April 08, 2026
Solar Storms Trigger Earthquakes
Timothy Birdnow
There is a connection between solar flares and earthquakes.
Researchers at Kyoto University found there was a link between these flares and earthquakes and that because the delicate balance in forces inside the Earth were being pushed by magnetic resonance.
So, if these storms cause Earthquakes are they perhaps also causing the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide? We've seen a decided uptik in solar storms in recent years, especially after 2008, but going well back before (in 1989 a big solar storm knocked out Quebec's power grid, for instance). If these storms trigger quakes, why wouldn't they trigger outgassing of carbon dioxide?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:51 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 1 kb.
Oceans Healthier than Ever
Timothy Birdnow
Researchers at the University of Washington Seattle came up with simple yet brilliant idea o how to track ocean health - they opened old cans of salmon and counted the worms imbedded in the seafood.
These worms - anisakids - are often present in such fish and do not pose a health hazard to consumers.
So why do it? The researchers figured that the presence of these parasites would give us a glimpse into ocean health; a healthier ocean would probably see more of these little parasites than an unhealthy ocean.
So what did they find?
"The team's findings, published in Ecology & Evolution, showed that anisakid levels increased in chum and pink salmon between 1979 and 2021. In coho and sockeye salmon, parasite levels remained steady.
"Anisakids have a complex life cycle that requires many types of hosts," said Mastick, who is lead author on the paper. "Seeing their numbers rise over time, as we did with pink and chum salmon, indicates that these parasites were able to find all the right hosts and reproduce. That could indicate a stable or recovering ecosystem, with enough of the right hosts for anisakids."'
Which means the oceans have been getting healthier DESPITE rising carbon dioxide levels in the Earth's atmosphere (and supposedly in her oceans). So what does that tell us class? If anything carbon dioxide is GOOD for the biosphere!
At a minimum it tells us the panic over rising carbon dioxide levels is overblown and that it's certainly good for these little worms.
We we're told that ocean acidification was killing all the marine life but it appears to be just the opposite; plenty of worms and plenty of hosts for those worms. It's a golden age in the sea for salmon, anyway, and the worms they carry.
Just one more piece of evidence against the panic-laden climate change hysteria. I almost feel sorry for the alarmists; nothing predicted by their theory has come to pass.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:17 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 347 words, total size 3 kb.
Microplastic Contamination Caused by Lab Gloves
Timothy Birdnow
Hew boy! Science is being done by middle schoolers these days it seems!
So all this hysteria over microplastics may stem from procedural errors involving their lab gloves!
The summary:
March 29, 2026Source:University of MichiganSummary:Scientists may have been unknowingly inflating microplastics pollution estimates, and the surprising source could be their own lab gloves. A University of Michigan study found that common nitrile and latex gloves release tiny particles called stearates, which closely resemble microplastics and can contaminate samples during testing. In some cases, this led to wildly exaggerated results, forcing researchers to track down the unexpected culprit.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:00 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.
April 07, 2026
No, Trump isn't Going to Nuke Iran
Timothy Birdnow
If these people - especially those on the Right - don't understand Trump's way of speaking and of negotiating by now they never will get it. This is why we fail; too many on our side are just stupid.
Anyone who knows anything about Trump knows this is the way he negotiates; the carrot and the stick. As he's dealing with people who have accepted multiple deaths of their own people to cling to power Trump has to menace them.
Infowars isn't the only one saying this; I found stories in multiple Conservative sites warning Trump is insane and warning he's going to nuke Iran. Marjorie Taylor Green (who herself has gone mad) called for Trump to be removed based on the 25th Amendment, for instance.
Trump has read his Sun Tzu and he understands that unpredictability is a great strength. Trump makes himself unpredictable. And these kinds of threats are designed to force the Mullahs hands one way or another - thus Trump controls the action, choosing time and place and forcing the Mullahs to commit to a course of action and to stick their necks out long enough for him to take more of them out. Now they are all cowering in their bunkers - he is flushing them out with this.
Everyone who knows anything about Trump should understand that about him, but sadly so many still fail to grasp this simple fact.
