Posted by: Sk | February 22, 2009

Chapter 16

Chapter 16: Playing cards

I have to take a decision. But there are so many things happening around all the time. But this one. It’s nothing but to put pressure, were it silently, finally. But what do I do now? I said I wouldn’ help him, but on the other hand, his arguments seem convincing. ‘They’ll kill me,’ he said. Hmm. It looks sound. All alone, all alone, ok. But so very much alone so as to risk his life.

It’s true that my mother had said when I was almost just born that ‘I’ll do it alone because I was very intelligent’ and I’ve had to struggle with this prophecy for all my life. There are moments you wish mothers wouldn’t pronounce such definite sentences so early – perhaps I believed it, perhaps the world believed it, perhaps there are angels assuring mother’s sentences be accomplished whatever happens. I don’t know. But it is true that the absolutely alone has some dark aspects in my mind attached probably to some kind of silent protestation in my unconscious. Hmm.

Well. I have to take a decision.


That was it. I have even politely knocked at the door in order to get some appointment with the chief in charge. Which was obtained almost at once – perhaps she wanted the answers to her questions, but they’re not ready yet. I know I look always stupid in such situations, but if what the man says is true, they better wake up. I thus started my report in some incomprehensible way in order to know whether it would wake up her interest. If it didn’t, the worse for you. Something like “There’s a guy the other side of walls who says there is something going on over there.” I was asked to sit down, though not excesively politely. And what the name is of the man, I don’t know, I said, I can’t remember those strange arabic names. “I meet him sometimes in the courtyard,” I said.

“So.” “They’re planning to murder a guard,” I continued. “That’s impossible,” she said again (such evidences all the time, this person). (She’s never going to believe me, I’ll have to point at some absolute evidence.) “He says that they talk with cards.” “With cards?” “Yes. Each card is a letter. There are about 40 cards and around 33 letters. The rest are signs. Question. Order. Request to talk.” When they sit down to play, which may take hours, there is one talking and the others put cards in some to a game ressembling system. Higher cards. The one who has the highest, wins. The one who talks puts the starting card where the conversation continues.” (Slight sign of interest.) “Why should they kill a guard?” “Because they’re condamned anyhow. – They’re just waiting to be transferred. He said ‘this will make them afraid and in any case, we don’t loose anything.’ ” “And how?” “I don’t know. He said he followed the conversation to a certain point but was then afraid they would get suspicious.” “How does he know about that?” “That’s the reason why he was meeting some people, he said, he thought the game funny.” “Why are you telling me?” “Because he said his life’d be in danger if he tells the other side. Perhaps he thinks it may help him to get free.” She disappeared inside of her papers and I understood it was about time to leave. Which I did.

For the time being I don’t know whether it has had any effect whatsoever. She may think I’m inventing everything. In any case I asked a few hours later to the guards whether I could send a copy of my cd’s to my father in Spain, as I had none and there was risk they got damaged with time. “It will be seen through, ” she said. “That’s no problem,” I said. Luckily I had already made the copy and even if I was asked a horrible amount of shekels for it to be sent, I paid without even seighing, just in case. That was another worry. I’m somehow afraid that in our scaled confrontation I will not see some things disappear progressively in my surroundings. Yesterday, tv did not work anymore. Not that I cared very much, I was tired and started singing some songs in order to distract my mind, but it is some sign I’ll have to consider. It may happen to the coffee machine, too. But I have already paid Halil another enormous amount of shekels in order to get some soluble coffee from outside, I’ve tons of now, just in case. I don’t mind cold coffee. Maya doesn’t like cold coffee, but I can’t make miracles. Or just small ones.

She has not decided yet whether she wants to collaborate in my plans to get a hamburguer. Today she stated that she prefered falaffel, which I thought was quite positive, too. I don’t know whether my undertones may have implied yesterday a hamburguer may be her last meal before being shot or whether she keeps herself inside of national traditions. In any case, I like hamburguers. She’s in knowledge of my wicked plans, that’s obvious. And it is obvious too that she has been promissed some reward if she helps to avoid such a thing to happen. They should be careful with her, she’s able to put some system in functioning implying thousands of people eating demonstratively falaffel in the surroundings of the prison which may cause some shock to Sask if she finishes by seeing her eating falaffel the same demonstrative way inside of prison. And seen that the second idea is much funnier than the first, she may decide herself for that, too.

I have some random notes on Maya’s psychic type somewhere. I’ll fish them out of the whole in order to see what I had remarked before. It may help. Here they are:


Latest news report that a horrible misunderstanding has arisen again, but this is normal as travelling on surrealistic waves and electronic engines. Thus, completely unaware of possible disasters and quite aware of the somewhat dangerous situation of room mate Maya, from Israel, who seemed quite lost in translation, I managed to get her e-mail adress in order to follow from far her movements. Nothing more intelligent invaded my intuition than to copy sask’s type while writing her e-mails, and as she hadn’t ask for mine, and didn’t know which it was, she simply thought … it was sask herself and spread the news all over Israel. (Mind,baby,you’d really say to everyone you’ve been at the is-department during military service, perhaps you know my friend…) Now,Sask, you are in a real bad position. Admit you belong aleatorily to the aleatory club or I ask my pakistani friend to give further proofs. Has advantages to speak urdu. Concerning Maya, she had a little accident a few days ago, and didn’t feel very well. Refuse the source?

First dishes

Of course, Sask does not give any kind of importance to good food, and of all, she was the most surprised when the police of Jerusalem almost made an insurrection because they claimed that food (at least) be improved. You can’t really imagine what these poor police men and women are fed in Israel, and although it is true that someone should be happy with something that is graciously offered by the state, it is an evidence, on the other hand, that the stomach has limits of tolerance. (Of course, it is nothing that should further bother us, but it happens that, as said, Sask was always involved everywhere.)

This is probably the deepest point of disagreement between Sask and myself. It is true that my family did not give excessive importance to food, even if my mother cooked quite well. We were educated in some kind of stoic mood where we had to integrate as essential value that everything that is linked to the body should be neglected in order to make more deeper values appear in the right light. All these unconscious efforts of education got definitely lost when I went to study to France, as it is well known that of all, the French essence lays somewhere around their stomach. (Perhaps there has been a French virus irrupting among the ranks of Israeli police … who knows.)

From that time, I would cherish oisters and brie, French mustard and green pepper steacks, as well as other specialities of the ‘cuisine française’ that opened in me the desire of getting to know equivalent dishes in other countries. It is true that I always laughed with the French telling them, that they do prefer the rotten: be it strange that the foie gras is made of an ill liver and the corresponding wine, some white wine whose name I don’t remember (they should pay, on the other hand, if they want publicity), of a region near to Bordeaux (quite expensive by the way and agreably sweet), does take its sweetness from a special bacteria that does practically rotten the grape… Psst

Did you know that in some southern regions they do eat birds they have left hanging from the ceiling for as long as to assure that they are rotten enough, too? Either they wait for food to be rotten, either they eat it uncooked, like the oisters and the steack tartar. Strange?

But I adored the ‘crème de marron’, my grandmother had brought one day home, and which was neither rotten nor uncooked, but made of the left over of the marrons (do you say chataigne, in English?) cooked and sweetened for Christmas times. This is though the case only for the one of the Ardèche, all the others are bad copies. It’s true that French cheese is very good, although others prefer the Swiss. Quite Spanish I did always locate things specifically somewhere and did never enter in political games what food was concerned: Swiss chocolates are good and certainly better than the Belgian, (as well as watches although you can’t eat them), but French cheese is extraordinary whatever the German say about Swiss cheese. (I really did never understand how German could import horrible second class Greek  or Yugoslavian wine just for political reasons. They would never take Spanish Rioja or Jerez, not only because they were jealous of the quality but because they would never take any political advantage of the aquisition: it was so easy to get something out of Greek and Croatians just by telling them they had spent so many thousands in importing wine, while the knew the Spaniard would say: you got a good wine for a good price, what else do you want?) Spaniards do never make politics with food, and that is a great advantage because thus, you always know what is good for taste and health, while German do have to feed themselves with the most unbelievable rubbish just because it is of general convenience.

I thus have to admit that of all I had the greatest admiration for French food despite our deepest political disagreements. Not that I wouldn’t like a pizza (I remember to have eaten pizza in Naple in a lost bakery at three o’clock in the morning, I was said, as thet were originally) from time to time, or a German Schweinehacke with Sauerkraut, it is that the French have combined things so as to make eating always agreable, and not only one specific dish or another (to say the truth I detest ‘nouvelle cuisine’ precisely because it seemed to stay in contradiction with tradition French cooking).  

Of course I adored Spanish traditional food, and there are quite a lot of good dishes, such as the Cocido (you will almost not find this rarity nowadays because the obligations imposed by wild dieting do characterize it as too heavy)

an enormous plate composed of peas, potatous, different vegetables, hen, pig, chorizo, tocino and morcilla that are all cooked together and then sought out: my mother said, the soup was eaten the first day, the vegetables and the potatous the second, and the meat the third day, or even the saucisses (morcilla, chorizo, tocino) one day and the hen and pig’s meat another one. My mother’s memory seem to keep occasions where the cocido lasted for one whole week. (Lazy Spaniards, she said, cook one a week.) For me it was an evidence that the Spanish way of thinking worked as a Cocido: They put everything together however big the problem, and then try to separate the different aspects starting by the lightest. What problems are concerned they usually don’t pass the first dish … There must still be a traditional Cocido restaurant in Madrid near to el Rastro, in the Centre, if you are not afraid of fat …

I have always liked Chinese food. I remember the first time I went to a Chinese restaurant, in Madrid, being about 15, and I was fascinated by the difference in combination of elements. I would never stop eating Chinese and had even a Chinese restaurant chosen for my stays in Istanbul, or in Jerusalem, or in Paris. I even went to a chinese resataurant in Islamabad, but it was very different from what I used to know. I couldn’t do with the japanese food though, because I rarely like uncooked food. (I was always horrified when my sister ate uncooked eggs with her spaghetti.)

Greek food, widely shared with Turks and Balkans, I like in Greece or Turkey. Nothing but a good melitzanosalata or tzatziki or mousaka among many other extremely good dishes in Greece: whenever I have tried Greek food abroad it was almost not eatable. Reason unknown. Have you ever tried real feta made of sheep milk or authentic sheep milks yogurt? You should, its difficult to find, very expensive but extremely good. Its so much appreciated buy certain elites that you can even find it in the most aristocratic Parisian Fauchon. Don’t go if you don’t want to get ruined …

From the Russian I knew little. Bortsch was again no real reference and Russian restaurants not very good, at least in Paris. I have always thought that you get to know the Russian in Russia, like the Greek.

Of course I was horrified with hebrew food, and even if a working mate coming from Australia tried to seduce me to like some peculiar Falaffel you could still find in the Jewish quarter in Paris, I could simply not submit the taste to any concept whatsoever so that I simply wouldn’t insist. It is true that every time I go to Israel I flee to Chinese or French restaurants (there is quite a good one near King David) or even to the palestinian quarters. To my understanding they had driven ascetism far too far.

Of course I like hamburgers and other deviations of common sense, and took even part in the opposition between Burger King and Mc Donald’s by taking decidedly the side of Burger King

It is true, that whenever I get in touch with aspects of American culture, I take decidedly the side of something: Marlboro versus Winston, for Marlboro, Coca Cola versus Pepsi, for Coca Cola, and Burguer Kind as said. It is funny that I don’t care whether the French mustard is Maille or another although I like their publicity very much (Il n’y a que Maille qui m’aille), as long as it comes from Dijon. There must be something inherent to American presentation of things that makes you take decidedly the side of something, and if you are eating a hamburger, why not play their game??

And many other things I will talk about slowly, as I habe to leave for … supper now, hoping Sask will positively solve the problem of the police by improving the food considerably (were it augmenting the taxes of reluctant populations, what she can use the well fed police for). And I have to remeber to write Maya an e-mail in order to correct the http’s adress, as I sent her a wrong one. Everything in its time.


(Polvorones de la Estepa)

Could say thank you

November 17, 2006

Perhaps I’ve solved the main question. If I get into your system and determine what has exactly happened, I may have the bridging coordinates between the reality appearing in my world and the ‘common’ one’s.

The aleatory relationship between logical consequences and reality is one of the questions that bothered me most and probably the clue to the solution.

My description of Sask’s stats department is of course nothing but a ‘virtual representation’, some kind of picture of a logical consequence in a certain situation.

As Maya is in Bolivia at this very moment, it is difficult to imagine she’d really given such an answer. Now, I send her the adress of sonjakastentoo yesterday and today I have one viewer more on my stats (The first was Ms Wingsurf who though immediately thought it was a personal affair and retired although quite bitten by curiosity … to say that there are still people caring about other people’s private life!).

