Российская Федерация

In den letzten Tagen häufen sich wieder die Berichterstattungen über den ach-so-armen Garri Kimowitsch Kasparow, den vermeintlichen Koalitionsführer des oppositionellen Bündnisses „Das andere Russland“.

Zuerst waren es die Berichte über Kasparows “Verhaftung” während des “Marsches der Nichteinverstandenen”, jetzt macht der gute Mann wieder Schlagzeilen. Diesmal darf der gute Mensch aus Baku nicht nach Samara fliegen. Warum wohl ?

Nennen wir das Kind doch beim (richtigen) Namen.

Seine Mutter, Klara Schagenowna Kasparjan, stammt aus Bergkarabach, einer armenisch besiedelten Enklave in Aserbaidschan, sein Vater, Kim Moissejewitsch Weinstein, war ein deutschstämmiger Jude. Geboren wurde Kasparow in Baku, Aserbaidschan am 13. April 1963 unter seinem richtigen Namen Garik Weinstein.

Im Alter von 12 Jahren änderte die Mutter den Namen ihres Sohnes von Weinstein in Kasparow (die russifizierte Variante von Kasparjan), um nicht am Namen als Jude erkennbar zu sein, eine Lebenslüge die bis heute andauert.

Eine weitere Lebenslüge des Herrn Kasparow ist sein “aufrichtiges Streben” nach einer Demokratie in Russland. Er lebt zwar vor allem in Russland, gelegentlich besucht er aber auch Armenien. Sein zweiter Wohnsitz ist in Manhattan, New York, seiner eigentlichen spirituellen Heimat und Operationsbasis seiner Brötchengeber.

Im Jahre 2006 wurde Kasparow als Berater (”Advisor”) auf der Internetseite des Center for Security Policy (Link zur englischen Wikipedia) geführt, einer US-amerikanischen Nichtregierungsorganisation, die sich mit politischen Strategien zur Stärkung der Äußeren Sicherheit der USA beschäftigt. 

Kasparow dementiert, jemals für diese Organisation tätig gewesen zu sein, vielmehr habe er lediglich im Jahre 1991 eine Auszeichnung von ihr angenommen.

Unstrittig ist, dass Kasparow eng mit den “Think Tanks” der neokonservativen Bush-Administration verflochten ist. Vielerorts wurde bereits darauf hingewiesen wer den “Großmeister” finanziert. Und zu welchem Zweck.

Schachmatt (oft auch einfach nur Matt) ist eine Stellung im Schachspiel, bei der ein König im Schach steht, und es keinen regelgerechten Zug gibt, dieses Schachgebot aufzuheben. Mit einem Schachmatt ist die Schachpartie beendet und für den Spieler, dessen König schachmatt gesetzt wurde, verloren.

Die Schachpartie um die es geht wird im Weißen Haus gespielt, die Figuren von der Bush-Administration bewegt, das Ziel ist Putin “schachmatt” zu setzen.

Der Begriff “schachmatt” stammt ursprünglich aus der persischen Sprache: arabisch aš-šāh māta “Der König (Schah) ist tot” = Schah matt. Herr Weinstein-Kasparow soll der “Königsmörder” sein, bei Weitem aber nicht der einzige.

Für erhebliche Aufregung in Deutschland sorgte die Ausladung Kasparows aus der Talkshow von Sabine Christiansen vom 10. Dezember 2006 , bei der er per Videoschaltung hätte teilnehmen sollen. Kasparow wirft diesbezüglich der Christiansen-Redaktion vor, man habe ihn auf Druck der russischen Regierung ausgeladen und technische Probleme nur vorgeschoben.

Na bravo, Herr Weinstein-Kasparow, ein ferngesteuerter “Oppositionspolitiker”, wirft einer Talkmasterin politische Ferngesteuertheit vor. Wer’s glaubt wird selig.

Leider glauben noch zu viele die Lebenslügen des Garri Kimowitsch Kasparow, daher wiederhole ich nur zu gerne meine Aussage …

Wer glaubt das “Oppositionsführer Kasparow” tatsächlich eine “Opposition führt”, der glaubt auch das “der Zitronenfalter” tatsächlich “Zitronen faltet”.

