Gba Pokemon Light Platinum Gameshark Cheats

A new pattern






I know, spring is coming, but it's still cold.
Ok, it's a pretty pathetic excuse, to be sure the problem is that they are always late with the publication of patterns. The work of writing the instructions, the test phase in Italian and English (especially this one) for me are very demanding. So, forgive me this time, I hope.

Baby It's Cold Outside is a perfect scarf for the coldest days. Woven flat with a chunky yarn and needles n. 6, and a project for people who want to start getting comfortable with the braids and the technique of the shorter irons and those who want the immediate satisfaction of a leader ready or a last minute gift.
The title is inspired by the homonymous song by Frank Loesser, a classic starring, among others, by Dean Martin, Ray Charles, Ella Fitzgerald, Dionne Warwick, Tom Jones.

Here's my new free pattern:
Baby It's Cold Outside
To download you must register to Ravelry, if you have not already done so, what are you waiting? Registration is free and does not reach e-mail sexual harassment, ever.

download now

The yarn I used is Puno1 of Filitaly -lab, you can find lots of information on these and other yarns in the free pattern Kniteasy blog. Alternatively you can use to Puno1 Puno2 made double.

For the test I am very grateful Summer, Chris, Rebecca (for English version) and Cynthia and Mirella (for the Italian version).

Good job!

