iDemo Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 Ja sam nesto kao imao komentar u vezi Gladijatora - kako istorijski nema veze sa zivotom, pa ovamo pa tamo - imperator iz jedne epohe, general iz druge - i tako dalje - kad mi kaze jedan sto se razume - tebra, po to je ipak samo fiction, cak i ako je (delom, donekle etc) baziran na istinitoj prici...
kobni zelaya Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 Ja sam nesto kao imao komentar u vezi Gladijatora - kako istorijski nema veze sa zivotom, pa ovamo pa tamo - imperator iz jedne epohe, general iz druge - i tako dalje - kad mi kaze jedan sto se razume - tebra, po to je ipak samo fiction, cak i ako je (delom, donekle etc) baziran na istinitoj prici... I naravno, taj što se razume je u pravu - i jeste fiction. Ali, imaš raznih fictiona - zamisli fiction o herojskom generalu Mladiću kako oslobađa žene i decu Srebrenice. Šta bi mislio o takvom fictionu? Međutim, nisam stavio to da bi sad nešto filozofirali, nego čisto onako, pošto mi je zanimljiva ta propaganda.
iDemo Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 ma da - to tako pocne a zavrsi k'o Spilberg - ono Spielberg was also awarded the Department of Defense Medal for Distinguished Public Service by Secretary of Defense William Cohen at the Pentagon on August 11, 1999; Cohen presented the award in recognition of Spielberg's film Saving Private Ryan A nama jos smeshno kako je nekad Veljko Bulajic prolazio s drugom Starim, ne?
kobni zelaya Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 Jebi ga, oni bar imaju Clinta i Spilberga, a mi smo spali s Bulajića na R. Bajića, u tome je naša beda. :)
iDemo Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 Dragojevic je napravio dobar i cenjen ratni film. Lepa sela... Sad sam naleteo (spremajuci garazu za seobu) na flajer iz neke '96te iz lokalnog arty bioskopa - sve pohvale plus poredjenja sa velikanima Holivudskim.
kobni zelaya Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) Istina, i meni je palo na pamet da bi trebalo više da cenimo Dragojevića, kada sam video scenu sa televizorom 9/11 kod Klinta. edit - mislim, razumem ironiju, ali pogledaj kod Dragojevića tu vrstu scene. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq-pxVGC9nw Edited March 18, 2015 by kobni zelaya
pacey defender Posted March 18, 2015 Posted March 18, 2015 http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/s-gun-show-vendor-booted-racist-target-sheets-article-1.2152926 A South Dakota man has been banned from a gun show after he was caught selling racist posters to be used in target practice. The unidentified vendor had been charging 10 cents each for the black-and-white signs that showed a grotesque caricature of an African-American under the words "Runnin' N----- Target,
pacey defender Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 ovo je super. kao miralem i eraser :) http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/02/19/jon-stewart-and-me/
Anduril Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 U veci ovih razmirica oko nove Azijske banke za razvoj, i ovde dole se spominje ista i vazna poenta - da SAD moraju dalje da grade globalne institucije sa drugim drzavama a posebno Kinom. The Indispensable American Partner MADRID – The United States is gearing up for that most intoxicating (and exhausting) of political events: an open-seat race for the presidency. With US President Barack Obama's eight years in office coming to an end, and Vice President Joe Biden unlikely to run, the race will be without an incumbent. As a result, the election could be less a referendum on the last eight years than a contest of ideas, with foreign policy emerging as a key topic. The potential candidates have already sought to stake out their positions on key foreign-policy issues, with early Republican frontrunner Jeb Bush, for example, delivering a speech devoted entirely to the topic. As for the Democrats, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's likely nomination (despite recent revelations that she used her personal email account to conduct government business) reinforces foreign policy's centrality to the election. Recognizing this trend, the World Economic Forum Global Agenda Council has brought together a group of experts and practitioners to help infuse substance into the foreign-policy discussions leading up to the US election, including by preparing a public discussion paper. From my perspective as the group's only European member, the overarching message should be that the US must conceive of itself not as “the indispensable power," as it now does, but as “the indispensable partner." This is not merely a matter of semantics; such a change will require the US to re-conceive its role in the world. But the payoff, for both the US and the liberal world order that it created, would be substantial. The key to success will be America's ability to retain the best – and abandon the worst – of that most American of notions: exceptionalism. The sense in the US that the country is unique, with a special mission to promote prosperity, security, and freedom worldwide, has long shaped American foreign policy. The idea extends as far back as 1630, when John Winthrop, the Massachusetts Bay Colony's first governor, declared that his community must act as a “city upon a hill," setting an example for the world. In doing so, he planted the seed of the values-based approach that was adopted by the US as it spearheaded the development of the rules and structures that order today's world. Those rules and structures have delivered unprecedented economic growth, benefiting all (though the US has reaped the greatest rewards). But, ironically, the notion of American exceptionalism often has led the US to undermine the international system that it nurtured. Indeed, US history reveals a persistent