I would add during WWII Roosevelt never promised to save the nations we were at war with; instead he promised to wipe them out. He did too; it took Germany decades to recover, even with the Marshall Plan. Ditto Japan, which was still largely in tact although we had firebombed Tokyo and blew up two cities with the first nuclear weapons.
But our modern tender sensibilities are such we recoil from even a bit of hyperbolic threat. What a bunch of weenies we've become!
No, Trump isn't going to nuke Iran. He doesn't have to; conventional weapons will knock them out just as easily.
I despair for America that so many are so foolish.
No, Trump isn't going to nuke Iran - he just wants them to think he is.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:05 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 387 words, total size 3 kb.
Kent Beclowns Himself
Timothy Birdnow
Thank God this jackass is no longer in a position of trust.
The leaky Mr. Kent shows his true Nevertrump colors here.
Kent made these remarks to Jake "the Snake" Tapper, building on a tweet in which he quoted Iranian media reports that claimed Trump was trying to kill the downed airmen.
This guy is a disgrace.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:46 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.
DHS May Pull Out of Airports in Sanctuary Jurisdictions
Timothy Birdnow
While I approve the sentiment I am not too fond of this plan:
Open Source Intel@Osint613DHS Secretary Mullin raises the possibility of pulling CBP and customs officers from airports in large sanctuary cities, citing lack of cooperation with the federal government and funding refusals.
International arrivals would be unable to clear customs at those airports.
"It’s something we’re looking at,” Mullin said.
You can't punish innocent travelers to spite the jackasses in these sanctuary areas, and all that would need to happen is one terrorist attack and the Administration would receive the blame.
There are better options, I am sure.
Also, I doubt it would pass court muster.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:07 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.
Kurds Steal Guns Meant for Iranian People
Timothy Birdnow
President Trump tried to send weapons to the Iranian people through the Kurds and the Kurds just kept them for themselves thus dooming any Iranian uprising against the regime.
You can't trust anyone over there!
We've been told repeatedly that the Kurds were honorable and our friends but when we needed them to step up they screwed us. President Trump promises to punish them.
The plan was for the Kurds to not only give the weapons to the Iranians but to launch an invasion of western Iran to disrupt and distract the government there. The Kurds failed to do either.
That was Trump's plan to overthrow the Mullahs and it has now failed not because it wasn't a good one but because our "friends" are simply dirtbags.
Now the President has no choice but use military power to destroy the infrastructure there. His options are far more limited than they were just a couple of weeks ago.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:50 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 166 words, total size 1 kb.
Johnson Turns Chicken
Timothy Birdnow
The rats are starting to jump ship.
First, we may not be at war with the Iranian People but we are at war with their government, and that is a difference without that much of a distinction. It is quite unfortunate that they may be caught in the crossfire but that is what happens in war.
Second we are not at war to "liberate the Iranian People" - Trump has been crystal clear about why we are at war. We are at war to prevent the terror masters in Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which they will use as soon as they have it. As an corollary to that we are threatening to bomb Iran's infrastructure because killing the top leadership has seemed to fail to properly motivate the government there and they have closed the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting the world's flow of energy. One of Trump's demands is that they allow shipping to resume.
While Mr. Trump would like to help the Iranian People it's not his top priority.
So what exactly does Sen. Johnson suggest Trump do? He reminds me of an episode of The Simpsons where Homer is drinking slurpees straight from the tap in the Quickie Mart and Apu, the owner, threatens him "I have asked you nicely to stop and you refuse. You leave me no choice but to ask you nicely again".
That appears to be Sen. Johnson's strategy in dealing with the Mullahs.
The Iranian leadership's strategy is patently obvious and it may yet work. They are buying time. They saw what happened with this partial government shutdown as the Democrats just stuck to their guns and refused to cut a deal and eventually the GOP caved, as usual. They know the GOP is chock-full of knock-kneed cowards. And they know the elections are coming in November and the Republicans are going to be increasingly frightened as that time nears if this thing isn't over. So the Mullahs are playing for time, dragging this out. I suspect they will have another big breakthrough just as Trump is about to start the bombing, then renege on it.
