Will the World Become a New Europe?

Ayaan Hirsi Ali writes in the Wall Street Journal about Samuel P Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. She claims it describes the world as it is, not as President Obama wishes it to become. She says we have to win the clash of civilizations. But is she not speaking against herself then, by assuming the fusion of civilizations to a One World scenario?

The US chose not to rule the world. I was under the assumption that this is a futile approach. I think Obama has a point in facilitating the cohabitation of Earth. We have to get along with the other civilizations rather than to win out somehow. After all, Fukuyama's idea about liberal democratic capitalism remaining as the ideology of choice is not that bad. I think he still might be right. I don't think this means that we have reached the "end of history" though.

Unfortunately then we are heading for a new Europe scenario on a world scale. The multipolar world everyone have been talking about. Someone recently wrote that we are now historically positioned again before World War I. I am not necessarily that pessimistic but I have a feeling we have retracted maturity wise due to the use of new technology, unfortunately. In some areas of the world they might just drive people a little too hard?

Ms Ali brings up China and Islam as the main competitors on the stage. I would say that Islam as a threat has been over rated. There is not, nor has it been, a risk that Islam would conquer the infidel West. We have terrorism yes, but that is down almost to a police level. I don't think it will disappear. It is rather a built-in problem with current management systems.

China, however, seems to become a real competitor. Mostly because of its state capitalism which is an economic system that entices many authoritarian governments around the globe.

From the "Folkhem" to the Cultural Racism of Tribalism?

They used to worship the social democratic God and all stood equal under the Northern Lights. Then the body snatchers arrived, made a fortune on selling small pills, and divided the kingdom up into many tribes clandestinely held together by a "chef".

When the tribes evolved and gathered various amounts of knowledge and richness a distinct difference between them appeared. A new cultural racism developed with a new supremacy concept replacing the equality imposed by the state bearing party.

Tribal members learned new behaviors for interacting between members of different tribes. It was possible for more powerful tribes to listen to the thoughts of a lesser person to win out in conversations. Plan conversations with knowledge of the memories of a given person. Criminal persons tended to interact with a person via others to not expose themselves.

Criminality, like the just mentioned, and other types could not be adjusted because of the secrecy involved. Rule of Law was a mere memory. There was no longer justice for the individual.

Well, Nelson Mandela managed to remove the apartheid system of South Africa by forgiving the rulers. Something similar ought to be possible in order to introduce transparency and restore the Rule of Law.

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." (from the Declaration of Independence of the US from 1776)

4th of July 2010

Dick Erixon — I hjärtat rebell: "Någonstans slutar människor att vara fria och blir istället statens förslavade undersåtar."

Erixon brings up the difference in being a citizen and a subject something apparently Jefferson chose between when he drafted the Declaration of Independence in 1776. However, is the notion of the state as the only villain not a little simplified? Economical differences between the left and the right still exist, especially in taxation, but the old separation in Conservative, Liberal and Socialist provides a for the times more important discriminator. Because there is bondage both to the left and to the right and freedom of the individual only in the middle. In Sweden though the liberals are for some reason called "night stick" liberals.

The civil society, or Big Society as David Cameron, the British PM calls it, is not a conglomerate of free individuals. Today people voluntarily apparently joins systems of people where they knowingly, or unknowingly, sell their soul to some form of community leader. Some of these systems are very conservative and have ideas on how people should behave in some detail. And they have means of enforcing this behavior.

According to Cameron we then have the unfortuante in the outsideship, without work, and dependent on either the state or on organisations in the civil society. Here life is even more of a subject and the "capos'", or "krösamajornas", enforcement reach torture chamber levels (own experience).

The "block politics" in Sweden unfortunately leave the free zone in between them and we have bondage both to the right and to the left. Freedom will continue to erode as long as people do not talk about TTDE. According to my understanding, the Tea Party movement in the US concerns the existence without a fürer.

David Cameron: Big Society not Big Government

David Cameron: My credo for my country - Telegraph: "And Labour’s top-down Government will make our broken society worse, not better. So we will create an army of community organisers, independent of the state, to build the Big Society – where people come together to solve their own problems"

Is this the Tea Party of the UK? Cameron's Tories are up 9.5% on Labour in the polls so this could become reality. I'm a little wary of the "army" connotation of the community organizers. To me this sounds like a revolution of sorts. A coup? There is critique for it in The Guardian.