Und wer glaubt das sich diese Meinung durch Zensur unterdrücken läßt, der irrt.

The “Peter-Weiss-Foundation for Arts and Politics” was founded in December 1993 in Berlin / Germany, founding members were (among others) Mircea Dinescu, Ulrich Schreiber und Prof. Alfons Söllner. The German abbreviation “e.V.” indicates that this foundation is accepted being a “charitable association”  (“eingetragener Verein” in German) by German law.

According to their statutes the foundation dedicates its work to “bringing the tension-loaded relationship of Arts and Politics to a broader discussion”.

Their activity mainly focusses on “Promotion of Art and Culture” by arranging cultural events, the suggestion of artistic interpretations , the support of artists as well as the “political-aesthetic education”  (via publications, support of scientific research, educational programs, conferences, support of scientists).

Since 2001 the  “Peter-Weiss-Foundation” organizes the “internationales literaturfestival berlin” (International Literature-Festival Berlin) which takes place anually since then (in Berlin / Germany). On March 20 2007 the foundation called for the “first global reading” to commemorate the “Anniversary of the Political Lie”.

Vilhelm Konnander of “Vilhelm Konnander’s Weblog” has dedicated an entry to this “Anniversary of the Political Lie” which itself has the Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya as its topic.

The “Peter-Weiss-Foundation” is named for Peter Ulrich Weiss (pseudonym “Sinclair” , * 8 November 1916 at Neubabelsberg near Berlin; † 10 May 1982 in Stockholm, Sweden) a  German author, painter and graphic artist.

The foundation has a homepage, the only entry there is dedicated to Anna Politkovskaya.

The Marxist-Leninist Party of Germany (German: Marxistisch-Leninistische Partei Deutschlands, MLPD) is an antirevisionist political party in Germany without parliamentary representation. It was founded in 1982 by members of the Communist Workers Union of Germany (Kommunistischer Arbeiterbund Deutschlands; KABD). The MLPD has long been the largest far-left grouping in Germany.

The MLPD has traditionally defined itself as Maoist in orientation, originating from the heritage of Maoism in the 1960s student movements. It declares the political and economical changes in most of the eastern european countries after the 20th Party Congress as treason to socialism. It refers to the ideas of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao. It propagates the “Dictatorship of proletariate”, before socialism can develope. This concept excludes the existence of the civil democratic order. So the MLPD wants to abolish the current German constitution and replace it with a new social order.

It participates in the International Conference of Marxist-Leninist Parties and Organizations (ICMLPO).

The MLPD’s youth movement is called Rebell (Rebel).

At the 1998 federal elections the party gained only 0.01 percent of the votes. In 2002 the MLPD didn’t participate at the federal elections and called on people for boycott. The MLPD participated in the 2005 federal elections, generally positioning itself in campaigns as a radical alternative to the Left Party. The MLPD won 0.1 percent of the total votes cast. So the percental number of votes increased tenfold in comparison to the result of 1998, despite the competition through the Left Party.

Its strongest showing was in the states of Saxony-Anhalt and Thuringia, where it garnered 0.4 percent of the vote.

Although some German labor unions declare a simultaneous membership in the labor union and the MLPD inadmissible, many members of the party are member of a labor union and even fulfil a task there. Thereby some MLPD members were already excluded from a labor union,among these the present chairman of the party Stefan Engel, who used to be a member of the IG Metall and is now a member of Ver.di.

http://www.mlpd.de/

Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung - www.fnst.org - Freedom and Responsibility

The Friedrich Naumann Foundation is an independent, nonprofit, nongovernmental organisation that is committed to promoting liberal policy and politics.Originating in Germany, the Foundation has won a reputation for promoting Freedom in human Dignity as the ultimate precondition of a society where people can live freely and in peace.

To create such an open society we are guided by the principles of Liberalism and its message of tolerance and acceptance of diversity. By applying its core concepts such as human rights, rule of law, liberal democracy and a free market economy, it has been proven through the centuries that Liberalism offers appropriate solutions for the present and the future in public and personal life.

