Kewl Video… I haven’t yet watched another iGNiTe video but the concept seams great!

The war in Afghanistan is controversy at best. Should “we” stay there or should we leave it? Was the war even necessary? That depends, what one sees as necessary, of cause…

The war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, and on that point, the war against Afghanistan was initiated after the Terror-Attack at the World Tread Center in NY. It was called a counter-strike after the attack. This counter-strike should overthrow the Taliban regime and in some way, it did, and bring Osama Bin Laden to justice. Under the Taliban-regime, Afghanistan was economically and socially in the late medieval. That is not really the fault of the Afghans themselves, it’s more merely bad luck in its history.

So lets take a short detour in the Afghan history. In its history Afghanistan was attack and occupied by the British Empire not less then three times. The first war toke place from 1839-1842 and resulted in a ceasefire, which was immediately broken by the Afghans when the British corpse retreaded from Afghanistan. The whole British Afghanistan Expedition was attacked in an ambush and all 15.000 British and Indian soldiers and there families were killed. Driven by anger, the British again declared ware on Afghanistan and occupied it in the year 1878. As an act of vengeance, the British burned down Kabul (the capital of Afghanistan). The third British-Afghan war in 1919 lead to the independence of Afghanistan. Actually Afghanistan was called Afghanistan only by now. It was also recognized as an sovereign state. In 1933 Afghanistan became a kingdom, a republic in 1973 and in 1978 the communists took over the country with the help of the Soviet Union.

In 1979 the Soviet army marched into Afghanistan to stabilize the communist government. This resulted in a 10 year lasting proxy war between the Soviet Union and the USA. In which course the USA supported the Mujaheddin, kind of Islamic guerrilla, in the war against the Soviet Union. Really nice depicted in the move “Charlie Wilson’s war“. After the retread of the Soviets in 1989, different Mujaheddin groups turned on each other. Which resulted in a civil war, that lasted till 1995. From 1995 to 2001 the Taliban started to conquer Afghanistan out from Pakistan. In the end they proclaim the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and implanted the Sharia, the Islamic law derived from the Koran, they closed many schools, forced man to grow a beard and women to wear the Burqa.Women were also no longer allowed to visit schools or to leave there home without any male company.

After the Attack in 2001, the US suspected that Osama Bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan and invaded the country in a so called act of self defence.

They never found Bin Laden, maybe he was killed during the war, maybe he escaped, maybe he was not even there. After three years the Islamic Republic Afghanistan was instated and the first President Hamid Karzai was elected. In his first 5 years, every President is elected for 5 years and can only be elected two times, the country improved in some points. But one can not really be sure if this is because of his actions. To keeps his power, it is known, that Karzai sells positions in his country. One can buy a position as  province governor for only about 20,000 €. The outcome for the President is, that these governors will enforce Karzais agenda and to keep there power, they will “encourage” people to vote for Karzai. The governors are usually local warlords. They control there province to some point and they drain some money out of it. They also sell local positions to other people, they may profit from some smuggling here and some drug production there and so on. It is a prospering system of corruption.

On the other hand, Afghanistan has new schools and universities, women and girls are now again allowed to visit schools. Hospitals have been build, the medical care has been improved. Kilometers of streets have been build, fountains have been dug. And Afghanistan has at least some democratic system, they have actually a women quota for their parliament.

The plan of the Bundeswehr, as part of the coalition force,  was, to first secure the country by fighting the Taliban off. Then to recruit and train Afghan police and army and build up the infrastructure and during that, decrease the number ob soldiers till finally leave the country. As plans tend, they go wrong. They couldn’t fight the Taliban off. Imagine to secure a country the size of Alaska with now ~70,000 men. That doesn’t work, and it didn’t. But still they followed the infrastructure plan and started to train new police.

Till 23. August 2009 the coalition force has lost 1,331 soldiers. There are no official statistics for the number of dead civilians, but is probably somewhat higher.