Cameron says "we want every adult to be part of an active neighborhood group". This would fix the "broken society" according to Cameron. He also says "Indeed there is a worrying paradox that because of its effect on personal and social responsibility, the recent growth of the state has promoted not social solidarity, but selfishness and individualism. Society is "atomised" Cameron says. I'm not sure what he means by this. People are becoming net-worked over larger distances via the internet by themselves and are perhaps not so 'neighborhoody' any longer.

To the best of my understanding there seems to be something already competing with and army of community organizers? It would also be very interesting to know how these organizers would be selected and if they would be coordinated and in this case by whom.

This is some new form of collectivistic conservatism that I find weird. Cameron's position in the EU and the intense Eurosceptism in his party would with these new ideas on how to organize oneself really move the UK to the sides in Europe. Or would it? Sweden's potential brokenness would be the partition with the "outsideship". Would a Big Society remove the outsideship in Sweden or would it just organize it?

Rattling the cage a little

Richard Cohen - Google's lonely stand for human rights in China - washingtonpost.com: "Their view of progress, they emphasize, is not our own. The free expression of ideas leads to chaos. Dissent is treason. China is too unmanageable not to be severely and ruthlessly managed. The Internet should not be a force for liberalization. It should be a force to encourage conformity. Let a thousand intellectual flowers bloom -- as long as they all bloom identically."

As I write on my Facebook profile, I am a new kind of prisoner. I have done nothing wrong but I'm kept down physically and intellectually and there is no one I can talk to about this problem. Officially I'm under the care of the psychiatry function of society.

Today I visited the local psychiatrist and tried to plead my case. It was five years since last time, if the person that said he was a psychiatrist in reality was this that time. She did not know anything about the technology which I call TTDE, the Technology That Doesn't Exist. The result is that I'm delusional and making it worse someone tried to lower my intellectual ability while I was pleading my case in the psychiatrist's office giving me that ugly Chinese smell. In other words, no positive signs yet.

My whole life hangs on the existence of TTDE. So I guess I just have to wait. Eventually there will be a Nürnberg II. If we are lucky... My book on Religious Humanism does not progress since someone from the religious hating Chinese-like sect that rule my life blocks my brain when I try to think about it, for example.

Well, Orwell's 1984 went on the radio theatre the other day. The thought police just have to lower your IQ and erase your memories, so it became worse than in the fiction. Everybody talks about innovation these days. I worry for the economy in the future.

When governments do not admit that violence is prevalent?

Fredrik Malm: "Jag har skrivit om detta tidigare, och efter Per Gudmundsons ledare i SVD idag, är det nödvändigt att återigen skriva om ämnet. Gudmundson refererar till en intervju med Ilmar Reepalu i Sunday Telegraph. Reepalu fäller i intervjun det smått bisarra yttrandet 'Det har inte förekommit några attacker mot judar, och om judar här vill flytta till Israel är det ingen angelägenhet för Malmö'."

It is very serious when a Mayor is not admitting that there is a problem of violence against a people, in this case Jews. When I wrote in support of the Jewish demonstration for Israel in Malmö that was attacked, I got a snyde comment that this was not a security problem for Sweden as a nation. I cannot disagree more. Looking the other way when violence is executed is always a problem. There are always people that think it might be OK to act in this way if such events are not forcefully denounced.

However, what Ilmar Reepalu might be referring to here is the general situation that he know of violence, for example clandestine violence, that occur which he is referring to as nonexistent. This might actually be a larger problem for Sweden than what the Jews are experiencing.

The Scandinavians are supposedly among the happiest on Earth. I would hate to wake up one day and find out that that is what Scandinavians say, because they don't dare to confront clandestine threats of violence.

Veil of Ignorance?

A Theory of Justice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: "Rawls develops what he claims are principles of justice through the use of an entirely and deliberately artificial device he calls the Original position, in which everyone decides principles of justice from behind a veil of ignorance. This 'veil' is one that essentially blinds people to all facts about themselves that might cloud what notion of justice is developed."