It is this proud tradition that we seek to expand even further through our intensive Work in political education, advice, training and dialogue.
In Africa we support various projects in co-operation with partner organisations and are similarly active in over 50 countries worldwide. 

Freedom and Responsibility - the principles

The Friedrich Naumann Foundation , in order to further its goal of a peaceful and free world all over the globe, is guided by the following political principles for its activities:

The Friedrich Naumann Foundation is the foundation for ideas on liberty and training in freedom. It wants to contribute to the furtherance of the principle of freedom in human dignity in all sectors of society in the united Germany as well as together with partners abroad.

It is the goal of liberal policies that all citizens may freely live together in an open society: the civic society. Without freedom other human values cannot be realised. Each human being needs freedom in order to develop his or her talents and to realise him or herself.

Without freedom the human spirit languishes, culture and science decay, and the economy stagnates. Our mind needs freedom just like our body needs air to breathe.

Each human being is an individual with his own ideas and desires. But he is also a social being, dependent on other human beings and under an obligation to them. Freedom and responsibility are inseparable. They determine the relationship between individual and community.

Liberals base human relationship on spontaneity not coercion - on the exchange of ideas and goods, free trade, reason, compassion, and responsibility. Voluntary associations promote mutual trust. They lead to the recognition of the values and goals of others and they deserve respect.

Liberal policies and the individual:

Liberal policies promote respect for the rights of the individual, for civil rights.

The individual needs these rights, if he or she wants to freely shape his or her own life. Therefore, freedom of opinion is not only a compelling moral requirement of tolerance and of the rule of law. It is also the path toward progress of the human mind, a path which can be found only through competition of free ideas and knowledge. The right to private property is a civil right, too. Without respect for private property, many other rights cannot be realised.

Liberal policies are in favour of equal opportunities at the outset, in favour of competition and pluralism. They strive, therefore, for the free access of everyone to all markets, education, information, labour, goods, and capital markets.

Liberal policies seek to free the individual from coercion by the state and by anonymous institutions so that he or she can fulfil his or her responsibility in freedom. Freedom requires responsibility for the community.

Liberal policies and civic society:

Liberal policies strive to increase the freedom of citizens in all spheres of life and to restrict the role of the state to the essentials. This includes recognising the ability of citizens to organise themselves.

The citizens can shoulder many responsibilities in municipalities, wards, associations, lobbies, other private institutions and initiatives and they wish to do so.

Liberal policies and the state:

Liberals consider the tasks of the state as the protection of individual freedom and the protection of citizens against violence from within and abroad, as well as the safeguarding of the constitution. Liberal policies want to ensure that rules apply to all, while leaving space for the free decision of the individual. Liberal policies do not want to predetermine a certain outcome; they want just rules instead of just results, because such results do not exist.

Liberal policies aspire democracy. Democracy permits choice and change, but it does not guarantee freedom. That is why Liberals are for the strict division, control, and limitation of powerstate power as well as private power.

Liberal policies aspire a state that is bound by rules and that respects freedom. The state has the duty to guarantee legal safety for everybody. In a liberal state, the rule of law respects group interests. That is why it provides them with freedom in responsibility, but not with political power. Liberal policies do not want the state to be active economically. The state should not compete with private enterprise, through its own institutions.

Liberal policies aspire to maintain the citizens’ freedom to take decisions in all areas of politics, both now and in the future. Therefore, they reject solving today’s problems at the expense of tomorrow’s generations, at the expense of sound public finances, and particularly at the expense of the environment.

Liberal policies and international co-operation:

Liberal policies aspire an open world culture and a free world market. For Liberals, the common features of mankind are more important than the division into categories of locals and foreigners. The liberal vision is a world society, in which there is free exchange, co-operation, and competition among different peoples, states, regional groups, and cultures.

Liberal policies strive for co-operation in development through free international trade and through helping to establish free and responsible civic societies in developing countries.

Liberal policies work towards the world-wide liberalisation of all markets- information, technology, goods and services as well as currency and capital markets.

Liberal policies want the European unity and other regional associations, but not at the expense of internal diversity and openness towards others.

Liberal policies aspire the triumph of human and civil rights in every corner of the world.

© Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung

In two previous blog entries I addressed the topic of NGOs. In the first entry I reproduced and linked to Sandra Flounders’ article on the Workers.org website, addressing NGOs in Russia. The second entry addressed the methods and techniques some NGOs, spin doctors and nekamas apply when doing their “non-governmental”, “non-profit” and “non-commercial” work.

Just recently I came across a German website, actually a German on-line newspaper, which bares the name “NGO-Online” and suggests to be a major news outlet for NGOs in Germany. I’d like to bring this website to your attention, for those among you speaking German this on-line newspaper might be an interesting read.

The owners of “NGO-Online” suggest to bring an entirely new journalistic concept to the reader.

“NGO-Online” suggests that today’s general journalistic concept plays a major role, like never before, in the formation of political wills and the penetration of the media by “power-politics”.

Simultaneously it claims to observe an increasing agreement of the media, regarding the transported and promoted opinions, with press agencies, with the interests of business partners, customers and political parties.

In “NGO-Online”’s opinion today’s journalism rarely has “the search for truth” in mind. According to them, today’s average journalism is nothing but the transportation, directly or indirectly, of the statements of “powerful participants” with little interest in communicating critical thoughts and ideas. Common Journalism produces, according to their view, nothing but folkloric accessories to “power politics”.
  
The Internet newspaper “NGO Online” claims to introduce a new journalism to the German media landscape. This new journalism claims to have the following characteristics:

Moderating a fastidious contest of  facts and arguments of persons and institutions with the most diverse political interests.

Clarifying current proposed reforms, principle positions, interests, persons and institutions.

Being interested in the “structure problems” behind the daily events.

Reporting on most diverse events and political activities in Germany and the world.

Providing information regarding the “mainstream” as well as the “edge of the center” news.

Addressing problems and interests of “the strong” as well as those of “the weak”.

Considering argumentations neglected in most other media.

Providing on-line documents, background papers and original texts essentially and argumentatively held by most different sources.

Taking readers to the “political will formation”, by providing a “database” of  argumentations and aspects.

Of course, “NGO-Online” is looking for submissions, contributions and, last but not least, for donations. What else could they do ?

My entry “Whack the Blogs” is admittedly inspired by a most rabid and fascinating phenomenon of blogosphere, by a persuasively US based group of spin doctors who vehemently try to convince me of them being one single hateful female and not some public relation agency or NGO.

“Whack the Blogs” intends to address the fascinating world of public relations, of lobbying and the manipulation of public opinion by discussing techniques and methods, not real life individuals or groups of people.

Of course, all characters and blogs appearing in this work are purely fictitious and I am certainly not intending to make a pun in the general direction of a living individual or any successful blog. Therefore any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is (of course) purely coincidental.

Having said this, let’s now enter the fascinating world of public relations, of lobbying and the manipulation of public opinion.

In public relations, “spin” is a usually pejorative term signifying a heavily biased portrayal in one’s own favour of an event or situation. While traditional public relations may also rely on creative presentation of the facts, “spin” often, though not always, implies disingenuous, deceptive and/or highly manipulative tactics. Politicians are often accused of spin by their political opponents. Some NGOs do exactly the same.

The term “spin” is borrowed from ball sports such as cricket or baseball, where a spin bowler may impart spin on the ball during a delivery so that it will curve through the air or bounce in an advantageous manner.

Because of the frequent association between “spin” and press conferences, the room in which these take place is sometimes described as a spin room. A group of people who develop spin may be referred to as “spin doctors” who engage in “spin doctoring” for the person or group that hired them.

Spin rooms can also be found on blogosphere, there they are called something like (exemplis gratia)

“The #1 Independent English-language XXX Politics Blog in the World”  or

“A Not-for-Profit XXXXXX blog recording the rise (and hopefully fall) of the XXX-XXXXXX XXXXX”.

But languages, as well as countries or nations, are interchangeable and, please do not forget, all characters and blogs appearing in this entry are purely fictitious. Again, any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

So please feel free to replace the “X”es by any country or person (living or dead) to your liking. Why not France ? No, please wait, let’s take Russia. I wouldn’t even mind if you took Germany.