They know they will get people like Johnson to carry their water.
NOT taking this action is a disservice to the Iranian People because it cements the regime in power. Johnson should know that.
So what does he propose we do? If he has a better idea he should brig it forward. It's easy to criticize when you aren't the one who has to take the heat for it.
Oh, wait; here's his answer:
"They ought to be putting pressure on their client states to open up the strait to everybody," Johnson said. "Your freedom of navigation. That's what the American Navy has done for 75-80 years. We've assured freedom of navigation, which has opened up the world economy. That is a principle that still has to be upheld, but the world has to be engaged in that."
What does Johnson think Trump's been doing all along? He's been putting pressure on our erstwhile allies to step up and they haven't been willing to do that.
This is simply egregious armchair quarterbacking by a guy who wants to get some good press at the expense of the Administration and the nation.
It's guys like this that make us question the whole point of electing Republicans. We put them in and then they turn on us when it's convenient. Johnson is actually one of the better Republicans too, and he may actually believe what he is saying, but he's simply a fool. This is nothing but pandering to easy shibboleths that have no concrete, constructive benefits.
We are at WAR, even if there is no formal declaration from Congress (something that couldn't possibly happen with the Democratic Party hating the President more than they love America). Wars are messy and people get killed and stuff gets smashed. Going after infrastructure is necessary on occasion. Or did we win the Second World War without bombing German and Japanese infrastructure? Shoot; we firebombed the daylights out of Tokyo and incinerated two other Japanese cities with nuclear weapons. If Ron Johnson had been a Senator then would he have called for a "kinder, gentler" approach to fighting the Japanese? Probably, but we would have lost the war. Wars aren't won by winning hearts and minds; they are won by crushing the enemy to the point they realize there is no hope of winning. That has been the great fallacy in modern times, that you win wars but building hospitals and schools. You don't and Iraq should have taught us that.
I cannot fathom how the Republicans became such timid, pucillanimous craven cowards but they are and that will be America's undoing. Nobody expects rationality from the Democrats, not anymore, but the Republicans have a duty to protect this country not just from the Democrats but from foreign threats and they are just unwilling to do the hard work of leading. If they don't want to do the right thing they should leave Congress and let those willing to step up take their places.
Of course most of them aren't there to lead but rather to enjoy the perks and fame that comes with power. Nobody ever made work a part of the deal.
Ron Johnson and the others in the GOP remind me of this.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:43 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 916 words, total size 6 kb.
America the Hammock; Aliens not Self-Deporting Fast Enough
Timothy Birdnow
According to DHS, 72.000 illegals have self-deported since Trump took office.
That is terribly disappointing; we needed a LOT more than that to leave, given the millions let in by Joe Biden.
It's still way too comfortable for them here; they aren't going to leave if they find the living easy.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:02 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.
The International Oil Socialism
Timothy Birdnow
Alan Dershowitz pens a fine essay in which he asks why oil is tied to the global market and why the U.S. has to guarantee the Strait of Hormuz is reopened.
As he points out, there is no reason for oil to have it's price set by an international market when it is produced in many places (most especially the United States) and should be subject to competitive pressures. Professor Dershowitz asks:
There may be good reasons for such global price fixing, but they are not inherent in the nature of the product itself or in the nature of world markets in general. Most informed people with whom I have discussed this issue have no idea why the pricing of oil is not subject to the usual competition involving most other commodities. Even local gas stations compete with other over the retail price of a fill up, so why should the wholesale price of oil fixed by global conglomerates? An understandable explanation — more than just "that’s the way it’s always been” — is required.
Actually there are a number of reasons and they all stem from the post-war era.
Oil was the lifeblood of the Allied military machine and so it was agreed that we would "share and share alike" during the great struggle that was WWII. Then, with Europe being in ruins after the war, we continued that policy because cheap, reliable oil was necessary for rebuilding, as it was in the struggle against the Hegemony of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Couple that with the fact that oil was only to be had in certain key places and you had a situation ripe for a quasi-socialist system that Kept everyone intimately tied to a world order devised by the Internationalists who did the post-war planning.
