Trilingual World Observatory: italiano, english, română. GLOBAL NEWS & more... di Redazione
Di seguito tutti gli interventi pubblicati sul sito, in ordine cronologico.

Starring and written by the comedy group Monty Python (Graham Chapman, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, Eric Idle, Terry Jones and Michael Palin), and directed by Jones. It tells the story of Brian Cohen (played by Chapman), a young Jewish man who is born on the same day as, and next door to, Jesus Christ, and is subsequently mistaken for the Messiah.

The film contains themes of religious satire that were controversial at the time of its release, drawing accusations of blasphemy and protests from some religious groups. Thirty-nine local authorities in the UK either imposed an outright ban, or imposed an X (18 years) certificate (effectively preventing the film from being shown, as the distributors said the film could not be shown unless it was unedited and carried the original AA (14) certificate). Some countries, including Ireland and Norway, banned its showing, with a few of these bans lasting decades. The film makers used such notoriety to benefit their marketing campaign, with posters stating "So funny it was banned in Norway!".

The film was a box-office success, grossing fourth-highest of any film in the UK in 1979 and highest of any British film in the United States that year. It has remained popular since then, receiving positive reviews. The film received a 96% "Fresh" rating on Rotten Tomatoes with the consensus "One of the more cutting-edge films of the 1970s, this religious farce from the classic comedy troupe is as poignant as it is funny and satirical", and it was named "greatest comedy film of all time" by several magazines and television networks. It is the first Monty Python film to receive an R rating in the United States.


Brian Cohen is born in a stable a few doors from the one in which Jesus is born, which initially confuses the three wise men who come to praise the future King of the Jews. Brian grows up an idealistic young man who resents the continuing Roman occupation of Judea. While attending Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, Brian becomes infatuated with an attractive young rebel, Judith. His desire for her and hatred for the Romans lead him to join the People's Front of Judea (PFJ), one of many fractious and bickering independence movements, who spend more time fighting each other than the Romans.

After several misadventures, and escaping from Pontius Pilate, the fugitive winds up in a line-up of would-be mystics and prophets who harangue the passing crowd in a plaza. Forced to come up with something plausible in order to blend in and keep the guards off his back, Brian babbles pseudo-religious truisms, and quickly attracts a small but intrigued audience. Once the guards have left, Brian tries to put the episode behind him, but he has unintentionally inspired a movement. He grows frantic when he finds that some people have started to follow him around, with even the slightest unusual occurrence being hailed as a "miracle". After slipping away from the mob, Brian runs into Judith, and they spend the night together. In the morning, Brian opens the curtains to discover an enormous crowd of people outside his mother's house, all proclaiming him to be the Messiah. Brian's mother protests: "He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy". Brian finds himself unable to change their minds, because his every word and action are immediately seized as points of doctrine.

Neither can the hapless Brian find solace back at the PFJ's headquarters, where people fling their afflicted bodies at him demanding miracle cures. After sneaking out the back, Brian finally is captured and scheduled to be crucified. Meanwhile, a huge crowd has assembled outside the palace. Pilate (together with the visiting Biggus Dickus) tries to quell the feeling of revolution by granting them the decision of who should be pardoned. The crowd, however, simply shouts out names containing the letter "r", in order to mock Pilate's speech impediment. Eventually, Judith appears in the crowd and calls for the release of Brian, which the crowd echoes, since the name contains the letter "r". Pilate then agrees to "welease Bwian".

The order from Pilate is eventually relayed to the guards, but in a moment parodying the climax of the film Spartacus, various crucified people all claim to be "Brian of Nazareth" (one man shouting "I'm Brian and so's my wife") and the wrong man is released. Various other opportunities for a reprieve for Brian are denied as, one by one, his "allies" (including Judith and his mother) step forward to explain why they are leaving the "noble freedom fighter" hanging in the hot sun. Hope is renewed when the Judean People's Front come charging towards the Romans, but as a political statement they intentionally commit suicide rather than concentrating their efforts in liberating Brian and his fellow sufferers. Condemned to a long and painful death, Brian finds his spirits lifted by his fellow sufferers, who break into song with "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life".

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa
By Danger (from 25/04/2013 @ 04:53:00, in en - Global Observatory, read 2933 times)


It was Earth day a couple of days ago, the 22nd April.

Most folk are proud of their heritage, their lineage, where they come from. They will defend family and cultural heritage even when it becomes irrational to do so. Most of the history of Europe was a series of bloody arguments battles between various family dynasties.

Yet, no matter our individual spiritual or scientific or political beliefs, we all have a common heritage. We all belong to something we cannot escape from, yet. Something that had to exist before we could. Something that developed us in all our varied forms. Something that fed and sheltered us. Something that tried to teach our stubborn asses how to work together. Something full of wondrous beauty and if we are lucky, a quiet grace. If we are not so lucky, it rages tempestuously at times for seemingly no reason.

No wonder we often refer to it as “Her” and “mother”.

You are standing on it. Her.


Without this planet, you would not exist. Nor would your family, your car, the fuel in your car, your house, all the crappy shit in your house that you bought to impress someone who doesn’t care about you very much, your noisy neighbors, your food, the air you breath, the water you drink, the internet, everything you believe in, everything you don’t believe in, the stupid crap other people believe in, no birth and no death, no politics, no religion.

No starry nights, no golden sunrise or set on a deserted beach, no misty mornings watching clouds roll through valleys, no lover to share it with, no kittens, no cute little puppies, no birdsong, no butterflies, no flowers, no desert to contrast with the rainforest, nothing to dazzle your eyes, no art, no music, no dance, no literature, no vices to enjoy, “No soup for you!”