It is possible to think that Maya knows really someone like Sask or related, and comes all alone by herself to the idea to ask whether she’d like After Eight, after all (Maya does always want to attract attention on herself and usually obtains quite rude reactions when she obviously makes misteps of all kinds). The answer should be reassuring for Maya: a quite sharp answer does simply remind her of the fact not to put personal questions (but are chocolates a personal question?). Maya sighs of hidden pleasure and thinks: She hasn’t really changed.

In the meantime David Kornik, who has put a permanent link to my page for unknown reasons (is a man and Israeli) gathers 12 admirors of my creations (among who the soldier put into prison of ‘Manual of a soldier’) around sonjakasten1.

If you were reading the stats, as she confirms bluntly by pingbacking stats day 17 or 12, Sask, then I know where more or less you are living now, which should help further in my integration attempt. Should make you a mariage proposal, dear, after what you’ve done for me!


November 16, 2006

Sask put 13 people in her department to work on the possible link between a certain number of texts in and reality. Very serious little soldiers learned thus a whole lot about Athina Onassis, Semmelweiss, German prayers and other most interesting stuff, while the only one who arrived into could still not find the way of how to link the statements to reality. In the meantime Sask was studying the stats. After a while, and three or four days after, the soldier stood up and approached silently Sask’s desk: “Officer, do you like After Eight chocolates?” Sask looked up, didn’t answer for a while and then said: “Perhaps.” The soldier sat back down and wrote on her paper:”There is an obvious link to a relative to an officer reality.” (Without specifications.)

Strangely, that same day, her father had sent her After Eight chocolates even if it was not her birthday, after all. The only thing that came to her mind was: that statistically there was an extremely high recurrence in the interest for After Eight during the last 24 hours. (And forgot the subjective statement of: around herself.)

Poor Sask. Must have some trouble these days.

Well, I have to answer to my second question, which was the first, actually. May a financial organization distroy a political system? Where did she get these highly abstract questions from? It’s not her type. Perhaps she’s picked them from internet. (How wicked I’m.)

Question 1

May a financial organization distroy a political system?

1. It may, certainly. An economical system is a distribution of wealthes and of social places which may or not imply power. If a society is thus built up that only people sharing some political opinions are allowed to earn more, as it is thought that from a better financial situation they may control people who have less, it is obvious that interfering in the financial system does alter correlations of power. To say. It is thought that some person who dresses in such way, eats this and that, goes to this and that,, is giving signs for the recognition of ruling characteristics. As he has put himself in the lines of thought of those, it is of no need to give him orders, he’s just deducing from the psychic perception that is induced through behaviour what he has to do. If he doesn’t, he may die. It’s compelling.

2. Conceive that you develop a financial system where hooligans are integrated, to say. Not by submitting them to given forms and normes, but by making of their own structures of ordering reality some new financial system. These people won’t hear the ‘orders’ as they are out of lines. Consequently they build up an opposition. The opposition may lead to the distruction of ruling poles as given.

3. Of course, from a more rational point of view this should not happen. Healthy organization of society implies the severe distinction between riches and power (Spain, Greece, Turkey, Russia, England, etc.). In these cases a new financial organization does just respond to needs of restructuring inside of a given society which is leaving out elements that may become dangerous if not taken care of – resistance in form of violent rejection of given rules, opposition through criminal activity, segregation leading to complete isolation of different bodies of societies until it provokes a crash.

4. In fact I don’t think it is possible to change a financial system without it having dangerous side effects as it provokes an organization without given political backing. It is revolutionary and it is dangerous. I thought myself that for example the very tense situation in France could be solved by an intermediate solution: not changing law at once, but using law in a larger frame of interpretation. It’s not infringing, it’s not imposing on others, it’s opening doors whose consequences can be studied at the same time some changes are introduced. If these were to be considered positive, they may allow a further change in legislation. It’s not easy: changes in social organization imply changes in education, in culture, everywhere. This is why you have to be careful with them.

5. This attempt I made in practice in 2003/4 in France. It was about time. The rejection of my brilliant idea can be put in correlation with the heavy revolts occured in 2005/6. You finish by understanding that the worse of hypothesis is always true. France hasn’t a financial system in constitution. France’s laws are respected point by point. Why does it react violently to such an attempt? Because it is under Germany’s influence, which pretends that the foundation of the EC is an economical system – they are transferring their constitution in value to a number of agreements between sovereign countries. And that’s what it is all about. For a Spaniard the conomical system is secondary to the political one and the financial agreement between nations does not imply a loss in sovereignity. Germany though thinks differently. They have a financial system in constitution, it is politics. They imply that EC agreements are power decisive. And that is what became obvious in France.

6. I wouldn’t have made the attempt in Germany. It’s obvious, I’m not silly. I’m not subjected to respect undertones and implications, I’m subjected to law and if I respect this inside of a given understanding I’m not infringing anything, but just reveal that there are attempts of violation of national sovereignities through the imposition of implications that do not derive from agreements. It’s a reason to further accuse Europe of tendencies leaning on dictatorial methodology as is considered reason of accusation what is not deriving of law but just of ethereal implications in undertones. I won’t change that. If the body of law starts to be governed by ‘implications’ there is no financial system to resist, however healthy. You won’t make money and I don’t work for free.

Texts related to the subject.

Agatha Christie and economy

Posted on by Rogier | Edit

Independently of all previous considerations, and there are many, whose principle we will perhaps have to determine later (if there is only one and not a multiplicity), there is something quite fundamental that determines my personal view both on life and on literature.

When I was a child, I used to listen to the radio at night when the light was already switched off. One day, I began listening to a program when it had already started, and in my confused child’s consciousness, voices talking excitedly refering themselves to living people, made me think something horrible was really happening and became pale and shivered and finally couldn’t stand it and stood up, and said to my mother: “Mum, there are horrible things happening.” She just looked at me while listening to my exposure of the events, started laughing and said: “Child, it’s just a radio program …”

From then on, not to talk about the fact that mistery and spies and adventures in the jungle did always attract my imagination, even historical almost forgotten stories, Michail Strogoff, and ‘les trois mousquetaires’ and Herodotus, etc, captured my attention, so that I explored the possibility of introducing contemporary elements into literature that would awake exactly the same feeling. It seemed impossible: my mind was structured abstract and theory, concept and idea, and was unable to think even tension as generated through basic literary means. Were it not because I met Hannah, I would perhaps have never tried doing so.

The perverted idea of mixing facts, objective evidence and tortured wrong logical structures giving birth to the most obtuse configurations, had in fact two reasons: first, I was fed up with gossip, bla bla saying nothing and bullshit and lies and listened to, and fantasy getting mixed in serious reviews with not even any more surrealistic fantasy that was confusing the border between reason, reality, illusion and madness. Let us do the same, I thought, and say after, we made it all up (ah, these coincidences, what can we do, really but really.) (If someone was to get angry.) If there was though an intelligent reader somewhere, would he not try making the difference between the true and the false grain? On the other hand it is a fact that working on schizophrenia does give you very bad ideas. As said, one of the main theoretical therapy approaches was to stay in the same psychological environment than the schizoid (of course you are followed, but that’s because you are very important, and now you have to learn how to protect yourself.) This atmosphere, quite quaking on the other hand, moved consciousness to a realm where even spies and mafia bosses and terrorists had their reason to be and even their hearts, so that I was finally enchanted by the perspective of actually living in such a virtual reality, where facts were so obviously misinterpretated that I had the feeling to be factually in ‘the end of days’ every day. (It’s very funny.) From then on I started making up exciting games such as to put under the word ‘blogger’ the meaning of terrible coming and already being marginal hooligans, thus slowly perverting thousands of people into such a mood, them already suspecting themselves of belonging to an on coming sect of the seven moons, when finally they discover that they were doing something that was … absolutely legal… (with little exceptions.)

In fact I defined principles in economical interaction that linked horribly sophisticated thought even to fashion appearance, and inside of this theory, I developed a model where business finished by representing some kind of reference of existence, it being of need to create ‘models’ or ‘muses’ that gave the exact image in esthetics to the compound as given. Thus, working on possible translations of already existing french ‘prototype’ or ‘model’ refered trend into the american market, I discovered that american would be much more fascinated by ‘characters’, even having slightest references to existing people, than by ‘models’ or ’stars’ whose materiality would finish by bothering them. How do you trasform my most adored and beloved Betty Catroux (don’t have bad ideas, she won’t like it but she’s almost 20 years older than me) into an american referential character? You make up a love affair, you put a business surounding, you let the whole bath in a cartoon mood for a while, and hop, here you have Ms Wingsurf with a little bit more agressive and determined features, but having the same weight than the before mentioned. (I have to say that these unworthy French did never appreciate in its exact measure the extreme value of the almost metaphysical transportation of finest currents in thought to esthetics, as they prefer running behind man Yves St Laurent, – were he gay, as he confessed a few years ago on tv, although everyone knew already -, incarnated by this woman, but these are again bitter tears running against the evident. If we don’t start boasting ourselves by ourselves, we’ll never manage to see a man recognizing what we are doing… it’s a sad evidence.)

In any case, I thought it extremely good marketing to have some kind of ‘business bear or cartoon character’ that could even tell eternal and never ending stories. The more there are, the better, it does really keep people’s attention alive.

On the other hand I had been studying the starter’s effect (physics: it is ten times more dificult, need of energy, to bring something to movement than to keep it running), and thought it a quite interesting challenge to know whether it was possible to create some kind of inner energy ressource alone, in order to avoid people blocking your natural development through the imposition on what you do, because they think they know better and have the right to tele guide you because they have ‘discovered’ you and to find people around you, were it three or four, who’d really like what you do and not only run behind trends, temporarily and without depth. You see, Mr Dashtag: adventure, spies, the feeling it’s really happening, two or three references to famous people, recipes and a game, and there it is! You become famous in one month’s time without having to bother about side effects.

But there are other points still left.

