Category Archives: Creeping Facism

Patrick Janssens is een gevaarlijke knul

De Antwerpse burgemeester Patrick Janssens (socialist) wil dat er gesloten instellingen komen, waar drugsdealers die illegaal in ons land verblijven worden vastgehouden tot ze teruggestuurd worden naar hun land van herkomst.

Zulke nonsens zetten me kwaad bloed. Buiten het feit dat de waardering van drugs en hun schade aan de maastschappij volledig en compleet niet gebasseerd is op feiten (wat het dus een geloof maakt), wil men mensen die dealen (en dus geen criminelen zijn, daar ze niemand in elkaar slagen, noch stelen) als zwaar criminelen behandelen. Op basis van een geloof en wat hol gebral wil men een zwakke minderheid (illegal with pot in the pockets) nog meer onder druk zetten om daarbij goedkoop politiek success te halen.

Hoe zit het overigens met hun cordon ‘sanitaire’ en hun onwil om een andere 36% van de bevolking mee te laten regeren ?

Ik vind persoonlijk dat men politici als janssens, als zwaar crimineel moet behandelen, en het land uitzetten. Bij voorkeur naar de oorlogsgebieden waar deze drugsdealers vandaan komen.

De Standaard censureert

De Standaard, een andere kutgazet in vlaanderen. Recentelijk vond ik het opmerkelijk dat de berichtgeving in deze gazet bijzonder gekleurd was. Op zich niet zo vreemd, alle kranten moeten netjes in de pas lopen. Doch in de publieke fora van dezelfde krant is zoiets niet te zien: daar vind men vooral mensen (vlamingen) die toch bezorgt zijn over de momenteel ondemocratische werking van de belgische politiek.

het laatste artikel dat verscheen was getiteld: ‘Franstalingen mogen de wever spreken’. Een vreemde utidrukiking op zijn best, omdat het uiteindelijk het werk is van politic om met elkaar te spreken, en voor zover ik zie, niemand hen verboden had met dewever te spreken. (http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=DMF20110414_146), waar de titel weliswaar reeds verandert is). De eerste 10 minuten nahet verschijnen van dit ‘objectief stukje journalistiek’ kwamen voornamelijk berichten binnen van mensen die overtuigd waren dat de vlaming het eindelijk begint te begrijpen. Voornamelijk zeer negatief tegenover de wever. Allemaal sfeermakerij, niet zo vreemd. Doch de densiteit van de negatieve berichten was veel hoger dan in andere commentaren in dezelfde gazet. Daarom vroeg ik me af hoe dit mogelijk was.

Uiteindelijk heb ik dan geprobeert een vraag te stellen op het forum of ik de enige was die vond dat de standaard zeer anti-NVA is. Dat bericht is nooit verschenen. Gecensureerd m.a.w.

Leterme, crap actor of the year

leterme_idioot1 January 2011: Van De standaard: Voor het nieuwe jaar dat ingezet wordt, kunnen we ons alleen maar overtuigen dat Leterme een idioot is. Zie foto: ‘zijn dit dan deze asielzoekers ? Verdorie, wie had dat gedacht ? Dat zijn precies toch ook mensen.’ Allesinds het veilig spelen: Niet te dicht bij komen, ik wil geen ziektes van jullie. Bedankt voor de photoshoot mijn achterban zal dat zeker leuk vinden. Ik sta er toch niet te gedistantieerd op ? Zeker ? Ha dan is het goed. Stuur de fotos maar naar de pers en wens ook hen een gelukkige nieuwjaar.

letermer-idiot221 April 2011: En dan nu het vervolg: Jep inderdaad, het is heel erg spijtig maar jullie gaan het land uit. Overigens: zorg ervoor dat de tekst onder de foto zegt dat ik hen ‘bezocht’ heb.

Tax Evasion on Capital: is it even relevant ?

Taxes on transaction and taxes on capital. What does that lead to ?