Oh, and no chocolate.



There is something here to suit everyone’s tastes.  

Early societies were Matriarchal. There were no hierarchies, classes or domination. They were about balance and equality. Being need based, there was no monetary system.

“Matriarchal women are managers and administrators, who organise the economy not according to the profit principle, where an individual or a small group of people benefits; rather, the motivation behind their action is motherliness. The profit principle is an ego-centred principle, where individuals or a small minority take advantage of the majority of people. The principle of motherliness is the opposite, where altruism reigns and the well being of all is at the centre. It is at the same time a spiritual principle, which humans take from nature. Mother Nature cares for all beings, however different they may be. The same applies for the principle of motherliness: a good mother cares for all her children in spite of their diversity.” - Matriarchal Society: Definition and Theory, By Heide Goettner-Abendroth

Have a read of the introduction of that article, think about a person you know who fits the description of a good motherly type, and imagine if today’s societies were staffed by people like this.


April 22, was Earth Day. It saddens me that we need a special day to remind us where we came from. It depresses the soul to see that so few remember or care.

How did we celebrate our mother today?

Another 175 square kilometers was deforested, destroying the biodiversity that makes our mothers beauty. Only 175 you say? That was just today. In just over a year that equals an area the size of Tasmania. For my American friends who are unaware that there are other land-masses on this planet, Tasmania is that big island under Australia (yes, Australia is on this planet too). That’s nearly 68000 square kilometers per year. Along with whatever strange and curious plants and animals that lived there, being driven to extinction, never to be seen again. Estimates vary, but about 50% (yes, that is a half) of the entire planets rainforests have been destroyed since 1900. Only 15% of the planets land was covered by rainforest to begin with, now we are down to 7%. That’s not good enough for us though, we are speeding up production and merrily planning to have the other half leveled by about 2030, 2040 at the latest.

Don’t mind us mum, just stealing the clothes off your back.

There’s all the mining. Mining in itself, if done intelligently, ecologically and ethically would not be so bad. There have been many amazing suggestions and advances in technology that would allow this, but no, some fat bastards pockets are not full enough. Raping the earth in the hallowed name of profit. And it is not even you or I that gain anything. Nope, we are worse off. Al Gore ran around scaring the simple folk with Inconvenient UnTruth’s about climate change in 2006, every nation in the world whose strings are pulled by the US government jumped on the bandwagon to make Climate Change laws for everything in sight. The Fat-Cats pillaging the ground pay nothing, the extra costs have been passed on to you and I. We are paying taxes for breathing. Lovely. Al Gore apparently, according to one article I read, lined his own pockets with an extra $1.5 billion. For telling fibs. Awesome.

Hey mum, screw you. Take this, and this……   

Ahh, that’s much better looking than this… 

There are approximately 40 military ‘conflicts’ raging right now while you read this. I really couldn’t be stuffed talking about them. If you think wars are necessary, If you think US troops using depleted uranium on civilian targets in Iraq was necessary, if you think Israel has a right to use Palestinian kids for target practice, if you think terrorists are coming to get you and you should support the troops, if you believe the official line for any of this crap, congratulations – you’re an ignorant fool. The damage this is doing to the planet and it’s inhabitants is atrocious. It is not, never has been, never will be necessary in any way, shape or form so stop defending it.

To cut a long rant short, how about pollution. Every day I see people throw garbage at a bin, miss, then leave it on the ground next to it. Industries belching obscene amounts of gases and toxic chemicals into the air and waterways usually with little if any punishment. Yes the laws are there but so are lawyers whose sole goal seems to be to find loopholes for wealthy psychopaths. A car-wrecking yard near here was caught last week dumping waste oil into a nearby creek. They were shut down and fined. They should have been publically beaten. I could go on, but the screaming fit and following bout of depression turns me off. I’m pretty sure you get the idea.

At what point do you stand up and say, this is my home and I shall defend it as vigorously as I would defend my child? When is enough, enough? After the damage is irreversible? Would you treat your own mother this way?

The earth gave birth to you, fed you, and did all the things your own mother did. Even when you turned your back on her, began making your own decisions and mistakes, forgot where you came from, she was always there, still feeding you, still giving you a place to stay, always ready to forgive. She did all this for your brothers and sisters too, even when you fought amongst yourselves, even when your battles raged out of control and scarred your mothers face, she was still there for you.

How have you repaid this kindness?

Our ego-driven, competitive, patriarchal society has trained us to believe we have limited power, we can’t make a difference, that we are alone and helpless.

Don’t for a minute believe a word of it. How often do you hear of something terrible happening to someone’s child and you catch yourself thinking what you would do the perpetrator if that was your kid? If someone came into your home and violated your mother, beat her, defecated on her, tortured her, what would you do or like to do to the scum, if you were given the opportunity? No army on earth would stop me. How about you?

You and I have the power to fix things. I’ll bet you even have a few suggestions or ideas. There have been some great ideas brought forward, read about them, encourage others to think about them. Look for people trying to make a difference. Open your mind to possibilities. Look into some of the ideas like The Venus Project. It’s not perfect, even it’s founder says so, but it is a great place to start. Go have a look. You may even have an idea to help make it work.


And that is precisely what you can do that WILL make a difference. Start. Get involved. Educate your children, teach them to look after and protect their environment. Don’t be afraid to scold the people abusing your home, your mother. Don’t betray yourself with thoughts of inadequacy, or ‘I’m only one person what difference would I make’ etc.

