Strange metal monoliths are materialising everywhere, in California, Romania, the Isle of Wight and, according to the latest reports, the Netherlands, Germany and Spain. Their rate of appearance is quickening: barely 24 hours separate photos of the lone sentinel on the Isle of Wight’s Compton Beach and the new European manifestations. As these silent messengers follow those seen at wider intervals in Utah, California and Romania it seems that their message is becoming more urgent, the time of their revelation imminent.
One thing is clear to people all around the world, the metal monolith saga will not be ending any time soon as another one has been spotted in the Netherlands.
Similar to the ones in Utah, Romania, California and Britain, the Netherlands, too, has added its name to the list of places where the monolith mystery has itched its place.
"I walked up to it, but there was nothing to be seen around the monolith. Just as if it was placed from above," hiker Thijs de Jong told media — who was the first one to spot the monolith.
Read more at:
Another one: Hiker finds a new metal monolith in the Netherlands, World News | wionews.com
with news about and related
to the EU, the Netherlands,
and Almere - Europe's most modern multi-cultural city
Showing posts with label Reality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Reality. Show all posts
December 8, 2020
July 6, 2020
EU-Turkey relations, Politics versus Reality: Why hasn't the EU lifted travel ban on Turkey?
Beginning
with July 1, The European Union opened its borders to visitors from 15
countries. The full list of the first 15 countries ranges from Algeria
to Uruguay, from Georgia to South Korea, from Serbia and Montenegro to
New Zealand, from Morocco to Canada. Europe will open its borders to
China as well, provided China opens up to travelers from the EU.
European doors
will remain closed to travelers from the United States, Brazil, and
Russia, due to the rate of the spread of coronavirus. Turkey, a
candidate member of the EU, which performed well above the EU average in
the Covid-19 struggle, however, is among those countries that the
travel ban from and to the EU will remain in effect.
Given the success of the Turkish
Covid-19 strategy, the disappointment expressed by the spokesperson of
the Turkish Foreign Ministry for the decision was not unexpected.
Indeed, Turkey’s coronavirus statistics,
for instance, in comparison to EU member Sweden, are much better. The
Turkish population is almost nine times as much as Sweden, but the
number of cases per 1 million is 2,370 in Turkey, while the figure
stands at 6,777 in Sweden. The death rate in Turkey is 60.8 per 1
million in Turkey, and 528.1 in Sweden. Even in comparison to Germany,
which has roughly the same population as Turkey and is lauded for a
successful Covid-19 strategy, Turkey seems to be doing as well as
Germany. The number of total confirmed cases in Germany is some 200,000
and in Turkey is some 195,000.
The reason for Turkey’s
exclusion from the EU’s reopening can be explained by political reasons
instead of public health concerns.
Read more at:
Why hasn't the EU lifted travel ban on Turkey?Read more at:
Labels:
EU,
oronavirus,
Politics,
Reality,
Statistics,
Travel Bans,
Turkey
August 4, 2018
Global Politics: U.S. Risks Losing World Power to China and Russia by Splitting with Allies on Iran, Experts Say - by Tom O'Connor
The U.S. could risk forfeiting its central role on the international
stage both politically and economically by splitting with its allies and
other major powers that oppose upcoming sanctions against Iran,
according to two former State Department officials who helped craft the
2015 nuclear deal.
In line with President Donald Trump's withdrawal from a 2015 nuclear agreement in May, the U.S. was set to impose Monday the first batch of sanctions that would affect Iran, as well as European and other international companies. The decision would be only the latest of a series of schisms between the Trump administration and the EU, which has continued to endorse the Iran deal.
When asked by Newsweek if top U.S. rivals China and Russia could stand to benefit from the split, former State Department Deputy Lead Coordinator and Coordinator for Iran Nuclear Implementation Jarrett Blanc said "yes."
"This is not strategic behavior, we're all over the map, we don't have a list of priorities, we're not relating issue A to issue B and so then of course that puts in a stronger position anyone who can set their priorities and tie these issues together," Blanc said Wednesday during a conference call hosted by progressive think tank Diplomacy Works, based in Washington, D.C.
Read more: U.S. Risks Losing World Power to China and Russia by Splitting with Allies on Iran, Experts Say
In line with President Donald Trump's withdrawal from a 2015 nuclear agreement in May, the U.S. was set to impose Monday the first batch of sanctions that would affect Iran, as well as European and other international companies. The decision would be only the latest of a series of schisms between the Trump administration and the EU, which has continued to endorse the Iran deal.