“Whack the blogs” tries to explore the serious theme of manipulation of public opinion, with a comedic sensibility. The title of this entry is taken from the joke:

“Why does a dog wag its tail? Because a dog is smarter than its tail. If the tail was smarter, the tail would wag the dog.”

Some suggest the dog is public opinion, and the tail represents the media or the dog is the media, and the tail is some (whatsoever) campaign.

The dog could also be some foreign president or federal chancellor and the tail might represent some spin doctors, who assume the authority of “whacking” them and the entire nations they govern. Not that I could understand why anybody would possibly want to do this.

Moreover, the expression “the tail wagging the dog” refers to any case where something of greater significance is driven by something lesser. So I am basically talking about “wagging the dog” in this entry but, as we are expressing our views on blogosphere, “whacking the blogs” sounds somehow cuter.

The term “whacking the blogs” is also appropriate, as some spin doctors might be omnipresent on blogosphere. They might not only (exemplis gratia) run three blogs (two on Blogspot.com and one on WordPress.com, one of the two Blogspot-blogs being something like a “backup blog” as it carries the suffix “II” and is empty) but also might extensively flood the comment sections of almost every other blog of their interest.

Interpretations differ as to the motivation of such spin doctors. I am not that much inclined to enter the debate on “why do they do this” as there is too much room for speculations and, without really knowing who may want to hire spin doctors and who wants to fund or pay them, it’s too much of a shot in the dark.

The interesting aspect is “how they do it”. They apply the technique of selectively presenting facts and quotes that support their position, more precisely the position of their principal(s).

This technique is widely accepted being the method of “cherry picking”. The term “cherry picking” is used metaphorically to indicate the act of pointing at individual cases that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases that may contradict that position.

For example, opponents of “air bags” (in cars) often cite rare cases in which car accident victims were killed, or injured, by an “air bag”, whereas accident statistics suggest that they much more commonly save the life of the passenger (unless used in combination with safety belts and a properly adjusted seat).

When a person is assigned to advocate a particular position, then cherry picking is entirely appropriate. Lawyers in a criminal case are one such example, where it is assumed to be the responsibility of the opposing counsel to present any contrary data.

In addition in common law guilt has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt and thus introducing “cherry picked” evidence is entirely appropriate because, while such data may not prove something in general, it may be successful in introducing the needed minimum level of doubt to win the case.

However, when a person with a supposedly neutral position cherry picks, that is inappropriate. Examples would be journalists, scientists and judges.

“Cherry-picking” is a technique where one weighs many relevant pieces of information (that one possesses) at zero and favours the information that is preferred. So there is a large difference between weighing information differently based on its quality to come to a conclusion and outright ignoring information that is not preferred. Spin doctors apply this technique brilliantly.

Another technique spin doctors apply is called “Astroturfing”.

“Astroturfing” is a term for formal public relations campaigns in politics and advertising that seek to create the impression of being spontaneous, grassroots behaviour. Hence the reference to “AstroTurf” (artificial grass) is a metaphor to indicate fake grassroots support.

The goal of such a campaign is to disguise the agenda of a client as an independent public reaction to some political entity — a politician, political group, product, service or event. Astroturfers attempt to orchestrate the actions of apparently diverse and geographically distributed individuals, by both overt (“outreach”, “awareness”, etc.) and covert (disinformation) means.

Astroturfing may be undertaken by anything from an individual pushing their own personal agenda through to highly organised professional groups with financial backing from large corporations or “NGOs”.

Being a form of propaganda, Astroturfing attempts to affect selectively the emotions of the public, whether trying to win a campaign, be the top music record seller, be the top book seller, or to be

“The #1 Independent English-language XXXXXX Politics Blog in the World”.

Astroturfing techniques usually consist of a few people discreetly posing as mass numbers of activists advocating a specific cause. Or, as in other cases, a highly professional and well funded group of spin doctors discretely posing as one single hateful female on a crusade.

“Supporters” (or employees ?) will manipulate the degree of interest through letters to the editor, e-mails, blog posts, blog comments, crossposts, trackbacks, etc.

They are instructed on what to say, how to say it, where to send it, and how to make it appear that their indignation, appreciation, joy or hate is entirely spontaneous and independent. This makes their campaign seem “real” rather than the product of an orchestrated campaign.

