Skitnödig debatt! Att vara elak mot en ständig! Ord & Mord

Det mördas med ord och med vapen. När 22-åringen som sköt senator Giffords hade tömt det första magasinet och skulle ladda om slet en kvinna magasinet ur handen på honom och kastade iväg det. Den pistol som 22-åringen använde var en 9 mm Glock 19. En Glock använde Peter Mangs också men han behöver ju inte vara skyldig för det. I Sverige laddas för en skitnödig kulturdebatt.

Peter Englund – den ständige – är redigt taskig mot Björn Ranelid i ett blogginlägg. Ett inlägg som gick in som etta på svenska wordpress direkt. Det säger något om vår pk-bloggankdamm. ”Allt som håller Ranelid borta från skrivandet välkomnas.”
Min kommentar där jag försöker rädda Ranelid med ord under inlägget lyder så här:

Det var snudd på taskigt! Nästan känsla av att det är legitimt att slå på en som redan ligger. Va´kan han inte skriva Ranelid?
Tycker nog att karln är strong som ställer upp och dansar i sin ålder. Strindberg var ju redan död. Ranelid sa väl inget om dokusåpor i allmänhet? Han gav väl en känga åt Svenska Akademin. Är Let´s Dance en dokusåpa. Nä, inte i min fatabur.

Ranelid är rasande och hotar att lämna tillbaka sina Akademipriser. Visst kan Ranelid skriva. Varför har han annars fått priser? Nä, det kanske handlar om ren och skär avundsjuka från Englunds sida. Det är för mycket ljus på Björn och ännu mer kommer det att bli när tuppen med sin plym börjar steppa i tv-rutan. Och sist men inte minst så vet ni väl att det viktiga inte är vad som sägs utan VEM det är som säger något. Dessutom är det alltid bra med en liten fejd så eftervärlden får något att rota i.

Expr SvD DN


…….

Det här inlägget postades i Människor och har märkts med etiketterna , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bokmärk permalänken.

20 kommentarer till Skitnödig debatt! Att vara elak mot en ständig! Ord & Mord

  1. Jo det är klart att Ranelid kan skriva, men han har blivit hackkyckling för många. Det här utspelet vinner Ranelid. Helt klart. Jag har försökt att läsa Peter Englunds bok om första världskriget: Stridens skönhet och sorg, men det var helt omöjligt. Så tråkig och tjock bok. Vi hittade den för någon hade slängt den i en papperskorg. Får väl också kommentera då. Hos Englund.

    Gilla

  2. Helena Palena skriver:

    Ann Helena: Visst är det kul när tupparna på dyngensta´n dras om maken och härligheten. Båda kan skriva men dom skriver på olika vis. Har läst Poltava. Vet hur svårt det var för Englund att få den publicerad. Bonniers – draken nekade visst och han fick på ut den på Atlantis om jag inte missminner mig. Men det är kamp överallt om ljuset från moderns och faderns blick. Det eviga barnet blickar upp mot sina föräldrar på olika sätt. Allt ljus på mig mor eller far! Snälla!

    Ja, det är Ranelid som går segrande ur denna strid. Tänk om han vinner Let´s Dance på det! Då blir det något att skriva om. Tänk att vara både kutlruell och populär i dom svenska hemmen!

    Gilla

  3. Leif skriver:

    Var det inte redan Strindberg som sade ” Det är synd om kulturpersonligheterna”?
    Eller kanske passar det bibliska citatet ” Du märker grandet i din grannes öga men icke bjälken i ditt eget”?

    Gilla

  4. Helena Palena skriver:

    Leif: Kanske han sa så. Men mer korrekt är nog: ”Det är synd om människorna”. Tack för bibelcitatet. Så bra. Så bra. Så sant! Tack! Kanske det är det han har Peter Englund – en stor takbjälke i skallen. Tycker han borde vara nöjd så långt upp som han nu kommit på parnassens topp. Det kan man tycka. Och det tycker jag. Nöj, dig människa! Nä, mycket vill alltid ha mer.

    Gilla

  5. Antonia skriver:

    Står också oförstående. Varför hackar alla på Ranelid? Vad har han gjort som retar så många?
    Vuxenmobbing skulle jag kalla det.
    Kan man inte ha kul om man är författare? Måste man ha pannan i djupa veck hela tiden?
    Men klart skriver man som Englund gör så får även han stor genomslag. Kanske det är meningen!

    Gilla

  6. Helena Palena skriver:

    Antonia: Pannan i djupa veck! Pennan kanske som är veckad. Skulle vara kul att prova på att skriva med en gåspenna. Ska prova. Har hittat två fina fjädrar från min tupp som jag sparat. Han han även släppt fina stjärtfjädrar som är böjda och som glimmar i fina färger. Otroliga färger. Såna fjädrar har grenadjäerna i sina plymer i Italien. Apropå tupparnas kamp! För till syvende och sist handlar det om hanar som slåss.

