in all the world is more dangerous, than sincere ignorance and
-- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
from April 14, 2019
B. On ME/CFS in the
This is a
Nederlog of Sunday,
This is a crisis
log but it is a bit different from how it was until 2013:
I have been
writing about the crisis since September
1, 2008 (in Dutch, but
since 2010 in English) and about
the enormous dangers of
surveillance (by secret services and
by many rich commercial entities) since June 10, 2013, and I will
continue with it.
moment and since more than three years
problems with the company that is
supposed to take care that my site is visible 
and with my health, but I am still writing a Nederlog every day and
I shall continue.
2. Crisis Files
five crisis files
that are mostly well worth reading:
A. Selections from April 14, 2019:
1. Edward Snowden Leads Chorus
Condemning Assange's Arrest
The items 1 - 5 are today's
selections from the 35 sites that I look at
every morning. The indented text under each link is quoted from the
link that starts the item. Unindented text is by me:
2. Here are 6 of Elizabeth Warren’s
3. The Assange Arrest: You Have the Right to Remain Silent
4. Assange’s ‘Conspiracy’ to Expose War Crimes Has Already Been
5. The Obvious Dirty Dealings Behind Julian Assange’s Arrest
Snowden Leads Chorus Condemning Assange's Arrest
article is by Jake Johnson on Truthdig and originally on Common Dreams.
It starts as follows:
Yes, this is all correct.
Here is some more by Glenn Greenwald:
Edward Snowden joined the
chorus of advocacy groups, reporters, and critics as the NSA
whistleblower described the arrest
of WikiLeaks founder and publisher Julian Assange Thursday
morning as a “dark
moment for press freedom” that could have grave implications for
journalism across the globe.
“Images of Ecuador’s
ambassador inviting the U.K.’s secret police into the embassy to drag a
publisher of—like it or not—award-winning journalism out of the
building are going to end up in the history books,” Snowden tweeted.
Assange’s arrest comes amid
concerns that British authorities could be planning to
extradite him to the United States.
The U.K. police confirmed that
Assange was arrested in part due to “an extradition warrant on behalf
of the United States authorities.”
Yes indeed. And here is
more by Matt Taibbi and Jeremy Scahill:
“If you’re cheering
arrest based on a U.S. extradition request, your allies in your
celebration are the most extremist elements of the Trump
administration, whose primary and explicit goal is to criminalize
reporting on classified docs and punish [WikiLeaks] for exposing war
crimes,” tweeted The Intercept‘s Glenn Greenwald.
Yes, I quite agree. Here
is the last bit that I quote from this article:
“All of us in the press
should read the charges made against Assange very carefully,” wrote Rolling
Stone’s Matt Taibbi, “as this case has enormous potential
ramifications for journalists everywhere.”
at The Intercept, investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill,
called the arrest “an extremely dangerous crossing of the rubicon” when
it comes to press freedoms. “All journalists,” he said, “should stand
in fierce opposition.”
Yes indeed, and this is a strongly
Ben Wizner, director of the
American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology
Project, warned in a statement
that “prosecution by the United States of Mr. Assange for WikiLeaks’
publishing operations would be unprecedented and unconstitutional, and
would open the door to criminal investigations of other news
“Moreover, prosecuting a
foreign publisher for violating U.S. secrecy laws would set an
especially dangerous precedent for U.S. journalists, who routinely
violate foreign secrecy laws to deliver information vital to the
public’s interest,” Wizner added.
are 6 of Elizabeth Warren’s bold ideas
article is by Alex Henderson on AlterNet. I abbreviated the title. It
starts as follows:
Yes, I agree with the
above. Here is some more:
Next to Sen. Bernie
Sanders, the most progressive Democratic candidate in the 2020
presidential race is arguably Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.
Warren is a
details-obsessed policy wonk, outlining solution after solution for the
United States. Yet her presidential campaign has been underperforming,
especially in light of her strong track record.
Yes, I agree although I do
not agree with Warren on the virtues of capitalism. Here
is some more
(and "(..)" indicates texts I deleted in this review):
Here are six of the many
areas in which the Massachusetts senator has excelled from a policy
1. Warren realizes
that gaping wealth inequality is terrible for free-market capitalism
Sanders and Warren part
company when it comes to describing themselves. Sanders considers
himself a “democratic socialist,” while Warren has said that she is a “capitalist
to my bones.” But the New England senators agree that gaping wealth
inequality is terrible for the U.S., and Warren—much like President
Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1930s/early 1940s and President Lyndon
B. Johnson in the 1960s—realizes that capitalism is best served by a strong
Warren understands that the U.S. tax system is
rigged in favor of the 1% (..)
