Archive for the ‘iHitNews tableaus’ Category

Oorspronkelijk gepubliceerd op 8 januari 2015 op mijn Flickr site (die sinds lang weer gecensureerd wordt omdat de inhoud van mijn 700 prenten aldaar tot ‘adult content’ door Flickr verklaard zijn en dus niet vrij (meer) toegankelijk op het internet… dat is weer een ander soort censuur (ik heb meerdere malen geprotesteerd en gevraagd naar welke prent dan aanstootgevend zou zijn) kreeg (Kafkiaans) nooit antwoord daarop!


Like it’s predecessor Hara Kiri (196-1969), Charlie Hebdo (1969-1981; 1992-) is a magazine that was & is “bête et méchant” (dumb and nasty). Large part of those who say to support it now – after the malicious murder of magazine staff and their police protectors – the indignation felt by many is mostly spontaneous and well intended (the exceptions are politicians who use their tactics of recuperation as always) but many of them, especially those outside of France have no idea what the magazine stood for.

Charlie Hebdo was against all forms of authority, not just that of muslim fanatics.Their satire was biting and directed at christian, jewish and political faith of all kinds as merciless as against islam fanatics. When I see all those priests of different religions coming out in support of Charlie Hebdo, one can know that it is circumstances that force them in taking such a position, one of them being to curtail islamophobia. Then I see all those demonstrators holding up placards with “Je suis Charlie” I know that many of them have hardly or never seen any of the radical cartoons and comics published by Charlie Hebdo.

When all those demonstrators want to be sincere about their unconditional support for freedom of speech, writing and drawing, they need to realise that freedom of expression does not flower in a climate of proclaimed “national or international unity”, however understandable such a reaction is.

Charlie Hebdo, will not rise from the ashes of the executed cartoonists, when it is hugged to death by supporters who do not really know what they are supporting.

Just imagine as I did this nice lady demonstrating in Nice with her placard “Je suis Charlie”… would she have hold up one of the covers of Charlie Hebdo, like this one?

“JE SUIS CHARLIE” misses the point (and is just a mechanical easy copy cat slogan)


This is the original caption of this photograph (left hand version): “A woman holds a poster reading ‘I am Charlie’ with a rose, at a gathering in Nice, southeastern France, to express solidarity with those killed in an attack at the Paris offices of weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo, Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2015. Three masked gunmen shouting ìAllahu akbar!î stormed the Paris offices of a satirical newspaper Wednesday, killing 12 people, including its editor, before escaping in a car. It was France’s deadliest postwar terrorist attack. (AP Photo/Lionel Cironneau)”

Read Full Post »

CHAVEZ: will the constitution survive his constitution?


This tableau picture and text I pulished on January 2. 2013 on my Flickr news-tableau page (now partly censored because all my articles there have been classified – wrongly – as adult content by some mechanism, in spite of my protest). So I tend to republish these articles on this blog when actual events make that meaningful). This article had 37.882 views. It marks the last days of the reign of Chavez who is terminal ill at that time and tries in all kind of ways to reign across his grave…

Wednesday January 2. 2013: Just made this tableau for what seems to be the last days of Chavez, who is said – by some sources – to have entered a state of coma. I merged a recent picture of Chavez after his chemo therapy into an earlier picture of Chavez holding the popular edition of his new 1999 Venezuela Constitution. The hand holding an older picture of Chavez as the adored messiahs of the poor… did appear this last week on the internet as an illustration of his followers praying for his well being. His rule was and is authoritarian, but what about those who oppose him now and will try to take power after him?

One does not judge a ruler by the new constitution he/she has written and passed, but by the level of equality, prosperity and justice that is practised in real life. The new 1936 constitution of the Soviet Union promulgated during the reign of Jozef Stalin was at first hailed by many, including many intellectuals from abroad, those who have later been grouped under the name of ‘fellow travellers’. (2)

It is lamentable that one of the promising points of renewal in the new Constitution was the declaration of “health care as a human right” (3) while the cancer treatment of the the President of Venezuela is not done in Venezuela, but elsewhere. Chavez has been treated in Cuba that tends to be praised for it’s free and social health care system, but Chavez certainly did not get his treatment in one of the hospitals for the general public. He has been treated in one of the special clinics for the ruling caste of the Castro family and related higher party functionaries. One of the reasons – is said – for this has been the guarantee of information control on the actual state of health of the Venezuelan President as any information on someone with such a contested power impacts directly on national and international politics.