Kidney Stones Diarhea And Vomit

Colonies

When the lies about the death of Salvatore Giuliano became literally huge, the famous Thomas Beson said it all with the equally famous expression "What is certain is only that it is dead." Paraphrasing this term with specific reference to "bold" analytical reading tumbler from newspapers, news, court scholars, intellectuals living room, "diehard anti-imperialists," North Africa for the current chaos, one could say for sure that a full, c ' is that only 90% of those who commented on this subject does not know what he's talking minimally. As always happens in human affairs, what happens in this rooted in the past, but the wretched and pervasive tendency to snub the History makes everything to be ignored, and that reality is analyzed only with the myopic lens of ideology. But leaving aside this misery is coming to the point, it is wise first, then return that sealed the triumph of colonialism. The reasons why the world powers to engage in colonial adventures do not fit into a monolithic design, but many are not only directly related to the ideologies and lines of thought that shook the Western societies in the nineteenth century. The footprint of a certain kind of enlightened colonialism became clear when they were pulled into play grounds "Humanist" as the literacy of the "barbarians", the economist when his motives were strictly anchored to the hoarding of vast mineral resources in Africa and Asia, the missionary when he proposed to extend Christianity to the entire globe, the most markedly imperialist when it came to satisfy the appetites of power in strong mutual antagonism. The foundation of the Enlightenment colonialism was indeed privileged Woodrow Wilson's idealism, that it was suggested, with his "Fourteen Points", to create an international community (the "League of Nations") that does not count more colonies but "mandates" of the colonial powers which act as "guardians" until it had completed the process of "education" of indigenous peoples. The truth is unknown to the whitewashed tombs, which the hypocritical veil thrown by Wilson on the reality that nothing else was used to conceal a very different context, in which the victorious powers after World War - Britain in the first place - they were reckless as hyenas on the ruins of the defeated countries (think of the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire). The brutal and arbitrary division into areas of influence, however, produced a fiercely nationalist sentiments within the colonies, played by famous people - such as Gandhi and Ho Chi Minh - and less famous - like Nehru and Lumumba - who also benefited from the slow but steady attrition of power Imperial and their mutual rivalry to score their winning shots. Imperial powers such as Japan animated anti-Western feelings in the colonies of Burma and the Philippines, and Italy Mussolini shook hands with Bourguiba as revolutionary anti-French and anti-British as the Indian Chandra Bose. The Second World War significantly altered the scenario, severely undermining the integrity of the colonial empires, that winning is losing. Italy took the trouble soon from Libya and the Horn of Africa, France lost credibility in the eyes of the colonies by paying the diversity of visions and intestine show that there was disunited, Britain was forced to acknowledge the triumph of Gandhi while United States For their part, took off their stakes from the Philippines. In the determination of the havoc played a rather important too that the wave of "renaissance" of the colonies had juxtaposed a symmetrical flower, in the heart of all Western nations, movements strongly sympathetic with the cause of independence fought by the revolutionaries of the colonies . However, the real crux of the question is the attitude taken by the United States, which claimed to extend the hypocrites Wilsonian principles even in the colonies. This attitude was motivated by the desire to stand up to American leadership of the Western bloc country - also seen the wickedness of a Europe unable to care for herself - and anything but minor fear of the Soviet Union. In essence, it was necessary to support the pro-independence factions inside the camps to prevent the Soviet Union was the first to do so, and you win the hearts of rebellious fringes as Lenin had done at the conference in Baku in 1920, when he cunningly decided to convene the representatives of the "oppressed peoples". Shortly after the ratification of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Secretary of State Dean Acheson openly supported independence movements from the colonies, inviting their "colleagues" in Europe to stop the anachronistic colonial policy and to recognize its subject the right to self-determination. Britain and France, very reluctant to follow these "tips" they turned a deaf ear and came to join forces, together with Israel, to give a sound lesson of the uncontrolled Egyptian Colonel Jamal Nasser, who had the audacity to nationalize the Suez Canal in order to reduce the separatist ambitions of the colonies and realign once throughout the entire area of \u200b\u200bNorth African axle London - Paris. In the days between October and November 1956, the Anglo-led coalition military operation in the port, but made a spectacular own goal internationally, as the UN condemned the attack, the Commonwealth countries expressed their opposition and open ' Soviet Union threatened heavy retaliation. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Dwight U.S. Eisenhower, who had not taken well, chose to go the hard way, by providing that the Treasury sells pounds a New York Stock Exchange. Within a few days, the U.S. was able to buy more international prestige at the expense of the Soviet Union agreed to suppress the riots in Budapest, Israel had set the balance of power with the hostile surrounding Arab countries, France had found to deal with the Algerian National Front refreshed after the success of the line held by extremist Nasser and Britain was left to pick up the pieces of the empire it was. In a few short years, all the great European powers dismisero their imperial robes. Too fast. Like "colonized" was the imperative of the late nineteenth century, "decolonization" had become one half of the twentieth century. If the work of colonization was implemented step by step forced for three decades at the turn of the century to decolonization took place more abruptly. And earned for Africa in particular, where the dismissal of France, Great Britain, Germany, Spain and Portugal produced a brand new nations, like Nigeria, Niger, Chad, Cameroon, Mali, Mozambique, Angola, Cape Verde, Uganda, Madagascar, Somalia, just to mention some disorderly. E 'sufficient to lay eyes for a moment on a map to understand that the problem of borders was not even addressed by the "decolonization", which was limited to shoulder to shrug this responsibility squarely on the shoulders of fresh independence. Ethnic and cultural differences were not taken into account minimum, which reflects the total lack of willingness to enter into serious negotiations on the establishment of real boundaries. Military and businessmen of every stripe - often baked by schools and universities in Europe and America - were the first to take advantage of this opportunity to settle which of these new nations built sailors along the lines of European governments in the absence of any kind of tradition and infrastructure comparable to them. Picturesque and often grotesque characters - from Amin to Bokassa, Mobutu from Kenyatta - came into being, often to "acclaim" which will redden the die-hard democratic universalists our own, to the supreme guide in dealing with countries such as private companies, buying up power and wealth to be transferred into safe Swiss bank accounts or some island in the Pacific and surrounded by members of their clan or tribe, giving them everything that normally do not deny or deprive followers. The problems are not addressed in the diplomacy of the European powers were resolved in other well-known place, and equally well-known methods, directly from the people. Fratricidal conflicts and civil wars of secession or burst in the blink of an eye, Hutu against Tutsi, Nigeria against Biafra, Katanga against Congo and so on. The list is endless. What conclusions to draw from this? That the decolonization made that way was probably worse than colonialism itself, which the colonial powers did not understand or would not understand the wickedness inherent in so suddenly get rid of regions which had held captive for decades by claiming that they assume the same structures of modern nation states. Affrancatasi penny from the brutal colonial rule exerted by Western powers, Africa is not instantly become a secondary battleground of the Cold War before, and competition among competitive power now. Since then, there has been no war, conflict or coup d'etat that has not crept into the hand of some foreign government or economic powers, with all well-known "special" in terms of corruption, arms trafficking and organ boundary. That's it. Pretending that nations or economic powers Prefer moral rectitude to protect their interests is to go against the story, and fight against the windmills. Each block, it makes no difference politically or economically, is pursuing its own interests appropriate to the context and the context of Africa is composed mainly of nations that continue to be treated as exclusive properties of their rulers. The sad account and durability, and is still valid today, as elite intellectuals continue to question his face demurely in front of the "cruelty" the "brutality" of Gaddafi who, after all, did for his country much more than the number of his "colleagues" well-revered in any way and for very different reasons by the Western powers who say they are so concerned about the safety Libyans. The very fact that, faced with the intolerable and unusual arrogance displayed by the most serious thing Obama has given the Maroni (text: "The Americans would do well to give himself to calm down. We are here, Europe is here, then it is better that we do it. ") in the absolute silence of Italy and, more generally, all European countries (or almost) is very eloquent on the current state degeneration of the Old Continent, which presents roughly, just the same symptoms Africa; formally de-colonized (not by much, in fact ...), controlled effectively and without the minimum requirements to walk on their own feet.

