Dezvaluiri, Se intampla azi

Gunoaiele bolnave psihic din Politia Romana: bietul om a fost batut cu salbaticie!


Un bărbat în vârstă de 42 de ani, din comuna Pochidia, a fost acuzat de ultraj și arestat preventiv pe 4 mai. De fapt, acesta ar fi fost bătut crunt de polițiști, lucru care a fost dovedit de camerele de supraveghere din zonă.

Imagini socante, de o violențã extrem de gravã, ies la ivealã acum, despre ceea ce s-a întâmplat în realitate cu un bărbat de 42 de ani din comuna Pochidia, tatã a sase copii, care a fost arestat preventiv pentru ultraj pe 4 mai, scrie Vremeanoua.

Douã camere de supraveghere au reusit sã surprindã corectia cruntã, la care este supus „inculpatul” de cãtre cei doi tineri politisti, care îl acuzã de ultraj. În timp ce oamenii legii s-au plâns procurorului cã au fost agresati de Iulian Nechifor, iatã cã imaginile îi contrazic si îi aratã pe cei doi politisti snopindu-l în bãtaie pe bietul om.

Dacã acest lucru s-a întâmplat într-un loc public, nu e greu de închipuit „tratamentul” de care a avut parte Iulian Nechifor în sediul Politiei Bârlad, acolo unde oamenii legii stiau cã nu sunt vãzuti de nimeni.

Ca un argument în acest sens, este faptul cã bãrbatul a fost luat de ambulantã din sediul Politiei Bârlad si dus la spital, unde a fost investigat la Computerul Tomograf, fiind diagnosticat cu „Traumatism cranio-facial cu pierderea cunostiintei”, dupã cum a precizat medicul Angelica Gramaticu, purtãtorul de cuvânt al spitalului. Familia lui Iulian Nechifor a fost cea care a reusit sã facã rost de imaginile surprinse de camerele de supraveghere, în urma solicitãrii fãcute de avocatul apãrãrii.

Dezvaluiri, Se intampla azi

Astazi a fost indosariata plangerea pe numele agentului Theodor Lungu din cadrul Sectiei 20, urmeza sa fie inregistrata! Repet: seara ma asteapta pe strada si se uita la mine! SRI-ul urmeaza sa stabileasca daca baiatul acesta este bolnav psihic sau nu!


Agentul Lemnaru din cadrul Sectiei 20 Politie: un bosorog libidinos care ma vaneaza seara pe strada! SRI: „Le spui sa se legitmeze si ne anunti imediat, pentru a incepe sa-i monitorzam!”.


Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Ce sunt desenele animate?


Israel and its friends in Washington and New York never miss the opportunity to exploit the news cycle to tighten the screws a bit more, rendering any criticism of the Jewish state unacceptable or even illegal. Israel’s Ambassador to the United Nations Danny Danon has been persistently demanding that what he describes as anti-Semitic speech be criminalized. Danon declared that “The time for talking and having a conversation is over. What Israel and the Jewish community around the world demand is action – and now.”

How exactly Danon would enforce his definition of acceptable speech is not clear, but the demands to eliminate any negative commentary regarding the holocaust or on Israel and/or the behavior of diaspora Jews have been promoted for some time, resulting in laws in Europe that inflict harsh punish on those who dare to speak out. The latest incident in the campaign to eliminate the First Amendment in America took place oddly enough on the pages of the New York Times, which, in its international edition, ran a cartoon by a Portuguese cartoonist showing a dog with the face of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a leash leading a caricature of Donald Trump wearing a yarmulke and a blind man’s glasses. The Netanyahu-dog had a tag on its collar featuring a Star of David.

There are several ways to interpret the cartoon. It is, of course, an insult to dogs to have them depicted in such a fashion as to suggest that they might behave like the monstrous Israeli Prime Minister. No dog would sink so low. One observer, commenting from a dog’s point of view, noted that “We canines share that saying that ‘the eyes are the window to the soul.’ Look into our eyes and you’ll see love and trust. Look into Netanyahu’s eyes you see cunning and deceit so why stick his head on our body?”

