jueves, 31 de enero de 2013
martes, 29 de enero de 2013
LOS NARCOSUBMARINOS: CONTRABANDO DE DROGAS
Por Gundhramns Hammer
29 de enero de 2013
El hombre (Homo insapiens) habita en un universo de universos paralelos desde el punto de vista de la física. Dentro del universo tangible donde el humano vive, su vida está regida por patrones y factores sociales, políticos y económicos.
29 de enero de 2013
 |
| Un narcosubmarino. Fuente: phpBB |
El hombre (Homo insapiens) habita en un universo de universos paralelos desde el punto de vista de la física. Dentro del universo tangible donde el humano vive, su vida está regida por patrones y factores sociales, políticos y económicos.
La economía ocupa un aspecto importante en su vida, por lo que a este primate homínido a veces se le denomina Homo economicus. Su universo económico consiste de dos mundos paralelos: el legal y el ilegal. Dentro del mundo ilegal existe una variedad de actividades clandestinas cuyo objetivo es obtener ganancias cuantiosas, con poco esfuerzo y de una manera muy rápida.
Una de estas actividades ilegales es el narcotráfico, entre otras (trata de blancas, tráfico ilegal de armas, comercio ilegal de vida silvestre, etc.) Y donde hay demanda hay oferta. Así, los narcotraficantes saben cómo aprovechar cualquier oportunidad para satisfacer las demandas de los adictos a las drogas en cualquier país.
Lo irónico de estos dos mundos paralelos es que lo ilegal alimenta al mundo legal directa o indirectamente. El enorme capital ilegal generado encuentra de una u otra forma el conducto para alimentar con dinero lavado la pirámide económica del hombre.
A pesar de que el mundo legal persigue al mundo ilegal, ninguno de los dos puede sobrevivir el uno sin el otro, al menos por el momento, hasta que el hombre encuentre otro sistema que no esté basado en el maldito dinero.
La mafia de la droga cuenta con todos los recursos económicos a su disposición para diseñar y sacar adelante diferentes estrategias para contrabandear los estupefacientes dentro de los mercados clandestinos en los Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea, entre otros países consumidores de drogas.
Los mafiosos, como un juego del ratón y el gato, se las ingenian para ir un paso adelante de las fuerzas de seguridad encargadas de combatir el narcotráfico. Uno de los últimos inventos que los narcotraficantes han sacado de la manga es la utilización de artefactos sumergibles capaces de llevar en su interior varias toneladas de droga y transportarlas por el océano desde Colombia hasta México o los Estados Unidos. Estamos hablando de los famosos "narcosubmarinos" (Videos 1-2), unos aparatos fabricados frecuentemente de fibra de vidrio de manera clandestina en los manglares de Colombia desde la década de los 90. En ellos se nota el ingenio del hombre para construir artilugios para sus trapicheos económicos.
A pesar de que el mundo legal persigue al mundo ilegal, ninguno de los dos puede sobrevivir el uno sin el otro, al menos por el momento, hasta que el hombre encuentre otro sistema que no esté basado en el maldito dinero.
La mafia de la droga cuenta con todos los recursos económicos a su disposición para diseñar y sacar adelante diferentes estrategias para contrabandear los estupefacientes dentro de los mercados clandestinos en los Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea, entre otros países consumidores de drogas.
Los mafiosos, como un juego del ratón y el gato, se las ingenian para ir un paso adelante de las fuerzas de seguridad encargadas de combatir el narcotráfico. Uno de los últimos inventos que los narcotraficantes han sacado de la manga es la utilización de artefactos sumergibles capaces de llevar en su interior varias toneladas de droga y transportarlas por el océano desde Colombia hasta México o los Estados Unidos. Estamos hablando de los famosos "narcosubmarinos" (Videos 1-2), unos aparatos fabricados frecuentemente de fibra de vidrio de manera clandestina en los manglares de Colombia desde la década de los 90. En ellos se nota el ingenio del hombre para construir artilugios para sus trapicheos económicos.
References
Calvani S., Estievenart G., Labrouse A., Nadelmann E. A., Reuter P., Youngers C. A., Astorga L., Thoumi F. E., Guáqueta A. & Vargas Meza R. (2006). Narcotráfico: Europa, Estados Unidos, América Latina. Unidersidad de Los Andes, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales - CESO, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia. 253 p.