In 1971 John Rawls published A Theory of Justice thus restarting political philosophy which had been in the doldrums during the 1950s and 1960s. For me this date coincides with a time just after the birth of TTDE and I can't resist speculating a little on what Rawls might have meant with the "veil of ignorance".

It seems like we are dealing with a justification of the procedure, perhaps common at the time, of organizing people in "systems" even without their consent or knowledge of the game? It became possible to clandestinely study the psychological reactions of people to posed questions and this led to the possibility of a detailed investigation of a person's prior life in order to present a thorough character analysis. Someone playing God could then place a person in this new "ministate".

The so created systems or ministates would then be more or less successful and fuse with other ministates to gradually bring us back to the national level with a set of "traffic rules" replacing the law-book of the previous society. The traffic rules are supposed to make individual paths of development possible within the system in line with a liberal set-up. People drive on the individual road and just have to stop at for example a red light now and then. Fees are collected for redistribution for the common good and helping the poor. Rawls, however, is left of the welfare state which he rejects.

Rawls ministates would ultimately form something like the society Sweden represents and Robert Nozick, also at Harvard University, produced a libertarian version of Rawls ministates calling the redistribution unfair. Each system has to decide on how large a fee would be reasonable thus perhaps making a total fusion of the ministates impossible. The nation will remain multi-fractured or fracture in larger chunks.

Just a preliminary analysis but this might be something rather than mini-kingdoms? You know, the Americans don't like Kings and Queens.

Back on Track

It worked. I stayed away from my computer for a week. When I checked in last night nothing much had happened during the week so the loss was slight. I also feel much refreshed.

Svante Nordin, the professor of history of philosophy in Lund, has written a narrative called Filosofins Historia. I gather from this volume that what made people start to use their brains forward in the 17th century was the discoveries in Nature made by early scientists or natural philosophers. One conclusion might be that we need Nature to make progress in our minds. Observing Nature is the same thing as posing questions worth their while answering.

The heliocentric theory from 1543 and the discovery of blood circulation from 1628 that led Descartes to think of our body as a machine really shook things up and could do so in the less dogmatic religious environment. Leibniz (influenced by Anne Conway) made this notion a little more subtle by proposing energized monads as the minutest particles making up the body. A forerunner like Francis Bacon who died 1626 had realized like a prophet that science was going to make us conquer Earth and free mankind from bondage. Almost like a prophet of my religion.

Nordin claims that Sweden did not contribute with a single philosopher to international philosophy. Scandinavia only had a single one, Sören Kierkegaard of Denmark. It is then satisfying to note that what propelled philosophy forward was discoveries in natural science from which Sweden during the 18th century had international actors like Linné and Scheele which ultimately led to a country excelling in engineering. Perhaps an explanation from Montesquieu's climate theory would work. The harsh Nordic climate forced us to cooperation and practical work. Scandinavians might be more survivalist in character than people from the Continent and the United Kingdom.

Nordin also claims that there is a discussion as to where the largest contribution from science, philosophy and religion is and how this changed during the 16th and 17th centuries. I think I belong to the people claiming that philosophy has become a branch on the stem of science. Why not theoretical science? Religion still affects science as is seen in the stem cell debate. However, George W. Bush's veto of stem cell research in the US only affected federally funded research and can therefore be considered a protecting of the results rather than an inhibition of research as such.

As remarkable as the revolution in experimental and observing natural science was the discovery by Hugo Grotius 1625 of natural law. Which was supposed to be the same even if God did not exist! John Locke further developed natural rights, a biological origin, and published his Two Treatises of Governments 1690. Psychological discoveries are currently transforming the way people are governed. Perhaps one can call it societal engineering. Political science has become a natural science. It is interesting that the revolution of 1688 made Locke a famous man despite the fact that he was way ahead of his time with his reasoning. He had to spend many years in exile in Holland because of the turbulent times. Words where weighed on a gold balance these days. As today I have realized.

Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote "Study Nature" in the middle of the 19th century. The US became the leader of Natural Science research. Currently is of great importance to study the behavior of people while assaulted by TTDE. The future of Man depend on the outcome. The Political Science front?

