This is an important briefing. Not that it is a dire need or has any direct consequences. Nevertheless, for whatever reason in this world. Don’t let other people think for you. God gave you a mind, so please for the love of God. Use it.
There are enough people out there, which will explain and tell how you need to think or what you need to buy. But be yourself. Think out and pan out your own way. Reason yourself and think. Don’t just buy what other people are writing, what other people are saying. Be critical.
Don’t buy into everything I write. It is sometimes terribly wrong or have bad sources. Sometimes even I am more biased than any other brother on planet earth. So, please use your mind. Ask yourself, is this right? Is this thought justified? Are these conclusions any good? Are these sources viable?
I ask myself that all the time, I get tricked and write false. I admit that, because I have too. I am just a man and cannot always be right. Just ask my wife. She will tell you, that I am often wrong.
So please, I ask you. Only once. Always think for yourself. Check out more sources, ask more questions about the topic. Is this brother, right or wrong?
If you do that, your are taking one step in making the world a better place. Not just accepting the powers, the articles and the ones producing content. You are using your mind and thinking, what if this is wrong? What if this is right?
We need those questions. I ask them all the time. I am not just accepting things. That is why my opinion pieces are filled with questions to the ones in power. That is why my pieces and letters are filled with facts, but also just bothering to ask the executives and ministers what need to be said. Someone has to ask. It just happens to be me, but it could have been you instead. Peace.
“Stories can conquer fear, you know. They can make the heart bigger.” – Ben Okri
I just have to ask, I know it is a foolish question, but ever since hearing that former Kenyan Minister Nicholas Biwott recently buried in a bulletproof coffin, what is the value of it? The person is beneath six-feet deep and cannot be touched. Unless, someone dig up the remains and start grave digging, which is not really respecting the dead. Alas, here we are at a situation where a former dignitary had it in his will. Just take a look!
“Former Powerful Minister, Nicholas Biwott, will be buried in a gold bullet proof coffin to protect him from enemies. In a will, Biwott said even in death enemies would be all over him. He therefore demanded that he be buried inside a bullet proof coffin so as to scare away people aimed at him. He also told his beloved ones to bury him in a golden coffin, to symbolize his social status. The tycoon’s coffin has been ordered from USA after it was established that a casket of this nature could not be found in Kenya. Anytime this week the coffin will arrive in the country under maximum security. Biwott was a man who constantly feared everyone and anyone. He was afraid of death. A secretive man, the former Minister never allowed any person near his compound unless it was a close family member. Even in death, it was his wish to be protected” (KenyaBytes, 16.07.2017).
He should have written in his will a nuclear safe bunker or a big tunnel inside a mountain, because who will shoot bullets into dirt and hope to hit a skeleton. Unless, he where he be buried with a fortune of bobs and get swarms of people digging for cash. However, that is not the case; apparently, he is buried with a bulletproof casket. A special design and kind, it amaze me.
Since he has already left for the afterlife. Not like he ghosts or the spirits cannot pass through a special made coffin. They can penetrate or reside wherever they like and that is within their power. Not as if the soul on its journey through the afterlife can decide its fortune, that is all up-to the almighty. If he grants salvation or whatnot. The bullets of the past, which is something a person has to answer for in eternity and it, is not changed by the special burial ground.
Clearly, either I have misunderstood something, the value or grandeur effect of such an investment, such a buy for eternity. That someone would go that far and order, fix and import such an artifact. Still, it boggles me, the misuse of resources mixed with the fear the person must have. Certainly, also the wealth and the stature as he can afford while living to buy such a thing.
If it was a bulletproof hat, a bulletproof car, bulletproof vest or bulletproof windows at someone’s station, as an executive, president and higher official, I can understand that to certain degree. That is while still breathing. Breathing and living, while avoid being killed. However, when you are already dead, these measures seems rather used up and has no meaning. Like you can have the nicest palace and biggest bank account. That will not be a part of your casket, but will be part of your legacy. That is what you leave behind to the next generation.
That is just me though, the simple-minded man I am, what about you?