Training Of O Stream Free

party that party is not

On 8 March is not a party, is a moment of reflection, the commemoration of a massacre. The massacre took place in 1908 in New York, in a textile factory, where 129 women who went on strike for days to demand decent working conditions, died in the fire broke out in their factory because the owners had locked inside. Mimosa, as a symbol of this day was born in 1946 on the initiative of women hearing (from wikipedia), a movement that united women belonging to major political parties of Italy just released.

So today is not the case for celebration and partying with strippers, but it would be worth stopping for a moment to think about what we were and what we were, who we want to be, who we are and what we become. The life of women today is different from what it was in 1908, but not everywhere and not enough. There are countries where to be born female is a big handicap, there are those who do everything to make us or make us feel good and he succeeds very well (see the Great Martian post, for those who had not already done so).

I believe that today, instead of the foraging market mimosa (maximum buy it from a street vendor), think about the meaning of equal rights, what it means to be a woman rather than a man (who knows if in the end the difference is really that strong) and what can I do for a boycott culture it takes unwitting slaves.

Is It Good To Wear Wrestling Headgear

interruption

There is a thread that holds it tied the Libyan and the current issue, dating back two decades ago, which marked the unfortunate fate of the Balkans. A thread made of exaggerations, distortions, lies, and whatever inadequacies that led to the disintegration of former Yugoslavia and who are also playing an effective role in determining the outcome of the Libyan revolt. It was 1991, when Italy came to the fore its inconsistency and invalidity strategic undermining of the effects of his stroke, laudable foreign policy course in the Balkans held for fifteen years (think of the Treaty of Osimo, 1975), outdoor cheeps nothing more than feeble protest in front of the Vatican and the German bully claims that area (which were translated with the immediate recognition of Slovenia and Croatia), considered by them as priority areas in which the component Catholic (Vatican) or extend its hegemonic influence (Germany). Until then, relations between Rome and Belgrade had been excellent, with Italy had managed to mend the many tears with Yugoslavia dating back to World War II showed a significant ability diplomatic, and lead by example - not emulated - for all European countries very reluctant to deal with a Communist country, although not a member of the Warsaw Pact. However, Yugoslavia was largely a result of the Cold War, a trench that stretched along the "Iron Curtain" which Tito was able to give a core of communism that had cemented the national unity. With the formation of the non-aligned bloc, the Yugoslav had also acquired an international reputation for nothing irrelevant. However, the death of Tito, the former Soviet Union and the seeds - the failure of economic reforms deprived the country within a few years, the reasons that had propped up the drive. Despite for Italy it was a golden opportunity to build on good-neighborly relations in order to assert their own strategic reasons - not only related to the fact of being left with a single and exclusive three antagonists were fiercely a few miles from its borders - prevailed As usual the interests of the parish, with a strong component of the Christian Democrats historically prone to the wishes of the Holy See. Thus Italy came to take note of the future Yugoslav breakup consolation with an eloquent "much worse, the better," convinced that it can pick up the crumbs of the spoils left by the other Balkan countries. The stubborn short-sightedness of the leaders in European competition with each other did nothing but make more unstable situation, which soon escaped from their hands. Do was to ask for help to the 'ally' from overseas, which was happy to join in the chaos of the Balkan and point the finger at the inability of Europeans to deal effectively with the issue within the Old Continent. Unable to fend for themselves, Europeans lined up to line the Atlantic and demanded that the main leaders of all factions that gave rise to the Yugoslav civil war (Milosevic, Tudjman, Izetbegovic) is submitted to the supper table at Dayton, Ohio 'sole purpose of ganging up against the Serbian part of Yugoslavia, to criminalize and especially to lay the groundwork for an impending process of fragmentation that would make perennially hot and totally ungovernable area. The United States thus succeeded in averting the danger of a real European unity, and to shoulder the entire burden of sanctions on the shoulders of only Serbs have the assent of the European political zealous dealt a blow to the real possibility of integrating the Russian Old Continent. The strong defense of Kosovo (KLA thugs and bullies) then closed the parable, since on the one hand would allow the U.S. military installations in the heart of Europe and other fomented the centrifugal forces of all the other Yugoslav ethnic groups, which soon emulated the example of Kosovo to claim independence after another. To this it must be the ultimate fragmentation of Yugoslavia and the emergence of Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia, in addition to the existing Croatia, Slovenia and Bosnia Herzegovina. In this way, the U.S. tightened the noose around the neck of Europe, thanks to the subservience of all the individual national political classes and a massive press campaign blatantly uninformed tenfold that in the blink of an eye on the number of "victims" of Kosovo falls under the blows of evil minions Serbs. Today we are witnessing a campaign uninformative if possible even more grotesque and one-sided, which made their claims immediately for some sections of Libyan rioters infeorociti with Muammar Gaddafi, the new Hitler, after round various Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic. After a few days of fighting there has been talk of staggering ten thousand deaths caused by bombings on the crowds, the creation of mass graves and the routine rapes of "demonstrators". A few days after news of the so-called "mass graves" turned out to be a colossal hoax, which has postponed the memory of those who do not have the brains to mush by the crap served up by "the media" to the fake carnage of Timisoara, put point to a table by the Soviet secret service (and not only by them) in order to oust the despot Nicolae Ceausescu. Day after day the myriad news for true dates were immediately refuted by the facts and when the entire house of cards "humanitarian" actually seems about to be buried under an avalanche of gross stupidity unmasked one after another. But European politicians are behaving like? Obama just opened his mouth are all snapped to attention, including Mr. Silvio Berlusconi, who at first had wisely watched the jump on the bandwagon of the apparent victors. Yeah, because the Italian relations with Libya are dated 1911 and since then the government of any color have maintained excellent relations with that country. Gaddafi himself owes much to Italy, which several times has literally saved my skin when the French and Americans were angry with him. These good relations have yielded huge gold purchases and business the leading Italian companies such as Eni and Finmeccanica, the mechanism innescatosi put at serious risk. Now, given up with undue haste, Gaddafi can count on the loyalty of the army seems to have taken the initiative, which has called into sharp question the happy ending of the story. Faced with this prospect intolerable, Mr. Obama has decided once and for all to discover the cards and to raise the bar, telling Gaddafi to "go away" and talking about the real possibility of an "intervention" - humanitarian, of course - solver. Meanwhile, Europe has blocked the assets of the "rais" and the Nuremberg Tribunal in The Hague is "investigating" the crimes of the "tyrant." Again Europe is queued to the U.S., places the interests of Washington and its line require that you keep the door of your own home. Was for European countries, another Dayton looming. Unfortunately, to upset the plans of the "divine providence" you made is the obstinacy of the Bedouin of Sirte. The usual shameless.