Decker S. H. & Towsend Chapman M. (2008). Drug Smugglers on Drug Smuggling: Lesons from the Inside. Temple University Press, Philadelphia, PA, USA. 209 p.
Duncan G., Vargas R., Rocha R. & López A. (2005). Narcotráfico en Colombia. Economía y Violencia. Fundación Seguridad & Democracia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia. 226 p.
Saumeth C. E. (2012). Narco-Semi-Sumergibles y Sumergibles. Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais, Brasil. 9 p.
viernes, 25 de enero de 2013
BAD NEWS STORIES INCREASE STRESS IN WOMEN
 |
| Source: 123RF |
TORONTO - It's said that no news is good news. But what's the effect of bad
news presented by the media?
For women, exposure to negative news stories may make them more reactive to subsequent stressful situations, according to a study published Wednesday in the journal PLoS One, which did not see a similar response in men.
Researchers also found that women had a better recollection of information learned from those so-called bad news stories.
"Nowadays, we are constantly bombarded with news in the newspaper, the radio, on the TV. And now with Facebook and online press and Twitter, you are constantly bombarded with information," said lead author Marie-France Marin, a PhD candidate in neuroscience at the University of Montreal.
"It's difficult to avoid the news, considering the multitude of news sources out there."
"And what if all that news was bad for us? It certainly looks like that could be the case."
To conduct the study, researchers recruited 56 subjects, aged 18 to 35, and divided them into four groups, two for each gender. Each group was given several recent articles to read from two Montreal daily newspapers.
One group of men and a group of women read emotionally neutral news stories, about subjects such as the opening of a new park or the premiere of a film. The other two gender-segregated groups read "bad news" stories, which described such events as murders or traffic accidents.
Saliva samples were taken from each participant and their levels of the stress hormone cortisol were measured within minutes of having read the stories.
"When our brain perceives a threatening situation, our bodies begin to produce stress hormones that enter the brain and may modulate memories of stressful or negative events," explained senior author Sonia Lupien, director of the Centre for Studies on Human Stress.
"This led us to believe that reading a negative news story should provoke the reader's stress reaction."
The researchers found that cortisol levels were pretty much stable in all groups right after reading the articles — no matter the subject matter.
But that wasn't the case after participants were faced with back-to-back stressful tasks — a mock job interview followed by mental arithmetic — within half an hour of the news-reading session.
Researchers found that women exposed to negative news were more reactive to the subsequent stressor, as shown by elevated cortisol levels, compared with men who read bad news stories and males and females given neutral articles.
When all participants were given memory recall tests the next day, Marin said women who read negative news stories were better able to recall the details of the articles. "It is interesting to note that we did not observe this phenomenon amongst the male participants."
The differences between how men and women react when confronted with negative news may be evolutionary, say the researchers. Scientists have speculated that an emphasis on the survival of offspring may have influenced the development of the female stress system, leading women to be more empathetic.
"The other thing is women have a tendency to ruminate more than men," said Marin, theorizing that turning an experience over and over in one's mind might store it more effectively in the brain's memory banks.
"This could explain why women have higher (levels of) memory after."
Joanne Cantor, a professor emerita in communication science at the University of Wisconsin, called the study "really interesting," in part because the researchers used an objective measure — cortisol — to compare gender-based reactions to bad news.
"It makes sense that a previous stressor might affect a stressor that comes right afterwards," Cantor, who was not involved in the study, said Wednesday from Madison, Wis.
"Because if you're already feeling levels of stress, then the next thing that comes along that's stressful is going to be more of a challenge, because maybe your ability to cope with stress is compromised a little bit."
However, she questioned the finding that men appear less stressed after exposure to negative news stories, wondering if males might react differently if the news were delivered visually on TV, for instance, instead of being read in a newspaper. The severity of "bad news" content might also be a factor, she suggested.
"My conclusion would just be to say, 'Look at what we've observed in women. We haven't observed it yet in men.' But at least in my opinion, this doesn't warrant the conclusion that men are not susceptible," Cantor said. "More research needs to be done."
And when it comes to women, would vocation make any difference in how they respond to negative news in the media?