Man landed on the moon because ONE person said, ‘Hey guys, let’s go to the moon!’ Then a group worked together to figure out how.

Man learned the earth was round because ONE man said, ‘Hey guys, I think this place is round, lets sail around it and find out.’ We killed him, and a bunch more until finally someone grew a pair and got a group working together to prove it.

Man learned how to fly and built airplanes because ONE guy said, ‘Hey guys, wouldn’t it be awesome if we could fly like birds? Check out these wings I made!’ Then when he crashed and died some other people got inspired, they (eventually) worked together to figure out how to fly.

Getting the idea yet? It only takes one idea, it could be yours.

The next step is to work together. Learn to see our differences for what they are, just opinions, and stop being so emotionally attached to them being accepted by others. Many people will tell themselves, and others, that they don’t care what other people think. If that’s the case, then don’t. We need to express ourselves of course, but we also need to grant others the same opportunity. The sooner you start acting that way, the sooner those around you will too. (It’s actually a bit of a secret, but people get all warm and fuzzy inside when you hear them out without berating them for it. If they think your respectfully granting them the freedom to be themselves, they soon start repaying in kind. Shush, don’t tell anyone!)

When we start changing our ways, our world will change. We only have to start.

Let me leave you with some inspiring words from people far wiser than I.


People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. – George Bernard Shaw

Whether you think you can or you can't, you're right!  -Henry Ford

When you cease to dream, you cease to live. - Malcolm Forbes

Great acts are made up of small deeds. - Lao Tzu





The Fine Print

All images borrowed via Google image search. All rights and credits to whoever believes they own them. , , ,

All Quotes borrowed via Googling.

The rest of it fell out of my head. If you want to use it, go for it. Just attribute it to me so you don’t get blamed and sent to the loony bin.


Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (1)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

Why write? (pp. 41-44)

CAMON: Somewhere you've said that your purpose in writing was "for inner liberation." But let's analyze this statement a little more closely. Why have you written? In order to denounce? Thereby to demand justice? To arrive at an understanding of an enigma, a mystery, "the mystery of Germany," the "madness of Germany"? Writing as an appeal to others for help in the solution? Writing as consolation? Out of all this, what was that "inner liberation" you were trying to achieve through writing supposed to be?

LEVI: Your question has to do only with Survival in Auschwitz. I wrote because I felt the need to write. If you ask me to go further and find out what produced this need, I can't answer. I've had the feeling that for me the act of writing was equivalent to lying down on Freud's couch. I felt such an overpowering need to talk about it that I talked out loud. Back then, in tile concentration camp, I often had a dream: I dreamed that I'd returned, come home to my family, told them about it, and nobody listened. The person standing in front of me doesn't stay to hear, lie turns around and goes away. I told this dream to my friends in the concentration camp, and they said, "It happens to us too."

And later I found it mentioned, in the very same way, by other survivors who have written about their experiences. So we're dealing with a typical situation.

CAMON: So was it your collective unconscious that felt that experience to be incredible, at the very moment you were all living it'

LEVI: Yes. But this dream of talking about it was certainly comparable to the dream of Tantalus, which was of "eating-almost," of being able to ring the food to one's mouth but not succeeding in biting into it. It's the dream of a primary need, the need to cat and drink. So was the need to talk about it. Already at the time it was a basic need. Later I chose to write it as the equivalent of talking about it.

CAMON: Talking about it more extensively, in me and space, to more people and over a longer period of time, to be believed finally by every one, since in the dream even your family didn't believe you?

LEVI: Yes. The nightmare of the dream, however, was still inside me. While I was writing Survival in Auschwitz I wasn't sure it would be published. I wanted to make four or five copies, and give them to my fiancée and friends. My writing was therefore a way of telling them about it. The intention to "leave an eyewitness account" came later, the primary need was to write for purposes of liberation.

CAMON: To write, that is, for therapeutic purposes.

LEVI: Yes, therapeutic.

CAMON: And in that sense did it work?

LEVI: Yes, writing relieved me.


8. The works (pp.59-64)

CAMON: Your literary works and those on scientific subjects (Storie naturali, Vizio di forma) are so different from the works on the "concentration-camp condition" as to raise a question about their author: what's surprising is that these "divertissements" (as you've called Storie naturali) are written by the same author as the books on the concentration camp. But I'd go even further and say that since Storie naturali was written simultaneously with The Reawakening, it would therefore indicate a kind of split in their author, a dual operation of his mind.

This is shown, in my opinion, by the different name used by the author: Damiano Malabaila. It may be that the pseudonym was suggested by fear and modesty, but at a deeper level it may well have been suggested by his awareness of being not one author but two-of being, so to speak, divided.

LEVI: That's a question that you can answer better than I. I mean I can't answer. I don't even know of any test or mental experiment that one could do to verify it. Before they arrested me I'd already written a short story, of which I still have a copy, but I've been careful not to publish it. It was a mediocre arabesque, with a little of everything in it.

CAMON: Maybe without the experience of the concentration camp, you would have been a writer all the same (I'm convinced of it-there's no way you wouldn't have been a writer, but an ironical, fantastic, allegorical, esoteric, scientific, naturalist writer.