Of course the discovery of large quantities of oil and gas in the Arab world, oil and gas that is easy to obtain (as opposed to many other places) and you had a recipe for the current system. OPEC was born out of the understanding that these primarily third world countries had real power because they had the one thing nobody dared interrupt - the lifeblood of modern civilization. OPEC flexed its muscle on a number of occasions and we saw some rather unpleasant results.
Then there was the end of the gold standard.
Money used to be backed by gold, then we went to a bimetallic standard, with gold and silver backing currency. But that was too limiting for governments, which wanted to spend more than they could back. What to do? While we today call it fiat currency the fact is our money IS backed, indirectly, by a commodity - oil. We have the petrodollar and it's worth is determined by how much oil it can purchase on the world market. But for this scheme to work there has to BE a world market with a set price; it wouldn't work if oil was priced on a competitive scale.
The end result was the American dollar became the world's fiat currency and it ultimately derived its international value based on oil.
Now every internationalist in the world loved this scheme because it tied us all together and that was what they long sought. The U.N. loved it. Big international corporations loved it. All the libera NGO's loved it. That is because they believed that by tying the world's economies into one uber-economy the political structures would follow, just as they did with the creation of the European Union. The E.U. started as a coal and steel entente' and morphed into the Common Market, then into a political entity that governed Europe with an iron hand. It couldn't have happened except for the economic Anschluss, the marriage between the German and French economies. This was a conscious, purposeful decision by the French to make it impossible for Germany to attack them again, to weld their economies together so Germany would be hurting themselves by attacking France. In the end this led to a new political entity.
That's been the model of the Left for a long time and we've seen less successful efforts at this, with the short-lived union of Egypt and Syria, for instance, or with the attempted creation of a North American Union (which started with NAFTA) that has thankfully failed. There is an African League, which is also an attempt to create a pan-Africa. And of course we have BRICKS now.
All of these towers of Babel have met with limited success, and even the E.U. is teetering now because the countries do not have enough in common.
But the point is there was a purposeful attempt to use oil to weld the world's economy together and they had some success in that. Certainly the "free trade" craze was as much about that as it was about making it easier to trade without government interference. That craze decimated both the United States' manufacturing and productive centers as well as the Europeans.
And of course now with the Climate Change scare pushing Europeans into not getting their own oil we witness the perfect storm; utter dependence on oil from enemy and rogue states on the Continent.
The problem is if we decouple the price of oil from the world market we run the risk of losing the petrodollar as the world's default currency, then the U.S. suffers economic catastrophe' as our debt becomes more than just theoretical. Now the whole world goes easy on us because if we fall the party is over for them. But decouple oil from the dollar and they are all going to start pulling out of the American economy over our ludicrous debt.
It's a real problem and while I think Trump understands it I can't be sure he does.
Dersh gives one possible solution to the Hormuz problem:
Israel has suggested yet another alternative: to reroute oil currently shipped through Hormuz in overland pipelines in nations that would not misuse their geographical power over international waterways as part of a military strategy. This would obviously take time and regional cooperation. Delinking the price of American produced oil from the price of oil produced by foreign countries could probably be done more quickly.
Actually there is an easy way to do this; just bypass the Strait in the Persian Gulf with large pipelines cutting across Qatar. Gulf tankers could ship to the Gulf shore of Qatar and the oil could be pumped across the peninsula that forms the Strait of Hormuz, to be loaded on another ship in the Sea of Arabia. It wouldn't be that hard to construct a large pipeline to do this, and in fact the Qataris were already working on such a plan, but it was low priority because it wouldn't be a whole lot of use with the strait open.
I had long through a canal would be a good solution but it would require a number of locks, and oil tankers are too big for that apparently. But a pipeline would be easy. Maybe not all that profitable but easy.