"That's a very good question," said Marin. "Do we have the same thing in (women who are) firefighters or police? We cannot answer for now ... That needs to be tested in future studies."
Cantor, who gives public lectures examining the emotional impact of mass media, said she advises her audiences to "choose your news."
"First of all, don't leave the news on all day because so much of it is negative, and you're likely to experience negative emotions which are stressful and interfere with other things," said Cantor, author of the book "Conquer Cyber Overload."
"Of course, you need to get your news, but it's better to find ways to do it that will expose you to the news that you want to know and need to know," she said.
"You can't keep away from all news, but you can certainly choose when and how to expose yourself to the news."
Source link:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/mobile/health/women/news+stories+appear+boost+reactivity+stressors+women/7370535/story.html
For women, exposure to negative news stories may make them more reactive to subsequent stressful situations, according to a study published Wednesday in the journal PLoS One, which did not see a similar response in men.
Researchers also found that women had a better recollection of information learned from those so-called bad news stories.
"Nowadays, we are constantly bombarded with news in the newspaper, the radio, on the TV. And now with Facebook and online press and Twitter, you are constantly bombarded with information," said lead author Marie-France Marin, a PhD candidate in neuroscience at the University of Montreal.
"It's difficult to avoid the news, considering the multitude of news sources out there."
"And what if all that news was bad for us? It certainly looks like that could be the case."
To conduct the study, researchers recruited 56 subjects, aged 18 to 35, and divided them into four groups, two for each gender. Each group was given several recent articles to read from two Montreal daily newspapers.
One group of men and a group of women read emotionally neutral news stories, about subjects such as the opening of a new park or the premiere of a film. The other two gender-segregated groups read "bad news" stories, which described such events as murders or traffic accidents.
Saliva samples were taken from each participant and their levels of the stress hormone cortisol were measured within minutes of having read the stories.
"When our brain perceives a threatening situation, our bodies begin to produce stress hormones that enter the brain and may modulate memories of stressful or negative events," explained senior author Sonia Lupien, director of the Centre for Studies on Human Stress.
"This led us to believe that reading a negative news story should provoke the reader's stress reaction."
The researchers found that cortisol levels were pretty much stable in all groups right after reading the articles — no matter the subject matter.
But that wasn't the case after participants were faced with back-to-back stressful tasks — a mock job interview followed by mental arithmetic — within half an hour of the news-reading session.
Researchers found that women exposed to negative news were more reactive to the subsequent stressor, as shown by elevated cortisol levels, compared with men who read bad news stories and males and females given neutral articles.
When all participants were given memory recall tests the next day, Marin said women who read negative news stories were better able to recall the details of the articles. "It is interesting to note that we did not observe this phenomenon amongst the male participants."
The differences between how men and women react when confronted with negative news may be evolutionary, say the researchers. Scientists have speculated that an emphasis on the survival of offspring may have influenced the development of the female stress system, leading women to be more empathetic.
"The other thing is women have a tendency to ruminate more than men," said Marin, theorizing that turning an experience over and over in one's mind might store it more effectively in the brain's memory banks.
"This could explain why women have higher (levels of) memory after."
Joanne Cantor, a professor emerita in communication science at the University of Wisconsin, called the study "really interesting," in part because the researchers used an objective measure — cortisol — to compare gender-based reactions to bad news.
"It makes sense that a previous stressor might affect a stressor that comes right afterwards," Cantor, who was not involved in the study, said Wednesday from Madison, Wis.
"Because if you're already feeling levels of stress, then the next thing that comes along that's stressful is going to be more of a challenge, because maybe your ability to cope with stress is compromised a little bit."
However, she questioned the finding that men appear less stressed after exposure to negative news stories, wondering if males might react differently if the news were delivered visually on TV, for instance, instead of being read in a newspaper. The severity of "bad news" content might also be a factor, she suggested.
"My conclusion would just be to say, 'Look at what we've observed in women. We haven't observed it yet in men.' But at least in my opinion, this doesn't warrant the conclusion that men are not susceptible," Cantor said. "More research needs to be done."
And when it comes to women, would vocation make any difference in how they respond to negative news in the media?
"That's a very good question," said Marin. "Do we have the same thing in (women who are) firefighters or police? We cannot answer for now ... That needs to be tested in future studies."