In Germany some of the most discussed question about the war in Afghanistan is, whether it is a war or not. The government call it a mission or operation but no war. That is probably with regard to the public international law. Officially, the Bundeswehr is helping the Afghan government to fight insurgent, the Taliban. On the other hand, to call it a war would acknowledge the fact, that there are soldiers fighting and dieing. That soldiers after completing there mission, come home from a war, not from a foreign deployment. Soldiers who are maybe in need of mental council.

Anyway, tho whether stay or leave Afghanistan is no easy decision. It is no wrong or good, no black or white. If we would leave now, the Taliban would regain their power withing a couple of years and overthrow the government. To stay would mean that “we” will lose more men and women in this war, that more civilians will die, but also that Afghanistan maybe stabilize some day. Maybe some day…

Make your own decision.

Director: Matthew Vaughn

Actors: Claire Danes, Charlie Cox, Michelle Pfeiffer, Robert De Niro

Stardust is based on the novel with the same name, written by Matthew Vaughn. It is yet another fantasy masterpiece from the pen of a British writer. It tells the story of a “boy becoming a man” to find his true love. This man is Tristan, a shop-boy, in a mid 19th century village in England. The village is called Wall because there is wall near the village which separates England from the magical kingdom of  Stormhold. Tristan wants to find a fallen star to get the girl he loves, Victoria, to marry him. The star felt down in Stormhold. Tristan finds out, that his mother lives in Stromwind and wants to visit her first and staring his search from there. He tries to travel to her with a Babylon candle, but he accidentally travels to the fallen star witch turned out to be a woman called Yvaine. So he decides to take the star to show her to his beloved Victoria but also promises to Yvaine, that he will use the candle to send her back home once they have reached Victoria. So the journey begins. But Tristan is not the only one looking for the star, there are also three witches and some princes.

My Opinion

Stardust is a British novel but thankfully not a British movie. That means, that beside a very nice story, we have also really amazing pictures and decent effects. Tristan is very well played by Charlie Cox, his character is trying to evolve from a boy to man. Even when his look doesn’t support this story, his character acting does. Claire Danes plays Yvaine, she is great eye-candy and a good actress. Yvaine at first wants to get back to her home, but is really fast overwhelmed by her feelings, which she never had before as a star. Robert De Niro is playing the sky-pirate Captain Shakespeare. Shakespeare is playing the hard and bad ass pirate but always wanted to be a coiffeur and he is gay. It is very funny to see Robert De Niro dancing in women dresses. One of the witches, Lamia, is played by Michelle Pfeiffer, the witches want the hearth of the star to stay young and alive. They have only little left from the last fallen star. To hunt Yvaine, Lamia eats the rest of the hearth and becomes young again but is rapidly aging when using her magic. By playing an aging witch, she is showing very lot of self-irony and therefore earns my respect. Despite that, her acting is also very nice.

“My humbled opinion”-o-meter: 5 out of 5 points. Because this movie is exciting from the first to the last minute. It tells a very nice story and has a great look and feel. Enjoy it!

More Videos about life and religion by Somegraybloke.

What does your supreme entity looks like? Does it look like meatballs with spaghetti tentacles? Or is it a pink unicorn? Has it maybe, six different colored letters? There are people out there who even believe in an almighty text editor. Some people believe in a carpenter who claimed he can turn water into wine. Some religions forbid there follows to imagine or depict there god or savior… Some people fear the souls of dead aliens brought to earth and killed here by Xanu approximately 75 million years ago.

I believe in the almighty teapot of Russel. Why? Why not? It’s as good as any supreme. What does it look like? Exactly like the Utah-Teapot (the pic). The teapot es revolving around the sun right between mars and earth. Unfortunately it’s that small that even our best telescopes can’t see it. Need any prove? Outrages, it is there I told you! Prove me wrong if you can! Ha! See, you can’t.

It is actually the same with the most churches. Isn’t that odd? Can you prove that Xanu didn’t burn those millions of aliens 75 million years ago? No, but your sense says, it’s bullshit. Probably not only because this church and the story was made up by a SciFi-autor. Can you prove there is no invisible pink unicorn? Of course not, it is invisible! Can you prove there is no god and there was no resurrecting Jesus? Can you prove that Mohamed didn’t get his orders from Allah? I don’t thing so, and unless we invent time traveling, nobody will ever.

