Sorry, don't know how to insert this type of video:
http://www.tsf.pt/paginainicial/AudioeVideo.aspx?content_id=1430294
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Monday, 23 November 2009
Thursday, 12 November 2009
First world country?...
So, the UK...
Before coming here the "gentleman" culture was fascinating and seductive. All the charm associated with it is great. Watching the BBC and often thinking how well educated the English are and how interesting it would be living in such a civilised place.
Well, reality is something different.
There are a list of things - the ones that know me wont doubt I would write pages and pages. But, there is one in particular: crossing the road at a junction.
In Portugal the highway code says that, at a junction, the pedestrian has the priority. In Portugal, often considered to be 3rd world by some either arrogant foreigners, or by some frustrated and/or short minded Portuguese, the rule is actually mostly respected.
I'm outraged that people do not stop at a junction for pedestrians here: NEVER! I'm not forgetting any case, in two years it never happened.
Well, I tried to give myself an excuse by thinking that the highway code was different here. However, as a form of respect in society, giving the priority to the ones more fragile, is a basic form of education. I could not believe people would not understand that a pedestrian on the road, should be protected.
The most annoying example, it happened again this evening and it was at least the 2nd time in the week. It is raining, it is cold, the pedestrians (including me) have no umbrella, but at a crossing: "Ah Ah Ah!! You stupid guy standing there under the rain and the cold trying to cross in front of my 1 ton car, try to get in front of me!"
No exaggeration, they probably accelerate. Once, since I was already in the middle, they actually protested that I was crossing the road!!!
So, the deception was already indescribable, but... The highway code of this country actually says:
"8
At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you. If you have started crossing and traffic wants to turn into the road, you have priority and they should give way (see Rule 170)."
"
"170
Take extra care at junctions. You should
* watch out for cyclists, motorcyclists, powered wheelchairs/mobility scooters and pedestrians as they are not always easy to see. Be aware that they may not have seen or heard you if you are approaching from behind
* watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way
* watch out for long vehicles which may be turning at a junction ahead; they may have to use the whole width of the road to make the turn (see Rule 221)
* watch out for horse riders who may take a different line on the road from that which you would expect
* not assume, when waiting at a junction, that a vehicle coming from the right and signalling left will actually turn. Wait and make sure
* look all around before emerging. Do not cross or join a road until there is a gap large enough for you to do so safely"
Welcome to the so called 1st world.
Before coming here the "gentleman" culture was fascinating and seductive. All the charm associated with it is great. Watching the BBC and often thinking how well educated the English are and how interesting it would be living in such a civilised place.
Well, reality is something different.
There are a list of things - the ones that know me wont doubt I would write pages and pages. But, there is one in particular: crossing the road at a junction.
In Portugal the highway code says that, at a junction, the pedestrian has the priority. In Portugal, often considered to be 3rd world by some either arrogant foreigners, or by some frustrated and/or short minded Portuguese, the rule is actually mostly respected.
I'm outraged that people do not stop at a junction for pedestrians here: NEVER! I'm not forgetting any case, in two years it never happened.
Well, I tried to give myself an excuse by thinking that the highway code was different here. However, as a form of respect in society, giving the priority to the ones more fragile, is a basic form of education. I could not believe people would not understand that a pedestrian on the road, should be protected.
The most annoying example, it happened again this evening and it was at least the 2nd time in the week. It is raining, it is cold, the pedestrians (including me) have no umbrella, but at a crossing: "Ah Ah Ah!! You stupid guy standing there under the rain and the cold trying to cross in front of my 1 ton car, try to get in front of me!"
No exaggeration, they probably accelerate. Once, since I was already in the middle, they actually protested that I was crossing the road!!!
So, the deception was already indescribable, but... The highway code of this country actually says:
"8
At a junction. When crossing the road, look out for traffic turning into the road, especially from behind you. If you have started crossing and traffic wants to turn into the road, you have priority and they should give way (see Rule 170)."
"
"170
Take extra care at junctions. You should
* watch out for cyclists, motorcyclists, powered wheelchairs/mobility scooters and pedestrians as they are not always easy to see. Be aware that they may not have seen or heard you if you are approaching from behind
* watch out for pedestrians crossing a road into which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way
* watch out for long vehicles which may be turning at a junction ahead; they may have to use the whole width of the road to make the turn (see Rule 221)
* watch out for horse riders who may take a different line on the road from that which you would expect
* not assume, when waiting at a junction, that a vehicle coming from the right and signalling left will actually turn. Wait and make sure
* look all around before emerging. Do not cross or join a road until there is a gap large enough for you to do so safely"
Welcome to the so called 1st world.
Saturday, 7 November 2009
Governo, oposição, e as fachadas...
Porra!
Mas isto é sempre o mesmo e andam todos felizes assim? Alguém me diz para que servem os pseudo-debates no parlamento?
Eu admito que sou novo e tal, mas nunca vi um debate no parlamento! Vi muitos discursos de um lado para o outro, mas nunca vi ninguém (NINGUÉM!) entrar naquela sala como deputado de espírito aberto para um debate. Vai-se para lá para dizer como os outros são idiotas, como eu é que sou bom, como é que o mundo é injusto, mas sempre com a razão absoluta!
O programa do governo foi apenas mais um triste evento na longa série da nossa democracia - e estou a considerar democracia apenas devido à eleições justas que temos. O governo a armar-se em vítima quando ninguém os obriga a governar se eles não querem; a oposição a não abrir portas de entendimento, apenas a fazer os tais discursos.