LEVI: Actually in that first story there's a lot of the natural world, rocks and plants. Yes, perhaps that's what I would have written about; I was fascinated by that world. But for me the experience of the concentration camp has been fundamental. Naturally I wouldn't do it all over again, but still, along with the horror of that experience, which I still feel now, I can't deny that it's also had positive results. It seems to me that that was where I learned to know the facts about people. There's a friend of mine, Lidia Rolfi, who was in Ravensbruck, she was a schoolteacher, and she says that Ravensbruck was her university. It was the only concentration camp strictly for women. I'd been to the university, but I too must say that my real university was Auschwitz. I have the feeling of having been enriched by it, so much so that it took me only a few months to write Survival in Auschwitz and I remember writing it without ever faltering. When it was published by Einaudi in 1958, I inserted one chapter, the one about Initiation, which isn't in the De Silva edition of 1947, and I added quite a lot, but I didn't change, delete, or correct anything.

CAMON: There are sufferings that make us better people and sufferings that make us worse. Probably those experienced in a state of powerlessness make us better.

LEVI: I don't think I became a better person. I understood a few things, but that didn't make me good.

CAMON: How many prisoners were there, on the average, every day in Auschwitz'

LEVI: There wasn't just one Auschwitz camp; there were thirty-nine of them. There was the town of Auschwitz, and in it was a concentration camp, and that was Auschwitz properly speaking, or the capital of the system. Down below, two kilometers away, was Birkenau, or Auschwitz Two: here they had the gas chamber; it was a huge concentration camp, divided into some four to six adjoining camps. Farther up was the factory, and near the factory was Monowitz, or Auschwitz Three: that's where I was. This camp belonged to the factory, it had been financed by it. In addition, all around, there were thirty to thirty-five small camps (mines, arms factories, farms, etc.). The most distant camp was Brno, in Moravia: it was about a hundred kilometers away, as the crow flies, and was under the administration of Auschwitz. In my camp there were about ten thousand of us; in central Auschwitz fifteen or twenty thousand; in Birkenau many more, seventy to eighty thousand; plus another twenty thousand scattered about in these little camps, which were all frightful places, mines, where you worked amid cold and hunger; they were punishment camps. But Auschwitz One was the administrative center for all of them, and Birkenau was the extermination camp. The Auschwitz system was the fruit of experience gathered in all the other camps, both for extermination and forced labor. There's a book about it, in fact the diary of the Auschwitz commandant, who when he was captured was asked to tell his story, and he did.'

CAMON: You're not a depressed man, and not even anxious.

LEVI: Is that a feeling you get from my books or from my presence?

CAMON: From your presence. You have an ironical and tolerant attitude, and you often smile. I have the feeling that by nature you're someone who loves life, who loved it before, and who loves it afterwards. Between the before and the after there's been a violent and total trauma, but it's over.

LEVI: In general, you're right. Since the concentration camp, however, I've had a few attacks of depression. I'm not sure if they go back to that experience, because they come with different labels, from one to the next. It may seem strange to you, but I went through one just recently, a stupid fit of depression, for very little reason: I had a small operation on my foot, and this made me think that I'd suddenly got old. It took two months for the wound to heal. That's why I asked you if the feeling came from my presence or my books.

CAMON: I said from your presence, but it's not that your books contradict it. In your scientific and naturalist works one is aware of a fantastic, allegorical writer, with a language full of life, and a display of metaphor.

LEVI: While I wasn't at all interested in the problem of language when I wrote Survival in Auschwitz, it gradually began to interest me the more I went on writing, until it became uppermost in The Monkey's Wrench, which is an experimental book. And also in this recent book, If Not Now, When?, in which I've been faced with linguistic problems, because it was a mattter of having people speak in Italian-of translating into Italian-dialogue that was supposed to be in Polish or Russian or Yiddish. I don't know either Polish or Russian, and my Yiddish is poor, and so I had to study up on it, which I did. I studied Yiddish for eight months, so as to be able to give to these characters an Italian speech that would sound plausible as a translation, I don't know if the average Italian reader is aware of these things.

CAMON: After the first books, the ones on the concentration camp, one feels this interest in words, in language, and even a taste for experiment. That's why it seems strange to me that you didn't become a literary writer, but went on applying yourself to chemistry and being a chemist.

LEVI: But I was always interested in chemistry, and in school I was lazy and bored, and poor in Italian. As a student I didn't understand the importance of Italian literature; I understood it later.

9. Chemistry and the man (p. 65-68)

CAMON: But what is it in chemistry that interests you?

LEVI: I'm interested in the contact with matter, in understanding the world around me; I'm interested in the chemistry of the human body, biochemistry. In short, science: but the science of particles doesn't say much to me, while I'm thrilled by the discovery of genetic mechanisms, the way the individual is coded, the minuscule chain whose alphabet is made up of molecules. There's a bridge between linguists and geneticists. These new concepts of "pregnancy," of "redundance," of "ambiguity," apply very well to the language of genetics, and genetic failures are due to the lack of redundancy, for which it takes only the slightest error and the reading is broken. But the reasons that brought me to chemistry were different at that time, because chemistry was then a different science, I chose to get interested in chemistry when I was a boy-I was fourteen or fifteen-because I was thrilled by the parallel between the formula written on paper and what takes place in the test tube. Already then it seemed to me something magical, and chemistry seemed to me the main key to open the secrets of heaven and earth, and having read at the time that a spectroscope allows you to know the chemical composition of a star, it seemed to me one of man's greatest powers.