On the other hand, one might see in the cartoon a serious message, that Netanyahu has been able to “wag the dog” with an ignorant and impulsive United States president who is so desirous of pandering to Jews both in Israel and in the U.S. that he is blind to his obligation to do what is best for the American people. Trump, who is the first president within memory not to own a dog, would rather stroke the head of the disgusting casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson than an intelligent and loyal Labrador retriever.

The cartoon was immediately blasted as being anti-Semitic, of course, because the definition of that “hate crime” has now been expanded to include criticism of anything that is even remotely Jewish. The Times twice went into full apology mode, promising never to do anything like that again and implying that heads would roll. The paper’s spokesperson stated that the publishers were “deeply sorry” and elaborated that “The image was offensive, and it was an error of judgment to publish it. Such imagery is always dangerous, and at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise worldwide, it’s all the more unacceptable. We are committed to making sure nothing like this happens again.”

But in spite of the abasement, the critics kept piling odd, some even claiming thatthe newspaper has a history of anti-Semitism. It was an odd assertion as the NYT has been Jewish owned since 1896, is home to numerous Jewish journalists, and its news coverage on the Middle East often serves as a mouthpiece for the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

All-Jewish all-the-time Times columnist Bret Stephens was in particularly fine form, attacking his own employer, writing in an op-ed entitled “A Despicable Cartoon in the Times” that appeared within hours of the cartoon’s surfacing. He demanded that the Times should engage in “some serious reflection as to how it came to publish that cartoon,” which he described as “an astonishing act of ignorance of anti-Semitism.” He elaborated how the cartoon shows “The small but wily Jew leading the dumb and trusting American. The hated Trump being Judaized with a skullcap. The nominal servant acting as the true master. The cartoon checked so many anti-Semitic boxes that the only thing missing was a dollar sign.” It might also be noted that the Times published on Sunday a photo that might be considered highly offensive to Catholics without any commentary by Stephens or from the paper’s editorial apologist.

Well, for once Stephens gets something right. The cartoon encapsulates the reality of U.S. policy in the Middle East and the relationship between Trump, who has made concession after concession to Israel, and his apparent masters. And yes, a few million Benjamins scattered around would have underlined why Trump misbehaves as he does.

And, in a demonstration that no crisis is too small to be exploited by the Trump Administration, Vice President Mike Pence tweeted, “We stand with Israel and we condemn antisemitism in ALL its forms.” Donald Trump himself followed up with his own tweet on the following day, writing that “The New York Times has apologized for the terrible Anti-Semitic Cartoon, but they haven’t apologized to me for this or all of the Fake and Corrupt news they print on a daily basis. They have reached the lowest level of ‘journalism.’”

The furor over a cartoon was useful as it covered up the latest outrage conducted by Israel against the Palestinians. The Israelis are again attacking Gaza, a story which the New York Times briefly reported in their Saturday edition. The Times headline in the online edition was “Gaza Militants Fire 250 Rockets, and Israel Responds With Airstrikes” before reporting that “Palestinian militants launched about 250 rockets and mortars into southern Israel from Gaza on Saturday, and the Israeli military responded with airstrikes and tank fire against targets across the Palestinian territory… Four Palestinians — including one militant, another man, a pregnant woman and her young daughter — were killed in Israeli strikes… That would bring the total number of Gazans fatally struck by Israeli fire since Friday to eight.”

Note how the Times reports the story. It gives the impression that the Gazans initiated a major attack by firing hundreds of missiles while Israel “responded” to Palestinian initiation of violence. Framing it in that fashion is a replay of the Israeli Foreign Ministry version of events, uncorroborated by any independent observers. Other accounts differ as to who started what and whom to blame. In reality, the Israelis have been threatening Gaza for months and have been moving troops up to the fence line for what is expected to be a final push to kill alleged “militants” in the Strip. The Times also wastes no time on humanizing the Arab casualties – the Palestinian baby that was killed was fourteen months old and named Seba Abu Arar. Her pregnant mother also died.

That the media in the United States should follow the Israeli line in reporting what takes place in the Middle East should surprise no one. It is called self-censorship and it will do until real laws can be drafted that will make speaking or writing anything unpleasant about Israel illegal. Referring back to the Times cartoon, the death of free speech is the reality that we American will eventually arrive at due to the actual power relationship that lies behind the metaphor of the wily Israeli dog leading the big, dumb American blind man.