Recently people started to talk about ‘tax evasion on capital’ and that capitalists are criminals. US citizens place their savings abroad, while European citizens place their savings in Switzerland. So why do they do that ? Mainly because they do not trust their own government not to steal their money by taxing it into oblivion. The question is of course: why would a government want a tax on capital ? After all, every transaction nowadays is taxed at various locations, so for all money that is created or used, the ‘administration’ gets it share. Should it receive a second share of that money ? Well: ‘no’, I would imagine. Of course, the focus on tax on capital is a distraction because the biggest problem is not the tax on the capital but rather the taxes on the transactions.

As a very rudimentary example. Assume we have 4 parties which transfer money from one to another. Such money transfer is normally believed to be associated with a form of ‘true value’ exchange. Let us assume we have a number of random transaction from A to B, in which each transaction is taxed at a fairly common rate of 7%. At the end of each year, the capital of each person is taxed at a rate of 1%. If they all start with an initial capital of 10000 units and perform each year 10 random transfers what do we get after 10 year ?

Year 1
Balances: 10000 10000 10000 10000
Transactions 0 to 2: 9383(656.81); 1 to 3: 2777(194.39); 2 to 3: 6644(465.08); 3 to 0: 7179(502.53); 0 to 1: 3226(225.82); 1 to 3: 7442(520.94); 2 to 3: 7646(535.22); 3 to 2: 9688(678.16); 0 to 2: 2424(169.68); 1 to 0: 160(11.2); 2 to 0: 4571(319.97); 3 to 1: 1284(89.88); 0 to 2: 1654(115.78); 1 to 3: 3342(233.94); 2 to 3: 4356(304.92); 3 to 2: 18674(1307.18); 0 to 2: 1564(109.48); 1 to 3: 23(1.61); 2 to 0: 8497(594.79); 3 to 2: 1476(103.32); 0 to 1: 5643(395.01); 1 to 3: 2147(150.29); 2 to 1: 7754(542.78); 3 to 0: 224(15.68); 0 to 2: 131(9.17); 1 to 2: 4710(329.7); 2 to 0: 11412(798.84); 3 to 1: 326(22.82); 0 to 2: 12702(889.14); 1 to 1: 961(67.27); 2 to 1: 15729(1101.03); 3 to 3: 1428(99.96); 0 to 1: 1181(82.67); 1 to 1: 22390(1567.3); 2 to 1: 913(63.91); 3 to 3: 726(50.82); 0 to 1: 678(47.46); 1 to 3: 12782(894.74); 2 to 0: 53(3.71); 3 to 2: 3370(235.9);
Yearly round 0: 8.0898; 1: 93.7962; 2: 34.7075; 3: 118.317;
Year 2
Balances: 800.89 9285.82 3436.04 11713.4