    Gilla

  7. Jonas Bergdahl skriver:

    Enligt Svd-artikeln var det Ranelid som startade elakheterna. Peter Englund påstår också det. Då finns det väl ingen anledning att tycka synd om Björn Ranelid? Vill han inte bli angripen själv så behöver han ju inte angripa andra. ”Arga katter får rivet skinn.”

    Gilla

  8. Helena Palena skriver:

    Jonas: Må så vara! Men för den sakens skull behöver väl inte en ständig sekreterare i Akademin nappa! Och vad var det som var så farligt i detta:

    ”Björn Ranelid, en av deltagarna, sa att Akademi-ledamöterna skulle behöva ”ta sig ut från kammaren och börja dansa”. ”

    Alla skulle behöva ut och stuffa runt lite mer. Jättekul att dansa. Rocka speciellt!

    Gilla

  9. Anneli P skriver:

    Hör man nånsin nåt om Ranelid i nåt litteratursammanhang? Nej, det är alltid något bråk när det gäller den karln. Det är tydligt i det Ranelid skriver att det viktiga för honom är att vara KÄND. ”Att skriva autografer i Ikea-kön och på bensinmackar.” Själva skrivandet tycks vara sekundärt för honom. Jag tror att de flesta som hälsar på honom på bensinmackarna inte läst hans böcker, utan att han för dem är en clown, ”titta där är den där pompösa solarieskadade narcissisten, som alltid bråkar med nån”. ”Jag ska ägna mycket tid av mitt liv åt att se till att han får äta upp det här”. Ägna tid åt det du Ranelid, allt som håller dig borta från skrivandet välkomnas, tänker iaf jag när jag läser detta.

    Gilla

  10. Helena Palena skriver:

    Anneli P: Tur att vi får tycka olika. Än i alla fall. Visst är Ranelid ett stort ego. Det tycker jag är härligt. Man måste se igenom. Han är en liten gosse som vill bli älskad. Han bjuder i alla fall på sig själv. Och visst kan han skriva. Men vänta – snart blir det högskolepoäng på Ranelid med.

    Gilla

  11. gotiskaklubben skriver:

    Trots sitt uppblåsta ego riktar showbizkillen Ranelid en så pass relevant kritik att gråsuggan Englund ser sig tvungen att ge igen. Skickligt bara det.

    Gilla

  12. Ping: Snille utan smak? | Motviktigt

  13. Helena Palena skriver:

    Gotiska: Instämmer. Smart kast av Ranelid. Han agnade rätt. Englund gick på det. Han svalde till och med kroken.

    Gilla

  14. Znogge skriver:

    Sandlådenivå och nedlåtande. Speciellt från Peter Englund.

    Gilla

  15. tannhauser3 skriver:

    Visst.

    Det är såå synd om Ranelid. Och det är synd om människorna, sade onde onde hemske August Strindbergs, som var sååå hemsk såå…

    Men syndast är det idag om någon stackars svärmor, som heter Helena…

    Läs här bara… om ni ville ha sandlåda, ska ni få sandlåda…

    http://tannhauser3.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/stackars-stackars-lilla-svarmor-helena-benaouda-det-ar-saa-synd-om-henne/

    Gilla

  16. Fidel Castro on the shooting. There is a lot of truth in what he has written:-

    Reflections of Fidel
    Without violence, without drugs
    (Taken from CubaDebate)

    YESTERDAY I analyzed the atrocious act of violence against U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, in which 18 people were shot, six died and another 12 were wounded, several seriously, among them the Congresswoman with a shot to the head, leaving the medical team with no alternative other than to try to save her life and minimize, as much as possible, the consequences of the criminal act.

    The nine-year-old girl who died was born on the same day the Twin Towers were destroyed and was an outstanding student. Her mother declared that there has to be a stop to such hatred.

    A painful reality came to my mind, which surely would concern many honest U.S. citizens who have not been poisoned by lies and hatred. How many of them know that Latin America is the region with the greatest inequality in the distribution of wealth in the world? How many have been informed of the rates of infant and maternal mortality, life expectancy, medical services, child labor, education and poverty prevalent in other countries of the hemisphere?

    I will confine myself to merely noting the level of violence, starting with the detestable event which took place yesterday in Arizona as a starting point.

    I have already indicated that every year hundreds of thousands of Latin American and Caribbean immigrants, driven by underdevelopment and poverty, make their way to the United States and are arrested, often even separated from their close family members, and returned to their countries of origin.