Asterix and Obelix or France’s defeat

Posted on by Rogier | Edit


After having lived about 10 years in Greece it’s obvious that my perspective on reality was heavily influenced by the nearest environment and got obviously a mythological touch I adored exploiting and developing, obviously convinced of the fact that even an exaggerated ‘compte rendu’ was much more attractive to the mind than boring statements.As said before (but in Word Press you read the before after, which in a certain way fits my own character and personality, as the past puts the foundation of explanation for the present), a terrible quarrel was born between some French intelligentsia and myself, quarrel whose terms may be put simply in the following terms: I maintained that the loss of criteria of identity in order to keep the people in a relationship of dependence to the state would finish by destroying economy and thus the foundation of the state itself, and that the fundamental aggression against the ‘holy’ (as feeling, custom, faith or belief) would turn itself against the state as law could not prevail otherwise but if embedded in that kind of notion, and law the basis of the state. On the other hand I insisted on the fact that economy could not be founded on robbery, exploitation or other derived benefits coming from the misuse of different patterns of understanding in lower developed civilizations. They maintained the contrary.It is obvious that my position was not positive, just slightly critical. It did not build up a new theory; it just drew the limits of the existing. The attempt of blocking extremely wide influence got at University from 1988 to 1992 lead to the ‘financial punishment’ as described before, an apparently quite frequent method used in France in order to put the people on the right path, as I learned after.When the opposition does not use the same pattern of understanding than you, it’s not worth the while trying to discuss with them. It’s obvious that identity is not an ideology but a tool of understanding. I suppose it’s obvious that I need to submit to some kind of some general principle of identity in order to be sure I’m understood and I understand the others. If I may understand under ‘table’ one thing and you another, I will end up showing with the finger at things in order to make myself understood. (And French drove theory that far in 1990, and said ‘that intelligible (understandable) was just what I pointed at with the fingers’. But we are no monkeys, my mother used to say, and have words to say things.)Consequently you know that if you say something in a context where this principle is rejected, you will simply not be understood, and luckily enough you can’t point at abstract questions with the finger, as you are obliged to think in order to get the point. But thinking is not the kind of exercise you learn during the Tour de France, and it was obvious that there was a general lack of these gymnastics beyond the Pyrenees.I understood about 2000 that I was perhaps one of the last Jews remaining, as I maintained stubbornly that it’s tooth for tooth and eye for eye, whereas to my greatest despair even formal Jews were already pardoning everything to everyone, as if converted to a new sectarian interpretation of Christianism. Consequently I thought that a consequent revenge for the loss of 10 years of my life due to a general blindness couldn’t be but the ruin of France whole and made myself very quickly on the research of allies for such a campaign.My allies are always of two kinds. Either they are false friends wisely introduced in the enemy’s camp, or logical structures picked from characters that do usually condense oldest wisdoms in every day’s behavior without worrying very much about the theory underlying the whole, which I convert into powerful devices to undermine the opposition.Independently of the mass of contradictory events that govern apparent reality and which may be understood in different ways, it is easy to discern the following governing logic in a general strategy developed in order to give back the blow I had been the object of without considering my ancestral pride. (Seen like that, Sask would say that I’m the most hypocritical bastard she’s been confronted to, and it’s true that I know extremely well to play a double game, but on the other hand, it’s not of need to bother you with details, poor Sask had to deal with without ever trying to find the general logic governing the whole.)My hero, Xristos Kakarantzas, who I called the Phoenician because he was the only one I knew, who knew how to deal with money, became an ally extremely quickly after my arrival in Greece in 1994. Further called Obelix, he built with the Asterix I was myself, the logical tandem preparing a horrible attack aiming at undermining French economy. (That he ended up selling corn to the French, hints only to the fact that he was not aware of the terrible misuse I was making of his logic.)Who was Xristos Kakarantzas? Actually he had a horrible reputation. Son of Giorgos Kakarantzas and brother of Sotiras Kakarantzas, he practically determined the agricultural market in the provinces of Serres and Drama, and sometimes far beyond. Presumably linked to sales of antiquities, he was suspected of an unbearable amount of crimes he had never committed. The others, he probably committed, I didn’t want to know of, as I knew that even knowledge may be considered as a crime. (As it is far to tempting to reveal things if you ever are in a difficult situation, it’s better to know less than more.)Soon after our arrival in the province of Serres, I was thus put in knowledge of the following story: Sotiras went to the Agrotiki Bank and asked for 100.000.000 drachmae, for which he presented a cotton factory as warrant. The cotton factory was evaluated at 30.000.000 (figures are not corresponding to reality), but the bank said ‘they always have money, and we know them’, as was reported to me later, while investigating the case, by Vassili Dalakouras, working at that bank.Sotiras put all his property at the name of his brother Xristos, and together caused a bankruptcy of the company, paying all the workers their due and without leaving a debt anywhere. The bank took over the factory, and put it for sale. Xristos made an agreement with possible buyers of the factory, went alone to the auction and bought it back … for 15.000.000. At least this is the reconstruction I could make of the event, as Macedonian do rarely talk and have quite a peculiar way of considering reality, so that you spend have your time guessing what they wanted to say and when you think you’ve got it, they say, you haven’t understood anything.Even if even Athens considered the ‘coup’ as a masterpiece of intelligence, as it was impossible to take any legal steps whatsoever to counter attack, Xristos had hardly evaluated the anger of the Agrotiki, which on the other hand, was one if not the bank linked to the state in Greece. He soon had the whole mechanism of state on his back, and great part of my job consisted in stopping the harsh attacks coming from all sides aiming at his total destruction.I did counsel an immediate alliance with next door population and mainly shepherds, as these were of heavy influence, by lowering prices of corn and other animal’s food. Campaigns against him through press and other were thus diminished if not completely avoided, while attempts to take away his main clients by artificial higher prices offered by another merchant farer away, were blocked by arguing the distance, and mainly that the destruction of a local merchant would have as an effect the substitution by a foreigner, it would be impossible to deal with. Thus, heavy alliances were obtained mainly with the ‘zarakatzans’, parts of population that were traditionally misesteemed by the state and vice versa, such as the Karalis, Mudjanas and other.After 6 years of heaviest quarrels, Xristos became one of the most influent merchants of the region, symbolizing the maintenance of particular identity against an almost totalitarian state structure (I mean by totalitarian: not considering particular ways of structuring or understanding). The whole built up a ‘chip’, a ‘device’, a logical structure of an event linked to several consequences in an irreversible chain. ‘Accidentally’ a French was contacted more or less at that time (1999), Isabelle Rose. Hypocritically seduced (Sask would say), she was to introduce the poisoned gift of Xristo’s strategy into France. Is there easier money than that obtained by cheating banks? I never said, but just heavily repeated with greatest enthusiasm how horribly effective Xristo’s strategy had been. I just needed of some intelligence in order to translate effectively the whole into a French mind, and I was sure, but really sure, she’d have the guts of doing. She certainly did.To my understanding France’s economy shows obvious supra evaluation of property as warrant for banking lends, which is to say, a hole that must be more than 60 USD and which possibly can’t be filled anymore. As I couldn’t find a better answer for the hideous prosecution I had been the object of than by putting them in front of the choice of law or the systematic violation of law, by simply showing with the finger towards the second, I even managed an extremely dangerous introduction into their territory in 2003 in order to obtain the wanted effect. The state would be unable to take the proper measures in order to put an end to the obvious disproportion of the fraud. I calculated that around 2005 France would have to declare bankruptcy and I even managed to augment the torture by pointing out that they should at least keep appearance and thus hide away the evidence. To my understanding they heavily paid for a little judicial (?) mistake.Of course, independently of the heavy adventurous spirit linked to the whole story, some questions arose from the whole situation that had to be cleared up before I did, if I ever could, join a structured society again.It’s true that I had always adored Robin Hood or Wilhelm Tell, whose more historical representative is King David before he became King, does always symbolize the inherent justice to some kind of opposition to ordered states or structures of power, whenever there is excessive abuse coming from their side. In fact, my heavily Spanish mind did evaluate opposition to given order as extremely dangerous as destabilizing structures that were sometimes thousands and thousands of years old and whose inherent wisdom could hardly be reproduced by the sudden shift of power. Seen from that point of view I did always reject revolutions and that kind of explosions of anger and jealousy and favored psychic pressure and intellectual means in order to compensate obvious instability.In fact, when my Bollix had become so famous that his name was known far beyond the borders, he was approached by radical independents aiming at the destruction of the Greek state by the declaration of independence of Macedonia/Thrakia. As I wouldn’t fundamentally agree with that turn of things and I knew that most of his fame was nothing but my job, I simply left Greece. On the hand it is of evidence that constant abuse of the state should find some kind of opposition allowing people at least to breath and thus avoiding real crashes.The fact of not allowing opposition (which is not, revolution) has made of most of the European States new fashioned totalitarian states, as they try to concentrate all their efforts in maintaining a power they have not the experience of dealing with. Strangely they push people whose advice could be of help out of their borders and privilege people who just say no to no and yes to yes, which is to say, without criteria of evaluation. A state without counselor is like a man without head, and the immediate consequence of such a state of things, is immediate economical ruin.Advice: be careful when the time comes to choose your enemy! 

The gracious, the random legal and the financial mess

Posted on by Rogier | Edit


There is probably nothing more fascinating for someone who may be interested in legal questions than the obvious jungle generated in the economical world by the appearance of internet and even more, the putting into disposition of the public of the gracious.The ‘free and gracious’ is obviously the source of the greatest perplexity. Perhaps, in my mind, the appearance of the ‘free’ will irreversibly be linked to the following story reported by Gorky in Klim Samgin, and of obvious historical foundation: during the marriage of Tsar Nicolas II, whole lots of sweets were put in a park to be graciously offered to the people. These, in their anxiety of getting more as quickly as possible, started running one upon the other, until a certain number died and many were injured. Although Nicolas II delayed the party for 24 hours, he finally insisted in doing as if nothing had happened.There is something poisoned about the gracious, I tended to think, and have always mistrusted presents. As I lived happily retired of civilization for many many years, in a place where internet appeared around 2003, this is to say, when I had just left, I had not yet been confronted to a whole number of twisted questions that would be my favorite food after rejoining civilization in 2003. (It’s true that very theoretically I had already been put in knowledge by Sask of all sorts of strange happenings and innovations, but to be honest, I frankly thought human imbecility could not reach that far, and esteemed Sask’s compte rendu as excessively exaggerated and lacking of rational foundation.) I was a little bit confused when I had to admit how admirable the accuracy of what had been reported actually was.In 2003 I thus opened my first e-mail account, which is my first suspicious confrontation with the gracious. It’s not only that you don’t evaluate properly the value of something which is free; it’s that you don’t understand where the money is taken from. At first, I thought of course that Microsoft had such a lot of money that they could afford the ruin of the postal system without moving a whimper. Not very happy with that explanation I dig a little deeper in order to understand the financial environment surrounding, and finally learn about the theory of currents (France, 2003/4). This very innovative financial structure consists (for whoever is as much in the mist as I was before) in making an agreement with a server and getting a percentage on the use (time) of the given page (functioning of Google and other research engines, e-mail servers and all the pages that propose gracious services, your friends at school, download for free, and the rest of the stuff). As you get money from the server, you may propose thousands and thousands of things for free, it seems.It’s true that I was already quite furious with the internet mess, I had been informed of through the exhaustive reading of the ‘Figaro’ that was religiously sent by Frank’s father to Greece every Tuesday and Thursday. But that concerned the inner and international legislation, question I had had the time to solve before getting into the internet business myself in 2003. ‘Figaro’ had not had the time yet to report about the question of the ‘free and gracious’ so that I was really puzzled with what seemed to me the beginning of the end of classical financial systems.The problem of the internet legislation concerned mainly two points: first, the legal status of a page, and second, the ‘globalization’ of business without legal corresponding status. On top of that, most of my fury concentrated on the lack of control of obviously illegal pages and the wide spread custom of not paying taxes linked to that sort of business.The first I solved saying that an internet page was a business if it was proposing anything for sale, and thus needed a legal status (company). If there was no business of support on the street, the page had to obtain this status by itself. If the company was to offer services on international basis, it had to get the ‘int’ or other status allowing sales outside the national borders. Consequently all pages getting money (income) through currents needed a legal status, too. All the rest was illegal.With this principle, 98% of internet business was to be considered illegal, and my attempt of finding the legal frame destroyed by the obvious mass of people not finding any kind of interest whatsoever in my proposition.Concerning the second I quickly answered that Google as a research machine and others were consequently some kind of ‘book shop’ that offers thousands and thousands of pages to the reader, and that no book shop has the right of proposing forbidden books on their shelves. Consequently Google was to be considered responsible for the divulgation of information illegal or forbidden such as how to crack programs, how to make a bomb and other most ‘interesting’ stuff. Not to say of the most disgusting pornographic invasion of a common reader’s every day’s life including sometimes: pedophilia, violence of all sorts, even, yes, even incest, I discovered one day not knowing anymore where to hide myself, and many other most horrible twists of the human mind.One of the most convincing arguments to my understanding concerning the utter need of taking measures was the following: I know that it’s illegal to crack a program. But not everyone knows, and the very fact of discovering a public space where a certain number of information can be obtained, clearly misleads people concerning the legality of those acts.And if I know that cracking programs is forbidden, it’s obvious, I remarked, that I’m not in knowledge of all the legal points of national and international legislation and that if the principle ‘the fact of not knowing law does not free you from prosecution by law’ is of obvious need, it necessarily looses of accuracy if the public is mislead concerning legislation by the appearance in public spaces of all sorts of undetermined information.It’s exactly the question that was slowly forming itself in my mind concerning the gracious and free. If Word Press does propose free pages, I’m legally not allowed to sell these pages but it can’t certainly not be forbidden that I propose the service of filling your page and get paid for the know how which, to say the truth, is not that easy to acquire. On the other hand, you ask yourself how it is possible that one of the most sophisticated programs allowing a presentation in internet be offered for free, while skins for FrontPage or other did (do?) cost hundreds, not showing half the commercial interest of Word Press skins. Although it’s certainly none of my business, I’d myself prefer less users proposing special customer service for those paying a certain amount, trying to avoid as much as possible the obvious misuse coming from those who not knowing how it works do finally provoke disasters all over the program. But that was a random question.Much worse was my attempt of capturing attention through the use of moving icons, which having attracted my eye, seemed an excellent way of improving commercial pages by synthesizing in one sole image a whole slogan. Discovered accidentally in Nokia’s free (!!) mobile screensavers I soon started building up myself a whole collection through researches in internet which concerned mostly free objects put to the disposition of the public.It was much much later that I remembered author’s rights while having already put hundreds and hundreds of Mickey Mouse’s and Pink Panther’s into my cds. Would these people have paid author’s rights I knew extremely expensive for Disney, Asterix and Obelix, Tintin and the sort, and leave the whole freely and graciously to the disposition of the public?? My careful answer was after a while, certainly not.Was I then myself to think that I couldn’t use these little and beautiful images myself to embellish my pages, while I wasn’t selling them (see and what would happen if I did finally sell them? French legislation, and as far as I know it is the same than international law, says: “There are three legal ways of obtaining a good: buying, inheriting and offered.” Further law establishes that the owner of a good is free to do with it what he likes.After deepest thought I concluded for myself the following: not knowing what Disney what mean about the whole, but there are things you simply can’t guess, I considered myself the legal owner of 12.000 moving icons through the free putting into disposition to the public of these goods on a public space, which I had all right to presume had the legal permission of thus doing and responsible in front of the law, if ever. If Disney or Asterix discovered an icon on my pages that had not been approved by them, they were to forbid the pages offering them graciously not having any means of confiscating my property as obtained through legal means, for which I could provide if necessary all pages of which I had obtained them without making use of any kind of illegal mean. It’s of evidence, I thought, that they had to take care of their rights before, and they can’t claim now to a legal owner for negligence that is obviously theirs and not mine.Being thus the legal owner of my 12.000 moving icons, may I sell a game not implying the sale of the icons? May I sell a choice, a presentation, and a structure? To my understanding, yes, and thus I would argue if I had to answer in front of law.The gracious has obvious limits and concerning the wickedness of the commercial strategy behind, I will still have to spend two or three Word Press pages. Not the last the forbidden mechanisms of security (virus) included in those pages in order to avoid for them to be freed of their property. It’s like putting poison into the sweet in order to avoid people eating too many of them. It’s not only forbidden, it’s a bastardize. You don’t want to pay author’s rights nor intellectual property, but you think you’re free to bomb up someone’s personal computer without warning because he’s just taking what is offered … for free (!) Is this a strategy or may we just say they’ve lost their minds?