My 991st post

First I thought I'd celebrate my 1000nd post, but since it is Friday and I like to sum up my speculations on the systems, I make a note of my 991st post instead.

I began in April 2007 and discussed some thoughts of mine on how it was possible to explain the function of our minds with the help of insights from the use of TTDE on myself. Occasionally over the years I have returned to problems that occur as a result of TTDE usage on people and the fact that we again live in a time where it is forbidden to talk about the things that matters most to us. My "book" began as science but continues as political science.

During the last decades we have entered a time of a clandestine revolution that takes place in society. I think it is dangerous to perform these changes without a possibility of a public debate. I would therefore like to return to about 1688, the year of the so called English revolution, and reiterate what John Locke gathered back then. He talked about a legitimate political power based on natural rights. He argued for a constitutional state where no one was above the law. At that time that meant a legislating parliament and an executive monarch.

Since we live in a constitutional monarchy with a legislating parliament where the monarch have been replaced with a prime minister we should probably take note of what went on some 320 years ago. That's right the monarch was not above the law which however is not correct today with all small monarchs around that have in their hands a power tool that makes them very full of themselves and totally dictatorial.

What Locke also argued was that tyranny could be morally destroyed which turned out to be argued during the American and French revolutions some hundred years later. Will it take another hundred years to normalize the situation this time?

Interestingly Locke also talked about the right of private property. Labor leads to private property since we own our own bodies and their power. Well, here we go again. Some people would argue that we don't own our bodies any longer because they can kill us with TTDE or they can steal all information we produce from our bodies before we can make use of it ourselves. It seems to me that people have bought that stupid argument. People can of course kill anyone with a gun but they don't own us for that matter. If we have not allowed slavery to return voluntarily.

Life, Liberty and private property. Over 300 years ago. What seems to be the trouble today?

A Post-Democratic Era?

Interview with Declan Ganley: Just Say No to the Lisbon Treaty. - WSJ.com: "Mr. Ganley says. 'You will hear it discussed quietly across the dinner tables in certain sections of Brussels and elsewhere that we're entering into this post-democratic era, that democracy is not the perfect mechanism or tool with which to deal with the challenges of global this-that-or-the-other"

Few things stir the debate in blogs in Sweden as the famous democratic deficit of the Lisbon Treaty. If Ireland votes yes in three weeks, are we entering a post-democratic era?

What is the difference of electing a president like the Americans directly from the people, or so it seems, or having the European Council, the heads of states of the 27 member countries, electing one for us? The heads of states are elected by the people directly and perhaps these people are better suited to pick a leader among them or other for optimal function. I have a problem with how this would count as a post-democratic event. If people turn out to dislike the president they will not vote again for the heads of states.

The American system, by the way is not particularly popular among Americans right now. Relatively few people show up to vote for the president and the Congress have an approval score of 29%. More people show up to vote for the heads of states in Europe. I would go so far as to say that under the Lisbon Treaty we will get a more democratically elected president than in America.

So what is Ganley talking about in the citation above: democracy is not the perfect mechanism or tool...

Is Reinfeldt, like Merkel, looking for a coalition with the Social Democrats?

Chancellor Merkel Refuses to Endorse the FDP - WSJ.com: "Mrs. Merkel refuses to attack the Social Democratic Party—with which she's locked in a so-called grand coalition—or to embrace the pro-business Free Democratic Party, traditionally the CDU's preferred partner. Her failure to clearly stand for a reform-minded government with the FDP may condemn Germany to four more years of compromises."

I can't help thinking that Reinfeldt, with his speech at the recent conference for the Nya Moderaterna, might be eying for a coalition with Socialdemokraterna that would assure that the former communists do not enter the government. That is if the Red-Greens will stay in the lead with increasing joblosses that makes the "job-line" look silly. The article above in WSJ is not the first reference I see that Merkel actually would prefer to stay in a coalition with SPD, the German Social Democrats.

It is indeed the same kind of idea that President Obama has with his insistence of the bipartisanship. Sarkozy does it another way. He hires leftish politicians into his government instead. Reinfeldt is like Merkel also the more popular politician. Steinmeier and Sahlin fare about the same. Could be that the real power is disseminated in society in a different fashion that spans the party line and that the parties want to have something going in the old vein for people to feel comfortable with.