I agree with all three
points. Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:
favors a wealth tax on the richest
4. Warren proposes
breaking up the United States’ largest banks
The Great Recession was the
worst financial crisis in the U.S. since the Great Depression, and
Warren—not unlike Sanders—has stressed that in order to avoid another
financial calamity, it is essential to break
up the country’s largest banks
into a bunch of smaller banks.
Warren stresses that increasing the minimum wage
is vital to having a strong middle class (..)
I again agree with both
points, and this is a strongly recommended article.
Warren views universal health care as essential to
a healthy economy
Assange Arrest: You Have the Right to Remain Silent
This article is by
Pepe Escobar on Consortium News. It starts as follows:
The date – April 11,
2019 – will live in infamy in the annals of Western “values” and
“freedom of expression.” The image is stark. A handcuffed journalist
and publisher dragged out by force from the inside of an embassy,
clutching a Gore Vidal book on the History of the U.S. National
Yes, I agree and
especially with this bit: "Julian
Assange is not a U.S. citizen,
he’s an Australian. WikiLeaks is not a U.S.-based media organization.
If the US government gets Assange extradited, prosecuted and
incarcerated, it will legitimize its right to go after anyone, anyhow,
The mechanism is brutal.
WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange was arrested because the United
States demanded this from the Tory British government, which for its
part meekly claimed it did not pressure Ecuador to revoke Assange’s
The U.S. magically erases
Ecuador’s financial troubles, ordering the IMF to release a
providential $4.2-billion loan. Immediately after, Ecuadorian diplomats
“invite” the London Metropolitan Police to come inside their embassy to
arrest their long-term guest.
Let’s cut to the chase. Julian
Assange is not a U.S. citizen, he’s an Australian. WikiLeaks is not a
U.S.-based media organization. If the US government gets Assange
extradited, prosecuted and incarcerated, it will legitimize its right
to go after anyone, anyhow, anywhere, anytime.
Call it The Killing of
Here is some more:
Assange is allegedly
guilty of helping Chelsea Manning, the former U.S. Army intel analyst,
to get these documents. But it gets trickier. He’s also allegedly
guilty of “encouraging” Manning to collect more information.
Yes, I agree again, in
part because - indeed - many journalists who get some information (from
usually anonymous folks) ask for more (and often get it).
There’s no other way to
interpret that. This amounts, no holds barred, to all-out
criminalization of journalistic practice.
Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:
The great Daniel
“Pentagon Papers” Ellsberg had already warned back in 2017:
Yes, I mostly agree with the
above and this is a recommended article.
“Obama having opened the legal campaign against the press by going
after the roots of investigative reporting on national security – the
sources – Trump is going to go after the gatherers/gardeners themselves
(and their bosses, publishers). To switch the metaphor, an indictment
of Assange is a ‘first use’ of ‘the nuclear option’ against the First
Amendment protection of a free press.”
The current DoJ charges –
basically stealing a computer password – are just the tip of the
avalanche. At least for now, publishing is not a crime. Yet if
extradited, Assange may be additionally charged with extra conspiracies
and even violation of the 1917 Espionage Act.
Jennifer Robinson, Assange’s
very able lawyer, has correctly stressed his arrest is “a free speech
issue” because it “is all about the ways in which journalists can
communicate with their sources.” The invaluable Ray McGovern, who knows
one or two things about the U.S. intel community, has evoked a requiem
of the fourth estate.
‘Conspiracy’ to Expose War Crimes Has Already Been Punished
This article is by
Joe Emersberger on Common Dreams and originally on FAIR. It starts as
Yes indeed. Here is more:
Julian Assange should never have been punished for working with a
whistleblower to expose war crimes. Chelsea Manning, the whistleblower,
has done more time in prison, under harsher conditions, than William
Calley, a key perpetrator of the My Lai massacre. Remarkably,
Manning is in jail again, failed by
organizations that should unreservedly defend her, as the US tries to
coerce her into helping inflict more punishment on Assange.
As for Assange, he has
already been arbitrarily detained for several years, according to
the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. Its 2016 press release on
the matter stated:
The expert panel called
on the Swedish and British authorities to end Mr. Assange’s deprivation
of liberty, respect his physical integrity and freedom of movement, and
afford him the right to compensation.
