The Federation of American scientists FAS has published the information that radiated tissue boxes and pet bowls turned up 

With the US election campaign being very concerned on security matters one wonders why this hasn´t been an issue so far 

Has [former] White House cat “socks” been contacted by its counter part Bond-“baddie” Blofeld? 

Maybe the Association of Concerned Democratic Cats and Dogs (ACDC) 

Should ask for information on weather modification drowning their homes

And they should ask why federal agents say they fear dirty bombs. 

Whereas it is not encouraged so far to produce every day goods without radiation or other toxics. 

People finding radiated goods should not be punished. The Spanish protocoll should be followed. A joint budget and capabilities fund shall ensure that no radiated goods are to be produced any longer. And that one works on ways to store the existing items in a manner that does as less harm as possible. And one agrees upon the promise that any technology that is developed for this purpose will not lead to restart the atomic programme. Only under this premise a real qualitative change will be possible.

Some information has to be said clearly. Only then the real difference becomes visible. 

The election debate between President Barrack Obama and M Romney was aired on tv. Working places were an issue as well as the relations to China and India. But it was not said that there are contrasting interests within China as well as within India. So the debate should turn into a qualitative one instead of staying a quick match of catch phrases. It´s all about quality and about the prize one has to pay. But: which price? Not only the one at the counter. But the price that comes next. If the product bought is radiated for example. 

This is the reason why 

Radiated tissue boxes and pets´ bowls are an example. Even if the Chiuaua doesn´t fall dead at once. Nor does the can opener.

But it all adds up. So with an ill dog there will come the question what to do with the ill fellow if one can´t pay the pet doctor. Well, first comes the dog then the man. And what about the family? Having bought food and everyday goods that didn´t cost much. But contained toxic ingredients or unhealthy ones. Who is going to pay? Those who produced those goods and claimed they were ok? Those who bought and did not know? Those who could have known if they had asked one question more? Have they been encouraged to ask one question more? Are those rewarded who ask that question more? Are those asking questions been regarded upon as the real heros? In politics. In media. In companies. At universities. Within rounds of experts? 

It´s not enough to have the ability, one needs the environment to live what one can. 

If those who know how to, are cut off finance. Wheras those with financial backing can´t or won´t give a dam – to say it bluntly. 

Yes we can. Sure. But where? 

And: under which conditions with which consequences? 

How to prevent short sightedness? How to counter act the Milchmädchenrechnung.

Work places. Sure. But which ones. Don´t call those ones lazy who don´t want to be killed by work. The president was very subtle when stating that his parents where in Germany at war times. Maybe he did not want to hurt anybody´s feelings. Well, he could have said: if it only were about work places then we should all know where this leads to. To destruction. As history has shown producing weapons of mass destructions seems to put a lot of people into work. First for war. Then a lot of people die. Then some built up. And very few profit. Is it really this you want? I do hope not. Because then you would repeat what has happened befor. Dictatorship and war whould be the choice. But this isn´t a choice. And this has to be said explicitly. And not as an unspoken subline. Because if the important sentences are omitted they are not heard. And what remains is the false. 

Sometimes one has to be explicit. Explicit is not unpolite. Even your computer asks you: do you really want to delete this file? Even your computer gives the choice to think twice and then decide. Because men have written the programme that way. 

So maybe the guideline for presidential debates should be rewritten. Add information and explicit answers. And questions. 

Such as: If people at this time can´t pay the not radiated tissue boxes, how can we change this? Proposals please come up with them. 

How to shift what has to be spend less on ill citizens to those producing the neutral things? Any proposal? 

How can we encourage those to think twice who till today have been forced to work around the clock just in order to survive and be falsely accused by others as being lazy. Any proposals? 

Because democracy needs people who have the time to exercise democracy. 

This has to be demanded and rewarded at the same time. 

Checks and balances. It is this belief that our land – our society – our law is built on. 

Time to rembember this. 

And it is this that we can learn from those who are migrating to our country. Because we are asking this from them to learn. Maybe we can learn this together. 

And with this message I am closing my speech. And open the floor.

Any question? Any answer?