Status Quo: Economy and Ideology

Posted on by Rogier | Edit


  The picture above shows a wooden latter on the window, in the Holy Sepulcher’s Church, in Jerusalem. Found in the Spanish site as mentioned, it should just illustrate the following questions. Its story is dark: different understandings of Christianism (there are whole lots of them) do fight for centuries for this church, until finally it is decided that each should have a section of it. Walking into the Holy Sepulcher is thus the confrontation with sections hold by monks and priests belonging to different religious groupments. The section attributed to each was though hold to conditions: if the Easter mess is not hold exactly at 12 (to say) that day exactly, the responsible groupment may loose the control of the section. From that day and on, some of them started spending their time and leisure to put traps to the neighbor in order to make him loose the control of the section.    Around 1970, this whole situation called the ‘Status quo’ (from Latin and meaning: as it is – meaning that neither discussion nor other may imply changes in the given order) is synthesized through the latter in question, which was being used to make some arrangements and fell under the stroke of the ’status quo order’, it being impossible to move it from there anymore.    I’ve always taken secure distances from political and religious authorities, as it being a family tradition, ’spheres of power’ having a suspicious aura and kindly and politely smiled at, simply not taken into consideration. My mother used to say: “Politics are very difficult.” And resumed the same after long and eternal studies of the ABC newspaper: “The ability of putting traps to the opposition while presenting facts in a convenient light.” “Es que nunca dicen lo que es (they never say what there is) y hay que estar buscando para encontrar el intríngulis del asunto (and you have to search in order to understand the quid).” Resuming she said: “that politics are dirty”.It is evident that having spent most of her life time giving most proper definitions to extremely complicated concepts, there were several of them that escaped to her synthezising ability. Politics and economy were two of them. “A la economía no hay quien entienda nada.” (There isn’t anyone who may understand anything to economy) She used to say looking with great despair at figures and abstract sentences that escaped completely to her capacity of understanding.I went more or less the same path and shared more or less the same fields of interest, psychology, psychiatry, history, literature, national identity, theology and philosophy, law and crimes, and some other. I got never involved in questions of economy and politics, although I was pushed during my youth by overwhelming currents coming from my father’s side, for a little while, and without depth.It was Hannah who arrived with questions that had never touched my mind and which I was hardly able to solve, as I didn’t have enough background (reading or experience). She asked whether I liked economy, and I said, ‘hardly’ (quite diplomatically, as the answer should have been: not at all). It was though her absolute passion so that I was obliged to concentrate myself on the question in order no to block with frozen indifference her enthusiastic exposures. After a while I told her that ‘well, yes, but all this needs a proper metaphysical frame’. “Can you build a metaphysical frame?” “I may”, I answered, “but it won’t be easy.”Whenever the time arises to answer to an extremely difficult question, I do always start the same way, answering to two main questions”what do I understand under economy?” and “which is my personal economical behavior?”The first question had as appalling answer: nothing. Strictly no concept, but a blank white sheet in front of me, which disturbed me for a while. I thus started to observe my economical behavior: how do I spend money? Which value do I give to it? What is of value for me? Which behaviors of mine are conditioned by economical aspects? In order to see whether I could draw a general theory of it that may be related to a more general group as financial activity and this inserted in a general interaction.I soon discovered that my economical behavior was related to subject. I had to keep myself inside of a notion or concept that was a warrant for happiness including subsequent notions as home, freedom, adventures and many thoughts, which as said in (under: personal) made many problems arise from my very peculiar arrival into the world, but maintained itself through the years without it being possible to submit my behavior to some other concept (I have to buy a house or a car or whatever) that may determine my behavior otherwise.The concept in question implied what I called after a ‘maintaining economy’. I assure myself survival inside of a certain environment through the insertion of my concept into the given context. Strangely, at the time where I had to decide about my destiny (1992-4), as having finished my studies, I find the most proper environment for my way of seeing in Greece, which is at that time at the edge of war and bankruptcy (no capacity of production.) Greece has no other solution but to adopt my Spanish concept: to care about survival in an extremely aggressive context.It really happened without it being anyone’s desire nor will, nor a determined thought in anyone’s mind. It props up as possible solution when there are solutions none. As behavior is determined by subjective criteria, things are done following impulses, and as impulses are determined by the instinct of survival, very difficult to counter. A somewhat chaotic and anarchic economy develops itself in Greece for 10 years whose underlying principle is though to maintain identity if it could ever be defined. Caring little about an impossible future, Greek plunge for a long while into some kind of self contemplation, which gives moments of historical brightness, as the speech of Stefanopoulos (then president of the nation) while receiving Clinton as guest.All this happens while I still don’t think about economy and discover the interrelated facts after having given in to Hannah’s increasing pressure.I start studying national economical behaviors (France, Germany, England, Spain, US, mainly) through history. The referential aspects considered are the following: what are the most representative products of each country? How are they made? How are they commercialized? What are the legal compositions (companies and other) that do allow production? What is the relationship of the State to these ‘compounds’? How does ideology or thoughts affect them? What is the relationship of the whole to the foreign or the outer world?Extremely interesting observations start fascinating my mind and finally I define two general lines of commerce: the particular expression (private) of a know how in a given context, and a more to general interests submitted production coming from organized states, whose determination through ideology is clearer than in the first case. Ideology in its influence to finances is marked by favors and privileges in taxes and possibilities of publicity, and thus, most interesting configurations are born from these observations.I seem to favor private business in a very sharp manner that does almost reject the influence of the state, which explains my extreme compatibility with Xristos Kakarantzas. The adventurous aspects of not knowing who will buy tomorrow, how to get up a price, the control of quality and the constant confrontation to human weakness or strength in his attempt to get higher or lower prices, attract me much more than the blind submission to general interests whose finality I don’t really understand.What really starts concentrating my attention though is the know how in production, in selling, in keeping a market, in flairing the possibilities. Fascinated, I discover that main brands keep themselves through the centuries because of their ability of keeping a secret. These secrets, I discover, correspond to deepest psychic logics that determine identity fundamentally. I spend years in analyzing the corresponding logics to a product, and finish by selecting a few of them as being highly compatible with mine: Sony, Coca Cola, Lübecker Marzipan, Rosenthal, Polvorones de la Estepa, Moutarde de Dijon and some other, implying the most diverse branches, social spheres and national contexts. On the other hand, commercial strategies linked to national entities or particular companies do seem to fit my own behavior much better than others, taking upper hands the French sarl and the Spanish original corporative behavior (’los cuchillos de Albacetes’: specialization of a whole village or region in one specific product, lowering costs and augmenting quality). What seems to attract me from the Japanese Sony is the apparent alliance of structured entities with lower groupments of society as mafia (evaluation is depending on foreign structures of understanding and may not be exact), and all those keeping a secret through centuries (Rosenthal, Lübecker Marzipan) take many stars in my personal list, as well as those that give importance to the attachment to a ’stamp of quality’ (Royal warrant).Further I discover that what seems to be the unifying principle of my highly evaluated products and strategies is that they seem to give space to the integration of psychopathetic psychic structures in a social environment. I study for months the label of ‘Duque de Alba’ brandy, and remark that the structures and colors do have resemblance with Bizanze deep and heavy symbols (gold and purple / gold and deep blue, etc.) and finally conclude that some people having studied deeply human’s psychic behavior do know how to recreate colors, ambiences etc that lower pressure on people whose structure does not allow them an immediate integration in a given social environment. This knowledge implies a logic that does seem to imply the understanding of what is good for health, for a relief, etc. so that quality is the immediate consequence of these extremely sophisticated observations and understandings, whose main developers through history are women as having to deal with ‘unbearable creatures’ in a closed environment for many years.Out of all this I develop the ‘Ludwig the Second-theory’ of economy (King of Bavaria). whose general lines may be said as follows:1. The sovereign (or some people) are in knowledge of all these secrets at least in the faculty of recognition. The recognition of these aspects is the utter warrant of peace.2. The structures of state (administration, law, forces of order) are to be ordered so as to warranta.) the protection of people recognizing these elements or producing themb.) the organization of a chain of production that does allow the distribution of riches through the recognition of particular knowledge, know how, etc. so that the recognition of each particular value in hierarchic organization (salary) allows the generation of new products and thus the common wealth.c.) (insertion of Spanish economy) wealth and organization are to be kept inside of borders as most of the people do not know of foreign exchanges and possible misuse of riches towards illegal business strongly punished in order to avoid the ‘escape’ of wealth. Some people in knowledge of general well being are in charge of foreign exchanged.) (insertion of French economy) value and thus salary is to be determined in percentage or through sales as this allowing the determination of each’s qualities and the localization of personal skills allowing to keep identity and thus, social peacee.) (insertion of American economy) poles of economy are to constructed in competition and monopole forbidden (heavy weakness of Spanish economy)f.) (insertion of Russian economy) in spheres of weakness in determination of identity, groupments with warrant of state and given determining order are to be imposedMy personal inventivity does include the possibility of organization of ‘economical flocks’ (insertion of moving populations, such as gypsies, shepherds, etc. into a general economical organization).This is the metaphysical frame for Hannah’s theory of economy. Of course I go on studying which currents, ideologies and dispositions do attack and harm this very healthy system, which allows other ways of organization in interrelative organization, and discover that mainly the German, the French and the Italian may provoke a frontal attack on this way of thinking as well as the underlying and very undermining financial understanding of the Vatican.Strangely I’m obliged at that point to define political lines, too, as the brutal aggression probably coming from these sectors of humanity may cause the complete failure of my attempt of realization of Hannah’s philosophy, as decided in 2002. Studies of history, financial organization after second world war, social structuring etc. do finally lead to the conclusion that the whole problem comes from the recognition of Vatican as State (Agreements of Latran, I think) as it provokes a fusion between the psychic structures and the logics of understanding that do generate thoughts usually only developed under high pressure, such as “I’m the only one or the best” etc. mechanisms of defense arising from the loss of identity in the incapability of synthesizing reality, and which become common in Europe because of the loss of main structuring concepts in their realization in image as given in social order.About how Chinese wisdom finished by revealing the extents of the illness by simply keeping ancestral tradition in due unawareness of other’s reality caused by heavy mistakes in translation, I may talk about later. Because they would simply say, if confronted to the evidence of possible economical changes, that “but, there is status quo…” Status Quo concerned the Church, Peking, and not universal economy, even if they’d have wanted to…juan reyero, bitácora :: La locura del Santo Sepulcro

Vigilando el cierre No siempre consiguen mantener el status quo a base de miradas Cerrando la Iglesia del Santo Sepulcro La idea es que la escalera es – 18k –
En cachéPáginas similares  