Sonet de Edgar Allan Poe – Catre stiinta.


Stiinta, fiica a timpului batran,
Sub ochii-ti scrutatori totul se abate;
Smulgi inima poetului din san,
Vultur cu-aripi de grea realitate!

Cum sa-i fii draga? Cum sa te revere,
Tu, ce nu-l lasi, in marea lui risipa,
Sa caute in ceruri giuvaere,
Desi zbura cu-o ne’mblanzita aripa?

Din ceru-i n-ai smuls tu dulcea Diana?
Si n-ai silit driada de pe dealuri
Sa-si caute o stea mai diafana?

N-ai aruncat naiadele din valuri,
Si elfii din poiene, si pe mine
Din tamarinzi de vis, de sub lumine?


Teoria existentialista a lui Martin Heidegger.


Teoria existențialistă a lui Martin Heidegger Este considerat unul dintre cei mai importanți exponenți ai acestei mișcări filosofice, asociate în principal, autori ai secolului al XIX-lea și începutul secolului XX. La rândul său, existențialismul a fost o mișcare care a influențat în mare măsură curentul de Psihologie Umanistică, ai cărui reprezentanți au fost principalul Abraham Maslow și Carl Rogers și în ultimele decenii a fost transformat în Psihologie Pozitivă.

Acest articol explorează principalele abordări ale controversatului filosof german Martin Heidegger în contribuțiile sale la filosofia existențialistă instanței, inclusiv propria înțelegere a operei sale, ca parte a existențialismului. Să începem să vedem ce anume este acest curent filozofic.

  • Articol asociat: „Psihologia umanistă: istorie, teorie și principii de bază”

Ce este existențialismul?

Existențialismul este un curent filosofic care a fost clasificată gânditori la fel de diverse ca Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche, Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir, Albert Camus, Miguel de Unamuno, Gabriel Marcel, psihologul Karl Jaspers, scriitorul Fiódor Dostoievski sau regizorul de film Ingmar Bergman.

Toți acești autori au în comun lor să se concentreze asupra naturii existenței umane. În special, ei s-au concentrat pe căutarea sensului ca motor al unei vieți autentice, pentru care au subliniat importanța libertății individuale. Ei au fost, de asemenea, uniți prin criticile lor privind abstractizarea și concepția gândirii ca aspect central.

Martin Heidegger, filozoful care ne preocupă, a negat legătura cu filosofia existențialistă; De fapt, în lucrarea sa au fost distinse două perioade, iar al doilea nu poate fi clasificat în acest curent de gândire. Cu toate acestea, propunerile și obiectele de studiu ale primei sale etape au un caracter existențialist evident.

  • Poate că te interesează: „Teoria existențialistă a lui Albert Camus”

Biografia lui Martin Heidegger

Martin Heidegger sa născut în 1889 în Messkirch, un oraș din Germania. Părinții săi erau devotați romano-catolici; Aceasta a condus-o pe Heidegger să studieze teologia la Universitatea din Freiburg, deși în cele din urmă a decis să se dedice filosofiei. În 1914 a primit doctoratul cu o teză despre psihologism, o tendință care evidențiază rolul proceselor mentale.

În anii 1920 a lucrat ca Profesor de filosofie la Universitatea din Marburg și mai târziu la Universitatea din Freiburg, în care ar exercita pentru restul carierei. În acest timp, el a început să ofere discuții axate pe ideile sale despre existența umană și despre semnificația ei, pe care o va dezvolta în cartea sa „Ființa și timpul”, publicată în 1927.

În 1933, Heidegger a fost numit rector al Universității din Freiburg, poziție pe care a lăsat-o 12 ani mai târziu. Afilierea și atitudinea sa participarea activă la Partidul Muncitorilor Socialiști din Germania – cunoscut mai bine ca „Partidul nazist”-; de fapt, Heidegger a încercat fără succes să devină filozoful de referință al acestei mișcări.