Cantor, who gives public lectures examining the emotional impact of mass media, said she advises her audiences to "choose your news."
"First of all, don't leave the news on all day because so much of it is negative, and you're likely to experience negative emotions which are stressful and interfere with other things," said Cantor, author of the book "Conquer Cyber Overload."
"Of course, you need to get your news, but it's better to find ways to do it that will expose you to the news that you want to know and need to know," she said.
"You can't keep away from all news, but you can certainly choose when and how to expose yourself to the news."
Source link:
http://www.thestarphoenix.com/mobile/health/women/news+stories+appear+boost+reactivity+stressors+women/7370535/story.html
LESSON OF THE DAY: LOVE TO EARTH
By Hugo M. G. von Österreich und von Toskana
Member of the Union of Concerned Scientists (USA)
Paz verdadera!
Member of the Union of Concerned Scientists (USA)
 |
| Source: Facebook |
Earth could more beautiful if you shone when you should shine and you turned off
when you should be turned off. There is only a way and that is within
you. The idea is turned into an act and the act into a boon or bane. You
decide. But when you decide you´d better shine because we already have
enough darkness in this beautiful planet. May your event be what you
want it to be for you: Love and Peace.
Greetings to all of you!
True peace!
LECCION DEL DIA: AMOR A LA TIERRA
LECCION DEL DIA: AMOR A LA TIERRA
La
Tierra podría ser más bella si tú brillases cuando deberías brillar y
te apagases cuando te deberías apagar. Sólo hay un camino y está dentro de
tí. La idea se convierte en acto y el acto en una bendición o perdición. Tú lo decides. Pero
cuando lo decidas será mejor que brilles porque oscuridad ya tenemos
suficiente en este bello planeta. Haz que tu acto sea lo que tú quieres que para tí sea: Amor y Paz
Un saludo para todos vosotros!
Un saludo para todos vosotros!
Paz verdadera!
jueves, 24 de enero de 2013
EUROPEAN MONARCHIES AND EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: HOW MUCH DO THEY COST TO TAXPAYERS AND ARE THEY WORTH IT?
 |
| Source: stuff.com.nz |
By Gundhramns Hammer
January 23, 2013
Royal balls are expensive to maintain. Buckingham Palace claims that the monarchy costs the taxpayers around £40 million each year and that this makes it an excellent "value for money".
Republic (republic.org.uk) has researched this matter and has found that the British monarchy is one of the "most expensive, wasteful and financially irresponsible institutions in the world".
According to Republic, the costs of keeping monarchies in Europe are:
TOTAL COST OF THE BRITISH MONARCHY 2009-2010
Item Cost (£ millions)
Queen's Civil List 14.2
Duke of Edinburgh 0.4
Property grant 15.4
Communications, media and public relations 0.4
Travel 3.9
Government departments and Crown Estate 3.9
Prince Charles and Camilla (additional costs) 0.5
Lost revenue from Duchy of Lancaster 13.2
Lost revenue from Duchy of Cornwall 24.5
Security 100
Cost to local councils for visits by Queen 26
Total 202.4
COSTS OF OTHER EUROPEAN MONARCHIES:
Monarchy Total annual cost (£ millions)
Netherlands 88.3
Norway 23.9
Denmark 10.5
Sweden 10.2
Belgium 9.7
Luxembourg 7.8
Spain 7.4
It is also expensive to maintain this business of the European Union, a gathering of nations with certain animosity to one another but that under the constant surveillance of an outside power (USA) have been able to come together and live more or less in peace for the last 50 years after warring for more than 2000 years. The economics of the few outweighed the needs of the many.
It cost the taxpayers €1,718 billion to maintain 754 members and 23 officials working languages in the European Parliament (EP) in 2012, of which 37% is for staff expenses, chiefly salaries for the 6000 officials working in the General Secretariat and in the political groups, as reported by the same EP.
This is a lot of money to keep a lot of politicians, some of them good, others so squalid and corrupt and some have never bothered to open their mouth to speak a single word at sessions but are only interested in cashing in their monthly checks. After all this is what "democracies" are all about.
The European Union and its EP members have become a giant leech that sucks up the taxpayers´ money for greedy purposes and the benefit of big corporations. It ha become a racket (Video 1).