Skate Party Ornaments

Who's afraid of the Russian bear?

The U.S. government, aided largely by the international press, referring to the large financial groups, has repeatedly expressed its "concern" about developments in the European energy policy.
The development pipeline "Nord Stream" and "South Stream" would enshrine in the second opinion of them, the charter of the European energy dependency on the Kremlin. This objection is probably the result of winning a new version of a revised and corrected maccarthysmo aiming to warn the "unarmed" and "naive" by the Europeans to encourage the return of Russia as a major player in this complex geopolitical scenario that is inexorably moving towards multipolarity. Just as the United States had made fun of that gonzo Gorbachev, the area of \u200b\u200binfluence extending far beyond the limits of NATO agreed, now Russia is regaining positions, weaving relationships with all major players in Eurasia. This is what is happening, but with a perspective of totally new era of 'Cold War'. To understand this new perspective, however, should take a few steps back, and return to the "Orange Revolution" in Ukraine in 2004, culminating with the rise to power of Viktor Jushenko Atlanticist. Jushenko was now the star of a series of diplomatic clashes with Russia rather hard, opposing a large tax increase resulting from the transit of Russian gas pipes in Ukraine, Gazprom's demand to bring the price of gas sold to Ukraine to normal market levels. The dispute between the two lasted for several years, and culminated in January 2009, at the end of the contract regulating the terms of the transit, when Gazprom decided to terminate the flow of gas to Europe. It was a skilful move, which gave way to colorless bureaucrats in Brussels to perceive what was urgent to find ways of energy supply stable and independent of the internal turmoil within the country. The election, in February, the pro-Russian Viktor Yanukovich has also brought a significant relaxation of relations between Kiev and Moscow, a friendliness that has made possible the ratification of an agreement by which Ukraine was granted the right to use the 30% discount on supplies of Russian gas in exchange for a series of military and economic concessions to the Kremlin. Despite the reconciliation between the two nations, the need to create new structures for the transit of oil has remained, for too long as Russia and Europe had been "held hostage" of the convoluted political maneuvering in Ukraine. In light of this finding, the construction of the pipeline "Nord Stream" and "South Stream" and then appears a sensible solution to the problem, taking into account the significant political problems of various kinds (such as Poland Katcynski era) that persist in other Eastern countries, understandably wary of the Kremlin. The "Nord Stream", when completed, will plow the waters of the Baltic and come directly to Germany, while the "South Stream" (in which Eni is called to do the lion's share) will cross the Black Sea, Bulgaria , will be the route south to Greece and Apulia and north to Austria and Hungary. E 'at this point that the terminally atlases are used to concentrate the fire, stirring obsessively spectrum of European dependence on Russia. In practical terms has been given the go-to point to the realization of the Nabucco pipeline (the construction of which is sponsored by the EU and United States), many analysts considered a credible alternative to the "South Stream", since many nations-pass "turbulent "and allow Europe to source the part of non-Russian gas but from the countries of Central Asia. The development of this pipeline, however, is greatly influenced by the bad relations that Washington has with Iran's Ahmadinejad. Right now, lean on the "South Stream" indeed seems to offer different guarantees more than what would result from filling up by the "Nabucco". From a strictly political point of view, Atlanticists argue that pandering to the Kremlin's plans, Europe would find itself subject to the oppressive Russian hegemony. Beyond the incredible hypocrisy shown by them (there is, for Europe, something more oppressive and stifling of American hegemony?), It is shown how their case alarmist inexorably collide with reality. Unlike in the U.S., the seeds - the nation's total oil and gas producing economy has heavily influenced by exports, the net profits from the sale of oil, the GDP of countries with this type of economy might disappear in one fell swoop. Russia has a need to export hydrocarbons probably greater than Europe does not have to import. Subtracting the energy asset currently available, will be reduced