Heidegger a murit în 1976 în orașul Freiburg im Breisgau; La acea vreme aveam 86 de ani. În ciuda criticilor le-a primit pentru colaborarea sa cu naziștii, de contradicțiile dintre lucrările sale și ignoranța altora din aceeași epocă, filosoful astăzi este considerat unul dintre cele mai importante secolului XX.

  • Ați putea fi interesat de: „Teoria existențialistă a lui Søren Kierkegaard”

Teoria existențialistă a lui Heidegger

Lucrarea principală a lui Heidegger este „Ființa și timpul”. În ea autorul încercați să răspundeți la o întrebare cheie: ce înseamnă mai exact „ființa”?? De ce consta existența și care este caracteristica ei fundamentală, dacă există una? În acest fel, el a recuperat o întrebare care, în opinia sa, a fost lăsată deoparte de filozofie încă din perioada clasică.

În această carte, Heidegger afirmă că această întrebare trebuie reformulată în căutarea simțului ființei, mai degrabă decât a ei în sine. În acest sens, el afirmă că nu este posibil să se facă separarea sensului de existență de un context spațial și temporal (cu moartea ca element de structurare) determinat; Ei bine, vorbiți existența umană ca „Dasein” sau „a fi în lume”.

Spre deosebire de Descartes și altele reprezentate de autori anteriori, Heidegger credea că ființele de gândire nu sunt izolate de lumea din jurul nostru oameni, dar foarte interacțiunea cu mediul este un aspect de bază al ființei. De aceea, nu este posibil să stăpânească de sine și să încerce să facă conduce la o viață lipsită de autenticitate.

în consecință, capacitatea umană de a gândi are un caracter secundar și nu ar trebui să fie înțeles ca ceea ce ne definește ființa. Descoperim lumea prin faptul că suntem în lume, adică de existența în sine; pentru Heidegger, cogniția este doar o reflectare a acesteia, și de aceea reflecțiile și alte procese similare sunt de asemenea.

Existența nu depinde de voință, ci mai degrabă suntem „aruncați” în lume și știm că este inevitabil ca viața noastră să se încheie. Acceptarea acestor fapte, precum și înțelegerea faptului că noi suntem o parte a lumii, ne permite să înțelegem viața, pe care Heidegger o conceptualizează drept proiectul de a fi în lume.

Ulterior, interesele lui Heidegger s-au mutat la alte subiecte. El a subliniat importanța limbii ca instrument fundamental pentru înțelegerea lumii, el a explorat relația dintre artă și căutarea „adevărului“ și a criticat atitudinea disprețuitoare și iresponsabilă a țărilor occidentale în ceea ce privește natura.

Dezvaluiri, Se intampla azi

Gunoaiele din Politia Romana, animalele bolnave psihic: tanara studenta AMENINTATA si SANTAJATA!


Şeful unui inspectorat de Poliţie este anchetat de Controlul Intern al IGPR într-un dosar în care este acuzat de ameninţare şi şantaj.

Georgiana, o tânără studentă, l-a reclamat pe poliţist, cu care ar fi avut o relaţie amoroasă, că o şantajează şi o ameninţă de câteva luni de zile.

Mai mult, poliţistul profită de funcţia folosindu-şi subalternii pentru a o intimida pe fosta amantă, potrivit

„Mi-a transmis mesaj, printr-un intermediar, că mă va termina şi că îmi va trimite mascaţii, ca să mă salte. Efectiv, îmi este frică. Face ce vrea, de parcă este poliţia lui. Se laudă că are pile la minister şi că a aranjat deja dosarul în care este cercetat de Controlul Intern al IGPR. Am reuşit să obţin strămutarea dosarului, fiindcă dosarul de ameninţare era instrumentat de prietenii lui, procurori”, a declarat femeia.

„Într-o seară, a sunat cineva la uşă. Am deschis şi era un agent care s-a recomandat drept poliţistul de proximitate, însă nu era, fiindcă pe acela îl cunosc. Mi-a cerut buletinul. Mi s-a părut incredibil că un poliţist vine, îţi bate la uşă fără vreun motiv temeinic, apoi îţi cere buletinul. După câteva zile, m-am trezit cu alt poliţist la uşă. Acesta susţinea că vrea să dea de fostul meu iubit şi mi-a cerut să îi dau datele lui. Sunt convinsă au fost trimişi de şeful lor, ca să mă intimideze”, a declarat tânăra.