CAMON: So, chemistry and literature; concentration-camp writer, and scientific and naturalist writer. The fact that the literary writing came after the concentration- camp books suggests that the Auschwitz trauma had receded almost to the point of disappearing and that it wasn't simply negative. How about at the private, personal, family level'

LEVI: No, as I said, Auschwitz was not simply negative for me, it taught me a lot. Among other things, before Auschwitz I was a man with no woman, afterwards I met the one who was to become my wife. I very much needed someone to listen to me, and she listened more than others. That's why, in sickness and in health, I'm bound to her for life. Before that I was full of complexes, I don't know why. Maybe because I was a Jew. As a Jew, I'd been made fun of by my schoolmates: not beaten up, or insulted, but made fun of, yes.

After my return from Auschwitz, I had a great need to talk, I looked Lip my old friends and talked their cars off, and I remember their saying to me, "How strange! You haven't changed a bit." I think I'd undergone a process of maturing, having had the luck to survive. Because it's not a question of strength, but of luck: you can't beat a concentration camp with your own strengths. I'd been lucky: for having been a chemist, for having met a bricklayer who gave me something to eat, for having overcome the language difficulty. This I can claim to have done; I never got sick-I got sick only once, at the end, and this too was lucky, because I missed the evacuation of the camp. The others, the healthy ones, all died because they were transferred to Buchenwald and Mauthausen in the middle of winter. I had an argument ... are you a believer?

CAMON: Why do you ask?

LEVI: I had an argument with a believer, a friend of mine from Padua, your city, by the way.

CAMON: You're not a believer?

LEVI: No, I never have been. I'd like to be, but I don't succeed.

CAMON: Then in what sense are you Jewish?

LEVI: A simple matter of culture. If it hadn't been for the racial laws and the concentration camp, I'd probably no longer be a Jew, except for my last name. instead, this dual experience, the racial laws and the concentration camp, stamped me the way you stamp a steel plate. At this point I'm a few, they've sewn the star of David on me and not only on my clothes.

CAMON: With whom did you have that argument?

LEVI: If you remember The Periodic Table, he's the one mentioned as "the assistant" in the "Potassium" story. He's a believer but not a Catholic; he came to see me after my release to tell me I was clearly one of the elect, since I'd been chosen to survive in order for me to write Survival in Auschwitz. And this, I must confess, seemed to me a blasphemy, that God should grant privileges, saving one person and condemning someone else. I must say that for me the experience of Auschwitz has been such as to sweep away any remnant of religious education I may have had.

CAMON: Meaning that Auschwitz is proof of the nonexistence of God?

LEVI: There is Auschwitz, and so there cannot be God. [On the typescript, he added in pencil:] I don't find a solution to this dilemma. I keep looking, but I don't find it.


Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

The king is conducting a survey...
How do you feel about paying taxes?

USEFUL IDIOTS in black with their faces covered and carrying weapons ... look familiar?

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

The relationship between unhealthy eating and the development of disease is undeniable. When most people get a cancer diagnosis their doctors are quick to prescribe drugs and harsh treatments such as radiation, chemotherapy, and surgery. All of these treatments have a harrowing effect on the body opening it up to a whole host of other problems.


Holistic health practitioners, on the other hand, will often recommend detoxification methods such as cleansing to eliminate cancer from the body. Here Allison Biggar interviews European journalist and ovarian cancer survivor Evita Ramparte about how she cured her cancer naturally through a raw vegan diet without chemotherapy, surgery or radiation.

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

During this short 24 minutes clip taken from Friday night, Saturday morning, John Cleese is quite clear in how much he despises the Christianity he was taught at school and taught by the bishop of Suffolk in the clip. Malcolm Muggeridge who featured strongly in Mother Teresa's promotional films and also Hitchens' "Hell's Angel" is here with his predictable offense.

The Bishop is camper than a row of tents and it will come as no surprise to learn he was outed as gay many years after this and forced to resign from the church.


Rowan Atkinson and Mel Smith do a fantastic job of taking this debate off in their own version of "The Life of Monty Python - Complete Blasphemy":

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

The Gleiwitz incident in 1939 involved Reinhard Heydrich fabricating evidence of a Polish attack against Germany to mobilize German public opinion for war, to establish casus belli, and to justify the war with Poland. This, along with other false flag operations in Operation Himmler, would be used to mobilize support from the German population for the start of World War II in Europe.

False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities, groups or nations than those who actually planned and executed them.

The name "false flag" has its origins in naval warfare where the use of a flag other than the belligerent's true battle flag as a ruse de guerre, before engaging an enemy, has long been acceptable. Such operations are also acceptable in certain circumstances in land warfare, to deceive enemies in similar ways providing that the deception is not perfidious and all such deceptions are discarded before opening fire upon the enemy.

Unlike Oklahoma City, the FBI cannot confiscate all of the surveillance, cell phone, and thousands of cameras that were at the finish line of Boston Marathon. 4Chan posted dozens of photos showing Navy Seal or Private Security personnel carrying the same black back packs which are the same style backpacks showed in FBI photos. It’s becoming crystal clear. Get these articles and this video out to everyone you know.

Breaking: Police Confirm Infowars Photos of Boston Suspects –

Obama Covering Up Saudi Link to Boston Bombing? –

Navy SEALs Spotted at Boston Marathon Wearing Suspicious Backpacks?

Boston Bombing Culprits Identified?


Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

Parents across Australia are waking up in droves to the dangers of vaccines, as evidenced by new government figures showing a major uptick in the number of parents who are choosing not to vaccinate their children. According to the data, there has been a 600 percent increase in recent years in the number of informed vaccine opponents who are simply not willing to inject their offspring with toxic, and largely untested, chemical cocktails.