If special cancer treatment is of top world level in Cuba is not certain. The economic blockade of the USA imposed on Cuba makes it often difficult to get all the needed medicines, latest equipment and Cuban surgeons have been quoted as they were complaining the limitations they had in participating in international high level medical conferences and other academic fora. As for the praised general level of medical care in Cuba one feels stepping back into Cold War Information times when reading the fiercely pro and contra arguments in news media and on the internet. (4) Also some of the praised facilities, according to several sources, are geared toward ‘medical tourists’ who bring in the needed hard currency for the Cuban government.

We will have to wait at least half a decade to pronounce a real judgement on the rule of Chavez. To see if what will come after him is any better or worse….

other news tableaus on Chavez & Chavismo:

– 29/7/2013: “”Instituto De Altos Estudios Sobre El Pensiamento De Chávez” will it offer a curriculum based on his unstable television rhetorics?”

– 8/3/2013: “Que Viva el Chavismo: embalming a leader is mummifying the revolution”

– 4/3/2013: “”LEADERS DIE” – the past does not last – ultimos momentos del librador from Bolivar to Chavez”

– 26/1/2013: “Chavez Still Alive but who does the kicking?”

– 8/10/2012: “Chavez commenting on a cartoon by ‘Weil’ depicting him as a military boot: “the eyes are missing”

– 8/5/2012: “Caudillos in the Americas: Bouterse & Chavez”


“Constitución de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela)” dating from 1999
It is described in Wikipedia in a most positive and glorious way, though there are other who hold another view of it and see it as either “Bolivarian Propaganda” or “Orwellian Newspeak” from the Chavez regime.

“The Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is the current and twenty-sixth constitution of Venezuela.[1] It was drafted in mid-1999 by a constitutional assembly that had been created by popular referendum. Adopted in December 1999, it replaced the 1961 Constitution – the longest serving in Venezuelan history. It was primarily promoted by the current President of Venezuela Hugo Chávez and thereafter received strong backing from diverse sectors, including figures involved in promulgating the 1961 constitution such as Luis Miquilena and Carlos Andrés Pérez. Chávez and his followers (chavistas) refer to the 1999 document as the “Constitución Bolivariana” (the “Bolivarian Constitution”) because they assert that it is ideologically descended from the thinking and political philosophy of Simón Bolívar and Bolivarianism.

The Constitution of 1999 was the first constitution approved by popular referendum in Venezuelan history, and summarily inaugurated the so-called “Fifth Republic” of Venezuela due to the socioeconomic changes foretold in its pages, as well as the official change in Venezuela’s name from the República de Venezuela (“Republic of Venezuela”) to the República Bolivariana de Venezuela (“Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela”). Major changes are made to the structure of Venezuela’s government and responsibilities, while a much greater number of human rights are enshrined in the document as guaranteed to all Venezuelans – including free education up to tertiary level, free quality health care, access to a clean environment, right of minorities (especially indigenous peoples) to uphold their own traditional cultures, religions, and languages, among others.

The 1999 Constitution, with 350 articles, is among the world’s longest, most complicated, and most comprehensive constitutions.”

Full text of the constitution at:


1936 Soviet Constitution: “The constitution repealed restrictions on voting and added universal direct suffrage and the right to work to rights guaranteed by the previous constitution. In addition, the Constitution recognized collective social and economic rights including the rights to work, rest and leisure, health protection, care in old age and sickness, housing, education, and cultural benefits. The constitution also provided for the direct election of all government bodies and their reorganization into a single, uniform system. It was written by a special commission of 31 members which Joseph Stalin chaired.”

Richard Stites writes in his study “Revolutionary Dreams:Utopian Vision and Experimental Life in the Russian”
“Stalin’s Soviet Union, ‘a panegyric utopia,’ consisted of a myth of well-being, an ‘iconography of hapiness.’ and a cult of a benevolent ruler. If the reality of the Soviet Union contrasted dramatiocally with the visions of the revolutionary dreamers and utopians, the myth and images constructed by the regime promoted the fiction that the Societ people were already living in a kind of utopia, that the conservative stability of the social system and the rigidity of the political structure were ‘revolutionar.’ (Page 247)


Health care as a human right

“Article 83: Health is a fundamental social right and the responsibility of the State, which shall guarantee it as part of the right to life. The State shall promote and develop policies oriented toward improving the quality of life, common welfare and access to services. All persons have the right to protection of health, as well as the duty to participate actively in the furtherance and protection of the same, and to comply with such health and hygiene measures as may be established by law, and in accordance with international conventions and treaties signed and ratified by the Republic.