Haute couture and international finances

Posted on by Rogier | Edit


It’s really horrible. Even if you’re no one you can’t help looking as if you had become the IMF president three days ago, just because you manage to juggle conveniently with concepts. Blame Sorbonne, and leave Frisco’s earthquake for Mane, Rita Hayworth’d say. Finally I had managed to build myself my room and place on earth, and my brilliant card in 50 exemplariness result of a virus (actually the president had said to change the factory’s name for the web page’s name, which I did, but changes not registered due to the virus, although appearing on the screen as such, so that acting with a certain quickness, I wouldn’t remark the falling back into my original idea) finished by constructing the virtual space allowing me to breathe in the world.That was the final answer to Lasségue’s request to care about myself. Why should it be that difficult, as places seem to be quite empty everywhere and easy to take. Precisely because a financial structure reflects a way of thinking and behaving, is nothing but the realization in patterns of common ways of understanding and thus fits some people, though not others. In 1992 already I know there’s no place for me anywhere, if I don’t want to get lost in foreign thoughts, which I always refuse, having kept many secrets as holy, such as my mother’s advice never but never to change identity. As I define identity as the exact behavior resulting of my most personal thoughts, I simply don’t want to become anyone’s slave, keeping the ancestral Freiherren title of my German family branch (12th century) as honorary pride, as the actual title is not existing anymore. It is true that my sheer incapacity to understand the existence of the outer world, as my mind is turned towards the inner realms as if fixed in other realities, make my movements during my youth look frozen and almost martial. The refusal to let foreign thought invade my territories through movement and appearance reflects itself in a non determined movement just saying: no, because I don’t know what it means. (Por si acaso, my mother’d say, ‘just in case’.) My agreement to fashion is virtual and takes lines that do say exactly that: jeans and sweatshirts and I don’t care about fashion.In Greece, I amuse myself for years to study the implications of movements and appearance, as vector of thought and understanding. At the end, I manage silence so well, that it is enough to light two cigarettes at the same time to indicate to a Greek that we are talking a double language. And finish by the defining the idea vehicled by fashion as: “Other we say, other we mean, other we think” (the three monkeys.)With greatest enthusiasm I retranscribe all types of appearances into inherent thought, while trying to understand what homosexual means. Thus I pass from a smyrnean mangas to a French softy copying movements and fixing the thoughts appearing to my consciousness while doing so. After, as said in (under: personal) I do the same for all sorts of women. Slowly I define my own movements and behaviors as resulting from my own fundamental nature, and feel myself horribly well in my new fashion. Corresponding wrapping in clothes is missing as no one has dared defining such fashion ever and thus I cover my whole invention with a ‘and nobody has cared to wrap me ever’ which gives the whole an almost provocative allure with an ironical touch. At that moment I start analysis of the implications of haute couture on people’s thoughts and behaviors. It’s not that I’m that worried about Chanel at that moment. In fact and fundamentally I had discovered that most of active and social terrorism as well as psychic illness seem to be linked to repressed homosexuality. But what the damn is homosexuality, I ask myself, while trying to get a clue of the block of thoughts staying (and I know it) as main vehicle of aggressive currents ending up in Twin Tower and Opera attacks every where in the world. I finish by understanding that even declared homosexuals are repressed homosexuals, and even worse, that heterosexuals behave very often as repressed homosexuals, too. I jump from one hypothesis to the other, making fun on Sask (harsh military lines) as she bans homosexuality as reality from her field of thought as not ‘corresponding to natural behavior’. Animals don’t get excessively excited by porno films either, I remark, with almost sarcastic distance, mind the natural.In fact, I finish by defining what I call the ‘Dutch virus’, as seeming to be the result of some thought defined by Spinoza and others during the XVIIth, which annihilates soul through the pretension a word is defined in word. Equivalences: word for body (male) and notion for soul (female), meaning that if the notion is not the source of definition but word itself said in categories (Aristotelian deviation), man loves man, and women are none. I call it then: deriving artificial homosexuality from mistake in definition of fundamental abstract concepts.This ‘mistake’ introduces itself through Wittgenstein and Russell (both either homosexual, either under the influence of the Dutch virus) in symbolic logic and thus in the computer logic (as the former is used as fundamental structure in the ‘translation’ of mechanical signs -typing- into electronic language). The computer transmits thus a logic that is inducing to homosexual behavior. The refusal to fall under the influence of this logic in different social environments does explain, though not justify, the proliferation of pornography as means of affirmation of strict male patterns.Is this natural, Madame Inés de la Fressange?Consequently I’m obliged to define a natural homosexuality and a perverted one (my mother’s idea when I was 13, although she had to give in to environing pressure and finished by accepting only heterosexuality as corresponding to nature when I was 16 – ya está, I thought, ha cambiado de identidad – that’s it, she’s changed identity …) But this becomes impossible if not thinking the concept of soul, which seems almost impossible in a general context allowing only the reality of material concept (strict empiricism.) Strangely, spiritual currents and religion become the support of this possibility of thought, as being the only realm allowing thinking soul. To think soul, allows the understanding of two independent entities, and the possibility ‘male souls’ get lost in a female body and vice versa. As sexual impulses are not as much determined by hormones but by psychic relation, the ‘double natured’ do vehicle sexual undetermined impulses towards the same physical appearance although to a different psychic determination (real homosexuals are more heterosexual than homosexuals, I comment ironically to Sask, as far as you don’t understand yourself as psychic reality, you’ve a body tending towards a body without vector of interrelationship, as positive poles don’t transmit but allow just transmission, consequently, you have sex without love and that means, that you’ve fallen lower than animals who are not that … brute!)Homosexual behavior without definition of soul is consequently a further deviation. It’s not even good for reproduction, I say, laughing, and neither beautiful considered from an esthetical point of view.Psychopathetic currents get born, I conclude, from the attempt of appropriation of an imaginary soul (to say: female) in a woman with male soul (or vice versa). The repressed reality of the male soul does not disappear, but goes on living in the very low levels of the unconscious, transmitting fundamentally: the hatred towards the own identity, the principle of keeping appearance against the real nature, the complete deformation of the other’s nature as such as being just an imaginary configuration resulting of a determination lacking of the backing of the principle of identity, and all sorts of lower feelings as jealousy, refusal of affective involvement and wicked logics aiming at the personal survival outside of reason and common sense, which are the result of the respect of the principle of identity.Is it like that, I say to Sask, you’re the worse of all, even if originally heterosexual, and a 90% of humanity bathing in homosexual waters.Seeing the disastrous universal situation, I conclude that a certain number of people, whose high capacity of work has been excessively estimated as not considered that it was nothing but the result of high affective repression and consequently transmitting into financial, social and other spheres ways of thinking affirming such dangerous thoughts as the before mentioned, are at the origin of the general mess and should be pushed out of spheres of influence.It’s too late. Finally, the excessive bombing through fashion, mass media, computers and other of all that block of thought has disturbed the common mind as much as to make impossible the functioning of the most fundamental structures of reason and common sense. This means an irreversible fall into a financial pit as the heal economical poles are almost all destroyed and can’t resist the constant attacks of the repressed though well dressed hooligans.Only image, I say. Only fashion. Like American Hollywood (another main object of my deep studies) French Fashion seems to keep a fundamental identity maintaining … something at least as consequence. The thin ghostly models of the last years do finally affirm the truth: we’re starving in our psychic dimension. Looking into the surroundings I’m though appalled by the difficulty of the task, which is not such in Hollywood, which maintains clear heterosexual lines as image in appearance of a potential psychic reality, with little exceptions staying without further success.Fashion has been eaten up by shadowy homosexual lines. To my greatest despair Yves Saint Laurent ‘announces’ his homosexuality on television, and ah! I say, they do not know how to keep appearance anymore, whereas my horrified soul sees only a way of escape in Betty Catroux, whose general attitude towards the whole appears clearly in my beloved wikipedia: “Catroux and Saint Laurent met, according to her, in a “very, very gay” nightclub in Paris, Regine’s in the 1960s and have been friends ever since. She reportedly inspired Saint Laurent to begin dressing women in clothes inspired by men’s tailoring, including the famous “le smoking” tuxedo. She is also friend with designer Karl Lagerfeld.”See the implications: she says (maintains as her personal experience and not a universal truth: as ‘he is homosexual’) he meets Saint Laurent in a gay bar. He ’s there. But she’s, too. Would this imply that she is homosexual? Nobody would conclude. Why then conclude for him? What opens the doors to a desperate homosexual public who hasn’t ’speakers’ in the outer world, is though elegantly veiled by her own determination as heterosexual for a more conservative public. These very elegant complementary lines to an extremely conservative Hollywood, do though get lost if Saint Laurent starts making ‘confessions’ in public. The conservative world does naturally turn its back on him and the structures of integration of homosexuals are lost definitely.Worse are Galliano and Lagerfeld. The first gets inspired of Almodovar’s flashy appearance in Hollywood while mentioned for ‘Mujeres al borde de un ataque de nervios’. Almodovar is though strangely extremely conservative. A book of his appearing around 1980 does take serious distances from excessive homosexual affirmations (or it was censored, but he submits at least to that) while he spends his nights in Chueca, the than á la mode gay quarter of Madrid. (And still.) On the other hand it is said that he ‘protects’ Antonio Banderas  from invited Madonna, who almost falling into his arms in Almodovar’s apartment in Alcalá, is pushed back by the latter who says: “Antonio is married and these things are not inside of Spanish customs.” Of course that was in 1981 and things have seriously changed ever since.Almodovar keeps almost hysterical lines preserving the possibility of free expression of the homosexual reality with strictest lines of appearance which become even sharper when he realizes that he may become international. Galliano seems to see in Almodovar’s horribly balanced distinction between private and public life resuming oldest Spanish traditions a ‘funny fashion’ and falls into the vulgar. Galliano is not able to make the difference between an image that synthesizes other realities and thus constitutes a relief for many hunted from their family and pushed to marges little one’s and the strict lines that preserve private life avoiding thus to be absolutely associated to determined movements, intelligence that allows to maintain lines of communication with more conservative parts of society. Thus, Dior falls into the caricature that just synthesizes the lack of behavior. Associating him to the third world does not mean the third world is that vulgar, it simply means that most of the third world countries are simply incapable of understanding these subtle differentiations that are the result of many hundreds of years of crashes inside of nations until everyone finds his proper place.Lagerfeld is even worse. His heavy homosexuality reminds more Nietzsche’s escapes to Italy prefiguring already holocausts and SS, megalomania and sexual excesses than fine and elegant distant lines. His underlying thought seems to be ‘elles sont toutes des putes, quoi faire’ (they’re all whores anyhow), which a wise Chinese would understand as rather pointing at himself than at anyone else. Chanel, who seems to have kept lines of protective simulation of anyone’s identity (as Piaf), falls into the Dead Sea.To my understanding, the only one able to keep distinguished lines (which is nothing but all that, as far as I see it) is Inés de la Fressange. She simply has no private life (to the public), she’s just … married. A social status without greater implications, flashy love demonstrations or known side steps. Of course I wouldn’t ask what reality’d look like, precisely, because it is none of my interest. The evident intelligence in the management of private life is already the warrant of elegance. This kind of elegance is to my understanding the warrant of financial success. Deepest wisdoms resulting from many hundreds of years of dealing with flirts and hot love affairs, which differentiates always the Court of France from the Court of Spain, known for its almost extravagant austerity and lack of humor (French wife of Philip II dies young, is  said, completely incapable of understanding the different environment), defines lines taking lessons from ‘Les liaisons dangereuses’ and other dangers resulting of gossip and free morals. Incapable of thinking abstract thought and always jealous for that of the German, jealous also of England’s adoration and submission to the Crown and the Spanish imperial heaviness, France hides its intelligence and wisdom in lines of haute couture, which heavily under attack for the last 30 years, where jealousy taking upper hands, some currents of population do play the German pretending to abstract thought, others run blindly into England’s adoration of the throne by wanting to submit everyone to a new born concept of non monarchic state where ministers are princes and lords and others play Cortés and Pizarro wanting to conquer worlds without weapons and law. As these three nations do not have anything to thank France for, the very usurpation of character and identity finishes by eating up the proper French identity in its way of expression. Galliano for England through Italy, Prada and Rabanne for Spain and Lagerfeld for Germany, do consequently invade the weakened French reality.Finally, that’s the problem of a philosopher. He/she falls in love with a leave while observing the deep implications deriving of the design, and finishes up analyzing the international situation in its historical implications. That’s why there’s no place for me in the world, Madame de la Fressange. The fact that I determine esthetical lines for myself marrying the hooligan image picker and the almost brutal reminder of reason and common sense, has no hat yet, which is to say, neither economical, nor social, nor national context except of a beautiful out of law card resuming the evidence: I’m very proud of myself.Of course, were it possible to think that some other may get interested by my almost sarcastic understanding of the serious and thus help to arrange the economical situation through the ironical imposition of flowy lines that may push the witches and repressed to marges until they definitely clarify their personal situation, I wouldn’t refuse the offer. Of course, I’m sure nobody can take this responsibility as it would condemn him to eternal laughter which would confuse a more serious determination of image. But what, shouldn’t we try?