Dersh is right; we need to address this issue in a way that helps the American consumer and decentralizes the issue. Now we have a central planning scheme that is intimately tied to a bunch of Arabs and Russians and there is nothing we can do about it, except go to war when the supply chain is threatened (and thus we have to hear the endless drivel from the Left about "No blood for oil!"
And of course the Gang Green, the environmentalists, love this because it punishes Americans for relying on an energy supply they deem bad and not buying the expensive and largely useless "renewable" energy that they keep pushing to reduce our living standards and force us all down the socialist rabbit hole.
By squeezing the price of oil in any manner they can the Gang Green wants to force us to use unreliable wind and solar, to run our cars on electricity generated by them, etc. This is a bait and switch; they know renewables will fail but once they get rid of oil and gas (as they largely have gotten rid of coal, at least in the U.S. and Europe) that we will not be able to go back, and they can then regulate energy usage "for the greater good" when shortages or brownouts occur. Then they own you.
At any rate Dershowitz is right about the need to make petroleum a capitalist commodity like others. But it's going to be very, very difficult to do it without wrecking our own economy. You can thank the political class here in America for that.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:22 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1457 words, total size 9 kb.
The International Oil Socialism
Timothy Birdnow
Alan Dershowitz pens a fine essay in which he asks why oil is tied to the global market and why the U.S. has to guarantee the Strait of Hormuz is reopened.
As he points out, there is no reason for oil to have it's price set by an international market when it is produced in many places (most especially the United States) and should be subject to competitive pressures. Professor Dershowitz asks:
There may be good reasons for such global price fixing, but they are not inherent in the nature of the product itself or in the nature of world markets in general. Most informed people with whom I have discussed this issue have no idea why the pricing of oil is not subject to the usual competition involving most other commodities. Even local gas stations compete with other over the retail price of a fill up, so why should the wholesale price of oil fixed by global conglomerates? An understandable explanation — more than just "that’s the way it’s always been” — is required.
Actually there are a number of reasons and they all stem from the post-war era.
Oil was the lifeblood of the Allied military machine and so it was agreed that we would "share and share alike" during the great struggle that was WWII. Then, with Europe being in ruins after the war, we continued that policy because cheap, reliable oil was necessary for rebuilding, as it was in the struggle against the Hegemony of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Couple that with the fact that oil was only to be had in certain key places and you had a situation ripe for a quasi-socialist system that Kept everyone intimately tied to a world order devised by the Internationalists who did the post-war planning.
Of course the discovery of large quantities of oil and gas in the Arab world, oil and gas that is easy to obtain (as opposed to many other places) and you had a recipe for the current system. OPEC was born out of the understanding that these primarily third world countries had real power because they had the one thing nobody dared interrupt - the lifeblood of modern civilization. OPEC flexed its muscle on a number of occasions and we saw some rather unpleasant results.
Then there was the end of the gold standard.
Money used to be backed by gold, then we went to a bimetallic standard, with gold and silver backing currency. But that was too limiting for governments, which wanted to spend more than they could back. What to do? While we today call it fiat currency the fact is our money IS backed, indirectly, by a commodity - oil. We have the petrodollar and it's worth is determined by how much oil it can purchase on the world market. But for this scheme to work there has to BE a world market with a set price; it wouldn't work if oil was priced on a competitive scale.
The end result was the American dollar became the world's fiat currency and it ultimately derived its international value based on oil.
Now every internationalist in the world loved this scheme because it tied us all together and that was what they long sought. The U.N. loved it. Big international corporations loved it. All the libera NGO's loved it. That is because they believed that by tying the world's economies into one uber-economy the political structures would follow, just as they did with the creation of the European Union. The E.U. started as a coal and steel entente' and morphed into the Common Market, then into a political entity that governed Europe with an iron hand. It couldn't have happened except for the economic Anschluss, the marriage between the German and French economies. This was a conscious, purposeful decision by the French to make it impossible for Germany to attack them again, to weld their economies together so Germany would be hurting themselves by attacking France. In the end this led to a new political entity.
That's been the model of the Left for a long time and we've seen less successful efforts at this, with the short-lived union of Egypt and Syria, for instance, or with the attempted creation of a North American Union (which started with NAFTA) that has thankfully failed. There is an African League, which is also an attempt to create a pan-Africa. And of course we have BRICKS now.