It is clear, however, that this grand coalition rule does not fit the US where there seems to be any number of issues that currently split the country in two. Torture, or "enhanced interrogations" is one of these. The republican party has 65% Cheneysians which presumably does not shun the use of "enhanced persuasion" techniques. Among such are means of lowering the intelligence on people that you term your enemies, such as the statistically more intelligent Democrats. Violence feeds violence is conventional wisdom and I have begun to wonder if there are similar differences here in Sweden.

Huffington Post speculates

Cheney In 2012? Some Key GOPers Aren't Kidding: "'But if the agenda turns to security, Obama is mired in a no-win mess in Afghanistan, and the Obama administration hasn't created a single job in four years after indebting the nation for generations, maybe Dick Cheney could run on a theme of 'Change'.'"

Reading up a little on the discussion of torture. I you start such a discussion with security concerns you very easily sneak in some torture for the security of the nation. However, which I prefer, you start with human decency for our civilization there are not many situations where torture would be warranted.

They are posing the question if Cheney would be back for the next presidential election at the Huffington Post. In some poll I saw Cheney had a 35% approval so he is more popular now than Bush was during the later time of his presidency, that, by the way, Cheney was part of. For those of you that read my post yesterday about what goes on here in Sweden, without terrorists, I think Obama's position of no torture is a very important one. Especially if it is extended to the non-terrorist realm as well. John McCain attacked Cheney the other day also on the torture issue. I would not be surprised that some of the car burnings we see here in Europe are due to the frustration of being manipulated from above with TTDE.

If Cheney have 35% approval in the US he does not have it abroad and it would probably be a bad decision to elect him president. Obama's paradigm is the better one for our present world situation. However, as you might remember a person like Newt Gingrich does not think in this way. John Bolton does not either but today in WSJ he did not say that Iran's nuclear installations should be bombed. He just stated that sanctions would not work and gave reasons for this. A large question mark on Iran in other words.

Torture and harassments?

What is torture? I guess it is when people are quite nasty to you. The debate and the fight between Holder and Cheney in the US is continuing. The use of TTDE in torture and harassment is intimately linked with threats (Olaga Hot). It is absolutely horrible that there is no one to turn to in society when you have the kind of problems I had. I will just list what I remember of what happened as a preamble to the Chrystal Night of my life where my mental health was taken away from me. I'm alone in my apartment and I have no idea when this is going to end.

There was the six so called "smällar". I don't know what it is in reality but I just experienced a bang and my body jumped while lying down. It could be a simulation of a slap on the face over the whole body. I prayed my heart would not start to fibrillate.

There was the two "spärrar". The head starts to oscillate back and forth on the torso at about 1-2 Hz using the neck muscles. It continues for about 5-10 seconds. Absolutely horrible.

I was sham-executeed twice using a simulation of the brain tilting over in my head after which I fainted. Could have been a simulation of a stroke. Scary!

The worst thing I was subjected to was a supposed constriction of the aorta that increased pressure on the heart valves to their breaking point. They gave my a horrible feeling in the body as someone talked me through this. I could not tell if it was real or just a simulation.

I was also subjected to intense headaches and I was given nausea for hours followed by and induced vomiting. They have some special affinity for giving diarrheas. I got some 40 very strong ones that leaves the tummy all messed up and that were very acute. Hundreds of regular ones. Imagine this. Some guy sits somewhere and gives you trouble just when he feels like.

I was given several sartorious cramps. The sartorious muscle extends from the inside of the knee to the outside of the hip. It is long and thin. This really hurts and I jumped up trying to counter stretch to release cramp. They also cramp the foot on both sides so it is not possible to counter stretch it and call this "fotknöl". Many times.

Just for the humiliation of it someone is pestering me with a nightly ejaculation that wakes me up. The often hurt because they are so violent. Some 18 by now over the years.

Also very ominous was the "sänkning" which they did when the picked me up for transport to Lillhagsparken. The light just went out and I fell to the floor. Afterwards I felt really strange. I have never felt like that. Perhaps it was a near death experience.

This is what I remember plus all the psychological torture and sleep deprivation.