Yes indeed. Here is more:
In 2010, the Guardian,
like the New York Times and a few other
corporate newspapers, briefly partnered with WikiLeaks to
publish the contents of
thousands of confidential US diplomatic cables, known as Cablegate.
That year, WikiLeaks released other
confidential US government information as well: the Afghanistan War Logs, the Iraq War Logs, the infamous “Collateral Murder” video.
The material exposed atrocities perpetrated
by the US military, as well as other disgraceful acts—like US
diplomats strategizing on
how to undermine elected governments out of favor with Washington, spying on
official US allies and bullying poor countries into paying wildly
exorbitant prices for life-saving drugs.
Yes indeed - and note
or ommissions about anything that may cause a journalist to be arrested.
Last year, James Goodale,
former general counsel to the New York Times, commented on
the (now confirmed) idea that a “conspiracy” charge would be brought
against Assange by the US government:
As a matter of fact, a
charge against Assange for “conspiring” with a source is the most
dangerous charge that I can think of with respect to the First
Amendment in almost all my years representing media organizations.
The reason is that one
who is gathering/writing/distributing the news, as the law stands now,
is free and clear under the First Amendment. If the government is able
to say a person who is exempt under the First Amendment then loses that exemption because
that person has “conspired” with a source who is subject to the
Espionage Act or other law, then the government has succeeded in
applying the standard to all news-gathering.
One way to avoid being
accused of a conspiracy is to simply not publish information that
powerful people don’t want published, as independent journalist Matt
Kennard, author of The
Racket, noted on Twitter.
Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:
Yes, this is at least fair
and this is a recommended
The Guardian editors
dropped any pretense of having journalistic standards when it comes to
Assange when it published an outlandish
claim that Assange met repeatedly with Paul Manafort in the
Ecuadorian embassy in London. Glenn Greenwald has
done tremendous work exposing that journalistic outrage. It
has become a “scoop” (heavily tweaked and qualified after publication)
that the Guardian doesn’t retract, but
doesn’t mention either—even in a very recent editorial (4/11/19)
about Assange’s case.
In that editorial, the Guardian, disregarding the
UN experts who said Assange had been arbitrarily detained for years,
still calls for Assange to be “held to account” for “skipping bail”
(though not extradited to the US). Journalism like that, at the
“liberal” end of the spectrum, explains why Assange and Manning are in
jail, while George W. Bush and Tony Blair walk free.
Obvious Dirty Dealings Behind Julian Assange’s Arrest
article is by Kit Knightly on The Off-Guardian. It starts as follows:
I do not know whether the
above is correct, but I fear it is. Here is some more:
The US has been planning to
have Julian Assange handed over for a longtime, that much is obvious.
Mike Pence, the Vice President, was visiting Ecuador last year,
notionally to discuss the Venezuela situation, and trade. But it was
fairly obvious at the time, and even more so now, that they were
discussing the details of Assange being handed over to UK authorities,
and eventually extradited to the US.
In terms of quid pro quo,
the situation is clear-cut – In February, Ecuador got a $4.2 BILLION
loan approved by the International Monetary Fund (amongst other
Yes, I agree with
above. Here is some more:
Less on the nose, but still
definitely present, is the slow-burn media-based campaign of defamation
and smears directed at Assange. A campaign designed to weaken public
support for him and lessen the potential outcry if/when the UK handed
him to US authorities, who famously use “enhanced interrogation” on
Last October, just three
months after Pence’s Ecuador visit, an Ecuadorian government memo was “leaked”
claiming that Assange had bad personal hygiene habits, was hacking
people’s electrical devices, and neglecting his cat. These charges,
cynically designed to make Assange a figure of ridicule, got massive
play in the media. The Guardian, ever at the vanguard of
sticking the boot in on Assange, ran a gleeful opinion piece mocking
him. As did many other publications.
In fact, Owen Jones is "the
token "Leftist"" on the present Guardian. Why he thinks (that
think) that Assange is "a liar", a "fascist" or a "misogynist" is
totally unclear to me, but then this is The Guardian's
Equally obnoxious and
dishonest is the ‘corporate concern trolling’ that allows faux-liberals
to take up the craven position of “qualified support”, such as:
“You can think Assange is
a liar, fascist and misogynist, but still think he shouldn’t be
This is the stance adopted
by folks like Owen Jones in the Guardian,
a position which claims to support one course of action, but is
actually covertly arguing for the opposite.