Transactions 0 to 0: 687(48.09); 1 to 2: 6411(448.77); 2 to 0: 3696(258.72); 3 to 3: 5376(376.32); 0 to 3: 210(14.7); 1 to 0: 346(24.22); 2 to 0: 3236(226.52); 3 to 0: 3583(250.81); 0 to 2: 3434(240.38); 1 to 3: 489(34.23); 2 to 2: 2120(148.4); 3 to 2: 2036(142.52); 0 to 1: 5783(404.81); 1 to 2: 5152(360.64); 2 to 0: 3054(213.78); 3 to 0: 4994(349.58); 0 to 0: 2747(192.29); 1 to 1: 712(49.84); 2 to 1: 1895(132.65); 3 to 3: 44(3.08); 0 to 1: 2510(175.7); 1 to 1: 3423(239.61); 2 to 3: 7311(511.77); 3 to 3: 2541(177.87); 0 to 3: 549(38.43); 1 to 0: 5411(378.77); 2 to 1: 161(11.27); 3 to 1: 8095(566.65); 0 to 3: 2506(175.42); 1 to 0: 1547(108.29); 2 to 3: 325(22.75); 3 to 1: 1316(92.12); 0 to 3: 5979(418.53); 1 to 0: 3115(218.05); 2 to 3: 24(1.68); 3 to 1: 4539(317.73); 0 to 3: 2810(196.7); 1 to 1: 1109(77.63); 2 to 3: 46(3.22); 3 to 3: 1045(73.15);
Yearly round 0: 40.9684; 1: 91.7377; 2: -8.09716; 3: 50.496;
Year 3
Balances: 4055.87 9082.04 -801.619 4999.11
Transactions 0 to 0: 1114(77.98); 1 to 0: 1722(120.54); 2 to 2: 55(3.85); 3 to 0: 2502(175.14); 0 to 0: 7955(556.85); 1 to 2: 5613(392.91); 2 to 0: 774(54.18); 3 to 3: 490(34.3); 0 to 1: 7637(534.59); 1 to 0: 5229(366.03); 2 to 3: 1337(93.59); 3 to 0: 1541(107.87); 0 to 3: 1019(71.33); 1 to 1: 1699(118.93); 2 to 3: 1134(79.38); 3 to 1: 317(22.19); 0 to 1: 5366(375.62); 1 to 0: 6223(435.61); 2 to 3: 228(15.96); 3 to 1: 3495(244.65); 0 to 0: 1712(119.84); 1 to 3: 4135(289.45); 2 to 2: 371(25.97); 3 to 0: 1298(90.86); 0 to 2: 1176(82.32); 1 to 0: 1083(75.81); 2 to 1: 1518(106.26); 3 to 0: 2909(203.63); 0 to 3: 524(36.68); 1 to 3: 1490(104.3); 2 to 3: 393(27.51); 3 to 1: 2248(157.36); 0 to 2: 6787(475.09); 1 to 3: 1241(86.87); 2 to 2: 2869(200.83); 3 to 2: 779(54.53); 0 to 0: 1352(94.64); 1 to 3: 565(39.55); 2 to 0: 624(43.68); 3 to 3: 158(11.06);
Yearly round 0: 30.2693; 1: 3.32035; 2: 68.9417; 3: 8.74516;
Year 4
Balances: 2996.66 328.714 6825.23 865.771
Transactions 0 to 0: 302(21.14); 1 to 3: 75(5.25); 2 to 0: 6721(470.47); 3 to 2: 680(47.6); 0 to 2: 6767(473.69); 1 to 1: 117(8.19); 2 to 2: 781(54.67); 3 to 1: 163(11.41); 0 to 0: 685(47.95); 1 to 2: 226(15.82); 2 to 1: 6366(445.62); 3 to 0: 20(1.4); 0 to 2: 42(2.94); 1 to 1: 3335(233.45); 2 to 0: 356(24.92); 3 to 0: 9(0.63); 0 to 3: 695(48.65); 1 to 2: 135(9.45); 2 to 3: 104(7.28); 3 to 3: 39(2.73); 0 to 2: 513(35.91); 1 to 2: 42(2.94); 2 to 3: 660(46.2); 3 to 1: 895(62.65); 0 to 0: 854(59.78); 1 to 1: 129(9.03); 2 to 0: 13(0.91); 3 to 3: 114(7.98); 0 to 2: 350(24.5); 1 to 0: 374(26.18); 2 to 0: 30(2.1); 3 to 2: 30(2.1); 0 to 3: 414(28.98); 1 to 0: 3615(253.05); 2 to 2: 211(14.77); 3 to 0: 87(6.09); 0 to 0: 2234(156.38); 1 to 1: 2179(152.53); 2 to 2: 53(3.71); 3 to 3: 442(30.94);
Yearly round 0: 45.4074; 1: 25.6982; 2: 2.89579; 3: 7.56241;
Year 5
Balances: 4495.34 2544.13 286.683 748.678