Newspapers are often victims of Astroturfing when they publish letters identical to those received and printed by other newspapers. The same goes for blogosphere, where (almost) identical comments are posted to a larger amount of blogs and contain a stereotype text.

It has become easier to structure an Astroturfing campaign in the electronic era because the cost and effort to send an e-mail or to post a commentary is so low.

NGOs may use a boiler room full of computers and telephones where hired activists locate people and groups that create enthusiasm for the specified cause.

Also, the use of psychographics allows hired supporters to persuade their targeted audience. This correlates with the merge-purge technique that combines information about an individual from multiple databases.

NGOs can then turn hypothetical supporters into activists for the cause. This leads to misuse of the Internet, for one person is able to play the role of a whole group of like-minded people.

Although I am convinced that “spin doctors” are always a group of people, a well funded and skilled troop of NGO activists, I’d also like to point out that there is also the possibility that, my purely fictional

 “Not-for-Profit XXXXXX blog recording the rise (and hopefully fall) of the XXX-XXXXXX XXXXX”

could be the product of a sock puppet.

A “sock puppet” (sometimes known also as a glove puppet, shadow puppet, mule, troll or “alternate identity”) is an additional identity of an existing blogger or contributor to an on-line media to invent several separate user.

This may be used for fictional support of separate people in a vote or argument by falsely using the “identity” as a separate user, or for acting without consequence to one’s “main identity”.

But as spin doctors sometimes run, as I’ve pointed out, two - three blogs themselves and flood a large number of other blogs with their comments on a daily and tremendous basis they can’t possibly all be a “sock puppet”.

As our earthly day has 24 hours only and even the most determined individual must eat, sleep, take a shower, go to work (assumed that this “sock puppet” is no full time “astroturfer” being paid for what it does)and certainly wants to have some kind of a “private life” those 24 hours are simply too short to permit a single individual to produce such an “output”. So let’s continue to assume that spin doctors usually appear in a flock and not in the form of “sock puppets”.

Spin doctors are particularly worried about their on-line reputation.

One’s on-line reputation is similar to the conventional concept of reputation, but in cyberspace / blogosphere. There, reputations can be easily made due to the high transfer of information.

But they can also be easily broken, due to the lingering, semi-permanent nature of the world wide web, especially the general existence of sock puppets.

An on-line reputation is often achieved while in a pseudonymous state. A digital reputation can be useful in situations where credibility must be established, but exposure of one’s real life identity is undesirable or possibly hazardous.

A good example of this is in the novel “Ender’s Game”, in which Peter and Valentine utilize their pseudonymity to great effect on the most influential political discussion forums, despite their youth.

Spin doctors also often apply a technique adopted from the Japanese. This technique is called the “Nekama Technique” and has to be seen in context with the on-line reputation.

Nekama is a Japanese term initially used to describe a kind of internet sock puppet used on dating and personal sites. The word is a combination of the Japanese words “netto” (internet), and “okama” (an effeminate gay man, a male cross dresser), and means a man who posts a personal advertisement using a female identity.

Nekama range from the blatantly obvious, for example those using a photo scanned from a men’s magazine and a sexually provocative message, to the subtle and hard to spot. There are many Japanese web sites dealing with nekama and how to spot them.

Nekama may be gay males, but this term also refers to heterosexuals who attempt to form friendships with females by pretending to be women, and people who simply enjoy tricking others.

To stress my purely fictional

“Not-for-Profit XXXXXX blog recording the rise (and hopefully fall) of the XXX-XXXXXX XXXXX”

again, such a blog could very well be the product of a nekama.

Here the spin doctors could very well insist, besides being a single person and not a group of NGO activists, to be a female and not a male or group of males.

Why ? As the political world, as well as the world of political bloggers, is a world dominated by men (which I deeply regret as we desperately need the female EQ in politics), many spin doctors prefer to appear being rather female than male. Highly educated political scientists and economists are usually well-behaved and polite, the products of good families and elite schools which have high moral standards and values.