Georgiana l-a chemat ca martor chiar pe poliţistul care i-a bătut la uşă. Potrivit ancetatorilor, declaraţia acestuia este desprinsă din filmele de comedie. Poliţistul susţine că în timp ce patrula prin zonă, a auzit sunete ciudate care proveneau de la etajul patru, al blocului pe unde trecea.

A alergat pe scări şi a nimerit exact la apartamentul unde locuieşte Georgiana. I-a cerut acesteia actul de identitate şi apoi a plecat.

Gunoaiele din Politia Romana, burtosii adunati de prin boscheti: PEDOFILIE!!

Într-o altă ocazie, un alt poliţist a venit la locuinţa femeii şi i-a cerut date despre un fost iubit pe care aceasta l-a avut cu mai mult timp în urmă.


Ofiterul CIA Philip Giraldi – Palestinienii sunt de vina!


If you have read a recent New York Times op-ed entitled “Care about Gaza? Blame Hamas” written by none other than the White House “special representative for international negotiations” Jason Greenblatt you would understand that the misery being experienced by Palestinians in Gaza is all their own fault. Greenblatt, who is Jewish of the Orthodox persuasion, just happens to be a strong supporter of Israel’s settlements, which he claims are “not an obstacle to peace.” He is very upset because some naysayers are actually putting some of the blame for the human catastrophe in Gaza on Israel, which we Americans all know is our best friend in the whole world and our most loyal ally. If that were not so, the New York Times and those fine people in Congress and the White House would surely inform us otherwise. And anyway, what are a few lies and war crimes between friends?

Greenblatt, who knows nothing about foreign policy and diplomacy apart from advising Donald Trump on Israel while serving as the Trump Organization chief legal officer, is supposed to be working hard with Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner negotiating “deal of the century” peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Betting is that the arrangement on offer in June will consist of American acquiescence in Israel declaring sovereignty over nearly all of land that the Arabs still hold on the West Bank with the remaining local population being bribed heavily to either move to Jordan or stay in designated non-Jewish sectors and stop complaining.

Jason Greenblatt is a perfect example of the type of “dual” loyalist who cannot appreciate that his overriding religious and ethnic allegiances are incompatible with genuine loyalty to the United States. Willingness to subordinate actual American interests to a those of a foreign nation means that he and others like him are contributing to the decline and fall of the country he was born in and which has made him wealthy. If he had any real integrity, when presented by Trump with the opportunity to benefit Israel at the expense of the United States he should have declined the offer knowing that he would inevitably be biased, making it impossible for him to fairly consider either American interests or those of the Palestinians.

Greenblatt knows that whatever lies he tells it will not matter in the least because no one will ever hold him accountable and it is all done for a great cause, which is Israel, to include anything that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants. And what could be better than to hold down a job that pays in the neighborhood of $200,000 a year plus a full benefits package for doing nothing but “creating facts on the ground” for the country that one loves best?

The Greenblatt op-ed includes some really choice “analysis” that does not correspond with the reality of what is going on in what remains of Palestine. He begins immediately with a heavy dose of Israeli propaganda, asserting that “Hamas has left Gaza in shambles,” before providing a partially accurate but morally neutral assessment of the sorry state of the enclave: “Life there is difficult, sad and abnormal. Only buildings with generators actually maintain steady power. The lack of power affects everything from preserving fresh food to treating sewage. If a person in Gaza falls ill, he is likely to find trained medical professionals unable to help because of the lack of equipment and medicines. The people there — even the talented and educated — can’t find jobs. The store shelves are empty. The shoreline, which in many other places in the Mediterranean would be filled with beach resorts, is covered in the raw sewage and debris from successive wars. The cost of conflict is seen in all aspects of life in Gaza.”

The dismal picture of conditions in Gaza, largely true, does not admit to any Israeli role in the suffering, or, at least, Greenblatt is blind to it. Israel controls both the land border and the seafront. It manages the enclave as if it were an outdoor concentration camp and military free-fire zone for its 2 million Arab inhabitants. Lack of electricity is caused by Israeli bombing of power plants, which also make it impossible to treat sewage. Proliferating sewage appears to be a preferred weapon for Israelis as settlers on the West Bank are also fond of letting it flow onto Palestinians farms and villages.