    Money and merchandise can cross the border freely, but, I repeat, not human beings, no. Drugs and weapons, on the contrary, cross unceasingly in one direction or the other. The United States is the largest consumer of drugs in the world and, at the same time, the largest supplier of weapons, symbolized by the gunsight cross-hairs published on Sarah Palin’s website and the M-16 on ex- marine Jesse Kelly’s election posters with the subliminal message to fire the full barrel.

    Is U.S. public opinion aware of the level of violence in Latin America associated with inequality and poverty?

    Why is the relevant information not released?

    An article by Spanish journalist and author Xavier Caño Tamayo, published on the ALAI website, offers some facts that U.S, citizens should know.

    Although the author is skeptical about the methods currently being used to defeat the power gained by the big drug traffickers, his article provides information of unquestionable value which I will try to summarize within a few lines.

    ”… 27% of violent deaths in the world occur in Latin America, although its population represents less than 9% of the planet’s total. Over the last 10 years, 1.2 million people have died violently in the region.

    ”Violent slums occupied by military police, murders in Mexico, disappearances, assassinations and massacres in Colombia […] the highest murder rate in the world is in Latin America.

    ”How can such a terrible reality be explained?

    ”The answer is provided in a recent study by the Latin American Social Science Foundation. The report shows how poverty, inequality and lack of opportunity are the fundamental sources of violence, although trafficking in drugs and handguns act as accelerators of murder crimes.

    ”According to the Ibero-American Organization of Youth, half of Latin American young people aged 15 to 24 are without work and have little chance of finding any. […] According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), the region has one of the highest rates of informal employment among youth and one in four Latin American youths is not working or studying.

    ”According to ECLAC, in the last few years, poverty and extreme poverty in Latin America has affected and is affecting 35% of the population, almost 190 million Latin Americans. And, according to the OECD [Cooperation and Economic Development Organization], some 40 million more citizens have succumbed or will succumb to poverty in Latin America before the end of this 2010.

    ”According to the United Nations, poverty exists when people cannot satisfy basic needs in order to live with dignity: adequate nutrition, potable water, decent housing, essential medical care, basic education… the World Bank quantifies this poverty, adding that those facing extreme poverty survive on less than $1.25 a day.

    ”According to a report on world wealth in 2010 published by Capgemini and Merrill Lynch, the fortunes of the Latin America rich […] grew 15% in 2009 […] in the last two years, the fortunes of the Latin America rich grew more than in any other region of the world. There are 500,000 rich, according to the report by Capgemini and Merrill Lynch. Half a million, as opposed to 190 […] if so few have so much, many are in need of everything.

    ”… There are other ways to explain violence in Latin America […] poverty and inequality are always related to death and pain. […] Is it an accident that […] 64% of the eight million who died as a result of cancer in the world lived in regions with the lowest income, where only 5% of the funds dedicated to cancer are spent?

    ”In your heart and looking us in our eyes, could you live on $1.25 a day?” Xavier Caño concludes his article.

    The news of the massacre in Arizona is filling today’s pages of the main U.S. media today.

    Specialists at the University of Arizona Medical Center in Tucson are cautiously optimistic. They have praised the work of emergency personnel who saw to it that the Congresswoman was treated within 38 minutes of the shooting. Such information was available on the Internet between 6:00 and 700pm this afternoon.

    According to these reports, ”The bullet entered the forehead, very close to the brain, on the left side of the head.”

    ”She can follow simple directions, but we know that inflammation of the brain could cause a turn for the worse,” they stated.

    They explain the details of every one of the steps taken to control her respiration and reduce pressure on the brain. They add that her recovery could take weeks or months. Neurosurgeons in general and experts in the field, will follow with interest the information released by the medical team.

    Cubans follow health issues closely, are usually well informed and are will also be pleased by the success of those doctors.

    On the other side of the border, we know the extremes to which violence has escalated in the adjoining Mexican states, where there are also excellent doctors. Nevertheless, it is not unusual for drug traffickers, equipped with the most sophisticated weapons produced by the U.S. war industry, to enter operating rooms to finish off their victims.

    The infant mortality rate in Cuba is less than 5 for every 1,000 live births; and the victims of violent acts, less than 5 for every 100,000 residents.

    Although it belies our modesty, it is our bitter responsibility to indicate for the record that our blockaded, threatened and slandered country has demonstrated that Latin American peoples can live without violence and without drugs. They can even live, as has transpired for more than half a century, without relations with the United States. The latter, we have not demonstrated; they have done so.

    Fidel Castro Ruz
    January 9, 2011
    7: 56 p.m.

    Gilla

  17. Helena Palena skriver:

    Courtneay: Well, what can one say? Poverty is the greatest sicknes of them all. I would like Castro to tell me what the solutions to problems that comes in the tracks of poverty is. What will he do to make the world better? Communism is not the way. People are starving in Cuba. No freedom of speach. No development what wo ever.