All of these towers of Babel have met with limited success, and even the E.U. is teetering now because the countries do not have enough in common.
But the point is there was a purposeful attempt to use oil to weld the world's economy together and they had some success in that. Certainly the "free trade" craze was as much about that as it was about making it easier to trade without government interference. That craze decimated both the United States' manufacturing and productive centers as well as the Europeans.
And of course now with the Climate Change scare pushing Europeans into not getting their own oil we witness the perfect storm; utter dependence on oil from enemy and rogue states on the Continent.
The problem is if we decouple the price of oil from the world market we run the risk of losing the petrodollar as the world's default currency, then the U.S. suffers economic catastrophe' as our debt becomes more than just theoretical. Now the whole world goes easy on us because if we fall the party is over for them. But decouple oil from the dollar and they are all going to start pulling out of the American economy over our ludicrous debt.
It's a real problem and while I think Trump understands it I can't be sure he does.
Dersh gives one possible solution to the Hormuz problem:
Israel has suggested yet another alternative: to reroute oil currently shipped through Hormuz in overland pipelines in nations that would not misuse their geographical power over international waterways as part of a military strategy. This would obviously take time and regional cooperation. Delinking the price of American produced oil from the price of oil produced by foreign countries could probably be done more quickly.
Actually there is an easy way to do this; just bypass the Strait in the Persian Gulf with large pipelines cutting across Qatar. Gulf tankers could ship to the Gulf shore of Qatar and the oil could be pumped across the peninsula that forms the Strait of Hormuz, to be loaded on another ship in the Sea of Arabia. It wouldn't be that hard to construct a large pipeline to do this, and in fact the Qataris were already working on such a plan, but it was low priority because it wouldn't be a whole lot of use with the strait open.
I had long through a canal would be a good solution but it would require a number of locks, and oil tankers are too big for that apparently. But a pipeline would be easy. Maybe not all that profitable but easy.
Dersh is right; we need to address this issue in a way that helps the American consumer and decentralizes the issue. Now we have a central planning scheme that is intimately tied to a bunch of Arabs and Russians and there is nothing we can do about it, except go to war when the supply chain is threatened (and thus we have to hear the endless drivel from the Left about "No blood for oil!"
And of course the Gang Green, the environmentalists, love this because it punishes Americans for relying on an energy supply they deem bad and not buying the expensive and largely useless "renewable" energy that they keep pushing to reduce our living standards and force us all down the socialist rabbit hole.
By squeezing the price of oil in any manner they can the Gang Green wants to force us to use unreliable wind and solar, to run our cars on electricity generated by them, etc. This is a bait and switch; they know renewables will fail but once they get rid of oil and gas (as they largely have gotten rid of coal, at least in the U.S. and Europe) that we will not be able to go back, and they can then regulate energy usage "for the greater good" when shortages or brownouts occur. Then they own you.
At any rate Dershowitz is right about the need to make petroleum a capitalist commodity like others. But it's going to be very, very difficult to do it without wrecking our own economy. You can thank the political class here in America for that.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:22 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1457 words, total size 9 kb.
American Communists
Timothy Birdnow
The Soviet era communists who are working to undercut our Cuba policy.
Communism is alive and well - it's just not being quite as direct as it used to be.
This was inevitable; the Soviets built the greatest network in history and that never went away. Obama may well have been one of their sleeper agents, for instance.
Our destroying the Soviet Union meant the Communists went underground, into the Green movement, into "DEI", into academia and elsewhere and are doing more damage now than ever. There is a reason why we think so much more like Communists than we ever did when we had the Soviet Union around to show how bankrupt the belief system really is.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:21 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 133 words, total size 1 kb.
April 06, 2026
How British Socialists Conquered the World
Timothy Birdnow
Here is an interesting read about the foundations of our modern world, how it was laid by socialists and big money interests in Britain early in the 20th century. It's too convoluted to excerpt; you need to read it for yourself.