Sherlock Holmes at the research for eternal truths

Posted on by Rogier | Edit


It’s while you are dealing with tons and tons of information, you’re unconscious is working at, something like by the way, that a certain number of ‘bizarreries’ finish by hitting your mind. I suppose that it is like that novels are built up. Perhaps. As you’re no police man, you can’t maintain truths, because proofs are relative to your own appreciation.Consequently you order facts also in a somewhat arbitrary way, as you can never get confirmation for your observations. This ‘research’ started with a very bad feeling. Perhaps, while trying to scotch my ideal configurations to some kind of reality, which is to say, to dress a concept with experience, likings and tastes, were it at the end to take determined distances from the same, you try to ‘read’ through pictures what the general impact of the surrounding on you ‘concept’ can be, in order to determine it in coordinates of reality.I had just arrived to Roger Vivier. To say the truth, I do never believe anything, except of what I really know. This article has appeared here or there and says the following …, is far the deepest truth I do believe into. Whether the contents of the articles refer to any reality whatsoever or not, is further not of my concern, except if I may get a confirmation. Whether Fressange was thus working for Vivier or not, as not appearing on the official site, was a … possibility. Because, who knows: Dela Valle talks with Fressange in November 2006, news appear in newspapers or internet February 2007, and … they quarrel definitively in March, as things are, it’s not impossible to think. People read news from February, it’s given further without anyone saying anything and thus, Fressange is presumably working for Vivier while she’s at this very moment still desperately searching for a baby sitter … To say.Facts are relative to many things and imagination does frequently distort evidence. Thus, for example, contrary to what a reporter tells in a French article, I’d not see Fressange modeling in order to get her ‘carte orange’ (monthly subway pass) nor getting money from the Assedic (Social Security) after the quarrel with company Inès de la Fressange. I’d though carefully keep the information that the first group, which sold Inès de la Fressange to LVMH was called Orfico.In a certain way, I suppose that reality is built up on a cloud of perspectives, points of views, distortions as effect of different metaphysical backgrounds, from which some aspects do seem to the one or the other more correspondent to a factual relevant reality. (To say that I don’t care if x has taken cocaine once in his life, which may be given further as a scandal through some channels, although I may start getting worried if someone appears as depending on cocaine, which is factual relevant.)Consequently I choose, too, among the many facts those that seem to be more correspondent to a principle of behavior as such. Strangely, the two Fressange’s appearing, one, the one described above in her relationship with the outer world, going from artificial to superficial among other compliments, and another, more reflected, deeper and somehow absent to herself, has simply nothing to do with two pictures appearing with her name of one internet fishing trip, of which one is associated to an interview in Morocco, that seems to have slightly anything to do with her.  Specially the second picture has something in the way to stand that seems not having anything in common with the whole rest of pictures. Fressange is known for her ‘natural’ movements, and here, there is something tense and extremely artificial about the way of looking into the camera. Hmm. People change. You may say.Models do never look exactly the same way from one picture to the other, due to make up and many other factors. A more careful examination of the pictures yesterday does though seem to further proofs: although as tall and thin as Fressange herself, I would say, that the eyes are nearer one to the other than in all the other pictures. Although trying to imitate a hair style, the very nature of the hair seems different. And Fressange does never wear scotched to the body shirts, even while wearing t-shirts. Now see … how strange.Of course this obliges to further observations and comparisons. The belt appears on another very strange picture which I can hardly associate to Fressange either. Perhaps it is her, though, and though … I can’t really believe it. Reference pictures for Fressange ‘au naturel’ are the following for myself:   Being more or less recent, they have still something in common with Fressange model and other pictures appearing more or less erratically around the world. And these have something that doesn’t fit the others.Of course, you have to reconsider things. Is the one who gives the interview in Morocco, Inès de la Fressange herself, or a fake? I’d say it is a fake. A comparison between a Fressange interview in France and that one shows one marked different: in her effort to appear natural, Inès de la Fressange does never overcharge the presentation of herself. A somewhat playing with easiness association to relevant characters without though heavy insistence on particular features. The one who gives the interview in Morocco seems to want to show deepest knowledge of Morocco’s history, culture and literature by the sum of names that … do say hardly anything to anyone, and which I would hardly say of the knowledge of a very towards the French turned Fressange. The interviewer does though refer two aspects that may have something to do with Fressange’s life: the Ecole du Louvre and a trip to Morocco when she was 13. The first is mentioned almost everywhere and seems to be a fact (although I don’t believe she finished school there, she probably took some kind of course), the second can be true or not, and if true, refers to very accurate information of her life, which is strange if the interviewed is a fake.Two things strike my mind: as mentioned before, some Inès had appeared in November 2006, who speaks many languages (although not as many as myself). This Inès appearing at the same time I start dealing with the Fressange character, is further associated to a strange Café, having been a ‘bordel’ before, and who wants to become a must of artists, photographers and around fashion working people. Saying it is located in Grands Boulevards it seems to be in the 10th arrondissement (either near to Gare de l’Est or up on the way to Pigalle). few days ago, someone saying herself French and claiming to be Inès de la Fressange’s friend, writes on a Spanish gossip site that she knows Ricky Martin is not gay. She speaks Spanish and obviously French. This time the signature is ‘Larafa’. Larafa is though an Arabic company in France, which may rapidly be located through a research in Google. Larafa speaks Spanish and French, says to know Inès de la Fressange, while at the same time, interviews and pictures of an ‘Arabic’ Inès de la Fressange appear in Morocco.

1.      Queridísimas amigas:Mi amiga Ines de
la Fressange ha venido esta tarde a la oficina, y mientras yo leía vuestros mensajes me ha dicho que Matt está encerrado en su piso y no quiere salir porque hay una mariquita loca vestida de Chanel que ha sobornado al portero para que la deje entrar al edificio con la excusa de pedirle a Matt un autógrafo, y por lo visto, se pasea con un cuchillo por todos los pasillos chillando a pleno pulmón que Ricky Martin es suyo y que nadie se lo va a quitar. Voy a tener que ir con Ines a calmar al pobre Matt que está de los nervios ya que nadie da con esa loca, y a colaborar un poco en la búsqueda, ya que no me interesa nada que mi Matt me caiga en una depresión. Así que enteraros muy bien y que sirva de aviso para psicópatas de todo género …

by LaRAFA 16-05-2006 at 17:29 it the same ? Somehow related? What is the relationship between the first Inès and the Larafa signing Fressange friend? Very strange, I think. Someone of Fressange’s surroundings who has just picked the way to schizophrenia? Things look even worse, after a while, although latter hypothesis a little bit fantastic. This is Inès de la Fressange with Luigi d’Urso short after her marriage. And this is Inès de la Fressange with Luigi d’Urso a few years ago? Strangely, the one on the second picture does resemble more my ’sosias’ or fake than Inès de la Fressange herself. A lover? A social cover if Fressange has taken far distances many years ago from d’Urso for personal reasons? If it is the case, this one may have more confidential information about Fressange while using some far similarity in order to open shops in Morocco or … sell Fressange’s counterfeits, which do obviously exist as one brand label not showing the accent on Inès, while the other does.It’s true that it is weird enough to make you doubt on the very constitution of social organization. On the other hand, an impression is difficult to prove, as pictures show many different ’selfs’. Were it though thus, there is something wicked about the second Fressange I can hardly assimilate to the first Fressange. In any case, as usual, an interesting subject for a future novel …Pictures not available  

Hypothesis 1: Orfico as financing entity

For the time being it is difficult to know what Orfico really is or was. But sometimes it is better not to have excessively accurate information at the beginning in order to gather little pieces until the patchwork shows a complete image. Sometimes, too, it is of interest to launch all sorts of hypothetical false accusations in order to have the accused move themselves in order to help finding out what has really happened.In any case, whatever the truth, a false accusation does build up a hypothetical frame which resumes a concrete case, which, though perhaps not referring to the case I’m dealing with, may though be of interest for other.The only Orfico that may be found now in internet is a company that gives financial advice and related, built up in 2006 with a capital of 8.000 euro and lead by someone called Sepulcher.To build up a hypothesis means that you take for granted a certain number of facts, which though you can’t verify. If the facts are corresponding to reality, your hypothesis may be considered as verified and thus as proper explanation. If though not, your hypothesis falls into the water and you’re obliged to build a new one. (No, Mr judge of California, strangely enough it’s not forbidden by law to make up hypothesis as they seem to airily escape the accusation of defamation and other.)Let us thus suppose Orfico 2006 is some kind of daughter company of some Orfico existing around 1994 (?) working on the same fields of financial activity. Which is to say, perhaps, investment counselors or the kind. Being extremely wicked, the following possibility appears: Inès de la Fressange, who, at that time, looks still quite innocently into the world even after the crash with Lagerfeld, has a marvelous project and asks around where she can get some financing for her idea. She’s obliged to sit down and concretely explain what she really wants (which is always very difficult), which is to say, how she wants to manage her business. As she is still smelling oysters and champagne from former Chanel surroundings, she builds up a somewhat luxurious concept which, she understands, is the warrant for success as the marks of quality and luxury attracting customers of strong acquisitive power. On the other hand she’s got no marked tendency to megalomania: some reminders of care and precaution do tell her not to jump into excessively perilous business.Now, precisely here, there are several possibilities, of which we may retain one for the time being. Either she finds people who with she builds up a company. Which is to say, that private business people do gather some money in order to get the amount as finally figured out by Fressange or some counselor, in which case those may have more than 60% of shares, although, as leading motor of the company Fressange may keep full power (carte blanche) in the how to run the business. If I remember well, (although it’s not very sure for a SA) some companies do give double vote to a share holder who is at the same time general manager. Let us than say that Fressange has 33% of shares, and other two investors have another 33%. One vote for each, makes three. If Fressange counts double, it makes 66% in equality to the other two. If she has 34%, she’s main share holder.This would be a construction I would have furthered if I had been her, which was though not the case.What happens though if Fressange walks into an investment company, or a financial advising company, not yet really knowing what the difference is, as neither champagne nor oysters do give lessons on financial concepts? Precisely here the environment is so cloudy that it is difficult even to build up an hypothesis. The problem of investment is the problem of property. It’s true that 4 years ago, not knowing anymore how to solve the problem, I made up a direct investment without share in capital: some kind of lend to the company that is inserted as capital by the share holders, where the investors win from percentage on benefit as compensation for percentage on lending, so that they lose word and property concerning the company itself.This is though not a common way of acting and to say the truth, I even had to get out of the shadows of forgottenness two or three French laws allowing to do that, as well as to argue that if the State is allowed to that kind of subvention, the private may be, too. Luckily the whole jumped into the airs before showing its inherent geniality, so that the French wouldn’t profit from my deepest intelligence and restore thus a shivering economical system.The problem precisely is that legislation progresses into a certain direction without taking into consideration that the structure on which these laws are built is no apt to support the changes. Thus, SA and Sarl are fundamentally organizations where the private does gather itself around a goal implying benefit through the production or selling of a certain number of goods. As around 1970 (although already before) banks wanting to control the whole economical world, direct investment is left beside and favored investment through banks (of course things are more complicated, but to say in general lines for my American house wifes or oysters eating Fressange), a very unequal relationship between the active private and the banking private is born. If I have 30% of shares and have two others I have to deal with in the company, it’s certainly not the same than if the other 70% is hold by a bank that may have 10.000 people working inside and thus have whole strategies, legal advice, wicked means, etc, in order to get their lines imposed. To my understanding it is mainly that which will finish by destroying commercial activity in Europe.Now, even worse. Imagine Orfico deals with investment. They see good business and ask themselves for a lend from a bank, in order to put the resting 70%. If they ever do. They may say (and write it down on ’statuts’, they have put 70% of the capital,) and then freeze the capital while arguing capital can’t be moved, for example. Don’t laugh Mr Judge of California, things have gone that far in France that a whole bank was cheated by a particular who argued that sarl’s percentage on benefit was on brutto and not on netto (!), without a whole bank’s counselors staff being able to turn the affaire to their advantage by simply defining correctly on basis of law. Unluckily I know that quite shameful event very well as the ‘cheater’ in question happened to be the uncle of a University mate.But let us say, things had not gone that far in 1994 and Orfico takes the money from a bank (if it is the actual company or cousins of the same, I don’t think 8.000 euro capital may be a support enough in order to allow to invest by themselves), which, well considered, a sane financing entity may have done in the name of Fressange. If Orfico takes a lend for Fressange, Fressange is only share holder and Orfico just manages the financial parts in exchange of some benefit (salary or other). If Orfico take a lend for themselves, the company becomes shareholder from a what, a subsidiary?This is exactly the legal structure that was starting to make me very nervous, as I do sanely understand that companies are autonomous entities which may come into commercial interaction with others, but that it is impossible to have some kind of financial cancers growing out from pretenders to financing, banking and investing. Thus (in my way of seeing), it will never be Coca- Cola that buys, I don’t know, a sugar company, but Coca-Cola invests in a sugar company and separates 7 or 8 or 20 people that will work for the sugar company, which will then be completely autonomous in its management and if Coca-Cola is lucky, it will get its benefit from the share sharing. Structures after 1970 do though not correspond to my very healthy understanding of economy, so that a bizarre, quite dubious configuration appears where people who have no idea of the business in question do impose lines because they’re main share holders coming from a completely different business which is run in different ways, causing thus financial break downs which are than put on the shoulders of a manager or the general instable financial environment.Precisely if Orfico has taken a lend in order to invest by themselves, I would say that there is an illegal activity. I would say. Which is to say, that I presume, from a general body of law regulating financial activity, that it is an impossibility, although I don’t know if there is a legal gap or if simply and as usual, it is done as if law didn’t exist anymore. It is obvious from other heavy misbehaviors that France tends after a certain while even to export their funny inspirations, as it is the case for the Credit Lyonnais affaire in California.To use this example: law in California does not allow a bank having shares in an assurance company, which is not the case in France. Credit Lyonnais does buy shares of an assurance company in California, thus infringing Californian law. Put against the evidence they’ll claim, it’s not forbidden in … France?This particular case does show more about the general situation in France than about a particular situation abroad. If it is allowed for a bank, why not for a financing entity? If this is possible for a meat company, why not for a luxury company, etc. Which is to say, that law is pushed to the borders of interpretation in order to allow all sorts of aberrant and dangerous constructions that put the whole financial body in a very weak position.Of course I don’t know whether that’s exactly the case, but it does very much look like that. First. What then if you use and misuse the obvious lack of knowledge on finances in order to build up the constitution of the company only and only to your advantage? And that’s exactly what I mean. A financing entity is ‘part’ if it becomes share holder. If it doesn’t, it will build up the company to the benefit of the company because their benefit is there. The very moment they become ‘part’, they will make use of their ‘knowledge’ for their own benefit against the benefit of the company itself. Consequently I would think that law does naturally forbid that kind of transaction. I do not know it though.Worse becomes the thing still, if Orfico does go so shamelessly far so as to sell company Inès de la Fressange with name surname and logo to LVMH. What does Orfico really sell? LVMH’s constitution is such that the companies are autonomous and participate to a whole in exchange of some benefit (mainly the distribution channels, as far as I understand). Which is to say, that LVMH do not seem to buy shares of a company but to sell their own shares. Is it then possible to sell Inès de la Fressange & co to LVMH? How can you integrate such bizarre configuration into LVMH itself? It looks a priori impossible, except if LVMH does make the same ‘mistake’ than Orfico before: to build some kind of illegal annex or prolongation of the company in Inès de la Fressange. Which seems to me obviously illegal, too.Not to talk about names and surnames and other illegal appropriations. Now ask yourself what for. It has strictly no meaning if not considered to aim deliberately at the destruction of Inès de la Fressange as possible competition of Dior or Chanel. It looked very much as if it could have become a serious challenge. Better destroy it before it becomes visible?You want some oysters, Madame de la Fressange?(Some results of the on going investigation: is this company belonging to a true or to a fake Fressange??)