So many Australian parents are taking charge of their children's health and making informed vaccination decisions, in fact, the Australian government is now working feverishly to dissuade and re-indoctrinate them back into the vaccine fold. According to 3AW 693 News Talk in Australia, the Australian Medical Association, along with the Academy of Science, has published a 20-page propaganda pamphlet that attempts to discard all the opposing science against vaccines as "common myths," and instead reassure everyone that vaccines are perfectly safe.

But people are not buying it, and the establishment "down under" is starting to panic. During a recent interview with talk show host Neil Mitchell, who on numerous occasions has taken the liberty to express his misguided opinion that parents who refuse to vaccinate their children are committing child abuse, Australian Vaccination Network (AVN) President Meryl Dorey explained how her work in presenting the vaccination science often ignored by the mainstream media is helping to shift public opinions.

"We believe that everyone has the right to make an informed decision about vaccination, and that includes having access to both sides of this issue," said Dorey to a belligerent Mitchell during the segment. "We absolutely oppose any form of compulsory vaccination," she added, contradicting radical new proposals that childhood vaccines be mandatory.

Mitchell, none too pleased with Dorey's well-reasoned and logical approach to the vaccination issue, quickly employed common badgering and manipulation techniques in an attempt to put words in Dorey's mouth and make her appear to be some kind of nutcase. But his feeble attempts were a complete failure, as Dorey successfully pointed out several important, and often omitted, facts about vaccines that simply cannot be refuted.

"We actually have the highest level of vaccination in Australia that we've ever had against whooping cough, and the highest level of whooping cough that we've ever had," explained Dorey, debunking the myth that decreased vaccination rates are responsible for the recent comeback of whooping cough in some areas. "We have more whooping cough now than we had since before the vaccine was added to the mass vaccination schedule in 1953."

You can listen to the full segment with Meryl Dorey here:

Sources for this article include:

Learn more: - Author: Jonathan Benson, staff writer

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

Per gli scettici si tratta di procedere sulla strada che nella narrativa fu del dr. Frankenstein, per gli entusiasti è invece l’opportunità offerta dalla scienza di curare malattie ad oggi incurabili. Parliamo delle cellule staminali e del loro utilizzo nella rigenerazione degli organi. Il Wall Street Journal compendia oggi tutti gli sviluppi sulla materia, partendo dalla notizia rivoluzionaria degli studi condotti sulla creazione di un cuore sintetico, capace di funzionare (e crescere) in maniera quasi del tutto autonoma. Arrivare agli studi sul cuore umano, prelevato da un cadavere e ripulito a dovere, che il dottor Francisco Fernandez-Aviles mostra su un vassoio d’acciaio, ha richiesto prima lo sviluppo di ricerche ed esperimenti su altri organi e tessuti. Si è partiti nel 1996 con la vescica. Partendo dallo studio e dalle necessità di bambini con malformazioni alla vescica, il dott. Anthony Atala, direttore del Wake Forest Institute Medicina Rigenerativa a Winston-Salem, NC, è giunto col suo team a crearne una in laboratorio, impiantata per la prima volta nel 1999. Si è trattato di un successo tale da ribaltare la visione della comunità scientifica, dato che solo nel 1980 erano davvero pochi coloro che credevano nella generazione sintetica degli organi umani. Dopo il successo della vescica, la squadra del dott. Atala prosegue nlla bioingegneria, dai vasi sanguigni ai semplici fegati umani.

Dagli esperimenti del dott. Atala si è potuto procedere a test più complessi. Nel 2011 Alex Seifalian, un ricercatore londinese, ha creato una trachea sintetica partendo dalle cellule del paziente, bisognoso di trapianto a causa di un cancro. La trachea, però, non è stato il punto di arrivo di Seifalian e dei 30 ricercatori che compongono il suo gruppo. La creazione del naso ha sviluppato ulteriormente le tecniche del dott. Seifalian. Si è imposta in primo luogo la necessità di creare un’impalcatura interna che sostituisse quella naturale di collagene e che fosse accettata dall’organismo. Si è giunti ad una soluzione di materiali hi-tech che utilizzano resine e fibre vegetali e che si strutturano secondo il modello a nido d’ape che caratterizza le ali della farfalla. Il materiale così ottenuto si è mostrato sufficientemente duttile, resistente ai batteri e accogliente per il contenimento di cellule grazie ai pori presenti naturalmente. Analizzato il naso del paziente, è stato riprodotto uno stampo e versato all’interno il materiale prodotto in laboratorio, con aggiunta di sale e zucchero tali che la parete venisse resa ancora più porosa.

A questo punto interviene l’uso delle cellule staminali, che, estratte da una parte del corpo, possono “crescere” e diventare cellule specializzate proprie di un determinato organo o funzione. Adoperate quindi nello stampo con l’aggiunta di prodotti chimici che ne orientassero la crescita, si è potuta creare la cartilagine necessaria all’ulteriore sviluppo del naso. Mancava a questo punto la pelle, che non è possibile produrre ex novo. Il dott. Seifalian concluse dunque che non si poteva far altro che impiantare il naso posticcio altrove nel corpo, in modo che venisse rivestito naturalmente. Si pensò in primo luogo alla fronte, ma l’idea di portare il naso lassù per giorni o mesi non piacque al paziente. Alla fine è stato impiantato sotto l’avambraccio. Se il processo di crescita della pelle andrà a buon fine, il naso verrà ricollocato nella sua posizione naturale e arricchito di cellule staminali che diverranno poi epiteliali. L’ultimo passo sarà collegare i capillari facciali al naso in modo da poter assicurare il sostentamento delle cellule. Così fornito, l’organo riacquisterà il senso olfattivo. L’intero processo potrebbe richiedere 6 mesi, per un costo complessivo di 40.000 dollari (che al momento non gravano sul paziente, trattandosi di una cura sperimentale). Lo stesso processo è stato utilizzato per le orecchie, tanto da portare il dott. Seifalian a concludere “Stiamo effettivamente lavorando a un volto sintetico: se si possono fare orecchio e naso, non è rimasto molto”.