Spin doctors, although they often apply rude manners and offensive language themselves, want to be treated with respect and good manners. They usually seem to feel easily offended and then vigoursly demand apologies, not because they are really offended but by wanting to bring discussions to an abrupt stop by claiming to be offended, particularly when these discussions reach a point where the spin doctors are cornered or running out of arguments.

Spin doctors simply know that no “gentleman” wants to offend a lady and rather withdraws from the debate then risking to hurt the feelings of a tender female psyche.

Would I be a NGO spin doctor and run the fictitious

“Not-for-Profit XXXXXX blog recording the rise (and hopefully fall) of the XXX-XXXXXX XXXXX”

blog, I would not only claim to be a female but also suggest(subconsciously)to be a female belonging to an ethnic group which has been harassed and pursued in the past.

I know that it is extremely dangerous for a German national to say this, but would I run such a blog together with my fellow NGO spin doctors, I would give our nekama a name similar to “Sharon Rubinstein”, “Sandra Cohen”, “Susanne Weinfeld” or “Kim Zeugfeld”.

This would be a smart move as the supposed female gender in addition to a Jewish sounding name would not only enable us to label a potential critic being a sexist, we could as well label him being a anti-Semite. We would have a double protective “criticism-prove vest” for our NGO operated and spin doctored blog.

Maybe the dedicated reader of “Whack the blogs” will understand the effectiveness of such a “Gender-bait”, a term coined by William Gibson in his 2003 novel “Pattern Recognition”.

But I also highly recommend the consideration of the “Sollog-Case”.

Sollog (born 1960 as John Patrick Ennis) is an American numerologist, mystic, and self-proclaimed psychic. He is also a self-published author and a self-described artist, musician, poet, and film-maker.

Sollog refers to himself by what he calls the “religious name” of Sollog Immanuel Adonai-Adoni (the first name is sometimes fully capitalized: SOLLOG). Howard Altman, a reporter for the alternative weekly newspaper Philadelphia City Paper, has written that Sollog stands for “son of light, light of God,” although Sollog has asserted that Altman is incorrect.

Sollog states that the name is derived from “Sol” and “Logos”, literally “the word of the sun”. The last part of his name, Adonai-Adoni, is Hebrew for “God (Adonai)—My Master (Adoni).” Sollog also provides an alternative explanation on page 29 of his e-book “Jesus is Not God”: “L LOGOS or the word of God in Greek is a Greek PI or word jumble of the word Sollog! Sollog is a hidden name that means the word of God!”

Well, although pretending to be a Jewish-American intellectual female is more success-promising for politically motivated NGOs than claiming to be a religious Messiah, some of the spin doctors might still want to chose such an identity, particularly when operating in the American “bible belt”.

Let me give away a little bit about myself. I have a business school degree in economics, studied some politics, some legal aspects of economics and also psychology. Regarding psychology I have to admit that these studies only addressed the “psychology of advertisement”. So I am certainly not Sigmund Freud.

During my military time, I served the “infamous” German Luftwaffe. No, I am too young for being responsible for “the blitz”. But old enough to have received my “lessons” on PsyOps (Psychological Operations) and on “Psychological Warfare”.

In my business life I was employed, and still am commissioned by, mayor European and American companies. There I learnt a hell of a lot about lobbying and “how to convince decision makers with costumers, clients and contractors”. I never did lobbying on a governmental level. I am very active in politics, learnt to think global and to act local. Friends of mine are members of the European Parliament, are members of the German “Bundestag” (our national assembly) or the regional parliament of the federal state I live in.

I could have went for a career as a politician, I somehow didn’t feel like doing this. I rather remain being a self employed business person. Although I am a member of a political party I rarely attend political meetings.

After all, I know how “spin doctors” and NGOs work and I recognize them when I see, hear or read them. I honestly hope you will enjoy reading this entry on my blog.

As a final remark let me please say, should there be anybody out there wanting to hire me for a

“Not-for-Profit XXXXXX blog recording the rise (and hopefully fall) of the XXX-XXXXXX XXXXX” or

“The #1 Independent English-language XXX Politics Blog in the World” ,

forget about it. Although the “spin doctors” of some NGO have already promised to ignore me one never knows. I have no idea how much they stick to their promises made in the comment sections of political blogs.