opinionPosted by grim(m)burger Tue, October 14, 2014 11:47:03
Two years ago a man went to work in Brussels and forgot his six month
old baby in the car. Upon his return after work, the child had died from dehydration.
After arrest and interrogation, he is arraigned for
involuntary manslaughter. Two years later the case comes to court. The
prosecution demands a conviction for involuntary manslaughter, but does not push
for any effective prison term or other punishment: they will be satisfied with
a confession of guilt. The defense
The judge has followed the defense and grants acquittal. What
is (more than) surprising is not the acquittal as such, because it was obvious
that the ‘crime’ was an accident rather than a willful act, and that the father has
already been punishment enough by having to live with the loss of his child and the memory
of his deadly negligence.
What is, indeed, stupefying, is that the judge motivates the
decision of acquittal by stating: if a person can forget a mobile phone in the
car, then (s)he can also forget his baby, for it shows that a person is not in
control of the brain function which we call memory. Therefore (s)he cannot be guilty.
Such judgments open a Pandora Box of questions, starting
with “to what extent is attention for a mobile equal to attention for your own
little baby” or, less straightforward, do we all suffer from serious Altzheimer from Day Zero?
Worse for "civilisation at large" though, is the very basis of the argument: namely the thought that our legal system
now has put a stake in the ground where “not remembering” has become just a bodily
function over which we have no direct control, a disease really, which (obviously) affects
some people more often than others, and some people in a totally different degree than
This ruling must be a first in the so-called civilised world (and is almost definitely impossible anywhere else in the world). Considering that Belgium is one of the most advanced and
rich countries in the world, the ruling implies that the (o so advanced) Belgians are less and less
in control of themselves, that they are turning into “just mammals”, with a
brain – at one time yonder the center of human supremacy – that leads a natural
life all by itself, like a liver perhaps. The ruling may also illustrate that
the judge, being Belgian among Belgians, is already a vivid example of this new
brand of homo sapiens, namely those people with brains they don’t at all control.
Grimburger, October 14th 2014
opinionPosted by grim(m)burger Sat, May 10, 2014 11:52:47
Proto-fascism in the West is spreading at an alarming rate.
Whether it is politics leading the press, or vice versa, is
difficult to ascertain for “outsiders”. It is obvious however that, almost independent of the
“political color” of any newspaper, one cannot deny that Western “burghers” are
force fed only one truth in world affairs, and that is the truth held by the
leaders of the mediatic ecosystem in Western capitals.
The escalating Ukrainian situation has been the latest
example, and an exquisite one at that. Today’s reporting was the cherry on the
cake: while Ukrainian tanks were threatening to crush civilians in the streets,
actually including one person shot dead at point blank (footage seen on tv),
the Int’l NYT thought it wise, and presumably journalistically correct , to
only report, in four lines, that “Ukrainian security forces attacked a police
station killing seven people in Mariupol”. At the same time, the editor elected
to inundate us with Putin’s visit to the Crimea, ad nauseum enhanced by
regurgitated opinion about the situation in the Crimea and gratuitous introspection
of Putin’s grander objectives.
No mention of Tiananmen!? Did the unarmed protesters that
wanted to stop the tanks in the streets of Mariupol have the wrong intentions perhaps
– “wrong” as seen from a railroaded Western opinion? Maybe, most likely even,
these people had truly peaceful purposes, as in “Stop this Massacre Now!” Why indeed
does anyone stand in front of a moving tank, unarmed? Is that not worth finding out? Are we afraid that the answers
interfere with our preprogrammed headlines?
And what about applying disproportional force!? Months ago
in Kiev, anti-government protesters occupied various buildings (some reportedly
still do!) and they were shot at by the then-Ukrainian security forces. The
press in the West raised hell and condemnation about undue force and, even,
criminal killing. What then does the same press have to say about the killings
in Mariupol on Friday May 9th 2014? No disproportional force?
Those of us that keep an open and critical mind for what
happens in the world around us, are not surprised that Western journalists
cover those killings … under a deafening blanket. I don’t know how you can call
yourself a journalist and perpetrate this “lying by smothering” unless you have
been infected by a fascistic virus, making you believe that your truth is the
only one around, and that it is your duty to spread “The Word” – your word.
Democracy has, meanwhile, many (hooded) enemies.
Saturday May 10th 2014
(Letter to the Editor of the Int NYT)