Τύπος επιχείρησης: Κατασκευαστής
Υπεύθυνοι: 11-50








Κατηγορία(-ες): Γυναικεία έτοιμα ενδύματα


31 Av Franklin Delano Roosevelt 75008
Paris Chez Arbel –

Tel: +33 156 88 34 00










Rubrique(s) :
Prêt-à-porter et confection – dames



31 Av Franklin Delano Roosevelt 75008 Paris Chez Arbel – FRANCE
Tel: +33 156 88 34 00



Type d’activité: Fabricant Effectifs: 11-50



States, banks and business

Posted on by Rogier | Edit


Exactly that’s why things are so difficult. Because concepts and laws are submitted to interpretation inside of general blocks of thought that are wanting to preserve the rights and interests of some who seem to us powerful and who we’re very often backing against our own particular interests.While thinking on catastrophic situations you may be obliged to position yourself somewhere, and even be allowed changing your position if things seeming to change. Thus, my own personal attitude for years was state and bank hostile, to the extent of making fun on almost everything just presuming that even the policeman had a cousin I knew and who’d make his life impossible if ever he submitted to some kind of pressure and who on the other hand would certainly be the best support for his own career.Seen like that, it looks as if I had integrated Greece’s well known and traditional nepotism into my own schemes of understanding taking largest profits of it whenever of need, to Athen’s greatest despair. But what, I said, will under Germany and France staying Athens be ever better than local traditional meanings of dealing with reality? I know that the earth is stronger than influences, although it may be tough work.But why? I’m not the kind of person who may just express general hatred for unknown reasons, the kind let us kill all rich and wealthy, and thus, my very determined positions takes roots in the understanding of consequences in the dealing of state and banks that do attempt against constitutional rights or fundamental natural rights, in which cases, it is of evidence that the state is none and banks have no legal meaning anymore.What do I understand under State? It’s nothing but a formal structure whose responsibility is to create laws that are adequate in the dealing with the whole under its responsibility and the surrounding national entities, warranting fundamental rights, such as freedom and justice and fomenting riches through the legal frame determining finances. Seen like that, the State has strictly no power, but just obligations and responsibilities. It’s not because a left party has won that the right party does not exist, and ideal politics consist to my understanding in the wise integration of the other’s opinion in a general frame. The State is thus no moral entity: it does not further opinions on the good and the bad, nor has it the right to condition people’s behavior through deviated means. Thus, for example, I’d think it immoral to ‘oblige’ people to have children by promising financing of the ‘business’. If there are no children because it is no one’s wish to have any, the State may consider a why, in depth, but can’t simply push people into a direction they don’t want just because they have to maintain figures in order to look powerful. The fact of wanting to become a moral entity through payment on top, often does distort law just because it favors some who are the nice goodies submitting to general politics against others who being worthier do simply maintain that conditions are not given warranting a healthy family.At the end, you may keep a rotten company with 7 red figures just because … o, the poor family. Personally I think that if you want to become father or mother you have to give yourself the means to warrant for the survival of the whole, and that it’s not enough to spend 5 minutes in an indifferent transaction in order to expect the whole world be turning around you ever after.This is just an example, but the same happens on other fields, such as the integration of nomads or moving populations in a state. Agrar politics are favored after 1950, having as a result the annihilation of moving populations and healthy nomadic shepherding. Result: the destruction of earth and of natural biological resources. Honestly, I don’t know why countries whole should destroy there fundamental resources just because Germany wants to sell chemistry. Are they going to feed me after?To say from both examples, that it is clear that the state is not governing. Instead of integrating all elements of the people, trying to keep a balance between contrary interests, it favors some through national politics that are thus going violently against human rights and constitutions. As the State does think it may become religion then, it will try to assure its power through illegal means, and by favoring entities that do seem to warrant its glory and power. The main entity used this way is the bank. Why? Because it destroys the person as individual character facing society. Just let them take a lend and spend their time running to pay it in order to get a house or a car and there is no chance one of them will defend his dignity or pretend to law.If you are aware of that, you can’t take but very far distances from states and banks, even more so if you have proofs that none of your fundamental rights are ever warranted. Seeing that for example the family politics will favor bastards who put children into the world without any kind of sense of responsibility but will obtain that way positions of responsibility they will not know how to deal with, while the agrar politics will destroy food resources in very little time, you can’t but chose the evidence: all those who suffering from those situations will back autonomous, independent private management of life. I don’t favor illegal activity. But I may understand that people who are distorting law in their favor are committing the vilest crime, as pretending to law while just using it for their own benefit. And if there is law none, who’d say what is illegal?It’s true that perhaps I was very lucky. My mother taught me something like the dignity deriving from the person as such, made clear differences between the private and the public, and maintained that some one had the right to live his own life if ever respecting law. She was not afraid of ‘power’. I remember one day someone crossed the street while she was driving down to the club, and was slightly hurt by the car. The one claimed to be personal guard of Franco, and that she’d see, and shouted around and shouted again, and my mother said: that it was not her fault if he crossed the street anywhere, which was infringing the driving codes. Of course she won the unexisting legal battle and this would build up the core of my own attitude towards the world: don’t ever claim to power if you’ve law none.Seeing though how little law is respected you sometimes have to go back to some kind of even more fundamental law: the law of survival. It’s obvious that you’ve no choice sometimes and that there is something horribly powerful and seducing deriving from that attitude: at the end, all human beings are more or less governed by this same desire, independently of their national, social or political belonging. It does destroy states, though. Even banks. What do you care, you may say, at the end, did they care about me?It’s not that strange that something around the whole organization of our contemporary world does more remind of Tarzan and Greystoke than of ordered wholes: gangs, mafia, tribal behaviors all over. It’s true, on the other hand, that neglected mistakes in the organization of the world deriving from German absolutism imposing abstract structures to their favor, are provoking cracks all over and more so in third world countries that start getting fed up of being treated as monkeys.Look how Kant’s definition of matter and form, where truth and universal value is deposited in form and matter is nothing, has as result the world being cut into the ‘forms’ (Europe, Us and little other) while the rest becomes a use and valueless mass expecting from the brightness of the former some ashes of organization and structure. Who does this favor? Germany, as fundamentally maintaining its own identity through this wicked distortion of thought. But it is wicked, and it is distorted: consequently it will have as result gravest distortion in the evaluation of reality and arising disasters and catastrophes, which will hardly be put on the shoulders of people who are said to … submit to the German order in order to assure themselves survival.Personally I don’t think that people who are at the origin of two world wars should even be received on a general conversation table. Murders, psychopaths and madmen are usually closed in, in its not because they do as if they were working that it gives them any kind of credibility. Money is nothing if you’ve nothing else. And to produce bank notes without financial structure corresponding is usually called inflation and produces national bankruptcies. But in order to understand that, you should still be able to define a concept.How is it ever possible that a band of killers in uniform is allowed to defend against all reason positioning saying that everyone can see things as he likes, that definition is not determining, that it is a question of interpretation, etc. destroying thus nations whole after having been the cause of millions of dead? Pointing with the finger at what seems to them iregularities in order to prove how bad others are and how nice they’re in the depth? Building up lists made of the best Gestapo strategies proving the one a whore, the other a lesbian, the next a murder and the last a bastard on unexisting evidence and just because they’re always right in their appreciation and reality does nothing but giving a posteriori prove of what they have decided a priori, whatever there is?Is it then that you’re revolting yourself against states, order and law if you don’t submit to such a state of things? You become a revolution man or a social terrorist? You’re not facing states, you’re facing bastards, idiots, murders and madmen. To say: I don’t spit on your faces because it’s still worth something.Luckily I have a German passport. And if I hadn’t, I’d say, that history is like that. If the Jews were bad in 1930, it may now be the case for the German. And there are violent impulses without control coming out of the unconscious that may excuse, yes, even excuse 80 million animals be slaughtered tenderly in concentration camps. No need. It’s just enough not selling for them to eat, because they’ve nothing.Mind the black on your own flag, on crossed Spanish colors. Or are you still going to want mango for two cents in exchange for poisoned rivers thanks to your contribution to humanities evolution? Things are changing, luckily. Beggars are others, now. Wanna get a course on definition, the German? Oh, so sorry, you certainly misunderstood my point of view. It’s just a question of interpretation, dear

The Russian Prince haunted by IP

Posted on by Rogier | Edit


Accused of speculation, the Russian Prince, though absolutely innocent of all charges, had temporarily to leave Cuenca and hid away in the wild forest next to the ‘Oriente’ where you’re still supposed to find gold grains in some rivers for just a little bit of work. Thus, I found some papers among his belongings that may be use in order to clear up the situation to his advantage. Before leaving he argued that the fall in Arbel’s shares of 0.48% was certainly due to a comment written 2006 (august) by someone saying nothing was working anymore in Arbel, so that he very happily sold shares at 2euro26 at that moment. And maintained his own studies on the different ways of organizing finances and his deep lucubrations on the subject, partly and wrongly given further by myself, he maintained, could certainly not be at the origin of such happening. Insisting by the way on the fact that it wasn’t him who had published Arbel had closed the year with 16ME losses.  Capital 8.000.000 1 euro chaque actionTurnover: 200.000 euro benefice net200.000 divisé par pourcentage en action = bénéfice des actionnairesOu — réinvestissement en capital et nouvelle division des actions sur prix 1.12Augmentation soit du nombre des actions (à vente, SA) ou du prix de l’action (SL)Co 1    co 2    co 3    co 4

+ 4       +1      +7      – 16

Una suma de compañìas cuya cotización en bolsa se hace con un solo nombre, el de la holding – ‘rumasa’

Brokerage sobre especulación (¿?)Pertes de 16 sur 113 – budget annuel

  • budget est sur commandes
  • budget est sur bénéfice
  • pertes sur budget prévisionnel
  • déficit en paiment (dette)

vente sous le cours des actions

Turnover: masa de dinero movida en gastos y beneficios

Bénéfice brutte: suma de todas las entradas sin considerar gastos

Bénéfice nette: resto de beneficio una vez descontados los gastos (incluso la división de dividendos)

Perte: suma de gastos superior a la suma de entradas


Año 1: beneficio 3 , del que reinversión en capital 0, inversión en fijos (propiedad)

Año 2: beneficio 7, inversión en fijos (inmobiliaria)

Año 24: pérdidas de 14: venta de fijos!