Food in Gaza is limited only to what can be grown locally or to what the Israelis allow in. Likewise medicines are only available when Israel permits. Gazans cannot leave without Israeli permission and on the seafront, fisherman who are brave enough to go out are frequently shot dead by Israeli gunboats if they go too far.

Israel bombs hospitals, schools and places of worship indiscriminately, always claiming that they are being used by terrorists even when United Nations observers are on site and declare that the allegations are palpably untrue. And then there are isolated incidents , to include the deliberate murder by naval gunfire of four young boys innocently playing soccer on a beach and the killing by missiles of nine other children who were watching television. An American military attache stationed in Israel once observer soldiers on the Israel side engaging in target practice by shooting at women hanging out their laundry on the Gaza side of the fence and Israeli snipers have proudly worn t-shirts showing a graphic of a pregnant Arab woman in a gunsight with the text “two for one” underneath.

Currently, protests by unarmed Gazans along the Israel-Gaza fence have resulted in 260 Palestinian deaths, mostly by Israeli sniper fire. Nearly 7,000 others have been shot and wounded. Those killed include 32 medical workers and 50 children. Twenty-one children have had their limbs amputated and many more have been permanently disabled.

Thousands more Palestinians have died from Israeli bombs, rockets and artillery shelling since 2009. In 2014 alone, more than 2,000 Gazans were killed and more than 10,000 were wounded, including 3,374 children, of whom over 1,000 were left permanently disabled. More than 7,000 homes were destroyed. The grossly disproportionate carnage in Gaza initiated by Israel was so outrageous that even many Americans began to wake up to what their tax dollars were buying. After 2014’s death toll, support for Israel began to wane. Currently 51% of Americans view the Israeli government unfavorably in spite of relentless pro-Israel propaganda by the U.S. media.

Jason Greenblatt goes on to claim that “The Arabs in Israel generally live normal lives and, in many cases, thrive. In fact, Arab citizens of Israel live freely compared with Arabs in many other countries in the region… Why are others moving forward while Gaza sinks further into despair and disrepair? Because Hamas, the de facto ruler of the Gaza Strip, has made choices… Hamas is to blame for Gaza’s situation.”

Greenblatt is wrong about the claimed happy lot of Palestinians living in Israel. Israel has recently declared itself a Jewish State. In practice, there are more than fifty laws and regulations that make Christians and Muslims second class citizens. Churches and Mosques are regularly vandalized and Christian and Muslim holy sites are regularly destroyed by the authorities while a prominent Rabbi has recently declared in the wake of Sri Lanka that proposals that all churches should be destroyed inside Israel should be considered but are “complicated.” Arab Israelis cannot get building permits, their schools are underfunded and they are discriminated against or ignored in nearly all their interactions with the government. Local communities can declare themselves Arab-free zones and they can refuse to sell houses to Palestinians.

The fundamental problem with Greenblatt and others like him is that they have a very selective moral compass and choose not to recognize apartheid even when it is right in front of them. Israel is a fundamentally racist occupying power with a colonial-settler mindset, which sees the Arabs as ignorant savages that have to be ideally removed, but if not, restrained by forced or even killed if necessary. And, like all purveyors of war crimes, the Israelis and their diaspora cheerleaders blame the victims for their plight. Greenblatt will have an excuse for any atrocity committed by Israel. The Israel Defense Force is shooting Palestinians individually now but if it starts doing them in groups he would no doubt come up with a good rationalization justifying the practice.

Israel is a Middle Eastern superpower, heavily armed and unconcerned over the consequences for starting wars and killing Arabs. To argue as Greenblatt does that there is some kind of “fighting” going on with Hamas “instigating” wars against Israel is ludicrous given the disparity in power between the two sides. It is largely retaliatory Hamas homemade bottle rockets, which kill or injure very few, against fighter jets, snipers and artillery barrages that kill thousands. And the really sad part for Americans is that the United States is deeply complicit in what goes on, sending “special representatives” like Greenblatt into the region on the taxpayer’s dime to argue Israel’s case.