Trotsky, we must understand that this person was in New York during the Russian revolution in 1917.
And when we are thinking about the connection between Trotsky's place, where he stayed during the revolution and hate him, we must consider that maybe the reason for killing that man was, that somebody else was claimed, that he was with Trotsky in some very important place, and when Trotsky was in New York, that story was uncovered the lie. So did that revolution began too early, that the persons would not be in right places when the operation began. The revolution began too early in St. Petersburg, and the front was opposite direction, to what was planned. Maybe the leaders of the revolution thought that they will start to attack the Pacific coast of Russia to St. Petersburg and Moscow.
But the plans were not working because the people would start to hit the winter palace, and that caused the situation, that some key leaders were in wrong place. And Lenin arrived in St. Petersburg after the revolution happened in that town. There was no evidence that Stalin ever was at the front, and he just claimed that he was the political prisoner. And the evidence was the prison card, what could be made by Okhrana, the Tsar's political police. And if Stalin was the agent of that organization, would that man be in trouble. He just claimed that he was the metal worker, who was the member of "secret communist cell".
But when we are looking about the "purges" what was me by him, this thing would get the different meaning, because GPU:s terror was targeted to metal industry and engineers who worked in there. So was Stalin hiding his past of the Okhrana's agent? This would explain, why this man hated those engineers. Because if Stalin ever was talked to real metal engineer about the things, what happened in the factory, this man would catch by lie, because if he was Okhrana's agent would this man know anything about the work in metal industry, and he would not know about the missions of the men, who work in there. And that would uncover the dirty secret about the man, what would cause death to him.
When we are thinking of some portraits we must understand that if there were the landscape where some great battle was to happen, and some leader doesn't remember that or this person remembers a wrong place, that would be very destructive for the reputation of that person. Those leaders of the revolutions might make about the personal glories around them, and that's why they are so sharp about their reputation. And in the case of the Russian revolution, might be some fakes in those votes, about the leadership of the state.
Sources
Picture 1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
New self-assembly nanotubes turn the impossible possible.
New self-assembly nanotubes turn the impossible possible. "The crystal structure of a carbon bilayer. The purple outer layer and blue...
-
That is the thing where electromagnetic wormholes are needed. In photonic data transportation, the system loads information as wave movement... -
"Illustration of the USS Delaware deploying the Yellow Moray spy robot underwater. Image generated by AI" (Sustainability Times, “... -
Above is a fictional interstellar spacecraft. There is a possibility that in the future this kind of spacecraft will be are reality. The ide...