As I observed in this post on Obama’s Pivot to the East, structure is important. Structure contains the culture of any movement of energy and culture doubles by multiply eight. Twice the structure containing culture represent 8 times the power of the movement the culture represents.
The structure in this tweet looks like a one-legged balance beam laying on the knife edge that is the Persian Gulf, held-up on the “heavy end” by the leg of Pakistan, the foundation of the Arabian Sea, with the muscle being South Asia (the home of the larges population of Muslims?). It is not so much a doubling of the population in any specific area, but the static forces on the structure itself.
As the Caliphate “finds” its way, its only advantage (as if the West will be able to take advantage of the position of the Caliphate) will be in its ability to take a little heat, cause by the weight of Geopolitics on the Geo-spacial areas of the world, off the that Geo-strategic area east of Afghanistan.
Structural-wise, it is the most contested area of the world largely supported by a leg, which, if not weak, whose force is made static by nuclear weapons.
Maybe balance is enough and the West has no real command of the situation, only some control over where it is postioned and who controls the Caliphate.
Velina Tchakarova on Twitter: “Geo-spacial, geostrategic and geo-energy importance of #Afghanistan for the #USA #geopolitics http://t.co/oBjh1c0fw7 http://t.co/GPWy2gtcum”.
I am going to try and build my new house in a decentralization way. At least that is a part of my Strategy. Strategy comes with an end, ways and means—Decentralization will be the “way”.
As the Designer, of this project, what I am planning to do is build the foundation and deck at the same time as I install the plumbing and electrical into the wooden structure. This will be accomplished through decentralization. Now, before I start getting a bunch of hate mail, hear me out.
Decentralization doesn’t mean there isn’t a “center”—it means each node of the network carries the same potential energy as their potential “center” would. And by “center” I mean brand.
So my “means”, which are resources, will come from the distribution of energy surrounding this project. So to does that mean that “local” gets moved further out as a center position, but I am still using “stuff” (resources) that would be put into the house anyway, if the house was built locally. So the problem with decentralization comes down to the question of: who will do the work local businesses or large corporations.
From “work” we create a “workspace”, and Orientation begins in the “workspace”. So the people who will do the work will also be the ones within the “workspace” of my design. If this is indeed a Community Project, and that is a big “if”, then the second problem with decentralization becomes: how much will the end of this project affect the community? If the people in command of the resources doesn’t make something off of this, then it is hard to gain any “enthusiasm” to this project.
But remember when you are talking enthusiasm, when you double the energy within the area of a community, it’s “end” doesn’t look like the 4 times the doubling of the area represents. The potential created is 8 times what you once had before you started. Or in other words, what you had at the beginning of the “end”.
The potential created by this project depends largely on how many homes I build on this property—one or the potentially 3 homes—and if these homes become a part of the community.
The BP oil spill left an oily “bathub ring” on the sea floor that’s about the size of Rhode Island, new research shows.
But what kind of tub are we talking about. Mine is made out of glass, so one of those eraser pads works great on.
Now that we know the structure, it must be easier to deal with.
via Gulf Oil Spill Left Rhode Island-Sized Oily ‘Bathtub Ring’ On Seafloor, Study Finds.
The American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world’s largest general scientific organization and publishers of Science Magazine, has re-stated their opposition to the type of misleading food labeling scheme proposed by Measure 92. The AAAS Board of Directors has repeatedly stated such labels would be misleading to consumers. Further, the AAAS statement contradicts the false claims and scare tactics of Measure 92’s proponents, stating that genetically modified foods “are the most extensively tested crops ever added to our food supply.”
Further the AAAS Board states that labeling initiatives such as Measure 92 are “not being driven by any credible scientific evidence” but instead “are being advanced by “the persistent perception that such foods are somehow ‘unnatural,’” as well as efforts to gain competitive advantages within the marketplace, and the false belief that GM crops are untested.”
As the article quoted above suggests, I believe as they do; “Such labels would be misleading to consumers.”
But I also think that the tipping point between what has GMO and what hasn’t has been reached, and it is too close to call if something is modified or not. For me I just assume everything is modified, and go on.
But “go on” to where?
The conversation in which we determine that modified foods are good or not good has not really started yet, but I support this measure with the hopes that it will.
I also do not believe it will be costly (unless the voters let it become costly), as this is really only an education bill and technology along with the economy is education driven. In today’s economy education can happen quickly and economically.
Once those at the top of our government make the determination that, for all practical purposes, all the foods out there are GMO unless it is printed on the label, then it is a short amount of time for education to quickly take hold and get the word out.
In other words, a “printed label” in today’s economy is cheap, because it is relatively easy to get the “word out” on-the-cheap.
It just needs a little push and the right kind of “printer”.
via No On Oregon Measure 92 – A Costly and Misleading Labeling Measure.
Turkish troops and tanks have lined the border but have not crossed into Syria.
I have a hard time thinking that Turkey is against the ideal of a Caliphate. More likely to me, Turkey is against the idea that the Caliphate shaping up will not be a part of the once great Ottoman Empire.
The USA is not now fighting a war against a Caliphate in the Middle East. The USA is fighting a war against the opposition to its homeland.
A Caliphate in the Middle East is not against the interest of the USA, if we convert to natural gas and defend the homeland (the F35 and missile defense). There is a huge anti-war movement shaping-up in the USA that is threatening to move the US’s line of defense towards the Pacific (Obama’s Pivot) and South America, and away for the MENA.
I think my saying that the fight in the Middle East is now against ISIS, but not one against a Caliphate, is also true of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). I am sure both Turkey and KSA are more than willing to battle ISIS, if it means that the Caliphate forming will be more to their image, than that of the Levant.
Perhaps getting into the fight will mean more to Turkey when the Kurds get their own nation-state, which, because of the oil the Kurds hold and the Kurdish population in Turkey, will not be in Turkey’s interest.
In the mean time, Turkey will take advantage of the situation, as that advantage becomes available.
Look out Kurds, get your shit together, because the big-boys are a-coming. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the fire!
via BBC News – Kurds protest against Turkey as IS advances on Kobane.
“…due to the ever-rising costs”
Well, before we get to the point when nobody will be able to afford rent, let’s look at those ever-rising costs.
“Are those costs structural, cultural, something in the system, or does it just have something to do with asset management”, may be the first question to raise in the debate.
via The Critical Difference Between Rentier Wealth And Wealth Creation | Zero Hedge.