Il team del dott. Aviles sta lavorando invece alla creazione del cuore. Partendo da un piccolo ripostiglio, nel 2010 è giunto, con il suo team di circa 10 collaboratori, ad un vero e proprio laboratorio, fornito di tutte le necessità del caso. Gli studi del dott. Aviles nascono e si sviluppano in Spagna, che risulta essere, tra l’altro, il paese con la maggiore percentuale di donazioni di cuore al mondo. Eppure, afferma il dottore, solo il 10% di chi ne fa richiesta, riceve il trapianto. Lo sviluppo della medicina legata alle cellule staminali, del resto, si muove dalla necessità di portare equilibrio tra domanda e offerta di organi. Eppure il cuore è forse l’organo più complesso da riprodurre, dal momento che le cellule al suo interno svolgono le funzioni più disparate, come regolazione del ritmo, la conduzione di segnali elettrici, la creazione dei vasi sanguigni, etc. Una complessità superata dall’”intelligenza” delle cellule staminali, che, inserite nel cuore, hanno sviluppato immediatamente capacità diverse, come se fossero informate sulle necessità del lavoro e sulla distribuzione delle competenze. Ovviamente la complessità del cuore non è risolta dall’intelligenza delle staminali. La quantità di ossigeno e nutrienti che l’organismo deve fornire alle cellule del cuore è regolata dal grembo materno nei mesi della gestazione; un meccanismo di regolazione che è stato riprodotto da un bioreattore che porta all’organo i nutrienti necessari ed espelle quelli in eccesso. Il tutto con estrema delicatezza per non uccidere le cellule, ma conservando il flusso di quasi 4 litri di sangue al minuto.

Il cuore ha bisogno di interconnessioni elettriche che funzionino costantemente, per garantire le quali il team spagnolo deve utilizzare uno strumento ampiamente noto, quello del peacemaker. Il dott. Aviles ha stimato i tempi di preparazione in laboratorio e sperimentazione pari a 5 o 6 anni, ma, considerati i limiti normativi e la necessità di garantire da subito un elevato standard di sicurezza, è più realistica un’attesa di 10 anni. La dott.ssa Taylor, che nel campo avviò test pioneristici sul cuore dei topi e che oggi osserva con attenzione gli studi del tema di Aviles, ha osservato che “Abbiamo aperto una porta e mostrato che è possibile [trapianto del cuore, ndr]. Ora non è più fantascianza, è diventata scienza”.


Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa

Stiu că mă citesc si oameni rupti de realitate. Remus Cernea e un deputat PSD, consilier de-al lui Ponta. Înainte de asta era un ecologist care se tot agita cu Partidul Verde (parcă) si nu-l băga nimeni în seamă. Acum câteva zile a propus să nu mai fie finantate cultele de la bugetul de stat. Toti politicienii i-au sărit în cap.

Să vă explic ce gen de idiot e Remus Cernea. Nu îi curge scuipat din gură. Nu e incult. E un băiat simtit, idealist, care încearcă să facă lumea un loc mai bun. Întelege foarte bine lucrurile complicate, în schimb are probleme cu alea simple. E genul de băiat care merge cu autobuzul, iar când ajunge acasă realizează că-i lipsesc o sută de mii pe care-i avea în buzunar. Si nu-si poate explica unde au dispărut. Tine minte clar momentul în care s-a uitat la ei si i-a băgat în buzunar. Stie sigur că nu a cumpărat nimic. Si nici n-au căzut prin autobuz, că sigur ar fi văzut băietii tuciurii care tocmai se lipiseră de el si l-ar fi atentionat. Chiar nu întelege, cum de au dispărut? Nu pricepe nici de ce-au sărit ca arsi politicienii când el a propus să nu mai dea bani de la stat Cultelor. De ce Ponta s-a dezis brusc de initiativa lui, de ce Radu Mazăre a promis că-i rupe picioarele si de ce toti parlamentarii care au zis că-l sustin au brusc pierderi de memorie?

E genul de idiot care nu întelege simbioza dintre politician si popă.

Există două tipuri de oameni în societate. O primă categorie sunt ăia capabili, care produc. Un procent mare din banii făcuti de ei se duce la stat. Ei vor de la politicieni să le explice transparent unde se duc banii lor si cum sunt cheltuiti în beneficiul cetătenilor. Cealaltă categorie e formată din fomisti si paraziti sociali. Ei vor de la stat gratuităti. Asta îi interesează. Ce le dă statul. Că de luat, n-are de unde să le ia. Cei din urmă sunt mai multi, mai prosti, mai usor de manipulat si mai disperati. Unui contribuabil îi iei votul cu un program coerent. Unui parazit cu o găleată, o pereche de cizme si un litru de ulei. Si la ăstia este puterea decizională la alegeri. La ăstia multi, prosti, usor de convins, care trăiesc din banii statului. Ăia care contribuie la banii statului si îi cară în cârcă pe restul sunt putini si greu de convins. Nici nu se oboseste nimeni să facă asta. Preferabil este nici să nu vină la vot. Oricum o să decidă niste prosti, nu ei, pe mâna căror hoti o să le intre banii. Votul e un bun. Si ca orice bun, valoarea lui e dată de pretul cel mai ieftin pe care-l găsesti. Al tău e scump. Nu îl vrea nimeni. O să cumpere de la băiatul cu scuipat în bărbie, pe o pereche de gumari.