When asked by Newsweek if top U.S. rivals China and Russia could stand to benefit from the split, former State Department Deputy Lead Coordinator and Coordinator for Iran Nuclear Implementation Jarrett Blanc said "yes."
"This is not strategic behavior, we're all over the map, we don't have a list of priorities, we're not relating issue A to issue B and so then of course that puts in a stronger position anyone who can set their priorities and tie these issues together," Blanc said Wednesday during a conference call hosted by progressive think tank Diplomacy Works, based in Washington, D.C.
Read more: U.S. Risks Losing World Power to China and Russia by Splitting with Allies on Iran, Experts Say
Labels:
China,
Confusion,
Donald Trump,
EU,
Global Politiics,
Iran,
Nuclear Deal,
Reality,
Russia,
USA
March 26, 2016
Terrorism and the Press: Politicians duck the blame for terrorism and Press lets them get away with it - never asking any real questions
The Press: Say not, See Not, Hear Not |
CNN in particular, turns these sad events into an endless nauseating soap opera with infinite and at times totally insignificant detail.
Questions are asked about why the most wanted man in Europe was able to elude the police for so long, even though he was living in his home district of Molenbeek in Brussels.
Television and newspapers ask nervously about the chances of Isis carrying out another atrocity aimed at dominating the news agenda and showing that it is still in business.
The reporting of the events in Brussels is in keeping with that after the January (Charlie Hebdo) and November Paris attacks and the Tunisian beach killings by Isis last year, or the killings in Ankara and Istanbul
For several days there is blanket coverage by the media as it allocates time and space far beyond what is needed to relate developments. But then the focus shifts abruptly elsewhere and Isis becomes yesterday’s story, treated as if the movement has ceased to exist or at least lost its capacity to affect our lives.
The outpouring of official grief that commonly follows any atrocity, such as the march of 40 world leaders through the streets of Paris after the Charlie Hebdo killings last year, is used to help neuter any idea that the political failures of these same leaders might be to a degree responsible for the slaughter.
After all, such marches are usually held by the powerless to protest and show defiance, but in this case the march simply serves as a publicity stunt to divert attention from these leaders’ inability to act effectively and stop the wars in the Middle East which they had done much to provoke.
But it its not only the US which deserves the blame. By taking up the cause of the Syrian and Libyan opposition and destroying the Syrian and Libyan states, France and Britain opened the door to Isis and should share in the blame for the rise of Isis, terrorism and creating the refugee crises in Europe.
By refusing to admit to or learn from past mistakes, the West Europeans did little to lay the basis for the current, surprisingly successful “cessation of hostilities” in Syria, which is now considered by the public at large almost entirely as a Russian achievement.
Once again the question can be asked - which major News Agency has shown the courage to sit down with any important political leader and ask them some serious investigative questions, like: "why have you made such a mess in the Middle East , or, "what is being done to stop weapon dealers from selling their weapons and munition around the world at will ", or, "how come the former US Bush Administration is not taken into a criminal court for war crimes ", or, "why is the West propping up the Egyptian military dictatorship, or, "why is the military industrial complex industry selling weapons and aircraft to despotic and undemocratic nations like Saudi-Arabia, Egypt, Iraq and Somalia", or, "why can't the UN declare the Middle East region a nuclear free zone", or, "what are the requirements to be a member of NATO, when we see that one of their member states (TURKEY) does not respect freedom of the Press, throws investigative reporters in jail or takes over newspapers when they don't follow the party line" - and the list goes on and on.
Barton Gellman of the Washington Post says that for journalists just getting basic information from any governmen tagency has become very difficult: “Besides the actual risk of prosecution . . . there’s an investigative issue that very much relates to the ability to do national security journalism now. Almost everything you want to write about these days, if you are writing about diplomacy, or intelligence, or defense, is classified; everything indeed, except the boiler plate press release and the tightly controlled news conference, is classified."
Unfortunately, that is just the way how most governments operate these days. Today there is more classified information which can not be accessed than there is open-source information on the planet.”
Bottom-line, political clarity and honesty is a "Fata Morgana" when it comes to getting it from Governments. Consequently distinguishing "fiction" today is the new reality.