Here is the last bit that I quote from this article:
Yes, I think Knightly is
probably correct, and this is a strongly recommended article.
But this is all distraction
and obfuscation – keeping the totally discredited
accusations in the headlines, whilst avoiding the actual truth,
Julian Assange was
arrested for publishing evidence of US war crimes, after the US
government bribed the Ecuadorian government to break international law.
That is what happened. And
anyone who uses lies and distraction to deny this truth is on the wrong
side of history.
B. On ME/CFS in the Netherlands
Both my ex and myself have ME/CFS for
more than forty years, and we are both Dutch, and have to
live - very unfortunately, in my
case - in Holland, for lack of
money. We both became ill in January 1979, and then saw together or
alone 30 Dutch medics.
Before saying what I think of 90% of the Dutch medics, I first add that
both of us also succeeded - with much physical trouble,
because we could not attend any lectures - to make excellent M.A.s in
psychology, but then again we were not able to use them to make
I have also been called "a dirty fascist" and "a terrorist"
for 11 years by members of the ASVA (in the university) because I was not
a Marxist, and
absolutely no one cared one bit
that I was called so.
Well... I strongly despise Holland and the Dutch; my ex and I
have visited 30 Dutch doctors which were randomly collected; 27 out
of 30 did absolutely nothing except take
our money and tell us the
utter (unmedical!) nonsense that it was "psychosomatic"; and
heard in March of 2018, after more than 39 years of illness that
were never admitted by any but 3 out of 30 Dutch doctors I saw, that
the Dutch health council had decided that we have "a serious chronic
I do not say "No" - but I have been trying to move Dutch doctors to
that position for over 39 years, and by now I have almost totally
given up on almost all Dutch medical doctors for the simple reason that
I am more than justified to claim that
This is based on the fact
that 27 of the 30 medical doctors my ex or I saw were very obviously totally
incompetent in judging us, and besides refused
to do anything whatsoever to help us.
Besides, the present medical doctors received at
most half of the medical teachings that were normal until the 1970ies,
because all Dutch universities have halved in what they demand of
of the Dutch medical doctors is dangerously
incompetent for anyone who has a non-regular disease that is difficult to diagnose
Anyway... here is a report on Dxrevision on the latest change in the
"medicine" that Dutch people with ME/CFS have been made the victim of
for over 40 years, in the case of my ex and myself, for there was
40 years absolutely nothing for us except medical discrimination and
This is from that article:
I say, for I did not
know that (for I dislike Holland and most Dutchmen so much that I
mostly avoid reading or writing about it).
As reported in Post
# 345, the SNOMED CT Concept SCTID: 192439005 Neurasthenia
(disorder) and its associated SCTID Concept terms were retired
(Inactivated) from SNOMED CT’s International Edition and from national
editions some years ago.
However, the Netherlands
Edition retained the term neurasthenie under the SCTID:
52702003 chronischevermoeidheidssyndroom (CVS) Synonyms
list. The neurasthenie term was exclusive to the
Netherlands Edition, was assigned to the SCTID: 52702003 CVS code, and
designated as an “Acceptable” Synonym term for CVS in the Netherlands
Dutch language reference set.
In case you are interesting in the meaning of "neurasthenie", here is
an English explanation: Neurasthenia
So my ex and I have been called that as well the last 40
years by nearly all Dutch doctors...
I better stop before I blow up, but will return later to the extra-ordinarily frightful utter
incompetence of 90% of the Dutch medics (for 40 years, in our cases) to
be human, decent, rational, scientific, reasonable or helpful to people
with "a serious chronic disease".
end of 2015 that
xs4all.nl is systematically
ruining my site by NOT updating it within a few seconds,
as it did between 1996 and 2015, but by updating it between
two to seven days later, that is, if I am lucky.
claimed that my site was wrongly named in html: A lie.
They have claimed that my operating system was out of date: A lie.
just don't care for my site, my interests, my values or my
ideas. They have behaved now for 3 years
as if they are the
eagerly willing instruments of the US's secret services, which I
from now on suppose they are (for truth is dead in Holland).
two reasons I remain with xs4all is that my site has been
there since 1996, and I have no reasons whatsoever to suppose that any
other Dutch provider is any better (!!).