Now that the Manchester City Manager Pep Guardiola is having his first real test as a professional manager, he wants to revamp the system. So that it can with ease fit his protocol and tactical, mastermind of tactics are struggling with “only” having 3 substitutes in the Premier League. Since he doesn’t have Arjen Robben or Lionel Messi; he has Sergio Agüero and Kevin De Bruyne. Seems, like they are not up-to his level or his standard of football, he is not winning with ease as Guardiola did in Barcelona and Bayern Munich.
With History in Mind:
“On 21 August 1965 Charlton’s Keith Peacock ensured his place in football history by coming on as substitute for injured goalkeeper Mike Rose at Bolton. The Football League had decided to allow substitutes from the start of the 1965-66 season, although only to replace an injured player. There had been many calls for such a change over the previous decade and the issue achieved prominence after a series of FA Cup finals had seen teams depleted by injury, often with decisive influence on the result” (Bateman, 2016).
What Guardiola was saying:
“’It’s not just English football, it’s all around the world. We’re going to kill the players,’ Guardiola said” (…) “‘For that reason we have to have huge squads, more money for the clubs to spend. Just three substitutions right now… why can’t you make four, five or six? ‘That [would] mean all the players are involved more than they were before. The coaches can use different tactics, where you can change four or five players’. ‘It’s [then] a more open game, not always the same. Less injuries. Everything would be better. I think UEFA and FIFA have another opinion about that.’” (Gaughan, 2016).
So to be able to change a forward, midfield and defence isn’t enough as he has loaned away Joe Hart to Torino, not thought much of many of the other former big-players under Roberto Manchini, Guardiola are now wanting to revolutionize the Substitutions system in the Premier League. This is the same kind of whining we heard similar fashion when Jose Mourinho started his first period in Chelsea. That there we’re to many matches in the Christmas and around New Years, as the Premier League and cup matches happens nearly every 3 day with no Christmas break as in other European leagues.
So now Guardiola, the tactical genius, the mastermind of football cannot manage to change 3 out 11 players on the pitch, as he cannot see this fitting the time schedule with Champions League and other cups. That sounds weak, as Alex Ferguson managed well for a decade with that in Manchester United. He has not been proclaimed the FOOTBALL mastermind and the one who could make water into wine.
The new-wine is to be able to substitute half of the team as the strength of modern players are lacking, the ease of heavy training make them more fragile as their salaries has surged and the level of tattoo’s are more common than on seamen back-in-the-day. That Guardiola has to and wants to change half his team says more about his lacking consideration and wish to have bigger squads. Because if they can substitute 6 players, the bench shouldn’t be 7 players with 6 players eligible to play on the field and one keeper! Than the number of substitutes should be 12 players and 11 eligible players to play on the field. That means that the squad of a team would be 23 players not the 18 players that it’s now. That together with the maximum squads registered into UEFA Champions League and Football Association (FA) for Premier League. Something that will make the richest and powerful teams grab more of the talent and more of skilled players without needing farmer-clubs to keep the level of world-class professional players elsewhere.
Guardiola just want it easy and make the changes as he sees certain players without form or without character on the field playing Burnley instead of intelligence of how to use those three to change the game. This isn’t what I expected of Guardiola, I thought he would cope with the Premier League and not bitches like this. The Arrogance of wanting to revamp an old system because he has a hard time isn’t wisdom. It’s the easy fix out. Just like I felt with Mourinho when he was nagging on the amounts of matches in the Christmas and New Year’s period!
Man-up Guardiola! You who are supposed to be a mastermind, a tactician use the system and hit it hard. You have a club with fortunes to spend; you got workmates from Barcelona to help you out in the corners of Football Academy and the scouting after talent on the continent. You Guardiola have a grand opportunity to prove your skills.