Votantul român seamănă si se confundă la tipologie cu genul de om care se duce la biserică: simplu, cu frica lui Dumnezeu, care crede în promisiuni electorale si în viata de apoi. Se duce la biserică si la urna de votare fiind sigur că asta îi va asigura bunăstarea, desi nu a văzut niciodată o legătură directă în viata lui între votat, rugat si bine personal. Până la urmă si viata de apoi seamănă cu promisiunile electorale. Diferenta esentială e că uneori vezi si oameni destepti care cred în viata de apoi.

Si evident votantul român îl ascultă pe popă. Popa e omul lui Dumnezeu. Si votează ce îi spune popa. Iar popa îi spune să voteze ce politician e mai cu „frică de Dumnezeu”. Si „frica de Dumnezeu” se măsoară în cantitatea de contributii la biserică pe care e dispus să o aducă din bugetul local.

Că asa ajungi primar la tară. Îi promiti popii că-i construiesti biserică nouă din bugetul local. El te promovează la turma de credinciosi si na, asta e. Acum trebuie să faci o biserică cu trei turle lângă aia cu două, că i-ai promis. Iar dacă se supără, te tine minte la următoarele. Asa ajunge satul cu ulita neasfaltată, dar cu două biserici una lângă alta.

De-asta i-au sărit toti politicenii în cap. Ca politician nu te pui prost cu popa. Dacă ai făcut asta, spune la toti habotnicii cu trei clase că esti un necredincios si ăstia nu te mai votează, să nu îi bată Dumnezeu.

BOR a răspuns că propunerea lui Remus Cernea e absurdă.

Că la culte se duce doar 0,2% din bugetul de stat si e putin. Da, se duce doar 0,2% din bugetul de stat de la centru. N-are rost să se ducă mai mult, că nu ai cum să folosesti centralizat biserica ca instrument politic. Sustinerea bisericii în campanii electorale si-o calculează fiecare politician cu preotii locali. De exemplu, fix cum a fost ales primar în sectorul 3, la mine, analfabetul ăla functional de Robert Negoită, care si-a luat BAC-ul la 30 de ani. Băiatul a tăiat fondurile de investitii pentru apă curentă, canalizare si refacerea sistemului rutier pe 19 străzi, ca să dea 1,4 milioane de lei la 12 biserici. Om cu frica lui Dumnezeu, nu degeaba l-au sustinut preotii în campanie. Atât a costat sustinerea lor. Pe noi, nu pe el.

Iar argumentul suprem al BOR a fost secularizarea averilor mănăstiresti. Dacă nu stiti evenimentul, e de pe vremea lui Cuza. Băiat înfipt, cu ceva stofă de dictator, i s-a părut  dubios că mănăstirile detineau cam 15% din suprafata forestieră si agricolă a tării si le-a confiscat-o. Ei sunt de acord să nu mai primească bani de la stat, dacă li se dau toate pământurile înapoi.

Faptul că toate afacerile BOR sunt scutite de impozit la stat nu le ajunge.

Eu sunt de părere că averile mănăstiresti au fost deja retrocedate. Uitati-vă în jur: spitale, scoli, adăposturi.

Era un băiat, Luca, care a spus „Vindeti-vă bunurile, iar banii dati-i celor săraci”.

Nu asta era morala crestină? Biserica nu are nevoie de proprietăti materiale. Să trăiască din contributiile enoriasilor. Tot surplusul să-l dea la săraci. Nu despre asta era crestinismul la origini?

Just. Cuza a confiscat proprietătile materiale ale BOR. Dar la principiile crestine au renuntat singuri cu mult înainte.

Sursa: - Autor: Radu Alexandru

Articolo (p)Link Commenti Commenti (0)  Storico Storico  Stampa Stampa
Ci sono 4965 persone collegate

< settembre 2021 >

en - Global Observatory (605)
en - Science and Society (594)
en - Video Alert (346)
it - Osservatorio Globale (503)
it - Scienze e Societa (555)
it - Video Alerta (132)
ro - Observator Global (399)
ro - Stiinta si Societate (467)
ro - TV Network (149)
z - Games Giochi Jocuri (68)

Catalogati per mese - Filed by month - Arhivate pe luni:

Gli interventi piů cliccati

Ultimi commenti - Last comments - Ultimele comentarii:
Now Colorado is one love, I'm already packing suitcases;)
14/01/2018 @ 16:07:36
By Napasechnik
Nice read, I just passed this onto a friend who was doing some research on that. And he just bought me lunch since I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that Thank you for lunch! Whenever you ha...
21/11/2016 @ 09:41:39
By Anonimo
I am not sure where you are getting your info, but great topic. I needs to spend some time learning much more or understanding more. Thanks for fantastic information I was looking for this info for my...
21/11/2016 @ 09:40:41
By Anonimo


22/09/2021 @ 02:14:38
script eseguito in 797 ms