Acho que da parte do governo/PS, deve ser algo muito estranho ir de uma maioria absoluta para uma maioria bem relativa. Apesar dos discursos de vitória, no fundo começam a perceber que já não podem ser arrogantes como sempre, e agora também têm que ouvir - pois, o mundo é injusto... Esquecem-se que se têm os deputados que têm é porque os Portugueses assim o quiseram! Aliás, convenientemente esquecem-se que há mais Portugueses em desacordo com eles que o contrário - eu sei, o mundo é injusto... Se não querem governar que não aceitem o convite do PR - rua!
A oposição... vazio de conteúdo! O que eu gostava de ter ouvido era as possíveis zonas onde cada partido poderia ter um diálogo construtivo com as "vítimas" do PS. Mas não, somos oposição, ainda somos maiores vítimas que o PS, e portanto os malandros que não votaram em nós agora vão perceber o que é a vingança! Pois, é uma palavra forte, mas é o que é!
Volto à minha antiga ideia: ponham um tipo por partido na assembleia, quando cada um levanta o braço representa o x% que o seu partido teve. Para quê pagar e ter de ouvir esses tipos todos quando os partidos deles não lhes dão o direito de pensar (se calhar nalguns casos até não será mau...)? Se aquilo é tudo para fazer uns discursos sem conteúdo e não para debater e chegar a acordos parem com o teatro.
Já não há paciência, ainda viro radical um dia destes!...
Mas isto é sempre o mesmo e andam todos felizes assim? Alguém me diz para que servem os pseudo-debates no parlamento?
Eu admito que sou novo e tal, mas nunca vi um debate no parlamento! Vi muitos discursos de um lado para o outro, mas nunca vi ninguém (NINGUÉM!) entrar naquela sala como deputado de espírito aberto para um debate. Vai-se para lá para dizer como os outros são idiotas, como eu é que sou bom, como é que o mundo é injusto, mas sempre com a razão absoluta!
O programa do governo foi apenas mais um triste evento na longa série da nossa democracia - e estou a considerar democracia apenas devido à eleições justas que temos. O governo a armar-se em vítima quando ninguém os obriga a governar se eles não querem; a oposição a não abrir portas de entendimento, apenas a fazer os tais discursos.
Acho que da parte do governo/PS, deve ser algo muito estranho ir de uma maioria absoluta para uma maioria bem relativa. Apesar dos discursos de vitória, no fundo começam a perceber que já não podem ser arrogantes como sempre, e agora também têm que ouvir - pois, o mundo é injusto... Esquecem-se que se têm os deputados que têm é porque os Portugueses assim o quiseram! Aliás, convenientemente esquecem-se que há mais Portugueses em desacordo com eles que o contrário - eu sei, o mundo é injusto... Se não querem governar que não aceitem o convite do PR - rua!
A oposição... vazio de conteúdo! O que eu gostava de ter ouvido era as possíveis zonas onde cada partido poderia ter um diálogo construtivo com as "vítimas" do PS. Mas não, somos oposição, ainda somos maiores vítimas que o PS, e portanto os malandros que não votaram em nós agora vão perceber o que é a vingança! Pois, é uma palavra forte, mas é o que é!
Volto à minha antiga ideia: ponham um tipo por partido na assembleia, quando cada um levanta o braço representa o x% que o seu partido teve. Para quê pagar e ter de ouvir esses tipos todos quando os partidos deles não lhes dão o direito de pensar (se calhar nalguns casos até não será mau...)? Se aquilo é tudo para fazer uns discursos sem conteúdo e não para debater e chegar a acordos parem com o teatro.
Já não há paciência, ainda viro radical um dia destes!...
Sunday, 1 November 2009
Democracy
Waiting for a bus I had the strangest thought:
I guess democracy is the equivalent of an iterative process. Dictatorship (e.g. traditional monarchy) is the analytical approach.
In a dictatorship one has a particular view of the problem and tries to solve it according to that idea. We even used to train/educate our rulers according to those principles and let him come up with a new idea, but the time dimension was a generation (like a new/better analytical method).
In democracy we alternate frequently between methods hoping to find a better one. The time dimension is much shorter.
I guess it is like the introduction of computers: we don't really know how to solve this problem, so lets try a solution, and another one, and another one,...
Ok, I probably need to sleep about this kind of strange thoughts...
I guess democracy is the equivalent of an iterative process. Dictatorship (e.g. traditional monarchy) is the analytical approach.
In a dictatorship one has a particular view of the problem and tries to solve it according to that idea. We even used to train/educate our rulers according to those principles and let him come up with a new idea, but the time dimension was a generation (like a new/better analytical method).
In democracy we alternate frequently between methods hoping to find a better one. The time dimension is much shorter.
I guess it is like the introduction of computers: we don't really know how to solve this problem, so lets try a solution, and another one, and another one,...
Ok, I probably need to sleep about this kind of strange thoughts...
European Union
http://www.euronews.net/2009/10/30/klaus-wins-lisbon-treaty-concession-for-czech-republic/
So, what is the fu***** purpose of signing a treaty for all UE members allowing an exception to the "Fundamental Rights Charter". I guess they're not so fundamental after all.
I believe in an united Europe, not in this "pretend to" group that lost the spirit of the union.
They forgot why they needed a treaty, they just care about signing a fu***** piece of paper now.
Shame on them!
So, what is the fu***** purpose of signing a treaty for all UE members allowing an exception to the "Fundamental Rights Charter". I guess they're not so fundamental after all.
I believe in an united Europe, not in this "pretend to" group that lost the spirit of the union.
They forgot why they needed a treaty, they just care about signing a fu***** piece of paper now.
Shame on them!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)