I feel the same way to ranting Mourinho who said this in 2013:
“We go into the Christmas period and the accumulation of matches is so high, we don’t do it as a normal thing, we do it as a special group with a special mentality, enjoying the situation, forgetting we don’t have a Christmas break like the Spanish, Italian and German players. We don’t have that” (…) “But we have the pleasure of playing a period that’s only for the braves. I like that very, very much.” (…) “”I enjoyed it when I was in England before and I missed it when I was in Spain and Italy. Now I’m back I want to enjoy it, I want the players to enjoy it, and we need a special mentality to cope with that situation” (…) “Nine matches and one of them is the match against Steaua. That’s our motivation for tomorrow, to try to kill the situation in the group phase and give us a little bit of space in December; instead of having nine real, competitive matches, we only have eight” (HGH Magic – ‘Mourinho: Christmas fixtures only for the braves!’ (26.11.2013) link: http://www.chelsea.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=538783#ixzz4SZILKQJi).
It’s time for Pep to cope with the Premier League, to play with the cards that are dealt and the cards on the table. He cannot think that his stature and his former accolades will give him way to fix the FA. Pep is not the first or last former successful manager trying himself in the Premier League. There aren’t many leagues with more substitutes over 3 + one extra if the goalkeeper is injured in the overtime. This is something that Pep should be able to fix it!
PEP, time to man-up eats the pupping-pop and figure out possible ways of using the players, the club and the league. Not complaining and wanting a revolution because you cannot handle the pressure. Time to think through your skill-set, talk with your fellow compatriots and club apparatus in Manchester City; they should help you and give you advice so you can manage 3 substitutes as it has been for decades. Peace.
Bateman, Jason – ‘Fifty years of substitutions in football: from necessary novelties to tactical tools’ (18.09.2016) link: https://www.theguardian.com/football/when-saturday-comes-blog/2015/sep/18/fifty-years-substitutions-football-sport
Gaughan, Jack – ‘Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola urges football authorities to allow managers to use more than three subs’ (10.11.2016) Link:: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4018792/Manchester-City-boss-Pep-Guardiola-urges-football-authorities-allow-managers-use-three-subs.html#ixzz4SZ8BtdBN
Staten Norge er styrt via proxy eller av Regjerningen i Statsråd som må på høring, om enn i ikke allerede har flertall for kunne få igjennom de lover, reguleringer eller de budsjett de måtte ønske eller vil ha.
Det Høyre og FrP med Erna Solberg som Statsminister og Siv Jensen som Finansminister har glemt at de regjerer ikke alene. De er ikke som Arbeiderpartiet i gamle dager som faktisk hadde flertall og ikke trengte å lytte til støttepartier, men dagens realiteter så er det faktisk slik.
Høyre og FrP må lytte til det evinnelige på KrFs Knut Arild Hareide eller Venstres Trine Skei Grande, fordi de er regjering fordi de er støtte av disse. Om det så er så må alle saker gå igjennom Stortinget og høringer før endelige vedtak. Dette vil forsinke en del prosesser og saksgang. Som gjør at budsjettet ferdigstilt vil ta lengre tid enn det allerede har tatt.
FrP og deres utspill har ikke hjulpet deres sak der de dedikere alle problemer og kommer med ultimatum, når de ikke skjønner at de trenger KrF og Venstre mer enn støttepartiene trenger dem. Selv om de har titlene og rollene i Stortinget, så har de disse på tillit fra både egne velgere og de som stemte på støttepartiene. En skrinlegging av dette fundamentet ville være å blott gi opp demokratiske prinsipper og akterutseile hele den Norske Parlamentariske modellen.
Budsjettet som legger frem bør være på kompromiss mellom alle partiene og må gi vei til at støttepartiene får sine kampsaker. Hvorfor skulle de ellers støtte regjeringssamarbeidet om Høyre i skjul har jobbet for Oljeutvinning i Lofoten? Eller hvorfor skulle de støtte en FrP om de bare gir skattekutt til Amerikanske bensinslukere?
Da kunne vi likeså godt bare sett om de fikk gjennomslag på høringer og avstemninger istedenfor i lukkede rom i regjeringskvartalet hvor de har likt seg godt i 3 år nå. Der Venstre og KrF ikke har fått mye gjennomslag med tanke på hva som har gått tapt med å støtte denne regjeringen. Som vakler fremover med slite seil og uten en definert kurs. Ikke noe Soria Moria eller Norske Hus, ei heller slukke branner ettersom de kommer.