to the recession comparable to that Yeltsin era. The same is obviously true for Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and Iran, a nation condemned without appeal by the many "useful idiots" (at best) who insist on not wanting to consider the possibility that the declared uranium enrichment by Tehran is aimed at achieving non-military and civilian purposes, while the diversification of energy sources is a road that many countries are starting to take. In any case, it should be noted that the United States were well aware of the limitations inherent Soviet economy (and that still prevail in a country like Russia) already close to the end of the Cold War, when (probably in 1986) to liberalize the sale of Alaskan oil and began to make its advanced technologies in the service of the European powers in NATO member in order to facilitate the extraction of oil from the North Sea, entering large amounts of oil on the international market was in fact to promote a dramatic fall in prices per barrel (which reached $ 10 in May), which in turn sort devastating and irreversible impact on the fragile Soviet economy, as it was anchored to the oil and gas market. Secondly, there are no credible alternatives in a position to cover the possible release (very welcome in that perspective in Washington) from Moscow. The gradual decline of extractions gasifier in deposits of the Mediterranean and the North Sea reveals the undeniable fact that Europe is running out of their resources, and supplies from North African countries are not sufficient to cover requirements. The polished economist Stefano Casertano writes that "Considering the 560 billion current consumption, we must subtract 60 billion cubic meters of reduced production in Europe, and we get 500 billion. To these we add 20 more arriving in 2020 from Algeria and 60 in most other countries, added to the initial 500, we get 580 billion cubic meters of gas. To reach 640 billion cubic meters in 2020 there are still 60 billion. The first solution is called Russia. "The road indicated by Casertano is actually safer and more convenient for Europe, both from the geopolitical point of view (proximity to Russia and the extent of its huge deposits are conditions that no other producer country is able to offer), how much, and perhaps more, from the policy level. If Europe decides to turn his back unfortunately, even partially, to Russia, Putin might turn their gaze entirely to the east towards the Chinese giant, literally hungry for energy supplies. Deng Xiaoping advocated the occurrence of "hiding its claws as it develops its power" and China, faithful to this principle, has many fabric textures with Central Asian countries, wisely putting the mute to their success. In Turkmenistan, the skilled strategists in Beijing have signed agreements extremely important, which allowed the construction of a pipeline which will bring 40 billion cubic meters of gas for 30 years, and a pipeline with a capacity of 200,000 barrels of oil a day. At present, China produces about 75 billion cubic meters of gas per year and consumes about eighty, but various estimates suggest that by 2030 one third of the nation's gas needs will be fully covered by foreign imports. The pipeline will likely be a substantial improvement soon, and also will be attached to the network gasifera Kazakhstan, another major producing country. The unusual aspect of the matter is that for the first time Moscow has left a free hand to a country historically gravitating around its orbit, allowing the Turkmen Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov scaltrissimo prime minister to deal directly with China, potentially competing nation in the medium term. Against Iran has not been given the same treatment, while both Russia and China have expressed before the Security Council met specifically, his vote in favor of applying new sanctions on Tehran. Ahmadinejad and Chavez was in fact flirting with Erdogan being sidelined from the negotiations on Russia, and is probably keeping in mind this "recklessness" that Iran is good to read the outcome of the matter. Moscow intends to hold on its power plants, which even the most recalcitrant countries are forced to refer, and will integrate a cycle of mutual dependence in all countries ranging from the Straits Gibraltar of the South China Sea. The vocation of Eurasian Russia at this point seems obvious, obvious to all but the bland bureaucrats in Brussels, which even in the face of open calls to the collaboration spent by Putin at the Security Conference held in Monaco on 7 February 2007 were felt "entitled" Who knows by whom, to reach out to the Russian leader.