Article 84: In order to guarantee the right to health, the State creates, exercises guidance over and administers a national public health system that crosses sector boundaries, and is decentralized and participatory in nature, integrated with the social security system and governed by the principles of gratuity, universality, completeness, fairness, social integration and solidarity. The public health system gives priority to promoting health and preventing disease, guaranteeing prompt treatment and quality rehabilitation. Public health assets and services are the property of the State and shall not be privatized. The organized community has the right and duty to participate in the making- of decisions concerning policy planning, implementation and control at public health institutions.

Article 85: Financing of the public health system is the responsibility of the State, which shall integrate the revenue resources, mandatory Social Security contributions and any other sources of financing provided for by law. The State guarantees a health budget such as to make possible the attainment of health policy objectives. In coordination with universities and research centers, a national professional and technical training policy and a national industry to produce health care supplies shall be promoted and developed. The State shall regulate both public and private health care institutions.”


The Cold War like debate on the actual state of the Cuban healt care system

– High ranking in number of references (and less when it comes to the quality of arguments) is the movie by Michael Moore (Sicko is a 2007 documentary film by American filmmaker Michael Moore. The film investigates health care in the United States, focusing on its health insurance and the pharmaceutical industry. The movie compares the for-profit, non-universal U.S. system with the non-profit universal health care systems of Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Cuba.).

The method of bringing not well treated patients from the USA to Cuba, in itself can not produce anything else than distortions, once such an idea is actually realised as a movie.

The official web-site of the movie Sicko describes the part of the movie that concerns us here as follow: “After detailing just how the system got into such a mess (the short answer: profits and Nixon), we are whisked around the world, visiting countries including Canada, Great Britain and France, where all citizens receive free medical benefits. Finally, Moore gathers a group of 9/11 heroes – rescue workers now suffering from debilitating illnesses who have been denied medical attention in the US. He takes them to a most unexpected place, and in addition to finally receiving care, they also engage in some unexpected diplomacy.” The most unexpected place a a Cuban clinic.

In thenationalreview.com Jay Nordlinger writes a reaction under the title “The Myth of Cuban Health Care – Michael Moore gives it a powerful boost.” and rages “To be sure, there is excellent health care on Cuba — just not for ordinary Cubans. Dr. Jaime Suchlicki of the University of Miami’s Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies explains that there is not just one system, or even two: There are three. The first is for foreigners who come to Cuba specifically for medical care. This is known as “medical tourism.” The tourists pay in hard currency, which provides oxygen to the regime. And the facilities in which they are treated are First World: clean, well supplied, state-of-the-art. ”

– “Revolutionary doctors : how Venezuela and Cuba are changing the world’s conception of health care” is a 2011 publication by the old time left wing publishing house Monthly Review Press, with this summary full of socialist optimism: “”Revolutionary Doctors gives readers a first-hand account of Venezuela’s innovative and inspiring program of community healthcare, designed to serve–and largely carried out by–the poor themselves. Drawing on long-term participant observations as well as in-depth research, Brouwer tells the story of Venezuela’s Integral Community Medicine program, in which doctor-teachers move into the countryside and poor urban areas to recruit and train doctors from among peasants and workers. Such programs were first developed in Cuba, and Cuban medical personnel play a key role in Venezuela today as advisors and organizers. This internationalist model has been a great success–Cuba is a world leader in medicine and medical training–and Brouwer shows how the Venezuelans are now, with the aid of their Cuban counterparts, following suit. But this program is not without its challenges. It has faced much hostility from traditional Venezuelan doctors as well as all the forces antagonistic to the Venezuelan and Cuban revolutions. Despite the obstacles it describes, Revolutionary Doctors demonstrates how a society committed to the well-being of its poorest people can actually put that commitment into practice, by delivering essential healthcare through the direct empowerment of the people it aims to serve”–Provided by publisher.”

The Book gives many details on the collaboration between Cuba and Venezuela in the ‘Barrio Adentro’ project that brought many Cuban health volunteers to Venezuela. Amazon Books has several pages on-line of this study:

– A mirror image of the one sketched by Michael Moore in his movie and other positive appraisals quoted above, comes – to no surprise – from a Cuban exile community web site produced in the USA, realcuba.com, with haranguing images and captions:

One of the greatest fallacies about the so called ‘Cuban Revolution’ has to do with healthcare.
Foreigners who visit Cuba, are fed the official line from Castro’s propaganda machine: “All Cubans are now able to receive excellent healthcare, which is also free.” But the truth is very different. Castro has built excellent health facilities for the use of foreigners, who pay with hard currency for those services.
Argentinean soccer star Maradona, for example, has traveled several times to Cuba to receive treatment to combat his drug addiction. But Cubans are not even allowed to visit those facilities. Cubans who require medical attention must go to other hospitals, that lack the most minimum requirements needed to take care of their patients.
In addition, most of these facilities are filthy and patients have to bring their own towels, bed sheets, pillows, or they would have to lay down on dirty bare mattresses stained with blood and other body fluids.”


Read Full Post »

“Een hologram van Maria Callas brengt op maandag 26 november de grootste klassiekers van de diva ten gehore in Carré, onder begeleiding van een groot orkest.”

Maria-Calles_1959_Heemstede_Bovema-StudioZo lees ik net in Het Parool (16 april 2018) en mijn herinnering dwaalt af na het jaar 1959 in de Overboslaan in Heemstede, waar ik de hand van de diva wist aan te raken als jongen van 15 jaar, die vlak om de hoek in deze villawijk woonde… het was in een periode dat ik mijn belangstelling voor bebop en andere moderne jazz koppelde aan bewondering voor grote zangeressen zoals Katheleen Ferrier (1912-1953) en Maria Callas (1923-1977) … ik had uitgeknipte fotootjes van beide dames in mijn schoolagenda… weet het dat zijn twee nogal verschillende diva’s, de één een contralto de ander een sopraan, Ferrier had een breder repertoire van volksliederen en klassieke opera tot modern klassiek met name Benjamin Britten… beiden hadden een tragisch einde, maar van verschillende aard. Ferrier overleed aan kanker en van Callas is er geen eenduidige interpretatie van de oorzaak van haar dood (hartaanval, overdadig gebruik slaapmiddel of andere medicijn). Tragische is ook het verval van de stem van Callas, die eerst een vet geluid en lichaam had en die na haar radicale vermagering de lichamelijke capaciteit verloor die van een dramatische sopraan verwacht wordt.
Was het toevallig dat ik zes jaar later – als kunststudent in Milaan – op een staanplaats op het schellinkje van het Scala in Milaan stond en mee mocht maken hoe daar hele passages door de fans meegezongen werden… dat was tijdens Verdi’s Aïda…. ik heb het nog eens opgezocht wat er op het internet beklijft van …..


hierbij een samenvatting in een oud nieuws tableau.

PS Lees tot mijn genoegen dat het Bovema pandje een ontwerp van architect Dick Plat met glas in lood van het echtpaar Bogtman, nu tot een bouwkundig monument verklaard is.

PPS Voor mijzelf een artikel over het basis-syteem van stembereik van operazangers nog eens samengevat in een diagram… (enkel het bereik in toonhoogte, het Fachsyteem gaat veel verder in detail, maar dat laat ik hier weg)…. het ging me om het verschil in toonbereik tussen Ferrier (contralto) en Callas (sopraan).


Read Full Post »


[iHitNews no.36 2/4/2018].

Most of her life dedicated to the struggle against Apartheid, a violent system, a violent struggle, more alone than together with her husband Nelson Mandela who was imprisoned from 1963 to 1990. She has been instrumental in years of mobilising campaigns for the ANC and the end of Apartheid. It made her a symbol of that struggle. That role was all fine when it was about community support (founding local medical clinics) and political attacks on the Apartheid regime, but became problematic after the mid 80s of last century when regime violence, counter-violence, spying and infiltration by the secret police, lead to distrust, suspicion, and accusation. Some suspicions of infiltration and betrayal proved to be right, others remained non proven or were simply false. Brutal reactions to state violence. Beatings, arson and murder became tools to forge ‘unity’. Most brutal the execution by burning people alive, with car tires in flames around their neck (necklacing). Winnie Mandela refrained from calling a halt to such methods, she even endorsed it.

13 April 1986 video recorded statement in Munsieville, South Africa she said:

‘We have no guns—we have only stones, boxes of matches and petrol. Together, hand in hand, with our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country.’

Emma Gilbey, The Lady: The Life and Times of Winnie Mandela, London, Jonathan Cape, 1993, pp. 145–46.

[NB Violence was official ANC policy in those days. At its Kabwe Conference in Zambia in June 1985 Joe Slovo, chief of staff of ‘Umkhonto we Sizwe’, para-military wing of the ANC, affirmed that there was ‘No Middle Road’, and the only acceptable strategy was the revolutionary overthrow of apartheid. Quoted in “Trust in the Capacities of the People, Distrust in Elites” by Kenneth Good (2014), p.71]

This statement on necklacing, dating back to 1986, is one of the most quoted endorsements of disciplining violence against ‘traitors to the cause’ by Willie Mandela. It is not the only time – though – she said it publicly, as can be seen on this video of her speech for a crowd in Soweto which is most probably at the day of her return to Soweto in 1985, from which she was officially still banned. The image and sound quality of this video are very bad, and there is no proper source, but still it serves it’s purpose as a historical document of those times.
We seeWillie Mandela addressing a huge crowd, speaking in English, pausing after each sentence for a translation (could be Zulu or Sotho). Her discourse as show starts of with:

You are not going to fight this government with AK47s because you do not have any. We are not prepared for any reform of Apartheid. You can not reform sin. Apartheid is a criminal act against mankind. We are not able anymore to accept that criminal act by a minority…we are 30 million… Power to the People!… 

It is often difficult to hear what she says…

…we have no arms but boxes of matches…

and then when you click the video-player once again there is the sentence:

With our necklaces we will liberate our country

It is in this suppressive atmosphere that the abduction, torture and murder of a young boy – Stompie Moeketsie – took place in 1988. The boy, 14 year old, was suspected of being a police informer and his abduction and murder was the work of the strong hand gang – and personal security force of Winnie Mandela – know as the ‘Mandela United Football Club’. It lead to several court cases against Winnie Mandela. In 1991 she was acquitted for the murder, but not for the kidnapping. It was proven that she had witnessed the torture of the boy before he was found killed. This was not the only case of civil terror during the 80s linked to Winnie. It hurt her public image. It also hurt her political career in post-Aparheid society. Attempts at reconciliation during hearings in 1997 failed. She did get government positions in the first ANC governments, during which there were allegations of corruption. Still she kept a large following among the ANC electorate. In 2009 she was second on the ANC list, after Jacob Zuma.

The depiction of Winnie Mandela in several movies tend to focus on the more glorious aspects of her life. Her role in the decades of struggle – some say – has been more important then that of her imprisoned husband Nelson Mandela.

It must be noticed that later in her live Winnie Mandela did condemn the outburst of communal violence against black immigrant workers from Zimbabwe, Mozambique and the Congo in the year 2008 in the Johannesburg and Pretoria area. Violent xenophobic riots whereby necklacing, did appear again.

It is the old question of means and ends, if violent acts can be used for constructing a beter and peaceful society. It certainly is questionable if the Apartheid regime would ever have collapsed without counter-violence. Was it no the utter dangerous situation in the townships that made them into no-go-zones beyond direct Apartheid regime control?

Post Apartheid euphoria has long faded away and the question of tactics for change are posed again. The controversies about the role of Winnie Mandela in this proces of change – flaming up again at the moment of her death – will not come to any conclusion, the camps of those for and against her seem to be in balance. Still this debate may lead to reflection on the importance of finding ways of social change whereby means and ends are more closely related, some may call it a luxury to be able to do so. This I will illustrated by a citation from a review of a movie on South Africa, the ANC and the Mandela’s, “Long Walk to Freedom” by Justin Chadwick (2013), by Gugulethu oka Mseleku in the Guardian (several years ago), in which Willie Mandela’s apology of violence is noted and also explained:

The fact is that, for South African women, Winnie’s role was more fundamental than her husband’s. Though the world’s leading opinion formers have been all too keen to demonise her, Chadwick’s film is a reminder that Winnie, with the help of her daughter Zindzi, was largely responsible for perpetuating Nelson’s image as the embodiment of the liberation struggle.
More importantly, the Mother of the Nation suffered, not only because of Nelson’s incarceration, but also through her own constant arrests and torture. Despite the cowardly, misogynistic regime’s torment of a single mother and her daughters, Winnie remained strong and resilient in her defiance.”

The article also mentions the case of the murder of Stompie and reacts on it like this:

Our hearts bled for Stompie and his mother, and recognised the brutality of his killing. But we understood that the system she was fighting against was brutal and brutalising. Where was the reconciliation that had been so freely offered to Europeans, for Mama Winnie? After all she had been through, could Nelson and the ANC really not be reconciled to the fact that she had been fighting a war “by any means necessary”?

There are 428 comments on this article which you can read for yourself. I just cite this one (number 110):

Habakuk 3 Jan 2014 15:26
“Her reputation was damaged by such rhetoric as that displayed in a speech she gave in Munsieville on 13 April 1986, where she endorsed the practice of necklacing (burning people alive using tyres and petrol) by saying: “With our boxes of matches and our necklaces we shall liberate this country.”
No thank you Winnie. Shove off.

And this one more moderate (Number 11):

Keo2008 3 Jan 2014 17:57 11 12 The writer is pointing out that Winnie hasn’t received the same clemency that has been enjoyed by other perpetrators of brutal violence during Apartheid. Personally I’m not so sure about this peace and reconciliation business and seeing thugs on both sides getting away with the most atrocious acts is sickening (and not just in South Africa…remember the Good Friday Agreement…?) but in the name of fairness I think the writer does have a point…

The full article can be found at:

ref. image elements:
(1) Photograph at top, Winnie during her seven year banishment and house arrest in Brandfort (free State) starting in 1977 (the house had no floor or ceiling, no running water and no electricity, no visitors allowed as well).
(2) The painting left under us by the artist Noel Hodnett (born in what was then Southern Rhodesia in 1949, later moving to South Africa).
(3) Winnie Mandela is a 2011 drama film adaptation of Anne Marie du Preez Bezrob’s biography Winnie Mandela: A Life. The film is directed by Darrell Roodt, and stars Jennifer Hudson, Terrence Howard, Wendy Crewson, Elias Koteas, and Justin Strydom. Image Entertainment released the film in theaters on September 6, 2013
Film citic of the Guardian Ed Gibbs had this comment: “This syrupy biography of the former wife of Nelson Mandela seeks to sugar-coat South Africa’s complex history.”

Read Full Post »


van moord & overval tot overlast & onveiligheid, bij ieder nieuws item in deze categorie komt er ook een persbericht van de politie waarin….
geëist wordt, waarop dan politici die eisen nog eens herhalen om hun achterban het gevoel te geven dat er wat gedaan gaat worden…
Bestaande selectie & opleiding zijn onvoldoende om aan de vraag te voldoen. Productie van geavanceerde androïden is het enige antwoord. Zo zijn er twee klassieke modellen uitverkoren om als basis te dienen van de nieuwe en masse te repliceren politie-agenten: Lust & Hauer.

Denk eens in Lust & Hauwer op patrouille, korte metten makend met:

-fietsers op het voetpad > “als ik u was zou ik afstappen” gecombineerd met een razendsnelle greep aan de bagagdrager waardoor de fiets direct tot stilstand komt;
-stuiterende auto’s door hun keiharde disco-speakers > een wenk is voldoende voor de bestuurder om de per direct het geluid af te zetten;
-bierblikjes gooiende hooligans > de aanvoerder wordt een arm op de rug gedraaid en op de grond gedwongen, allen begrijpen dat er hier niet met het gezag gespot kan worden;
-een schietgraag bendelid op straat > ziet zijn kogels afketsen op het bionic harnas van de ‘replicant cops’ en gooit van schrik zijn wapen weg…..

En dat alles wordt tevens live gestreamed op een apart Lust & Hauer kanaal van de lokale televisie….


Zo hoort het ook in onze moderne tijd: de reality show wordt werkelijkheid.


Read Full Post »


… dat hadden wij toch niet van hem verwacht! [iHitNews nummer 30]

Read Full Post »


BEA HOUD JE GEHEIME FEESTJES PRIVÉ en niet op gemeenschapskosten midden in de stad in het genaaste Stadhuis op de Dam, waarbij het eigen dagelijkse leven van de stad ondergeschikt gemaakt wordt aan een afgetreden Koningin die publieklijk blijft herhalen hoezeer zij zih bevrijd voelt na afstand van het koningschap en hoezeer zij de privésfeer opzoekt en haar verjaardag in besloten kring wenst te vieren: zie hier het resultaat zoals altijd het tegenovergestelde van wat zij en haar entourage beweren….

Het stadhuis staat nog steeds op de Dam … en in Amsterdam is nooit een koninklijk paleis gebouwd (dat wat zo genoemd wordt is jatwerk uit de tijd van de Napoleontische bezetting)… de Oranjes (prinsen met een bijbaantje als stadhouder) logeerden in Het Princenhof, een voormalig klooster genaast door de protestanten van de katholieken, aan de Oudezijds Achterburgwal… Omdat de Oranjes gewoon het jatwerk van de Fransen overnamen werd het stadsbestuur verbannen naar waar vroeger de Prinsen van Oranje sliepen, Het Princenhof… dat gebouw over een eeuw steeds aangevuld en veranderd, ondermeer een deel in de stijl van de Amsterdamse School, werd eind vorige eeuw weer door de het toenmalige stadsbestuur verpatst aan een Chinese hotelketen…
en ja wie betaald de rekening voor dit en andere feestjes, waarvoor de stadsburger om moet lopen, wachten… zelfs als het privé is nog de arrogantie hebben om je feestje midden in de stad te bouwen… ik ben al lang Oranje Beu (moest als kind nog deelnemen aan jaarlijkse aubades ter ere van de koningin en met een oranje vlaggetje zwaaien).

Ref: “De trams in de binnenstad rijden om of zijn ingekort vanwege een feestje van prinses Beatrix. De voormalige koningin viert vanavond haar tachtigste verjaardag in het voormalige stadhuis op de Dam. Hoewel het geheim is wie daar allemaal voor uitgenodigd zijn, is het in ieder geval wel behoorlijk druk.

Lees ook: Beatrix viert verjaardagsfeestje in Koninklijk Paleis

Trams die de Dam passeren op hun vaste route lopen vertraging op, moeten omrijden of zijn ingekort. Ook het overige verkeer op de Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal heeft last van het feestje.”

Read Full Post »

GENAAST STADHUIS op de Dam te Amsterdam in 1808 door Lodewijk Napoleon wordt ons steeds weer gepresenteerd als Koninklijk Paleis:
“ANP 3 FEBRUARI 2018, 10:20
Prinses Beatrix geeft aan het eind van zaterdagmiddag een verjaardagsontvangst voor familie, vrienden en bekenden in Amsterdam. // Het is een besloten feest in het Koninklijk Paleis op de Dam. Een lijst van genodigden is niet bekendgemaakt.”

Het Koninkrijk der Nederland (inclusief het huidige België) was een door de grootmachten die Napoleon hadden verslagen verordonneerde bufferstaat die het smeulend gevaar van een nieuwe Franse overheersing in bedwang moest houden. De executeur van de restauratie van monarchistisch Europa de Oostenrijkse staatsman Von Metternich stipuleerde dat de vanuit Engeland ingevaren nazaat van de Oranjes die tot Koning gebombardeerd werd (hij die het ooit nog eens op een akkoordje met Napoleon probeerde te gooien om als als zetbaas voor het Napoleontische rijk de Nederlanden te besturen), die nieuwbakken koning zou het symbool van de macht van de ten val gekomen Hollandse Republiek der Zeven Provinciën, het Stadhuis op de Dam, tot één van zijn residenties moeten verklaren. De Oranjes hadden over eeuwen een afkeer ontwikkeld van het burgerlijke machtscentrum Amsterdam dat hen vaak dwars zat in hun lang mislukte streven naar monarchale macht. Von Meternich con sui wisten dat en bevalen dat de nieuwe monarchen van het nieuwe koninkrijk der Nederlanden, minstens twee weken per jaar dienden te resideren in het door de Fransen ooit genaaste Stadhuis.
Zo komt het dat ik vanmorgen die krantenkop las met “Paleis op de Dam” en het meervoudig gebruikte zelfstandig naamwoord “naasten” en dacht “he ‘naasten’? … het zijn ‘naasters’ die Oranjes!”
BEATRIX VIERT FEEST MET JATTEN zo kun je het ook lezen die krantenkop in Het Parool van vandaag….
Ref: https://www.parool.nl/amsterdam/beatrix-viert-feest-met-naasten-in-amsterdam~a4566298/
iHitNews nummer 26 is het resultaat

Read Full Post »