Why do people believe in in any god, when it is that obvious that it is all stupid, made up nonsense? Two reasons, first they have been told that this is the truth when they were children. Who ever questions this truth is bad and will lead you to damnation. The second reason is, they have to fill a void in there lives. They may have lost someone close or suffered a very bad destiny. Then the church jumps in and says the magic sentence, “It all happens for a good reason. <Insert supreme being> has a bigger plan!”. In my opinion that is basically the exploitation of mentally weak person.

Why do churches want people to believe? It’s about power. Any imaginable system is build upon by the power of people. If you speak for many people, you have the power of those people. Basically the deal is the following, they give you a codex to life after to reach salvation at the end of your life (and it is always the end of your life ) and you give them your power, and sometimes quite often your money as well. Isn’t that nice of them? They give you a goal for your life and the only thing you have to do, is to pay with is your soul (and money (souls are overrated)).

That’s whats so bad about nonbelievers (read: all people who don’t believe in your religion).  They basically idle assets! You have to activate those assets for your religion, so go and convert them. But watch out, some of those assets are bad for your religion. If you push them too hard or you drain your followers to much, maybe someone will start a rebellion and break your church in two halves. (e.g. Luther) If you see that some people in your church are unhappy with the general circumstances, start a small fire. Fires are always considered very purging. Let them experience the fire directly. If you are short on fire, use water. A very long bath with a purification stone around the feet is also very purging.

Are atheists are a church of there own? It depends. If they are organized, then yes, they probably act like a church. Therefore, the real atheist is not only a nonbeliever, he is also a non-organized. Cause, the organization of faith is what causes the most trouble. Let it be a pope who calls for a crusade or a Imam who calls for a Jihad. Almost every cases of religious violence is caused by someone in the management, who wants to extends his power by acquiring more believers or extinguishing the believers of another religion.

So my message of the day is, believe in what god you want, but shut up about it and let other people believe in their gods. This would make living on this planet much simpler. By shut up I mean, no ringing on other peoples doors, no youth festival to embrace easily influenceable children, no Jihad or other holy war. And the most important don’t teach anyone, especially not your children, your religion. Let people decide to come to you, when they want.

What bothers me, is the way how the discussion is lead. The supporters bring there arguments, why it would be good for the community. E.g. poor people have at least a basic health covering. The opposition however argues against the plan. Their arguments are, you will lose your doctor or this is what the socialists always wanted or an enormous bureaucratic machine would stand between the you and your doctor and the best one you are going to die (see video at the bottom).

It should be clear for everyone with the slightest idea of politics, that the current private health insurers are working against the PHS. Why? Easy, because a public insurer has no need to create any profit and is therefore more efficient than a private insurer. This means that the public insurer can provide health care at lower cost and would by that be a real danger for the private insurers.

The front between supporters and opposition seams to be drawn sharp between Democrats and Republicans. I have to ask, why would any official elected representative work against the people who elected them? Is it really blind ideology? Do they take money from the insurers? Why would people even belief the crap they are telling?

Almost 20 years after the breakdown of the soviet union, the people still fear the ominous thread of socialism that much, that when anybody only mention this word, people start running around waving there arms in the air and scream, “Apocalypse! The doomsday is here! They finally got us!”.

A real socialistic insurance would have everybody is insured by force at the one public provider. The fee is would be calculated by ones income, more income more pay. The hospitals would get all there money from the state and the patient has to pay nothing. The hospitals would still be very bad equipped cause the money is drained away by the political system.

The PHC is far away from these good and bad sides. It seems to be only an alternative for not too wealthy people to get insured. The competition between the public insurer and the private ones will probably make all insurance cheaper. That would be a good thing for all the people. So try to consider it and don’t judge it be the flowcharts of Republicans.

How does the media cover the debate? Watch this.

And the winner of the PC-demo contest of the EVOKE 2009

Update: Nice stopmotion, watch it with sound!