Anna Odell?

Trying to read up on the case of Anna Odell who apparently have tried to create a piece of art by wallraffing at the acute psychiatric care ward. On DN.se kultur May 8, 2009, I read an article that makes me wonder if Anna Odell is not in reality psychiatrically ill, rather than a criminal.

Apparently she had been suicidal 1995 at the same spot where she acted insane recently. I would also ask the question if not a person that voluntarily tries to get placed away at a psychiatric care unit is not a little ill. I wonder why they did not keep her there? Probably she had loving relatives and friends that vouched for her.

It does not seem that Ms Odell have managed to find faults with the psychiatric care. She reacts against the bed where she got strapped up but this is for a patient's safety only. It is also impossible to administer a drug if a patient is moving about. My experience with ten months at Lillhagsparken closed psychiatric care unit is positive in principle when it comes to the personnel. However, I was treated criminally several times by TTDE operators but they are not at the ward. Block of salivation a whole night that forced me to drink all the time and an evening with tooth ache an other time. By the way, I got a feeling that the particular ward did not contain regular psychiatrically ill patients but rather people that had some problem with TTDE. Someone called it a "tukthus", i.e., a place which is used for punishment only. A place where medical expertise is not really around. Where the so called physician says you are there for an acute psychosis but you don't receive any medication. My conclusion was that I was twice locked up for five months.

As I pointed out yesterday the most interesting aspect of the situation that Ms Odell is trying to present is not what happens at the acute ward, which is only routine, but why the patient is taken in. Why the police is called and who called. This aspect is not treated in her "piece of art".

Closed Psychiatric Care?

The single worse occasion in my life was when my mental health was taken away from me. It happened on November 9th, 2000 when I was taken in four five month of closed psychiatric care. The day of the Crystal Night 1938. I had then, since April 15, been subjected to quite extensive harassment and torture by TTDE and my daily sleep was down to about 2 hours per night. As a further means of bringing me down my eyesight was taken away from me during the stay at the hospital. I needed glasses when I came out.

Closed psychiatric care is a system by itself. Once you get a ticket to the ride, everything goes on rail. You can't argue with anything because due to your disease what you say carries no meaning. I got to think about this due to the headlines concerning Anna Odell. The important thing is who decides to bring you in and how this is performed. Gulag is very close. Perhaps a relative says that you don't seem yourself for some reason and they can use this. At the time I only had a contact at the welfare bureau once a month and there where no problems there. To this day, I don't know who did me in but I know that due to the advancement of science the old invented diagnosis of schizophrenia is possible to ascertain with fMRI so they have been starting to talk about dementia instead. It is possible to lower memory capacity and lower the capacity for associations with TTDE. They try to make me believe that I'm ill.

In my case people broke into my apartment and I was brought by the police to the hospital. Or should I call it prison. I did not give any signs of psychiatric disease to the person calling himself a psychiatrist that was among the eight people that came but he wrote the magical "vårdintyg" right there. I was not given medication for the first couple of weeks interestingly enough which in essence proves he had not a clue of a disease. Then all of a sudden I was supposed to get injections because I refused pills. Psychopharmacological drugs are poison to a healthy body and I did not voluntarily admit to disease. To further bring that point home I made passive resistance to the attempt of the first injection. I was strong at the time so I was difficult to force onto the berth of restrainment. Later injections I also did not voluntarily participate in although I did not make passive resistance. I felt this was important in order not to seek medical help myself. I still have never asked for "sjukskrivning" so I am still technically under forced care at home. Force meaning the nasty treatment with TTDE they gave me once when I tried to quit taking pills.

The way I see what happened between 1998 and 2001 was that first they wanted to dirty me up with the "rapes" for two years. I figured that they needed to catch me in an interaction with someone. Not good for a married person. I have never had sex with someone else when in a relationship. Therefore I took great care in not doing this. When this did not work, they opened the ear hallucination channel and started hitting me badly up until Nov 9th, 2000. The purpose of this treatment, in my humble opinion, was to make me capitulate for the force of my tormentor and ask for psychiatric care. They then took my eyesight to further weaken me. It was a real blow I can admit.

