O campanie mediatică a ONU: afişe înfăţişînd oamenii drept creaturi ale Răului în ipostaze care citează trei filme thriller de mare succes. Homo Sapiens este potretizat ca un monstru care distruge regnul animal, o specie sadică de Untermenschen, cu excepţia posibilă a Übermenschilor ecologici de la ONU, Greenpeace şi a eco-gurului Gore.
Campania este sponsorizată de United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), afişele sînt realizate de organizaţia Convention on Migratory Species (CMS). UNEP este organismul ONU care a înfiinţat IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), iar IPCC este internaţionala antioameni pe motive de CO2 şi „schimbări climatice”.
Setea de despotism a psihoticilor globali cere imperios regresia omului de la stadiul de fiinţă superioară şi liberă, înzestrată cu calităţi morale şi intelectuale excepţionale, la stadiul de serv pe feuda planetară administrată global de nobilimea politicienilor şi birocraţilor.
Tot acest proiect în numele climei… cel mai dement pretext posibil.
![mihaela-barbus[1]](https://inliniedreapta.net/wp-content/uploads/elementor/thumbs/mihaela-barbus1-pydiituedconmrou0twklsfz7egtqhonla40po561c.jpg "mihaela-barbus[1]")
12 Comments
panseluta
17 December 2009emil,
Un sincer „Fuck them!” si un raspuns video:
panseluta
17 December 2009Am uitat sa spun ca voi petrece ajunul de Craciun cu baietii nostri raniti de la spitalul Walter Reed.
Francesco
17 December 2009Un raspuns la mesajele United Nations Environmental Program-Convention on Migratory Species a sosit de la personajul urmator:
El a spus: „UNEP and CMS are stupid fearmongers”.
costin
17 December 2009emil, iti faci prea multe griji..
http://www.bradpitt.dk/
panseluta
17 December 2009em,
Era tirziu cind am postat „Black Hawk Down”. Am trait episodul care s-a intimplat in Mogadishu aici, in SUA–pe vremea in care mediile nu erau complet vindute Stingii-si m-a marcat pentru totdeauna. Am uitat sa adaug ca videoul era un exemplu la indemina de „menschen” pur si simplu, nu „uber”, nu „unter”. Restul–cei care au creat campania expusa de tine–sunt tiritoare/”bottom feeders” scirnave printre eroi.
panseluta
17 December 2009Plus, melodia de fond, „Barra! Barra!” (Afara! Afara!)a minunatului Rashid Taha, interpret de „rai”, e obsedanta.
emil
17 December 2009Panseluta… thank you to our American brothers down south and to all our allies fighting alongside us.
panseluta
17 December 2009emil:
Multzumesc tie.
panseluta
17 December 2009Incercarile de extorsiune a natiunilor Vestului de catre dictatori primitivi asiatici si africani, ca Mugabe si urmasii lui Mandela de la Copenhaga mi-au reamintit un articol al ziaristului irlandez Kevin Myers din 2008.
Articolul e socant, si s-a vrut asa. Dar cred ca merita citit.
„Africa is giving nothing to anyone — apart from AIDS
‘Africa’s peoples are outstripping their resources, and causing catastrophic ecological degradation,’ writes Kevin Myers.
Thursday July 10 2008
No. It will not do. Even as we see African states refusing to take action to restore something resembling civilisation in Zimbabwe, the begging bowl for Ethiopia is being passed around to us, yet again. It is nearly 25 years since Ethiopia’s (and Bob Geldof’s) famous Feed The World campaign, and in that time Ethiopia’s population has grown from 33.5 million to 78 million today.
So why on earth should I do anything to encourage further catastrophic demographic growth in that country? Where is the logic? There is none. To be sure, there are two things saying that logic doesn’t count.
One is my conscience, and the other is the picture, yet again, of another wide-eyed child, yet again, gazing, yet again, at the camera, which yet again, captures the tragedy of . . .
Sorry. My conscience has toured this territory on foot and financially. Unlike most of you, I have been to Ethiopia; like most of you, I have stumped up the loot to charities to stop starvation there. The wide-eyed boy-child we saved, 20 years or so ago, is now a priapic, Kalashnikov-bearing hearty, siring children whenever the whim takes him.
There is, no doubt a good argument why we should prolong this predatory and dysfunctional economic, social and sexual system; but I do not know what it is. There is, on the other hand, every reason not to write a column like this.
It will win no friends, and will provoke the self-righteous wrath of, well, the self-righteous, letter-writing wrathful, a species which never fails to contaminate almost every debate in Irish life with its sneers and its moral superiority. It will also probably enrage some of the finest men in Irish life, like John O’Shea, of Goal; and the Finucane brothers, men whom I admire enormously. So be it.