Vi får håpe det blir en enighet som er gunstig som er nyttig for alle de prioriteringene som trengs for at vår velferd og sikkert skal være ivaretatt, at det er nødvendige til helse og infrastruktur, samtidig som det er investert i fremtiden bærekraftige industrier og forskning slik at vi kan finne nye former for inntjening som fremtidens budsjett kan nyte godt av. Selv om jeg tviler det siste, det er kostbart og sanker ikke stemmer. De gjør derimot prestisje-prosjekt som ferjefri E39 og annet viderverdigheter som ikke akkurat skaper mye vekts i næringene som trenger støtte.
Uansett om det blir forordnet og justert innen fristen søndag er ikke lett å vite, selv om FrP både i Statsråd og Regjering bør begynne å ydmyke seg litt. De er altfor breie og arrogante ovenfor kollegaer, da passer sikkert deres ønske målgruppe av velgere, men for resterende er det grotesk hvordan man oppfører seg. Der en utenom forum både med og uten Statsminister på sin side, kommer med bastante ultimatum til pressen og dette uten å forhandle dette på reelle vilkår. Skittentøysvasken burde være internt mellom Høyre og FrP, resten burde bli tatt i mellom hverandre, fordi dette virker uproft av Regjerningen og FrPs eget apparat rundt Stortinget.
Det eneste positive er at uansett hvordan budsjett så vil vi i disse Vipps og bankkort tider få nye sedler å betale smøret på butikken:
«Norges Bank setter sin nye seddelserie i sirkulasjon i tre omganger. 100- og 200-kroneseddelen er de to første valørene som blir lansert, og de blir tidligst satt i sirkulasjon i andre kvartal 2017. Deretter tar det ca. ett år før 50- og 500-kroneseddelen gis ut i løpet av andre kvartal 2018. Til slutt blir 1000-kroneseddelen satt i sirkulasjon innen utgangen av 2019» (Strongpoint AS – ‘Når kommer de nye sedlene?’ link: http://www.psigroup.no/psi/nye-pengesedler-i-norge/nar-kommer-de-nye-sedlene/).
Slik at vi kan vite at det eksisterer fortsatt noe av det gamle, bare i ny former, akkurat som budsjettet hvor øre-merkinger og prioriteringer til de som vår regjering ser nødvendig eller ønskelig. Om dette er en Snekke-Avgift eller muligheter for høyere fortjeneste på kreditt-kort det er opp til dagens regjering.
The DA is in the process of considering its legal options following the announcement by the COO of the SABC, Hlaudi Motsoeneng, that the public broadcaster will no longer air footage of service delivery protests.
The reason Motsoeneng is allowed to make this absurd decision is as a result of the new SABC editorial policy approved in secret by Minister of Communications, Faith Muthambi, and the SABC Board in February this year.
The policy gives total control of all the SABC’s programming and news content to the SABC COO who is also a political appointee.
There is a lot’s of Members of Parliament, lots of cabinets and governments with Ministers smiling and making nonsense claims or laws for quick popularity instead of long-term care of their citizens. That is why I write today, because this is international issue, where did the honorable elected person who actually gives a damn go? Do they hide in cave in Afghanistan or is it in tiny local council in Dublin? I just have to ask as the assets and the capital are spoilt, bent or betrayed by the same persons who are supposed to represent us. First let me explain what a Statesman is… and be clear this is not done in my words.
Meriam Webster says this: “a usually wise, skilled, and respected government leader” (Meriam Webster). Another dictionary says this: “a man who is a respected leader in national or international affairs” (Vocabulary). Some qualities many people agree that a Statesman should have is: “Principles”, “A Moral Compass”, “A Vision” and “The ability to build a consensus to achieve that vision” (McKay, 2012).
With that in mind you have a lot of expectation of a man or woman to be respected and qualities in the leadership from the person. There are not easy being resourceful, have the ability to govern and become respected. The ability and skills comes from the person and the respect. The respect comes from the ones the statesmen actually govern and international community.