African American Salaons In Brampton

Liebster blog and the birthday of the blog of Emma

Fassio Knitting Emma is two years old and celebrates with a gift for her readers. If you have not already done so, you can enter the draw for a beautiful bag project created by Emma writing a comment to this post . Emma does not need any introduction, is one of the best designer on Ravelry, and has a blog, very rich in resources for the maniacs we ball. Among his many pattern, the one I prefer is the Rosa's sleeveless cardi-jumper I realized for me, a simple design and brilliant, very quick to do and very effective, suitable for all seasons, just change the yarn and the diameter of the rods and you will get a head or a transparent top winter for the summer. Work in the round, and requires no seams, with a simple game increases you get the detail of the side peaks. This is my version .
If there was anyone among you who still do not follow his blog, this is your chance to start.

Another blogger friend of Donna Magliano am ... I had the honor to assign me Liebster the Blog Award, an award for small blogs with less than 300 fixed readers. Send to a maximum of 5 other blog is optional. Thanks Donna, I do not hand over even and especially for not having the embarrassment of choosing five of the many blogs I follow, but will launch a series of posts dedicated to other blogs. This was the first.

Ohio License Template Creator

sclerosis humanitarian

The popular revolts that held the bank for a couple of months have rekindled the spotlight on the crucial issue of "human rights". In the view of many priests of the unique but widespread ideology that has risen to an unspecified love "Humanity" in the supreme value and indispensable, as gerontocrat Muammar Gaddafi, Hosni Mubarak and Zin El Abidin Ben Ali would have been undermined by the fury of people suffocated from severe coercive measures disrespectful of the "fundamental" rights.