Transactions 0 to 1: 3791(265.37); 1 to 0: 363(25.41); 2 to 3: 101(7.07); 3 to 3: 83(5.81); 0 to 0: 513(35.91); 1 to 3: 1987(139.09); 2 to 3: 2(0.14); 3 to 0: 1097(76.79); 0 to 2: 1244(87.08); 1 to 2: 2904(203.28); 2 to 0: 1252(87.64); 3 to 1: 1045(73.15); 0 to 1: 1121(78.47); 1 to 0: 15(1.05); 2 to 0: 820(57.4); 3 to 2: 512(35.84); 0 to 1: 1117(78.19); 1 to 3: 1222(85.54); 2 to 2: 1357(94.99); 3 to 1: 578(40.46); 0 to 2: 170(11.9); 1 to 2: 24(1.68); 2 to 1: 53(3.71); 3 to 0: 223(15.61); 0 to 3: 27(1.89); 1 to 0: 2492(174.44); 2 to 1: 1625(113.75); 3 to 0: 253(17.71); 0 to 3: 2528(176.96); 1 to 2: 2140(149.8); 2 to 0: 881(61.67); 3 to 1: 343(24.01); 0 to 3: 466(32.62); 1 to 1: 0(0); 2 to 2: 2081(145.67); 3 to 3: 1365(95.55); 0 to 2: 196(13.72); 1 to 2: 186(13.02); 2 to 1: 1804(126.28); 3 to 0: 2632(184.24);
Yearly round 0: 30.8123; 1: 18.9482; 2: 4.26364; 3: -1.70492;
Year 6
Balances: 3050.41 1875.87 422.1 -168.787
Transactions 0 to 1: 1278(89.46); 1 to 0: 2113(147.91); 2 to 2: 198(13.86); 3 to 0: 108(7.56); 0 to 0: 1384(96.88); 1 to 1: 447(31.29); 2 to 0: 325(22.75); 3 to 2: 270(18.9); 0 to 2: 1203(84.21); 1 to 1: 611(42.77); 2 to 2: 110(7.7); 3 to 1: 54(3.78); 0 to 2: 2477(173.39); 1 to 1: 423(29.61); 2 to 1: 1965(137.55); 3 to 0: 289(20.23); 0 to 1: 243(17.01); 1 to 0: 2303(161.21); 2 to 0: 1275(89.25); 3 to 1: 557(38.99); 0 to 0: 1675(117.25); 1 to 1: 734(51.38); 2 to 0: 315(22.05); 3 to 3: 1148(80.36); 0 to 0: 191(13.37); 1 to 2: 40(2.8); 2 to 1: 98(6.86); 3 to 3: 251(17.57); 0 to 2: 2304(161.28); 1 to 3: 668(46.76); 2 to 1: 66(4.62); 3 to 2: 23(1.61); 0 to 3: 1199(83.93); 1 to 2: 167(11.69); 2 to 0: 1096(76.72); 3 to 3: 7(0.49); 0 to 1: 316(22.12); 1 to 0: 373(26.11); 2 to 1: 1029(72.03); 3 to 3: 164(11.48);
Yearly round 0: 13.6851; 1: 12.6634; 2: 2.8371; 3: 1.96243;
Year 7
Balances: 1354.83 1253.67 280.873 194.281
Transactions 0 to 0: 167(11.69); 1 to 3: 807(56.49); 2 to 1: 269(18.83); 3 to 0: 527(36.89); 0 to 3: 372(26.04); 1 to 0: 93(6.51); 2 to 2: 3(0.21); 3 to 0: 354(24.78); 0 to 1: 888(62.16); 1 to 0: 403(28.21); 2 to 2: 0(0); 3 to 1: 420(29.4); 0 to 1: 750(52.5); 1 to 1: 2063(144.41); 2 to 1: 5(0.35); 3 to 3: 8(0.56); 0 to 2: 497(34.79); 1 to 2: 918(64.26); 2 to 1: 142(9.94); 3 to 0: 14(0.98); 0 to 2: 3(0.21); 1 to 2: 878(61.46); 2 to 2: 668(46.76); 3 to 2: 4(0.28); 0 to 0: 4(0.28); 1 to 1: 252(17.64); 2 to 2: 1674(117.18); 3 to 2: 31(2.17); 0 to 0: 27(1.89); 1 to 1: 59(4.13); 2 to 3: 307(21.49); 3 to 2: 92(6.44); 0 to 3: 12(0.84); 1 to 2: 242(16.94); 2 to 3: 852(59.64); 3 to 1: 610(42.7); 0 to 2: 21(1.47); 1 to 1: 507(35.49); 2 to 1: 629(44.03); 3 to 0: 291(20.37);
Yearly round 0: 3.01959; 1: 11.9013; 2: 4.44443; 3: 0.367107;