Inversión en capital / fijo productivo (fábricas etc) / fijo inmobilario

Arbel . Facts:Forum Arbel : Arbel : Assemblée Générale reportée au 26 septembre– [ Translate this page ]

Re: Arbel : Assemblée Générale reportée au 26 septembre. Décidement rien ne va plus chez ARBEL, il vaut mieux se tenir à l’écart , perso j’ai vendu à 2.46…/arbel+:+assembl%E9e+g%E9n%E9rale+report%E9e+au+26+septembr-35593-1.html – 75k –
CachedSimilar pagescomment by:Par jpaulmoulin  Arbel : 16,8 ME de pertes pour le pôle ferroviaire en 2006 – [ Translate this page ]

Chez Arbel Fauvet Rail (pôle ferroviaire), l’exercice 2006 s’est caractérisé par des prises de commande atteignant près de 44 ME (pièces détachées incluses) – 84k –
CachedSimilar pages

On economy

Posted on by Rogier | Edit

Gathering in very simples words what may be the result of hundreds and hundreds of observations on such a vast and almost undetermined subject as is economy as abstract concept, you may almost be obliged to go back to the original meaning of the word ‘oiko nomos’ the rule or law of the house.

In fact, too often we understand as economy the simple fact of gathering money in someone’s pockets, without considering that such a simple and thus almost attractive consideration does not determine almost anything. Were it that simple, we’d almost all be economists or at least economical, which is rather not the case.

A little bit deeper we may think that economy is some kind of distribution of wealthes in the consideration of determined or aleatory values, which is already somewhat better, but seems to make appear in front of our eyes huge problems as , what to whom? and how much this?, questions that will stay without answer and left to common sens for thousands of years as it seems it were impossible for one single generation to consider all items to evaluate, and yes, were it finished, the next generation may start again, as values … change.

It’s true that a good chirurgian of concepts does always try to separate with intelligence one concept from another, as if they were living cells whose fusion may cause gravest theological problems (AT forbids explicitly the fusion of ‘fruits’), but reality does rarely adapt itself to rational philosophical rules and economy appears often mixed to obscure politics and other dark intentionalities whose final aim is difficult to determine and were it, to understand.

In any case, though, were it even to understand reality, and how it finishes by infringing gravely old testament laws, you need a clear idea of things and a water proof concept that may allow you to measure reality on an abstract and impossible ideal, which though, luckily, has become possible as concept and measure, which is, for the time being, more than enough.

Let us thus start with values. What is a value? Value is a measure. If it is subjective, it is ‘what we consider of importance’, and if it is objective, generally ‘what may be considered of importance for an individual or for a whole’. Of course values change and it is extremely difficult to establish what may be of ‘absolute’ importance. In general we may say though that what is related to ‘health’, ‘food’, ‘ability’, ‘peace’, ‘intelligence or knowledge’, ‘order’, ‘confort’, ‘balance’, ‘beauty’, is among other of universal value, independently of what everyone does understand under each concept, which is also slightly varying.

The reasons why each of those terms is of value may need, in its detailed explanation, perhaps, of whole tractata, but may simply be gathered under the understanding of ‘what keeps life and specific human skills inside of a general living frame’.

Strangely, this doesn’t mean that items needed in order to preserve all this, are necessarily expensive. On the contrary. Precisely because they’re of absolute need, some like those related to food and health and even education, sometimes, are kept at very low prices in order to assure the possibility for everyone to acquire them. This has caused problems with populations who are mainly dealing with those items as they can’t get rich through a vital production for everyone, as ‘wanna-be’ esteem that you need a Rolls to be someone and the fact of dealing with shares the top of human realization, so that these populations are misregarded and rejected. This had as consequence that skilled people on these domains (animal and vegetables) left their main activity in order to ‘become someone’, too, which made that one of the vital sources of human well being was neglected, putting humanity whole in front of its own stupidity.

Human activity may further be divided into two sections: the management of the whole and the management of the private, which may include all sorts of particular business. The management of the whole is said ’state’, and is supposed to charge itself with the distribution of wealthes acquired through different means (mainly taxes) on ‘items’ whose finality is the general well being and which are little affordable for a particular or a small unit, or, not being ‘productive’ are of vital importance for the whole. Under the first category you understand ‘hospitals, water and electricity nets, road and postal nets, etc.’ (sometimes varying, too, as it may happen that one or the other falls under the responsability of a private company), and under the second ‘army, police, universities and schools, administration, justice organs, legislative organs’, etc, it being possible that some fall under the private domain, too (private security forces, private army supplies, private universties, etc.)

The private is generally responsible for the production of goods and services inside of an ordered frame, which may imply or not, the fact of obtaining goods (as primary matters if not property of the state), such as fish and other. It may take over some parts of education, information (news papers, radio, tv), health (private hospitals and doctors, chemistry), and construction (roads, buildings, etc.), among other.

A government is supposed to manage general balances in values, straining some and stopping possible excessive prices (Governamental control on prices in mostly communist ideologies) and assure through control, quality, and through law, possible lack in general balances.

The fact that a body is not producing goods or services does not imply it is useless, on the contrary, it may be vital: thus, bodies of legislation, of justice, of education, of order are absolutely necessary to the well functioning of a society. It may seem absurd to insist on the point, but unhappily quite blind German theories on the subject, do supra evaluate the ‘production force’ as motor of economy, while it is obvious that it is the passive sections of society that constitute the real motors of economy: without police, there is no security, without justice, no contract is valid, without administration, property can’t be assured, were it a something (house, fields, cars) or titles. Without law, there is no society at all but just an endless mess in the middle of the jungle.

Whenever one of both sections is neglected, were it the private in totalitarian states, were it the state in excessive liberal states, balances tend to get lost and lead to civil wars or wars.

In fact, after 1945, general economy theories 1. want to make of production the centre of all considerations, and even mass production 2. esteem that higher salaries increase the economical activity through the augmentation of the ‘acquisition potential’, without considering 1.) that rational production is depending on factual need and riches not increased by the ‘more’ but by the ‘exactly that’. To give an example: I produce perfumes. My perfumes are of very good quality and have no competition in market. I put them into nice bottles in a nice shop in an expensive quarter in Paris and sell 300 USD a bottle, having determined that about 200.000 people a year are going to buy my perfume with an intelligent marketing and publicity strategy. I sell ‘the rare, the unique, the difference’ at 70% benefit for myself and make quickly a fortune. Another who is selling 3.000.000 bottles at lower to production cost price, to sell more, will very quickly be ruined. The intelligent perfume producer is an active economical motor. Half of his production cost is feeding a small cristal producer in the north of the country, which is keeping alife through its income, a region whole. In the meantime, the silly perfume producer has been the cause of a hole of 2.000.000 USD in Bank x, and while ending up in prison, will certainly not fill up the hole. The mass producer starts becoming a heavy weight for society, while a great lot of politician maintain holes should be taken over by the state in order to keep working places, as for the French Peugeot. 2. Increased salaries seem not to have activitated economy at all. People who are not used to deal with money will very easily be tempted by ‘what is at the origin of pleasure’, such as prostitution, alcohol, drugs, gambling, or be cheated by not controlled elements of society in fail investments and other frauds and scams. Conclusion: the money that was supposed to be used to buy goods and services and thus be an income for the state through taxes, gets lost in marginal surroundings and ‘dies’ (is not active). Money is used to buy up weakened police and justice or administration and the state perishes. False titles and papers give birth to a random non qualified, even dangerous number of ‘experts’, who make the criteria of quality fall and the mistrust on given authorities augementate. Values shift progressively towards ‘mafia’ values, that are not objective but are hold on favours: “you’are my social cover in our dark business and I buy your miserable paintings and production at excessive prices to thank you for that”. The loss of rational value criteria, distroys fundamental economical basis.

Another almost crazy theory, very much defended by people like Miterrand, is that knowledge as such is not worth anything (passive non producing) and that knwoledge should be ordered only towards economical interests. Main formal structures ordering society through definition, logical coherence and many other are necessarily passive as the work extremely difficult and not allowing on top of that, a visual production of a thing, an object, a good. A good theory is worth much more than a training strategy, and the trainer often gets more than a single player, although he’s ‘doing nothing’. Well educated people are able to stop through their sole presence the eruption of violent subjective expressions, as the very concept is as such ordering for a sane human being. Peace is much more important than wealth as the fact of having 20.000.000 and needing 10 body guards and a complete isolation to live much less worth than having 1.000 and being allowed to walk all alone and peacefully around the street caring about oneself and sharing one’s life and sorrows with some others.

Conclusion: if you want to feel rich, never go to Germany!

The reasons of war

Posted on by Rogier | Edit

Of course you may ask yourself what may have induced such bitter and frozen war against Europe, which, I know very well, will finish by been won were it obliging millions of European to learn to pick tomatoes and olives and freeze in winter.

Eventually, only one event may give light on such an indifferent decision and this is the murdering of the two children in Belgium, linked to a paedophilia net and whose author was left free to escape bacause … there were to many personalities involved. The children were found in some garbage tin wrapped in black plastic bags.

Not that you don’t shiver while considering such an event. It’s that nobody does anything. Which means that a whole political system does allow and tolerate such an event without throwing out the responsible state of the whole or putting severe measure to avoid the whole happening again. The Belgium paedophilia net was linked to a Dutch paedophilia net that arrived to Spain with greatest success around 1982. Ever since, it has proliferated more or less under cover, giving the most shameful researches you may aim after in search engines such as the latest found, which was ‘niños corriéndose’, for example.

Not that you don’t feel a horrible shame of coming from countries where you may be obliged to sit at the same table or even stay under the same roof of bastards whose only ‘pleasure’ may be to obtain some result after coming back home from work, it is that, if you keep some kind of reminder of reason, you know perfectly well that the mental disposition deriving of such ‘hobby’ is necessarily affecting a whole society and state organization by making people profit of the benefit of most generous and wealthy states and thus, necessarily, contaminating the most secure organizations by their very presence. The necessary double tongue used to participate to such ‘orgy’ will, in time, become the possibility of organizing the vilest criminal nets.

Whether there are or not most notable people involved, whose hands I wouldn’t certainly shake, were it in justice, police, administration, education and church, it is an evidence that the very presence of those nets does show nothing but a rottenness in disposition that makes that people involved, and involved in any case as not doing anything, may not be considered responsible for the ruling of more general affairs, were it finances, politics or other.

Of course you may consider that this may throw us back to some wild forest general organization but even if it were so, I think that even in wild forests, those kind of happenings do not tend to happen, which makes of it a healthier general organization. Perhaps it can be avoided, although sometimes you dream it may not, as you may finish by not understanding why the third world, relatively healthy in its moral dispositions, should be suffering under the dictatorship of some bastards that have nothing else to do but amusing themselves those ways.

That things are ugly enough is an evidence. It’s not me, by just trying to point at the evidence, who am creating further disturbances. On the contrary, it may put some barriers to the explosion of some underground irrational fury. And even if to point at a real event, which may certainly be the result of some lately acquired schizophrenia in German’s mouths, may clear up some determined positions, it is obvious that it is nothing but to illustrate the general disaster as already visible in the whereabout.

May I denounce the rotten milk sent by Holland to Greece after the Kosovo war, certainly to punish them for their too loud support of Serbia? It is called ‘Nounou’ and was directly imported from Holland shown to me by a merchant who stated the state of a milk tin which had been accidentally opened.

Shall I denounce the fact that Greece’s products were rejected as ‘contaminated’ by the Kosovo war radiation, when everyone knows that wind was blowing towards Italy at those moments, with greatest risks for Italian products and earth, without them ever be publicly affected by such fact?

Is it necessary to say that the ‘crazy cow’ illness had affected whole lots of the French stock, without anyone saying anything nor cows put to death, as it may have put economy in danger, and people affected by the illness left to die alone and in silence, the rest of population not to get panicked?

May I confess that I was fed myself with ‘memory erasers’ because I had dared saying that some chemistry may be at the origin of cancer in a catholic/french hospital?

It’s not everything and certainly not all, but just as hints of what may justify the further decision of moving inside of a world where Germany does not exist and even less the Euro. Of course I’m nothing but myself alone. Unluckily though I know half the world quite well, which may already be some kind of solution. It’s obvious that I will start laughing when Holland will pompously claim it does not admit the Teheran market as gem evaluating. There they are, the first to back my propositions. And they go up to Pakistan, China, Russia and India, locally, hypocritically, they will start asking for Teheran evaluated stones in foreign exchange and nothing else, and the others, well, who cares about them. And if they don’t say anything, well, the best, you’ll have two markets of which the one, does certainly not need of the Euro anymore. Such luck.

You see how easy. And don’t say there are no means of control of such dirt, may I not start laughing again. Perhaps you’ll need some doctor, too. Because those who are there are just tipping idiocy into computers to see which pharmaceutical company pays best. But only in rubis or eventually diamonds. Health has some kind of value, too, but it gets lost easily when you don’t know where to put the barriers to bastardize.

Honestly. I may have wanted perhaps Teheran may have not had such an intelligent idea. Because without second market, the only result would have been an explosion of anger, which I may have prefered. How things are.



  1. wow nice

    thanks for sharing

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: