Ist auch Andreas Popp (Wissensmanufaktur) ein U-Boot?

Als ich hier über Ken Jebsen berichtete, bekam dieser kleine aber feine Blog zwei Tage lang täglich 2.000 Besucher, eine Steigerung um über 660 Prozent gegenüber gewöhnlichen Tagen. Das lag sicher daran, dass der Artikel zu einem aktuellen (alle vier Jahre immer wieder aufs Neue aktuelle) Thema und einen Tag vor den Bundestagswahlen veröffentlicht wurde. Darin griff ich Ken Jensen an, der diese unbeweisbare und falsche Behauptung aufstellte: Jeder, der Wählen geht, unterstützt das System moralisch und erkennt es damit an. Wie ich nachgewiesen habe, ist genau das Gegenteil der Fall. Das Wahlsystem bestimmt nunmal die Regeln, und die sind

  • (1.) dass es in Deutschland keine Mindestwahlbeteiligung gibt, und
  • (2.) dass Stimmen, die nicht ungültig gemacht wurden und auch nicht abgegeben wurden, prozentual auf alle anderen abgegebenen Stimmen aufaddiert werden.

Damit ist Fakt: Wer gar nicht zur Wahl geht, DER unterstützt das BRD-System tatsächlich.

Nach Ken Jebsen zeigt nun offenbar auch Andreas Popp von der Wissensmanufaktur unter Weglassung der oben genannten Fakten sein wahres Gesicht: Popp sagt in nachfolgendem Video genau das gleiche:

Wer zum Wählen geht, der gibt seine Stimme ab. Er steckt sie in eine Urne. Und da ruht sie dann die nächsten Jahre, unsere Stimme. Und ich möchte gerne meine Stimme behalten. Und wer sie abgibt, wer zum Wählen geht, der erkennt auch das System an. Der erkennt damit auch an, dass genau die Parteien rankommen oder die Parteien…

Es kann wohl niemand ernsthaft behaupten, dass auch Popp die Parameter des Wahlsystems nicht kennt und nur aus Nichtwissen heraus seine Behauptungen aufstellt. Die Möglichkeit, dass man seine Wählerstimme (nicht die Stimmbänder) ja ungültig machen kann, um somit wenigstens nicht die Einheitspartei zu unterstützen, lässt Herr Popp auch ganz bewusst weg. Und somit geschieht eben das gleiche wie bei Ken Jebsen. Auch Popp lockt den Zuschauer in einen Hinterhalt und bewirkt damit das Gegenteil von dem, was er behauptet bewirken zu wollen.

Sind Jebsen und Popp eigentlich Aufklärer, ergebnisoffene Wissenschaftler, Wahrheitssucher, oder doch etwas ganz anderes?

Hinweis zu Kommentaren: Kommentare ohne Sachbezug und ohne Anerkenntnis des Wahlsystems werden anders als beim letzten Artikel nicht mehr freigegeben, da wir das Niveau der Kommentare nicht ins bodenlose fallen lassen wollen. Bitte um Verständnis.

50 Questions That Will Free Your Mind

50 Questions That Will Free Your Mind

These questions have no right or wrong answers.

Because sometimes asking the right questions is the answer.

  1. How old would you be if you didn’t know how old you are?
  2. Which is worse, failing or never trying?
  3. If life is so short, why do we do so many things we don’t like and like so many things we don’t do?
  4. When it’s all said and done, will you have said more than you’ve done?
  5. What is the one thing you’d most like to change about the world?
  6. If happiness was the national currency, what kind of work would make you rich?
  7. Are you doing what you believe in, or are you settling for what you are doing?
  8. If the average human life span was 40 years, how would you live your life differently?
  9. To what degree have you actually controlled the course your life has taken?
  10. Are you more worried about doing things right, or doing the right things?
  11. You’re having lunch with three people you respect and admire. They all start criticizing a close friend of yours, not knowing she is your friend. The criticism is distasteful and unjustified. What do you do?
  12. If you could offer a newborn child only one piece of advice, what would it be?
  13. Would you break the law to save a loved one?
  14. Have you ever seen insanity where you later saw creativity?
  15. What’s something you know you do differently than most people?
  16. How come the things that make you happy don’t make everyone happy?
  17. What one thing have you not done that you really want to do? What’s holding you back?
  18. Are you holding onto something you need to let go of?
  19. If you had to move to a state or country besides the one you currently live in, where would you move and why?
  20. Do you push the elevator button more than once? Do you really believe it makes the elevator faster?
  21. Would you rather be a worried genius or a joyful simpleton?
  22. Why are you, you?
  23. Have you been the kind of friend you want as a friend?
  24. Which is worse, when a good friend moves away, or losing touch with a good friend who lives right near you?
  25. What are you most grateful for?
  26. Would you rather lose all of your old memories, or never be able to make new ones?
  27. Is is possible to know the truth without challenging it first?
  28. Has your greatest fear ever come true?
  29. Do you remember that time 5 years ago when you were extremely upset? Does it really matter now?
  30. What is your happiest childhood memory? What makes it so special?
  31. At what time in your recent past have you felt most passionate and alive?
  32. If not now, then when?
  33. If you haven’t achieved it yet, what do you have to lose?
  34. Have you ever been with someone, said nothing, and walked away feeling like you just had the best conversation ever?
  35. Why do religions that support love cause so many wars?
  36. Is it possible to know, without a doubt, what is good and what is evil?
  37. If you just won a million dollars, would you quit your job?
  38. Would you rather have less work to do, or more work you actually enjoy doing?
  39. Do you feel like you’ve lived this day a hundred times before?
  40. When was the last time you marched into the dark with only the soft glow of an idea you strongly believed in?
  41. If you knew that everyone you know was going to die tomorrow, who would you visit today?
  42. Would you be willing to reduce your life expectancy by 10 years to become extremely attractive or famous?
  43. What is the difference between being alive and truly living?
  44. When is it time to stop calculating risk and rewards, and just go ahead and do what you know is right?
  45. If we learn from our mistakes, why are we always so afraid to make a mistake?
  46. What would you do differently if you knew nobody would judge you?
  47. When was the last time you noticed the sound of your own breathing?
  48. What do you love? Have any of your recent actions openly expressed this love?
  49. In 5 years from now, will you remember what you did yesterday? What about the day before that? Or the day before that?
  50. Decisions are being made right now. The question is: Are you making them for yourself, or are you letting others make them for you?

Quelle: IAMMAI Blog

Matt Lauer goes after Bush over secret prisons and torture

Video von 2006.

CrooksandLiars.com: Matt Lauer went after Bush over his secret prisons and the use of torture on the captured terrorists via The Today Show this morning. He was uncommonly strong and didn’t back down when Bush gave his pet answer. He hits the right note because if what we’ve been doing is legal then why was there the need for secret prisons? When Bush gets cornered–he starts saying he’s not going to talk about it anymore…

Matt Lauer: And yet you admitted that there were these CIA secret facilities. OK?

President Bush: So what? Why is that not within the law?

Ist POSTEO wirklich so GUT, wie es draufsteht?

Was einen skeptisch macht, muss nicht gleich schlecht sein. Doch ein E-Mail-Anbieter, der mit vollkommener Anonymität und Sicherheit wirbt, und das auch noch mitten in Deutschland? Da war eine genauere Überprüfung notwendig. Ohne Lange Absätze zu texten nehme ich die Werbeaussagen von POSTEO hier auf und beantworte diese.

Pro: Anmeldung ohne Angabe persönlicher Daten.
Contra: Ob bei der Anmeldung die IP-Adresse und Zeitstempel gespeichert werden, ist unklar.

Pro: Website ohne IP-Speicherung.
Contra: Das kann man so gelten lassen. Ob es aber tatsächlich stimmt, weiß nur Mr. X bei Posteo, der gerne selbst anonym bleibt.^^

Pro: IP-Stripping. Unser Server ersetzt Ihre IP-Adresse beim Senden über den Webmailer durch unsere IP.
Contra: Das kann man so gelten lassen und ist ja auch prüfbar.

Pro: Verschlüsselter SSL-Zugriff auf das Webmail.
Contra: SSL gilt spätestens seit 2013 als unsicher. In den meisten Fällen wird heute für SSL immer noch AES eingesetzt statt RC4. Manche Browser unterstützen auch nur TLS 1.0, so dass das Problem zusätzlich von der Software des Endbenutzers abhängt.

Pro: SSL-verschlüsselter Zugriff via SSL/TLS bei IMAP, POP3, Webmailer, CardDAV und CalDAV.
Contra: SSL gilt als unsicher, s. o.

Pro: Verschlüsseltes Adressbuch und Kalender
Contra: Es ist unklar, wie der Schlüssel gespeichert wird, da die Ent- und Verschlüsselung automatisch erfolgt. Der Schlüssel muss offenbar nicht vom Benutzer selbst eingegeben werden, ist also bei POSTEO gespeichert.

Pro: Verschlüsselte Server-Festplatten.
Contra: Jede Festplatte ist im laufenden Betrieb entschlüsselt; die Verschlüsselung bringt nur etwas, wenn der Server aus ist, also geschätzte 5 Minuten pro Jahr.

Pro: Verschlüsselter Mailverkehr zwischen den Servern.
Contra: Nur verschlüsselte End-to-End Kommunikation ist sinnvoll; spätestens am Mailserver wird ja wieder entschlüsselt, um die Nachricht dann mit dem Schlüssel des nachfolgenden Servers wieder zu verschlüsseln.

Pro: Feature XYZ des Webmailers.
Contra: Es wird eine alte Version von Roundcube verwendet. Die gleichen und bessere Features bietet die aktuelle Version von Roundcube, die auch bei diversen Webhostern eingesetzt wird.

Pro: Kein Datenhandel und keine Datenweitergabe (ausser auf richterlichen Beschluss)
Contra: „Ausser auf richterlichen Beschluss“ sagt schon alles. In Stuttgart gibt es Richter wie Stempelautomaten.

Fazit: Posteo bietet Schein-Sicherheit zur Miete. Auf meine umfassenden kritischen Fragen wurde kaum eingegangen, und wenn doch, dann am Thema vorbei. Lavabit.com war einer der wenigen E-Mail-Dienste mit echter Sicherheit innerhalb von Lavabit, doch der musste leider dem Druck von Drei-Buchstaben-Organisationen weichen.

‚Infomercial King‘ Kevin Trudeau Released From Jail

Was macht eigentlich … Kevin Trudeau?

Nachdem abc The Lookout ihn vor drei Monaten ordentlich durch den Dreck gezogen und diffamiert hatte, hat er jetzt vom Richter eine Gnadenfrist bekommen. Eine Woche. Die Vermutung, er kann mit Stiftungen umgehen oder hat alles seiner Geliebten übertragen und besitzt tatsächlich selbst nichts mehr. Das müsste doch ein Richter blicken können?!

Sep 19, 2013

Former infomercial king Kevin Trudeau was released from jail today after spending one night in federal custody in Chicago.

Appearing before U.S. District Court Judge Robert Gettleman Wednesday, Trudeau was found in contempt for violation of an asset freeze by transferring nearly $20,000 from an Australian account and for using a debit card tied to that account to buy things beyond the ordinary and necessary living expense he is permitted under a court order.

The specific expenditures from the Australian account that led to the contempt finding included $894 at a liquor store, $359 for two haircuts at Vidal Sassoon, $1,057 for meats ordered online and $920 on cigars. There was also an $18,642 transfer from the Australian account that was paid to a lawyer who worked on Trudeau’s taxes, which happened without the judge’s approval.

Trudeau told the judge Wednesday that he spent the money because he had no cash or credit cards and hadn’t yet received his monthly allowance from the receiver, Robb Evans and Associates, a Los Angeles-based consulting firm that was appointed by the court in August to marshal assets and take control over Trudeau’s businesses.

Trudeau and his attorneys argued Wednesday for more time to prove his cooperation, and offered to pay back any money spent on things the judge deemed inappropriate expenditures.

But Gettleman wasn’t convinced and ordered Trudeau to report to the Metropolitan Correctional Center and to remain in federal custody.

But Trudeau, who appeared in court today wearing a short-sleeve orange jumpsuit, with slip-on orange sneakers, pleaded for the judge to believe him and pledged once again to be „100 percent“ cooperative.

„I am penniless. I am homeless. I surrender. I am at your mercy,“ Trudeau told the court. „I will do anything you ask.“

After hearing his pleas, Judge Gettleman said he is giving the controversial TV pitchman another week to somehow convince him that Trudeau is truthfully disclosing his assets, and granted Trudeau his freedom. Gettleman admonished him to cooperate fully or else he would be back in court „wearing the same color you are now.“

Trudeau’s next court appearance is scheduled for next week.

Trudeau had previously been found in contempt in July for failing to pay a $37.6 million sanction against him for deceptive marketing. Then, in August, Judge Gettleman sided with the Federal Trade Commission in granting a court-appointed receiver broad authority.

Trudeau met with the receiver and the FTC Wednesday night in the visiting area of the correctional center for a hastily scheduled interview that spanned about three hours. In reporting the results of that interview to the judge this morning, both the receiver and the FTC expressed concerns about Trudeau’s vague recollections and sketchy memory.

The receiver, Kenton Johnson, the executive vice president of Robb Evans and Associates, told the court that he had „concerns about some of the content we received“ from Trudeau. He said the pitchman had a „consistent failure of memory“ and was unable in most cases to provide specific detail in answers to questions.

Although Johnson stopped short of saying Trudeau is being dishonest, he told the judge he found his lack of detail and memory „questionable and troubling.“

The FTC lawyer, Jonathan Cohen, was less charitable. „We strongly disagree with how candid Mr. Trudeau was“ in the interview, he said in court.

Some of Trudeau’s responses, Cohen said, were „implausible or demonstrably incorrect statements.“

Trudeau argued it was unrealistic to expect him to recall specific details of transactions that in some cases occurred years ago. He told the judge that at the time of the interview he was tired and „loopy,“ and hadn’t eaten all day.

„There is no 37 million dollars. There’s not 10. There’s not 5. There’s not even 1 million,“ Trudeau told the judge today in court.

The government, however, remains deeply skeptical.

Despite his pronouncements in court today, Trudeau is getting a monthly allowance of nearly $5,000 from the receivership, and he is still living in a 14,000-square-foot rented mansion in a tony suburb west of Chicago. The receiver stopped paying the rent on that home this month, and it is unclear whether Trudeau intends to, or has the means to remain there.

For the better part of the past 14 months, Trudeau has been locked in an acrimonious dispute with the FTC over the agency’s allegations that he was concealing assets that should have been used to pay the sanction.

Wednesday’s contempt finding was the fourth of Trudeau’s career, which is also dotted with $2.5 million in prior settlements with the FTC for allegedly misleading claims for a host of products he pitched in infomercials. The 50-year-old Massachusetts native’s record also includes two felony fraud convictions from the early 1990s, for which he spent nearly two years in federal prison.

The $37 million penalty at the root of this dispute was formally entered in 2010 when Judge Gettleman ruled Trudeau had made misleading claims in infomercials for his best-selling book, „The Weight Loss Cure ‚They‘ Don’t Want You to Know About.“

The FTC’s complaint in that case alleged Trudeau had bamboozled hundreds of thousands of consumers with claims that the diet – which calls for prolonged periods of extreme calorie restriction, off-label injections and high-colonic enemas – was „easy.“ The judge ordered Trudeau to compensate any consumer who bought the book after viewing one of the ads.

But Trudeau didn’t pay. So last summer, the FTC petitioned the court to jail Trudeau, arguing that was the only hope of getting him to pony up. Trudeau countered that he would pay if he could, but it was impossible because he had no assets.

Over the course of the next several months, the FTC subpoenaed the records of dozens of banks, corporations, individuals and law firms to bolster its allegations that Trudeau was masking his control of multiple lucrative business ventures that funded a lavish lifestyle, replete with luxury automobiles and stately homes.

The FTC presented evidence that alleged Trudeau, who moved to Switzerland last fall, had embarked on a sophisticated asset-protection scheme that revolved around the creation of several vaguely-connected companies, trusts and overseas bank accounts nominally owned or directed by Trudeau’s young Ukrainian wife, Nataliya Babenko.

Trudeau and Babenko were married in 2008. She was 22 and Trudeau was about to get hit with the $37 million judgment. The FTC argued that Babenko was a key figure in Trudeau’s attempts to dodge the penalty.

Trudeau’s attorneys consistently claimed that Babenko, who recently completed a year of graduate film studies at New York University, was a „successful businesswoman in her own right“ and that the assets of companies she owned or directed could not be used to satisfy the judgment against Trudeau. The judge didn’t buy that, and placed those companies and about a dozen others under the control of the receiver.

Babenko has since returned to her home in Kiev, Ukraine. Evidence presented today in court indicated that Trudeau allegedly directed associates to make a $380,000 mortgage payment on an apartment in Kiev for his wife and her mother.

Babenko’s assets, which could also include overseas trust accounts, and tens of thousands of dollars in designer clothing, jewelry and furniture, may also be subject to forfeiture, to the extent that they were acquired with proceeds from those corporate coffers.

Among the companies covered by the judge’s ruling is a multi-layered marketing foundation called the Global Information Network, known by the acronym GIN. It is billed as private wealth, health and success building club –boasting of thousands of members in more than 150 countries.

The club was conceived, Trudeau claims, by a secret council of 30 people — including anonymous billionaires, royals, high-level members of secret societies — and Kevin Trudeau. In Internet videos, Trudeau pitched GIN as a way for members, who pay $1,000 to join and $150 a month in dues, to acquire secret information heretofore available to only the elite.

The club’s U.S. subsidiary, GIN USA, reported more than $60 million in gross revenue in the past three years, virtually all of which came from payments, purchases and upgrade fees from the club’s own members. It is not clear how much, if any, of that money remains.

The receiver will have to determine whether GIN and its affiliated entities should be allowed to continuing to operate or should be shut down and have their assets liquidated. The receiver has already fired a number of GIN employees, and has barred Trudeau from speaking at any of the company’s events, even if he spoke for free.

Anne Will und Bernd Lucke (AfD)

Euro-Kritiker auf dem Vormarsch – kann Merkel sie kleinhalten?

Ihr Triumph kommt Angela Merkel teuer zu stehen: Sie hat ihren bisherigen Koalitionspartner verloren, und die eurokritische Partei AfD hat es aus dem Stand fast ins Parlament geschafft. Kann Angela Merkel in einer Großen Koalition die Sorgen der Bevölkerung zerstreuen – und damit verhindern, dass die Euro-Skeptiker weiteren Zulauf erhalten? Über die Euro-Kritiker diskutieren Gesine Schwan, Edmund Stoiber, Bernd Lucke, Ulf Poschardt und Serdar Somuncu.

Djokovic kritisiert Syrien-Pläne der USA

bombardierung

New York – Tennis-Branchenführer Novak Djokovic hat am Rande der US Open die Pläne der US-Regierung zu einer militärischen Intervention im Bürgerkriegsland Syrien kritisiert. „Ich bin entschieden gegen den Einsatz weiterer Waffen, gegen Luftschläge und Raketen-Angriffe“, sagte der 26-jährige Serbe:

„Ich bin gegen alles Destruktive,

denn ich habe diese Erfahrung selbst gemacht: Es kann nichts Gutes bewirken.“ Djokovic ist in Belgrad aufgewachsen und erlebte im Alter von 12 Jahren die Luftangriffe der NATO auf das damalige Jugoslawien im Rahmen des Kosovokrieges mit. „Diese Zeiten, die meine Landsleute und ich damals durchgemacht haben, sind eine Erfahrung, die wir niemandem wünschen. Krieg ist das Schlimmste, was einem Menschen in seinem Leben wiederfahren kann. Niemand gewinnt dabei“, sagte Djokovic.

Mit 12 Jahren erlebte Novak Djokovic die Nato-Luftschläge gegen seine serbische Heimat. Darum lehnt der Tennis-Superstar einen Militärschlag gegen Syrien ab.

Die aktuelle Nummer 1 im Männertennis hält ein militärisches Eingreifen des Westens in den syrischen Bürgerkrieg für eine schlechte Idee: «Ich lehne jegliche Art von Waffen, Luftschlag und Bombardierung kategorisch ab. Ich bin aufgrund meiner persönlichen Erfahrung gegen alles Destruktive, weil ich weiss, dass daraus nichts Gutes kommen kann», sagte Novak Djokovic am Sonntag am Rand des US Open.

Djokovic war 12 Jahre alt, als die NATO 1999 die serbische Hauptstadt Belgrad bombardierte. «Diese Zeiten, die ich mit meinen Landsleuten und serbischen Tenniskollegen erlebt habe, wünschen wir niemandem. Krieg ist das Schlimmste. Es gibt keine Gewinner», sagte Djokovic. Gleichzeitig habe er versucht, aus der schwierigen Situation das Beste zu machen: «Wir waren Kinder. Also dachten wir, okay, wir müssen nicht mehr zur Schule gehen und können mehr Tennis spielen.»

Tennis mit Kampfjets am Himmel: «Zwei Monate lang spielten wir praktisch jeden Tag Tennis, während die Kampfjets über unsere Köpfe flogen. Wir machten, was wir wollten und liessen das Leben entscheiden, was mit uns passierte. Wir hatten keine Kontrolle darüber, wir waren hilflos. Zum Glück überlebten wir alle», so Djokovic weiter.

Der heute 26-jährige Superstar konnte im September 1999, wenige Monate nach Ende der NATO-Bombardements, Serbien verlassen und in eine Tennisschule in Deutschland übersiedeln. Von dort startete er zwei Jahre später seine internationale Karriere.

Primärquelle: SID, Sekundärquellen: tz München, Handelsblatt.com, 20 Minuten. Propaganda entfernt.

Buch: Serve To Win

Novak Djokovic reveals the gluten-free diet and fitness plan that transformed his health and pushed him to the pinnacle.
In 2011, Novak Djokovic had what sportswriters called the greatest single season ever by a professional tennis player: He won ten titles, three Grand Slams, and forty-three consecutive matches. Remarkably, less than two years earlier, this champion could barely complete a tournament. How did a player once plagued by aches, breathing difficulties, and injuries on the court suddenly become the #1 ranked tennis player in the world? The answer is astonishing: He changed what he ate.
In Serve to Win, Djokovic recounts how he survived the bombing of Belgrade, Serbia, rising from a war-torn childhood to the top tier of his sport. While Djokovic loved and craved bread and pasta, and especially the pizza at his family’s restaurant, his body simply couldn’t process wheat. Eliminating gluten—the protein found in wheat—made him feel instantly better, lighter, clearer, and quicker. As he continued to research and refine his diet, his health issues disappeared, extra pounds dropped away, and his improved physical health and mental focus allowed him to achieve his two childhood dreams: to win Wimbledon, and to become the #1 ranked tennis player in the world.
Now Djokovic has created a blueprint for remaking your body and your life in just fourteen days. With weekly menus, mindful eating tips for optimal digestion, and delicious, easy-to-prepare recipes, you’ll be well on your way to shedding extra weight and finding your way to a better you. Djokovic also offers tips for eliminating stress and simple exercises to get you revved up and moving, the very same ones he does before each match.
You don’t need to be a superstar athlete to start living and feeling better. With Serve to Win, a trimmer, stronger, healthier you is just two weeks away.