Year 8
Balances: 298.94 1178.23 439.999 36.3436
Transactions 0 to 2: 228(15.96); 1 to 0: 276(19.32); 2 to 1: 469(32.83); 3 to 0: 6(0.42); 0 to 1: 265(18.55); 1 to 3: 1029(72.03); 2 to 2: 129(9.03); 3 to 3: 921(64.47); 0 to 2: 41(2.87); 1 to 1: 253(17.71); 2 to 3: 63(4.41); 3 to 2: 993(69.51); 0 to 2: 3(0.21); 1 to 1: 315(22.05); 2 to 3: 794(55.58); 3 to 2: 590(41.3); 0 to 0: 5(0.35); 1 to 1: 38(2.66); 2 to 1: 775(54.25); 3 to 2: 67(4.69); 0 to 3: 0(0); 1 to 3: 457(31.99); 2 to 3: 81(5.67); 3 to 2: 592(41.44); 0 to 3: 3(0.21); 1 to 2: 132(9.24); 2 to 2: 664(46.48); 3 to 3: 2(0.14); 0 to 3: 1(0.07); 1 to 1: 137(9.59); 2 to 3: 109(7.63); 3 to 3: 38(2.66); 0 to 1: 0(0); 1 to 0: 393(27.51); 2 to 2: 546(38.22); 3 to 1: 98(6.86); 0 to 0: 103(7.21); 1 to 2: 234(16.38); 2 to 3: 75(5.25); 3 to 0: 66(4.62);
Yearly round 0: 4.5351; 1: 0.357521; 2: 6.94649; 3: 0.00233607;
Year 9
Balances: 448.975 35.3946 687.702 0.231271
Transactions 0 to 0: 194(13.58); 1 to 1: 18(1.26); 2 to 2: 417(29.19); 0 to 3: 262(18.34); 1 to 1: 25(1.75); 2 to 0: 586(41.02); 3 to 3: 76(5.32); 0 to 3: 167(11.69); 1 to 0: 25(1.75); 2 to 3: 26(1.82); 3 to 2: 212(14.84); 0 to 0: 465(32.55); 1 to 1: 3(0.21); 2 to 1: 83(5.81); 3 to 3: 40(2.8); 0 to 2: 491(34.37); 1 to 3: 67(4.69); 2 to 2: 307(21.49); 3 to 0: 126(8.82); 0 to 2: 3(0.21); 1 to 2: 5(0.35); 2 to 2: 494(34.58); 3 to 2: 29(2.03); 0 to 2: 141(9.87); 1 to 1: 5(0.35); 2 to 1: 599(41.93); 3 to 2: 95(6.65); 0 to 1: 0(0); 1 to 1: 339(23.73); 2 to 3: 122(8.54); 3 to 3: 14(0.98); 0 to 0: 0(0); 1 to 1: 306(21.42); 2 to 3: 53(3.71); 3 to 3: 192(13.44); 0 to 3: 0(0); 1 to 0: 73(5.11); 2 to 3: 3(0.21); 3 to 2: 131(9.17);
Yearly round 0: 0.743646; 1: 4.86775; 2: 1.34402; 3: 0.431812;
Year 10
Balances: 73.6209 481.907 133.058 42.7494
Transactions 0 to 0: 3(0.21); 1 to 3: 340(23.8); 2 to 2: 90(6.3); 3 to 0: 192(13.44); 0 to 1: 16(1.12); 1 to 1: 83(5.81); 2 to 1: 121(8.47); 3 to 3: 42(2.94); 0 to 2: 221(15.47); 1 to 3: 36(2.52); 2 to 2: 111(7.77); 3 to 3: 75(5.25); 0 to 0: 2(0.14); 1 to 2: 157(10.99); 2 to 1: 104(7.28); 3 to 1: 116(8.12); 0 to 0: 5(0.35); 1 to 3: 56(3.92); 2 to 2: 26(1.82); 3 to 2: 99(6.93); 0 to 0: 10(0.7); 1 to 1: 27(1.89); 2 to 0: 82(5.74); 3 to 3: 6(0.42); 0 to 0: 42(2.94); 1 to 0: 83(5.81); 2 to 2: 258(18.06); 3 to 3: 23(1.61); 0 to 2: 102(7.14); 1 to 2: 61(4.27); 2 to 2: 239(16.73); 3 to 0: 10(0.7); 0 to 3: 19(1.33); 1 to 0: 44(3.08); 2 to 3: 121(8.47); 3 to 2: 98(6.86); 0 to 2: 49(3.43); 2 to 2: 385(26.95); 3 to 3: 16(1.12);
Yearly round 0: 0.447909; 1: -0.00183191; 2: 3.84468; 3: 0.523594;
Year 11
Balances: 44.343 -0.181359 380.623 51.8358