Almere-Digest
Labels:
Blanket Coverage,
CNN,
EU Commission,
EU Parliament,
EUb Commission,
Fiction,
Government,
Nato,
News Agenda,
Press,
Reality
May 26, 2014
Opinion: We must value the EU once again - by Christoph Hasselbach
No one can say it was inevitable, but it was expected. The next European
Parliament will be even more fragmented than the last. Representatives
from both far-left and far-right parties will be moving to Strasbourg in
greater numbers than before. As for turnout, the picture is mixed: in
some countries more people voted than before, but those votes often went
to Euro-skeptic parties.
All in all, the general public's interest in the EU is shockingly low - even though all the parties tried their best to motivate the electorate. For the first time, they chose leading candidates to tour the continent and debate each other. They tried hard to personalize and enliven the election, and make it more relevant. It did little good.
The only reassuring thing is that the parliament will remain functional, despite all the enemies in its own ranks. The representatives from UKIP, the Front National, the Danish People's Party will deliver angry speeches, but they won't really be able to block anything - because they differ from one another too much - they're too focused on their own nationalism.
By the same token, their rhetoric is always directed at their own voters in their respective home countries. They prefer to be the voice of the dissatisfied, rather than develop a major common project. This will cause the centrist, Europe-friendly parties to stick closer together. No, the Euro-skeptic extremists don't present a threat, at least not in the European Parliament.
The debt crisis of a few years ago showed how quickly an old order could be overthrown. The EU itself was peering into the abyss. That crisis has been overcome, more or less, but only thanks to common effort, mutual aid, and discipline. If each country had tried to find its way out of its crisis on its own, they would all have lost - even the stronger among them. Is that too long ago to still be a lesson?
How high the stakes are in Europe can also be seen from the Ukraine crisis: 25 years after the end of the Cold War, we're in danger of entering a new long-term European conflict. Astonishingly, the Ukraine crisis barely played a role in the election campaign, even though the EU is perhaps the best example of what balance and cooperation can achieve.
I met an African election observer at the last European election in 2009. When he saw the turnout figures - of 43 percent, the same as this time around - he shook his head and said, "In a lot of African states we'd be glad to have any free elections at all. And you Europeans throw away your rights!" It was a humbling meeting.
If we in the EU have no bigger problems than a few over-bureaucratic directives, then we really do have it good. Maybe we have it too good to appreciate the miracle of peace and common prosperity that we gained 70 years ago.
Read more: Opinion: We must value the EU once again | Europe | DW.DE | 26.05.2014
All in all, the general public's interest in the EU is shockingly low - even though all the parties tried their best to motivate the electorate. For the first time, they chose leading candidates to tour the continent and debate each other. They tried hard to personalize and enliven the election, and make it more relevant. It did little good.
The only reassuring thing is that the parliament will remain functional, despite all the enemies in its own ranks. The representatives from UKIP, the Front National, the Danish People's Party will deliver angry speeches, but they won't really be able to block anything - because they differ from one another too much - they're too focused on their own nationalism.
By the same token, their rhetoric is always directed at their own voters in their respective home countries. They prefer to be the voice of the dissatisfied, rather than develop a major common project. This will cause the centrist, Europe-friendly parties to stick closer together. No, the Euro-skeptic extremists don't present a threat, at least not in the European Parliament.
The debt crisis of a few years ago showed how quickly an old order could be overthrown. The EU itself was peering into the abyss. That crisis has been overcome, more or less, but only thanks to common effort, mutual aid, and discipline. If each country had tried to find its way out of its crisis on its own, they would all have lost - even the stronger among them. Is that too long ago to still be a lesson?
How high the stakes are in Europe can also be seen from the Ukraine crisis: 25 years after the end of the Cold War, we're in danger of entering a new long-term European conflict. Astonishingly, the Ukraine crisis barely played a role in the election campaign, even though the EU is perhaps the best example of what balance and cooperation can achieve.
I met an African election observer at the last European election in 2009. When he saw the turnout figures - of 43 percent, the same as this time around - he shook his head and said, "In a lot of African states we'd be glad to have any free elections at all. And you Europeans throw away your rights!" It was a humbling meeting.
If we in the EU have no bigger problems than a few over-bureaucratic directives, then we really do have it good. Maybe we have it too good to appreciate the miracle of peace and common prosperity that we gained 70 years ago.
Read more: Opinion: We must value the EU once again | Europe | DW.DE | 26.05.2014
Labels:
EU,
European Parliamentary elections,
Eurosceptics,
Peace,
prosperity,
Reality
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)