But, please, please, you self-righteously wrathful, spare me mention of our own Famine, with this or that lazy analogy. There is no comparison. Within 20 years of the Famine, the Irish population was down by 30pc. Over the equivalent period, thanks to western food, the Mercedes 10-wheel truck and the Lockheed Hercules, Ethiopia’s has more than doubled.
Alas, that wretched country is not alone in its madness. Somewhere, over the rainbow, lies Somalia, another fine land of violent, Kalashnikov-toting, khat-chewing, girl-circumcising, permanently tumescent layabouts.
Indeed, we now have almost an entire continent of sexually
hyperactive indigents, with tens of millions of people who only survive because of help from the outside world.
This dependency has not stimulated political prudence or commonsense. Indeed, voodoo idiocy seems to be in the ascendant, with the next president of South Africa being a firm believer in the efficacy of a little tap water on the post-coital penis as a sure preventative against infection. Needless to say, poverty, hunger and societal meltdown have not prevented idiotic wars involving Tigre, Uganda, Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea etcetera.
Broad brush-strokes, to be sure. But broad brush-strokes are often the way that history paints its gaudier, if more decisive, chapters. Japan, China, Russia, Korea, Poland, Germany, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the 20th century have endured worse broad brush-strokes than almost any part of Africa.
They are now — one way or another — virtually all giving aid to or investing in Africa, whereas Africa, with its vast savannahs and its lush pastures, is giving almost nothing to anyone, apart from AIDS.
Meanwhile, Africa’s peoples are outstripping their resources, and causing catastrophic ecological degradation. By 2050, the population of Ethiopia will be 177 million: The equivalent of France, Germany and Benelux today, but located on the parched and increasingly protein-free wastelands of the Great Rift Valley.
So, how much sense does it make for us actively to increase the adult population of what is already a vastly over-populated, environmentally devastated and economically dependent country?
How much morality is there in saving an Ethiopian child from starvation today, for it to survive to a life of brutal circumcision, poverty, hunger, violence and sexual abuse, resulting in another half-dozen such wide-eyed children, with comparably jolly little lives ahead of them? Of course, it might make you feel better, which is a prime reason for so much charity. But that is not good enough.
For self-serving generosity has been one of the curses of Africa. It has sustained political systems which would otherwise have collapsed.
It prolonged the Eritrean-Ethiopian war by nearly a decade. It is inspiring Bill Gates’ programme to rid the continent of malaria, when, in the almost complete absence of personal self-discipline, that disease is one of the most efficacious forms of population-control now operating.
If his programme is successful, tens of millions of children who would otherwise have died in infancy will survive to adulthood, he boasts. Oh good: then what?I know. Let them all come here. Yes, that’s an idea.
kmyers@independent.ie
dr pepper
17 December 2009eu as vrea ( daca as avea cum) sa ii multumesc lu’ mama natura cand le mai da cate una dupe ceafa sau vreun sut in cur la prosti.
bloomberg:
Blizzard Dumps Snow on Copenhagen as Leaders Battle Warming
dr pepper
17 December 2009bipezilor, poate ma ajutati voi sa inteleg, pentru ca eu traiesc o mare dilema.
se ia un studiu al AP:
AP-Stanford Univ. poll on global warming
si avem intrebarea #5:
unde 30% sunt pentru si 70% impotriva.
apoi intrebarea #11:
pentru 58% impotriva 37% nu stiu 5%
acum: 30 de procente sunt pentru cresterea preturilor pentru energie astfel incat lumea sa inceteze sa mai consume ( WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE???) si 70 procente se opun.
in schimb la intrebarea 11, 58% dintre respondenti sunt de acord ca preturile sa sara in aer.
cu toate ca cu sase intrebari in urma gandeau vice-versa.
pe cine intervieveaza astia?
si ce’o fi in capul lor?
daca companiile care produc energie vor fi nevoite sa cumpere dreptul de a produce de la alte companii – inseamna o cheltuiala in plus care se va vedea la factura.
si cea mai buna afacere va fi sa iti faci o fabrica de barbierit oua si sa iti vinzi drepturile de poluare clor care produc energie.
banii care iti vor intra in buzunarul personal vor veni din buzunarul idiotilor care cred ca daca pretul de productie va creste – asta nu se va reflecta in pretul produsului finit.
partea proasta este ca pe langa si din cauza prostilor sufera si ceilalti.
oare nu se poate da o lege in care cei ce sunt de acord cu impozitarea – sa fie impozitati pana nu mai pot?
sa ne lase pe no astialalti in pace?
dr pepper
17 December 2009sau macar sa impoziteze prostia.