Or at least deserved an ending like it just because of the totalitarian measures which had subjugated entire populations for decades. It is a contradictory concept but very engaging human relationships, that, despite its roots in the more extreme individualism ends up assuming a universal connotation that you want to apply "in all places and at all times." In essence, we feel the supreme value of the individual and shall register a generic "human" based not only formal equality of all individuals. On the one hand, it proclaims the unique "uniqueness" of the individual and on the other pretends to throw the entire amount of such "oneness" within a single cauldron equiparante that would enshrine equality. The paradox appears in all its evidence, as preaching the equality of all individuals there is nothing to deny that their so-called "uniqueness." The tare clear of this whole approach "humanitarian", highlighted in their time as much to Karl Marx by Joseph De Maistre, is its obvious and incoherent abstraction. In this regard, when Fyodor Dostoevsky (ne "The Idiot") wrote that "In love for humanity abstract often ends up only love themselves," he simply summarized in a single sharp expression, the extreme ideology of "human rights ", pointing to the leveling of all individuals within the 'humanity' be prevented from taking into account the fact that the rights" real ", actual, arising from the full recognition of the differences between men. And these rights are neither innate nor prior to it, but reflect certain values \u200b\u200band historical traditions, in particular historical context in which they develop. Which refers most obviously to their purely relative, which makes them suitable for some contexts and not others. Schmitt's thinking in terms correct, it should be noted that there is a universe, but a "multi-verse" policy, which prevents contain all the peoples of the earth in a single group of any kind. The same Carl Schmitt wrote that "If the various peoples, religions, classes and other groups of men on earth were so united that it is impossible and unthinkable a war between them, if the same civil war, even within an empire covering all the world, no longer to be taken into account, for ever, even as a mere possibility, even if it fell the distinction of friend and enemy, even as a mere possibility, then there is only a conception of the world, a culture, a culture, economy, morality, right, an art, not contaminated by politics, but there would be neither political nor the state. "In short, the establishment of a depoliticized world where there is no enemy and in which all the peoples of the world peacefully in unison singing the praises of the "pensée unique". This does not correspond to the extinction of the war, but will lead to its further changes to the skin, where, continuing with Carl Schmitt, "If a state fights its political enemy in the name of humanity, its not a war of humanity, but a war for which a given state is trying to steal against his opponent, a universal concept in order to identify with it (at the expense of his enemy), so how can they be wrong to use the concepts of peace, justice, progress, civilization, to claim him and shield them from the enemy " . Moreover, the vague concept of 'humanity' itself - as pointed out, once again, by Carl Schmitt - to be heavily exploited for purposes imperialiastiche, hypocritically renamed as "humanitarian intervention" in Kosovo represents a milestone. Those who argue in good faith the legality of that practice, unaware of the fact that, as the saying goes, "the paths that lead to hell is paved with good intentions, believe that reducing political institutions as carriers of poor "humanitarian credentials" will give way to the people to free themselves from their chains and start Rousseau inexorably toward the light path that leads to the attainment of achievements in different eras in Western countries. The smarter you are whitewashed tombs instead of this preposterous ideology contradicted repeatedly by history to cover with a veil ethical legitimizing their imperialist greed, by which to protect their special interests and very personal. As we have seen in Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq, such actions do nothing but worsen the situation and lead to the establishment of political and economic institutions for the consumption sharks cruising in the murky waters of financial markets. On a purely legal, such legitimation have shattered the pillars of international law set in 1648 at the Peace of Westphalia, which did not provide any facility which may be part of a state or a coalition of states to interfere in the affairs of other sovereign nation in order to prevent or stop in advance so-called "human rights violations." In this case, it happened that the only remaining superpower after the collapse of the Soviet Union or the United States, it was steep (with the menial to the following European countries) as the supreme representative of an unspecified "international community" to extend its own economic model, cultural, social, and protect their interests by taking advantage of various, alleged "violations of human rights." Despite the desire to extend the same concern for justice beyond the boundaries of individual states may seem attractive in some environments, particularly nefarious, it must be remembered that justice can not in any case submit the policy, why is it that follows, and is down ' fruitful meeting of traditions and values \u200b\u200bmore or less shared within a given political community that the resulting legal constraints that reflect the broad lines of thought of the community. This suggests that any global justice is only applicable when several seemingly disparate political communities together are found to recognize the same principles. But this has never happened, and is a real deception (so dear to the various Pannella and Bonino) affirm that all peoples of the world are reflected in the West, or at least there would reflect, if only the "tyrants" of turn left them free to express themselves. But it is not necessary to apply the rhetoric of "human rights" to the global context in order to highlight the huge gray areas, as many aberrations can also be deduced from analysis of the situation prevailing within the West itself, the supreme temple of "human rights ". The imprint on irreducibly individualist whose ideology is based "humanitarian" has caused a massive hypertrophy of both claims, which refer to the "human rights" and an erosion of the social mirror, with the parallel judicial repercussions it entails. In essence, depopulated, a tendency to overlap the concept of "right" to that of "need" to be found in turn overlapped with that of "interest." Needs and interests in transforming needs into rights, we end up claiming substantially the "sacrosanct" protect their interests by passing off the latter for "rights", and as giants of the past such as Thomas Hobbes have demonstrated the overwhelming preponderance of the conflict ("homo homini lupus ") in human affairs, Western society has found itself "compelled" to come up with psychological tricks at the highest level of coercion (eg the studies of Michel Foucault and Noam Chomsky on the subject) in order to keep under control the community and partly to stem the destructive potential conflict arising from competition between individuals. This was partly translated by the mammoth growth of the judiciary, which reflects the widespread tendency to total legalization of human relationships, as the only force capable of governing the chaos. The enormous power held (or acquired by?) Judges reduced the political space in which individuals accept to delegate to judges the task of resolving their conflicting interests, tanning entrusting the tasks that normally would be for the "political" in the hands of the judges, putting it entirely to the "mercy of the court." With the outcome you know.