During all this time, due to the harassment tortures and rape, a person with my medical and research background understood the function of TTDE. Prior to 1998 I did not know of its existence but once enlightened I realized that I had been hit many times over the years since about 15 years of age.

Right now, because what I write in my blog, or just for making my mood lower, I am subjected to "krämpor" or ailments. I have an Achilles tendon that hurts a little after Brad Pitt was on the television in the movie Achilles. I did not see it but someone engaged my mother in playing so she informed me. They keep engaging my mother in showing me things on the television all the time for the games. Annoying. I have an ulnar nerve paresthesia. I think someone is trying to make me believe that I'm hurting my elbow while on the computer because I'm leaning on my elbow while reading. I have a skin lesion on my thumb on a spot where I'm supposed to believe that I cause myself by scratching with my finger nail. They turned off the left ear function again. Worst of all is that I'm made sleepy in the mornings. This looks bad because if I'm presented to someone only up to 5pm they think I'm not working a full day. However I work all nights. I work American hours. In plain language. People try to scare me with TTDE all the time and use it for making me search for medical aid.

There is no respect for private property what so ever. I have been on my own money for four years but the harassments just continued. This is a theft of my inheritage of my father's that I have been living on.

Freedom of the press in Sweden?

Exambassadör sågar svensk pressfrihet - Sverige - Sydsvenskan - Nyheter dygnet runt: "Hur tidningarna - med 'de fyra stora' menas troligen Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet, Aftonbladet och Expressen - skulle vara knutna till socialdemokratin eller fackföreningsrörelsen förklarar inte Zvi Mazel i artikeln. Landsorganisationen, LO, var tidigare storägare i Aftonbladet och äger numera nio procent av tidningen. Resten ägs av den norska mediekoncernen Schibsted, som även äger Svenska Dagbladet. DN och Expressen ägs av Bonnierkoncernen (som även äger Sydsvenskan)."

It seems to me that the question now is if there is a power system that can infringe on the owner's prerogative on the employees? Does Social Democrats have means to influence people despite the fact that their salary comes from elsewhere?

In my experience there are at least two ways of doing this. I have had my own money, which would make me in theory an employee of whichever newspaper, but people tries to influence me via charades and imagery on the Internet as well as with TTDE. What I have called Human Destruction Inc. have a lot of supposed dirt on me that they try to use. However, in my case it does not work because it is untrue but I can imagine that such a technique can be very successful on guilty people.

TTDE works on me however. The other night I was not allowed to sleep and for at least an hour I was made nauseous. I was also given a pressure headache. Many people would think twice before they ignore such steering attempts.

The question is now up for further debate. Or is Zvi Mazel right on the short duration of debate issue as well?

"Olaga hot" och integrity breeching TTDE are criminal methods. Are we living in a Criminocracy?

Harassment or rape by use of TTDE?

Oförsvarligt av Hillegren Brännpunkt SvD: "”En dag gör kvinnan polisanmälan och påstår att en viss kväll upplyste hon sin man om att hon inte ville ha samlag, vilket inte respekterades av mannen. Trots det genomförde han samlaget, varvid hon förhöll sig passiv.”"

Between 1998 and 2000 I was raped or harassed every day for two years by unknown person via TTDE. I realized when I read about the Hillegren case that a sexual assault with the technology on a person could be considered as rape rather than sexual harassment. I did report the infraction to the police but this did not help.

The psychological trauma is in this case much greater than the physical which is equal to the Hillgren scenario. It was by far the worst two years of my life.

Was I legally raped every day for two years?

To criminalize a whole youth generation?

So called pirate copying involves the desire to, for no cost, procure music and films for personal consumption. The Pirate Party have apparently benefited from individuals so inclined. For example they got a lot of new members after the verdict on The Pirate Bay case.

Since I have not ever copied any film or any music, I would like to be provocative, for the sake of argument.

Why do we have a whole generation of suspected criminals on our hands? Could it be that their parents and grandparents are equally culpable? They have been doing something criminal as well. They have been utilizing a new technology that officially does not exist--the technology that does not exist (TTDE)--on people that does not know it exists.

Children tend to do what you do, not what you suggest verbally.

Therefore it is possible to see that the Pirates are gaining ground. They have silent benefactors.