    It so bad in Latin America and it should be because the ones who rules likes it to be that way. The world could be better off with another financial system. Haiti for example – why doesn´t money reach the people. Why are they not helped? Beacuse they are supposed to die I think. If you read on Georgia Guidstones there are too many people on earth. So let som die. Terrible.

    I wonder if Castro is one in the club? What do you think? Maybe Putin is to? I do not know. I just wonder.

    Gilla

  18. There are historical and structural economic reasons for the poverty. we can discuss on another occasion.

    Actually Cuba has the best health care system in the Americas and has given considerable assistance to neighbouring countries.

    Gilla

  19. @HELENA – When you think of it – capitalism is the exploitation of man by man – and – communism is the same thing in reverse.

    When it comes on to imperialist pursuit of the world’s natural resources – oil pipeline across Afghanistan – illegal invasion of Iraq – diamond wars in West Africa – cobalt mining in the Congo – there is not much consideration for democracy in pursuit of these ventures. Add to this all the arms that Sweden, the US, Eurpoe in general sell to the world and you begin to understand the true global processes at work.

    HERE IS A PIECE I SENT TO A CUBAN DISSIDENT…
    CUBA – WHAT MODEL: The observations that you make might be simplified ( hopefully, not over-simplified) as follows, as choices between:-
    1. Complete state control; or
    2. A laissez faire system with maximum private ownership of the means of production; or
    3. A mixed system with the state having a role and the central tenets of government playing its role in governance.
    If one considers the US system, then one is not even at point 2. My reason for saying so is that if I ran a large company and failed in a truly laissez faire system, then my bankruptcy would be my final entrepreneurial demise of my ownership of that enterprise. The recent example given by the US is one of a bail-out in the trillions for the “banksters” of Wall Street accompanied by unprecedented “corporate welfareism”. The foregoing statement is fact, not merely born of my imagination.

    Cuba, brings us to point 1, which does have inefficient levels of production because of its large and oftentimes inefficient state employed personnel accompanied by state control over many of the island’s productive sectors.

    Making a blanket choice between 1 or 2 is not the answer. One must honestly consider the US abysmal record in its health care ( i.e. despite being the world’s wealthiest country). Additionally, its average educational accomplishments for the general citizenry pales when compared to Cuba. Surely, if the benefits of production do not enhance the welfare of the people – then for whose benefit is the production to be?

    This brings me to point 3. If the US was compelled, and indeed it was, to have a monumental intrusion of the state into the “free market” when the system as is known there was likely to collapse, then can the argument be honestly run that state involvement is automatically a bad and undesirable option in governance for the welfare of the people – or – is that intrusion ultimately to be an intervention for the perpetuation and welfare of the system? This question is compelled because of the recent economic experiences of the US and Cuba. In whose interest ultimately is the state to be run? That seems to be the question.

    My choice? I make a simple point. Any society that wants wealth has to advance beyond subsistence production and produce a surplus. The hands that control the surplus so produced, will then also have some measure of power and control over the direction that the wealth then goes in. The controlling forces of government will likewise, relative to the balances between private and public control of power ( i.e. be this political or economic) will influence/guide/ control the directions in which the wealth(once produced ) is invested, re-invested, directed and applied relative to some overarching philosophy of the desired “good”, by reason of such application/expenditure/re-investment.

    I don’t think that my observations go simply in directions of right or left in political terms, but I am trying ( hopefully am) saying two things:-

    1. Neither Cuba nor the US are all “good” or “bad” – subject to one’s value judgments of those politically subjective words; and
    2. The welfare of the citizenry relative to the GNP and GDP must fairly be assessed and on that measure, Cuba with all its admitted shortcomings has so far come out ahead of the US,over the past 50 years, at least in these regards:-

    A. Universal health care.
    B. Education of the populace.
    C. A progressive foreign policy that has assisted the world from the period when Reagan and Thatcher were bolstering the White racists in Apartheid South Africa and Cuba was being the pivotal military point in the struggle in Southern Africa – through to – the contributions to many countries of doctors, nurses, medical and educational facilities contributed to levels far in excess of the productive means of the Cuban state.

    There is no Utopia on planet earth – neither Cuba, nor America. Now – make the criticisms of Cuba, as is only just and fair and necessary for constructive advances. But, do so with integrity and honesty.

    Gilla

  20. Ramona Fransson skriver:

    Hej Helena! Bra skrivet! Visst är det tvunget med lite rivjärn inom den annars så stela finkulturen. Björn Ranelid vågar och ska stå upp, han är duktig, inte tu eller tal om den saken. Nu ska han bara rycka till sig en knippe självförtroende också, så kan han gå segrande ur Let´s Dance!

    Gilla

Kommentera

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:

WordPress.com Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Google-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Google-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Twitter-bild

Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Ansluter till %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.