isolationist streak, in which the “city upon a hill" is not a beacon, but a fortress. At times, including over the last six years, the belief that the US is better off going it alone has led to withdrawal from the world. This tendency was not a serious issue before World War II (though the people of Abyssinia and Manchuria may beg to differ). But today, US withdrawal from the international system that it built has serious ramifications – namely, the kind of chaos and lawlessness exemplified by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Yet isolationism is not America's most destructive impulse. Worse is its “exemptionalism": its penchant for opting out of the rules that it promotes – and often actively enforces – elsewhere. The lengthy – and growing – list of major international conventions left unratified by the US includes the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, the Mine Ban Convention, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Beyond the resentment that such an attitude engenders, American exemptionalism directly undermines multilateral institutions' capacity to address challenges that the US is unwilling or unable to resolve on its own. How can the US expect China to follow rules on maritime delimitation in the East and South China Seas when it refuses to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea? US President Barack Obama's administration has tried to create the illusion of a change of course in this regard, pushing “soft" deals that allow the US to participate without submitting to binding rules. Such was the case with the much-lauded “handshake agreement" between Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping on carbon-dioxide emissions in November. But, though such arrangements make for great headlines, they do not provide the stability and predictability necessary for long-term success. For that, hard rules and strong institutions are essential. If the US is to serve as the world's “indispensable partner," it must recommit to the rules-based order that has served it – and the world – so well for the last seven decades. It should begin by strengthening the flagging institutions that have served as the backbone of the liberal international order. Specifically, the US should finally approve the International Monetary Fund reform package that was agreed in 2010; promote real progress at the Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in May; and ensure that this December's UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference in Paris yields formal commitments. Indispensable partnership is about helping countries help themselves. It requires vision, commitment, and, most important, leadership. A frank discussion about America's foreign policy could prove vital to ensuring that this “city upon a hill" remains a beacon of hope – and a catalyst of progress.
MancMellow Posted March 19, 2015 Posted March 19, 2015 (edited) U veci ovih razmirica oko nove Azijske banke za razvoj, i ovde dole se spominje ista i vazna poenta - da SAD moraju dalje da grade globalne institucije sa drugim drzavama a posebno Kinom. Sećaš se ovoga? Zasto mislis da je sukob SAD i Kine neizbezan? SAD+Tajvan+Japan+Koreja+Vijetnam+Filipini+Indonezija+Tajland su sasvim dovoljna i stabilna protivteza Kini tako da tu za oba partnera nema razloga da ruse status kvo cak i ako Kina prestigne SAD. Takodje, Bliski istok postaje sve manje vazan za SAD na duzi rok jer su resili svoju energetsku zavisnost pa ce i tu verovatno naci zajednicki jezik. Da nije jednog malog pokazatelja da nece biti bas tako: kineskih investicija po svetu. Pogledaj Iran – 50 milijardi dolara u infrastrukturu! A to je samo Iran. A gde Pakistan (42 milijarde) gde je Afrika, a gde je, cini se, juzna i centralna Evropa, itd. I sad to uporedi sa ovim baksisom sto evroatlanski saveznici nude onima koji kao treba da se vezu za njih. To sto Kinezi imaju drugaciji pristup od drzava koje se naslanjaju na, da tako kazem, evropsko-levantinske (spoljno)politicke tradicije, to ne znaci da im je cilj mnogo drugaciji. Pre ili kasnije Kina ce zahtevati slobodan izlaz na svetska mora, to je vise nego verovatno. Ako budu imali Rusiju pored sebe, to je prvorazredna opasnost po svetski mir. To moze da bude i za 15-20 godina, to nije sporno. Ukrajina je velika rusko-američka svinjarija gde objektivno sahranjuju jedni druge. Edited March 19, 2015 by MancMellow
kobni zelaya Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 Amerikan Sniper, odosno političke implikacije oko njega, treći deo. :)
pacey defender Posted March 20, 2015 Posted March 20, 2015 (edited) Ohio man cleared of murder after 39 years in jail to get $1 million payment(Reuters) - An Ohio man freed last year after spending 39 years in jail for a murder he did not commit will receive more than $1 million from the state for his wrongful imprisonment, court records show. An Ohio Court of Claims judge on Thursday ordered that just over $1 million be paid to Ricky Jackson, the longest-held U.S. prisoner to be cleared of a crime. Jackson was convicted along with Wiley Bridgeman and Bridgeman's brother, Kwame Ajamu, for the 1975 murder of Harold Franks, a money order salesman in the Cleveland area, after a 12-year-old boy testified he saw the attack, court papers show. The boy, Eddie Vernon, recanted his testimony years later, and told authorities he had never actually witnessed the crime. There was no other evidence linking Jackson to the killing. http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-man-cleared-murder-39-years-jail-1-063803465.html Edited March 20, 2015 by pacey defender
maximus Posted March 21, 2015 Posted March 21, 2015 fuckin fuck - 39 x 365 x 24 = $2.92/hr for jail time nadam se da nije 1mil minus jew lawyers 33%fee in which case it's buck96 Jbg, oh well
Recommended Posts