The statesmen isn’t like the Members of Parliament (MPs) and Ministers of our day. There might be a few exceptions but our society is so quick and so microwaved. The news and the decisions are taken out of nowhere. What is worrying is how the multi-national companies (Like Royal Shell, Amazon, Monsanto and others) and multi-national organizations (World Health Organization, World Bank and International Monetary Fund). That together with International trade and Unions (NAFTA, European Union, ASEAN); who keeps forging the sovereign nations under siege by trade-regulations and the restrictions on the nations who complies with laws they set.
This here is with all of this in mind together with the endless cycles of elections that the politicians have in mind. The initial issues with the access to the media as the live-TV and debates, together with Social Media and even radio programs; there are these where their legacy and character are on display, together with the initial reporting on what they are doing in their councils or parliament. The Politicians have aspects as they supposed to be loyal to the party organization and also to the constituency.
The people who read the papers, the articles, listen to the radio and watch TV are the ones that will discuss these politicians and vote for them. They are the ones responsible for their existence if they are real elections then the ballot will pick the men and be tallied right. If they are rigged in and selected by a committee or an Executive, then they never will be statesmen; as they never have the moral compass to even show respect to the ones they represent.
An initial position for them is supposed to be the Representatives of the citizens or the constituency. These people who are supposed be leaders and take decisions where the end-game are supposed to be for the better for the citizens and constituency. In our time, the MPs and the Politicians are more into their own career and their own capital than the ones they are supposed be there for. Many of them could just been lobbyist and work for corporations instead of the chambers where they represent a district or a county.
When it is like this with the bottom-line is their own personal wealth instead of the moral judgement, when the words portrayed and pledges given are for fitting the times and popular judgement of the times instead of longevity of the constituency and nation. That is what is missing. So few politicians of our time is gambling their career for the common good or the care of their constituency; with that in mind the level of trust between politicians and the people are low.
The low trust is because politicians are not who supposed to be, they are either biased by the structures over them like the European Union or the Multi-National Companies who are controlling their judgement. The judgement and the laws set to regulate the actions of the Politicians are altered as they are usually the ones that set the standard and are the lawmakers in the Nations. That is why they need to be men of vision and moral capacity to create a consensus with others; this is because it is also agreed upon by the other parties and also with the other people who elected them.
Now that I have the bar; take shot and sit down. I have already black-balled a generation as we have inherited this, the parliament didn’t sit there all of sudden, as much as the books we have in our libraries with common knowledge didn’t happen to jump into the houses. All of this got created over time and with capacity and tender hesitation of what we wish for. This is because we as citizens have to take more care of the parties and politicians around us, as they are a reflection of our societies and the ground-level we all build. We cannot be bushwhacked by strangers, we have to make sure the policies and a law they creates is the ones that are accepted.
Because a true statesmen are the ones that makes a mark on our time; the ones that are not a politician who are just popular, but will be remembered for making the decisions that maybe was hard at the time, but on the long-term making sure that the nation and constituency got better or made progress. That is why we have politicians, they are not there to be kings and queens, be lords and honorable men who think they can run us naturally. Certainly they cannot, they are there because of us; if they do not serve us and they are not useful for us.
What I miss as I see in a Statesmen, is not take the popular decisions or the one in the time, but the ones who are there now is more politicians who thinks more about polls and elections cycles, than being about the people they represent. That they are pressured by the Multi-National Companies and International Organizations who putting pressure on them as well, but they shouldn’t bend backwards for these, as they doesn’t represent Brussels or Coca-Cola, but they represent their constituency.
I want a politician I can remember for having the balls to think about how the decisions will be remembered in 20 years and if it will be setting the standard for the ones after him/her. That is a statesman, who is somebody who actually cares about the real future, not next election cycle, not only the persons own career and also the clarity of the ramifications of their acts as representatives. So with this in mind, do you feel the same or am walking alone in this tabloid world of quick headlines and quick careers; instead of building nations and being gentlemen of the board and take charge of what is left of it. Peace.
Meriam Webster ‘statesman’ link: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/statesman
McKay, Brett & Kay – ‘The 4 Qualities of a True Statesman’ (30.01.2012) link: http://www.artofmanliness.com/2012/01/30/the-4-qualities-of-a-true-statesman/
Vocabulary – ‘Statesman’ link: https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/statesman