The last few month the legislature tried to install a law to block web pages with child pornography. I already gave a short summery in another articel. The German law passed the Bundestag and the Bundesrat, our two chambers of legislative, and should have been signed this Friday by the Bundespräsident. Unlike Presidents or Primeminsters of other countrys he has only few rights. One of these few is, that he has to sign bills after they have been accepted by the Bundestag and Bundesrat in order to become law. But the new bill, which should be in order as of August the 1st, wasn’t signed, because it was not ready.

That is not because of the many protesters against this law, it is because our government is fearing the EU government. The EU has released guidelines for such laws and our government is not sure whether the passed bill match that mandatory guidelines or not. If it wouldn’t match the EU guideline, the law would by unlawful and therefore laps. In fact both instances have maybe passed an unlawful law. It is not only violating EU law it may also violate our beloved Grundgesetzt (our Constitution).

But to the facts, the bill was introduced by Ursula von der Leyen she is Federal Minister of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (Yes that’s a real name). In in her position to watch over the German youth, she herself has seven children (which is about 18.9% of the German youth population [round about]), she wanted to protect the German Internet from showing child pornography.

Okay, let’s take short break here. Child pornography is a serious problem, along with many other issues. What it makes about the worst crime is, that it affects innocent and defenceless children. There is no good reason why we shouldn’t forbid, people watching child rapes in the Internet. What we can discuss is, what else can we do to prevent such bad things and what has to go along with the Internet blockage.

For starters, Ms. von der Leyen has created this bill probably for only one reason. Power. In this case reelection. They may be the issue of protecting children, almost all of her “facts” has been proven wrong. She claimed, for example, that there are 160 states with laws against child-porn and 95 nations without any law of that kind. First there are currently only 193 sovereign states. Then lots of those nations without any law against child-porn has laws that forbid pornography in general. Beside the USA and Somalia all nations have signed the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child which also prohibits child-porn. That would only leave Somalia, but they have currently other problems.

Ms. von der Leyen made in many points clear why she has almost no idea about the Internet and why such a blockade is a bad thing for many Internet users. She antagonized many lots of people with her reckless accusation, that many experienced Internet users who can by-pass the blockade were potential child-porn consumers. Of cause the current Internet community is to young to be a target group for election campaign, also many “off-liners” also agreed with her plans, without really knowing what are they about.

Under which circumstances could I personally tolerate a Internet blockade and life with it?

First, the list of blocked sites must be freely available. The argument, that this would prevent the prosecution of the content suppliers, because they would then know that they are being watched, is stupid. In the moment, the blockade is active, the website admin would know that it. Because if from one day to another the access statistics from one country drops to zero you would see it. Even more if the website is commercial motivated. And, by putting the website on the blocking list, we would admit, that we can’t do anything about it.

Second, the blocking can not be the only corse of action. German executive has to enforce, the remove of the website and the prosecution of the operator. Which means, asking the hoster to delete the page, asking to remove the DNS entry if possible, asking the local executive to prosecute the operator. I not only mean, sending a nice mail. They have to check if there action cause any changes. If not they have to try harder, call higher instances if possible.

Third, ONLY BLOCKING CHILD-PORN content. In the last days, Ms. von der Leyen is claiming that the Internet is lawless area. That’s wrong, the websites under German jurisdiction, fall under German law. If you are mobbing, insulting or molesting someone. You can be prosecuted. The first voice call already for blocking Nazi-pages. One can say that’s good, because Nazi are stupid bastard, in my opinion. But what would be the next step? Left extreme pages? Religious organizations? Unpleasant comments? Parties? We have laws to prosecute Nazis, laying a blindfold over the peoples eyes will not make them go away.

Fourth, it is zenzorship. We dont like every thing, whats in the internet. Many people don’t understand what the internet is. Many people don’t understand our new culture. We should show them some symathy and try to explain them how it works. Eventually they will understand, or not.

For now, Internet blockates are just a cheep way to get votes.In my Opinion, it can lead in two directions. A real Internet Zenzorship which cloud maybe lead into a absolutistic system or, and thats my favorit direction, into more understanding between on-liners and off-liner where such blockates are not neccesary.

It’s late, if you find any errors, keep them.