In these times of all kinds of crises, especially economic where a lot of people are having a hard time making ends meet or have nothing at all, perhaps it is time we should decentralised governments and let the people in every town have the control in their own hands and decide their own destinies in a true democratic sense. May be we have learned enough not to fall in the mistakes of the warring medieval Italian city states. Why not give it a try?
The "democratic" systems we have now are not really working as they should because we have profit- and business-minded people at the helm, humans who idolised money and power. People who look at their pocket first and afterwards the interests of the masses. It should be the other way around.
And at the same time all humans, ruled and rulers, should never forget that whatever they do to make a living infringes and impacts directly upon the Biosphere and if Nature is not put as the first consideration we might never make past another century.
The way we are going eventually we will never get anywhere. Everywhere we look at we see the signs that our present squandering system is bursting at its seams: poverty, pollution, climate change, deforestation, etc.
Someone once said that after the fall of communism the next one to come down would be capitalism. If man does not put an end to this criminal Nature certainly will.
What we call "democracies" in whatever shape they come, including constitutional monarchies, are nothing but circuses. They are there just as a farce to keep the public from revolting. They serve to maintain the public not so happy but unhappy either but in a state of constant fear of losing that which do not have and can never possess, for we are all here on Earth only for a very short while.
People thoughout the world are beginning to realise that governments are not there to protect the public´s interests but to watch for the interests of the rich classes. And this is quite unfair.
It is obvious that sooner or later we shall be confronted with the dilema:
Is it worth it to have selfish kings and queens who are not willing to share their tonnes of bread with people in times of need?
Is it worth it to hang on to this sick system which we have been brainedwashed to cherished so dearly?
References
Gill G. (1994). The Collapse of the single-party system. The disintegration of the CPSU. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 258 p.
Hall P. (1992). Royal Fortune: Tax, Money and the Monarchy. Bloomsbury Publishing, Plc., London, UK. 320 p.
Republic (2010). The "Value for Money Monarchy" Myth. www.repiblic.org.uk. London, UK. 15 p.
Ringe N. (2010). Who Decides, and How?: Preferences, Uncertainty, and Policy Choice in the European Parliament. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 233 p.
miércoles, 23 de enero de 2013
MASSACRE OF STARLINGS (STURNUS VULGARIS): HUMANS NEVER LEARN THE LESSONS
Humans (Homo insapiens) exterminated the Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius) more than a hundred years ago. They almost exterminated the Bison (Bison bison) and the Prairie Dogs (Cynomys spp.)
And now they are attempting to exterminate the European Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris).
Will this stupid naked ape (Homo insapiens) ever learn the lesson?
HEALTHCARE: A FREE BOOK TO GET YOU ON THE HEALTH TRACK
 |
| Source: Learning Fundamentals |
FREE BOOK:
"Towards Healthcare Emancipation: Defeat Cancer, AIDS-HIV & All Other Parasitic Disease Within 90 Days!"
Download book: Click HERE
Do not forget to donate!
DISCLAIMER
All information is intended for your general knowledge only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, prevention, diagnosis, or treatment for specific medical conditions. Please consult with your physician, pharmacist, or health care provider before taking any home remedies or supplements or following any treatment suggested by anyone on this site. Only your health care provider, personal physician, or pharmacist can provide you with advice on what is safe and effective for your unique needs or diagnose your particular medical history.
All information is intended for your general knowledge only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, prevention, diagnosis, or treatment for specific medical conditions. Please consult with your physician, pharmacist, or health care provider before taking any home remedies or supplements or following any treatment suggested by anyone on this site. Only your health care provider, personal physician, or pharmacist can provide you with advice on what is safe and effective for your unique needs or diagnose your particular medical history.
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: HOMELESS PEOPLE SLEEPING UNDER A BRIDGE
The cow is the public and the politicians are the ticks.
It is very ironic that poor people are living in tents right under a bridge near the European Parliament in Strassbourg. It is obvious that something is wrong with the system when people are homeless like the ones shown in the following video.
Link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNzSKTQW6II&list=UUz84cLA1kFgUwbiFm3J4fvQ&index=15
Disclaimer:
The posting of stories,
commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site
does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express
or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts
therein. The information herein contained is for educational and/or entertainment
purposes only.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)