As can be observed: such a (rudimentary) taxsystem bleeds taxpayers dry. The simulation does not take into account the problem that a small number of people are much richer than the largest section of the population (a power law). One could introduce this as well. However, the only thing it would do, is to delay the inevitable outcome: a complete bankrupcy of all entities that pay taxes. The only way one can evade such outcome is either to cheat or to get into the administrative side and claim money from there. This is also what many people do: they work at universities, they work in bureaucracy, administration, in public service sectors, etc. For big companies this means that they need to set policy (clearly, they want to get some of their taxes back) or let the taxpayer pay their apparent bankrupcy (banks). Nevertheless, after such struggles, the end result is inevitably: a complete state control over what they do; after which it is very likely that the state will start paying taxes to itself in some form of internal powerstruggle; thereby inflating money.

The Zealot, the Bitch and the Vagina: some Observations on Airport Security

ItemsNotPermittedMediumThis year we went to London. Below is a report on the things we learned about airplane travel.

Zealot: ‘Sir, you are not allowed to carry liquid in the airplane’
Me: ‘Certainly not sir, I understand, but I have some liquid in my brain’
Zealot, not knowing how to react: ‘Haha, I think everybody has liquid in their brains !’
At this moment I was about to react: ‘you certainly don’t, I think it’s desert-dry up there’, but reason took over and I kept quiet

Airports are completely out of control. Authorities seem so ridiculously scared of ‘bombs’ and ‘terrorists’, that as a result their measures no longer stand in relation to the thread. Just think about it: how many people are in an airplane -and- how many people are queued in front of the security checkpoint ? If I were a terrorist I would probably blow up the queues instead of the planes.

Airport security also lacks creativity. Most of the ideas come from those darn terrorists: first there is the thread of weapons on airplanes, so let’s scan people with metal detectors. Then there is a thread of weapons in shoes, so they started scanning shoes. Then there is the thread of liquid bombs, so they prohibit liquid on board. ‘Excuse me sir, do I detect some water there ? You must certainly be a terrorist !’, ‘No Sir, I’m not this rha-dhi-khal the-rho-rhist, I think that must be that glowing radioactive man over there’. Which in our case would have been appropriate since at that time (end of October 2006) there was this assassination of a former spy with radioactive material.