This shows how a cabal of socialists and high finance capitalists conspired to give us the world we currently live in, the international order and the Green movement and all the rest of it.
Do read the whole thing.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:22 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 88 words, total size 1 kb.
Deport 'em to the Congo!
Timothy Birdnow
Ii think SCOTUS will strike this agreement down. It IS cruel and unusual punishment, after all...
Half the country is fighting over a single can of tuna after all.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:35 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.
Trying to Snatch Defeat from the Jaws of Victory
Timothy Birdnow
This is from The Daily Mail, an allegedly conservative British company:
You will notice Fox hasn't been much better in their coverage of this.
Trump’s daring extraction of US airman trapped in Iran almost failed and cost dozens of American lives https://t.co/hmoLW3wAXA
— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) April 5, 2026
That is a lie; no lives were lost. And it was a spectacular success, plucking a pilot right out of the jaws of the IRGC.
The author of the accompanying article is one Tom Lawrence, a complete Nevertrumper. But the editors posted it, which speaks volumes.
With friends like these...
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:22 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 136 words, total size 1 kb.
Media Misses the Boat
This from Mike
I hope Trump leaves something for the Iranians to build back better. Israel wants total decimation of Iran with cause. They have witnessed first hand that until you cut off the snakes head the snake will come back to bite you. They beat hamas bloody how many times? The same with hezbollah and yet they came back thanks to money and materials that came from Iran.Leaving Iran penniless will see terrorists hamas, hezbollah and houthis become extinct. The wonderful media got the story all wrong on the Iranians peoples part in the rescue of the weapons tech, including Fox who probably still are broadcasting it. The Iranian people came out in mass to impede where they could the IRGC from finding him. In one city they were walking around the streets en mass blocking traffic. They are so out of touch with reality it boggles the mind that people still pay attention to them.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:54 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.
April 05, 2026
Yes, Fascism and Naziism were Socialist
Chester McAteer
National Socialism as the Dark Heir of Marxism: When Hitler Finished What Marx Began
National Socialism, despite its later vilification in the West, was not, in its own self‑understanding, some kind of generic "anti‑left” ideology. On the contrary, its leading figures repeatedly presented it as a species of Socialism: a radical, anti‑capitalist, collectivist system that consciously claimed territory next to Marxism, even while rejecting internationalism and substituting race and nation for class.
When one reads the programmatic speeches and private reflections of Hitler, Goebbels, Gregor Strasser, and Otto Wagener, a clear picture emerges: National Socialism is best grasped not as the opposite of Marxism, but as a nationalist mutation of the same basic socialist Weltanschauung, one that seeks to realize "the pure idea” of socialism within the framework of the German Volk rather than the "international proletariat.”
more...
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
03:58 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1673 words, total size 12 kb.
He is Risen
He is risen!
28 After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
2 There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 4 The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.
5 The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.”
8 So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 Suddenly Jesus met them. "Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.”
The Guards’ Report
11 While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. 12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13 telling them, "You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ 14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” 15 So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.
Happy Easter!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
02:42 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 346 words, total size 2 kb.
ex injuria jus non oritur
Lynn Chu
The common law doctrine most relevant to the birthright citizenship issue is ex injuria jus non oritur. No rights can arise from an unlawful act.
You just freaking cannot confer citizenship on your baby and by extension yourself and most of your family by breaking into the country to drop it there. It’s the commission of a crime. Several in fact. Illegal border crossing and fraud. To hold that you can confer citizenship on yourself by your own illegal acts encourages and fosters egregious moral turpitude.
Britain’s assertion that everyone in their colonies be considered British property and cannon fodder was exactly what the American colony overthrew.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
01:10 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.
No, I Said I Want a BIG MAC!
Timothy Birdnow
"I thought this was a protest criticizing Burger King..."
Half of these nitwits have no idea what they are doing at those rallies.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
12:38 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.
87kb generated in CPU 0.0646, elapsed 0.3682 seconds.
40 queries taking 0.3561 seconds, 231 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
40 queries taking 0.3561 seconds, 231 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