People in law ‘enforcement’ often seem to have only access to some lower mental capacities. Just for the sheer irony they must have forgotten to list ‘bombs’ and ‘weapons-of-mass-destruction’ in the panel to the right 🙂

Bitch bitching: ‘Can I open your bag sir ?’
Me thinking: No bitch, stay out of it.
Me saying: ‘Yes of course !’

This law-enforcement zealot lacked all higher brain functions. She was looking for a reward from the very people she was ‘checking out’ (invading privacy might be a better term). It was almost like: ‘please take of your pants sir, I really need to poke your ass to verify that you did not store a secret nuclear silo in there, it is due to those darn terrorists of course ! They might blow up the plane you now ?

Who is she anyway to implicitly tell me that I am a terrorist. It is not me running around with weapons, nor am I obliterating people with all kinds of fancy bombs and ‘high-precision’ weapons. Neither am I the one taking amphetamines to bring peace to the middle east, nor do I need XTC to be able to ‘talk’ about the crimes I committed…

Me to bitch: ‘this is rather ridiculous isn’t it’. on which she takes the phone and starts whining: ‘Do you remember Madrid’. I was about to say: ‘No, and why should I ? I am at an English airport’ but reason took over. It was however quite clear that she was completely mentally drained.

Bitch: ‘look these are used as detonators, dhe_tho_nhe_thors. What if you are 9000 Ft in the air and something happens ? Then what will you say ?

I was about to start a philosophical discussion on the chance of actually being hit and the reason why England is in this ridiculous state of fear. Of course, this would take us way too far and she was not really asking questions. She was merely making sure that everybody who passed through the checkpoint was _really_ afraid because your neighbor could be a terrorist. Probably one of them was indeed an American or Englishman.

However, since I did not give the bitch the reward she was looking for, she must have figured that she could get some mental support from the already purple looking man behind me. He was furious about the situation. So, for some reason, she turned to him and said

‘do you see sir, this is what I have to put up with every day !’. (I didn’t say that much !).

As expected, she didn’t get much reward there either. How far have we come: law enforcement personnel looking for candy from the very people they subjugate. Fuck them. She is a bitch and if the bitch does not behave properly then she does not get a reward. If bitch wants happy life then she should resign job. And so should everybody involved in this chirade of law-enforcement. In the future those people will probably say ‘we didn’t know’. Well: how could you if you never listen ?

Then arriving in Oslo we got a warning that from 6 November on, people would not be allowed to carry liquids on the airplane ! My goodness, is Europe becoming equally stupid ??? These days travel is a far cry from ‘open boundaries’ in Europe. Next thing they do is to reinstate curfew, allow governments to check your bank-accounts, install cameras at every corner of the street and make sure people spy at each other for security reasons. After all, your neighbor might be a terrorist: does he have regular sex with his wife ? Before or after pledging legiance to the flag ?

At the checkpoint check in Oslo, I looked at our new inspection agent, the vagina. Holding the no-liquid poster in my hands, I said
Me: ‘this is a joke right ?’
Vagina: ‘No sir, regulations !’.

As if ‘regulations’ is the answer. I could already guess that these were regulations.
Me: ‘C’mon this is a Joke, how paranoid can one become ?’

The vagina gave no answer and kept smiling, so I said: ‘yeah keep on smiling’. At which point she didn’t know how to react and looked me furiously in the eyes clearly pondering what to do. Shall we drag him to a ‘full body inspection’. She didn’t, but it was quite clear that she felt really powerful about it and that she would really enjoy to of use her ‘power’. In the future, those people will all claim: ‘We didn’t know what happened, we were misguided. We never wanted power over others’.

I’m probably too sensitive. *grmpf*