May 29, 2025
Swiss Avalanch
Timothy Birdnow
This is the benefit of a cool climate.
Yes, a glacier in Switzerland collapsed and buried a village. And of course it's all because of Global Warming, they tell us.
Doesn't this illustrate the dangers of all that ice hanging above your head in Switzerland instead?
We have been told over and over that landslides are being caused by climate change, by a whopping 1* f. of warming. But if that is so why did we have so many historical accounts of similar events in bygone days? In fact landslides usually happen when there is a LOT OF SNOW, not a dearth of it.
National Geographic says this about avalanches:
Yet we are repeatedly told tthe glaciers are melting away, particularly in Switzerland. How is it there is a landslide from a collapsing glacier when there is Less of the glacier to begin with?
Anyone who has ever shoveled wet snow knows it is stickier than new, dry snow. Yes, water under ice can sometimes cause the ice to slide off a roof and melting glaciers can and do collapse in this fashion, but not when we are talking about a lilliputian rise in temperature. a single degree of warming would not lead to such a collapse.
Temperatures in Switzerland have risen by just 1.5* C since 1864.
This is the benefit of a cool climate.
Yes, a glacier in Switzerland collapsed and buried a village. And of course it's all because of Global Warming, they tell us.
Doesn't this illustrate the dangers of all that ice hanging above your head in Switzerland instead?
We have been told over and over that landslides are being caused by climate change, by a whopping 1* f. of warming. But if that is so why did we have so many historical accounts of similar events in bygone days? In fact landslides usually happen when there is a LOT OF SNOW, not a dearth of it.
National Geographic says this about avalanches:
"Snow avalanches are most likely to occur after a fresh snowfall adds a new layer to a snowpack . If new snow piles up during a storm, the snowpack may become overloaded, setting off a slide.
Yet we are repeatedly told tthe glaciers are melting away, particularly in Switzerland. How is it there is a landslide from a collapsing glacier when there is Less of the glacier to begin with?
Anyone who has ever shoveled wet snow knows it is stickier than new, dry snow. Yes, water under ice can sometimes cause the ice to slide off a roof and melting glaciers can and do collapse in this fashion, but not when we are talking about a lilliputian rise in temperature. a single degree of warming would not lead to such a collapse.
Temperatures in Switzerland have risen by just 1.5* C since 1864.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:24 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 258 words, total size 2 kb.
Cat Fight
Timothy Birdnow
This is what happens when you send a girl to do a man's job!
/]Secret Service Agents Suspended for Brawling after Leaked Video
The two babes in tweed got into a catfight over who got to take the cool car.
This is what DEI has done to what was once America's finest and most competent agency.
This is what happens when you send a girl to do a man's job!
/]Secret Service Agents Suspended for Brawling after Leaked Video
The two babes in tweed got into a catfight over who got to take the cool car.
This is what DEI has done to what was once America's finest and most competent agency.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.
Greenland Gains ice
Timothy Birdnow
The Greenland Ice Sheet gained 622 billion tons of ice in direct refutation of the climate alarmists' claim it is shrinking away.
Not sure how you gain ice when it's melting.
The Greenland Ice Sheet gained 622 billion tons of ice in direct refutation of the climate alarmists' claim it is shrinking away.
Not sure how you gain ice when it's melting.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:01 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
Worst Tornadoes were in the 1920's
Timothy Birdnow
Gee; I thought tornadoes and big storms were getting worse with Climate Change!
Gee; I thought tornadoes and big storms were getting worse with Climate Change!
Tornado deaths peaked in the US 100 years ago, in 1925
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:57 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 32 words, total size 1 kb.
Trade Court Bans Tariffs
Timothy Birdnow
Congress granted the power to issue tariffs to the President in Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. That act has not been repealed.
This court is accusing Trump of "exceeding his authority". Yet it is ignoring the law and replacing it with his personal opinion. Who is exceeding their authority?
Court Intervenes in Trump's Economic Agenda, Tariffs in Major Trouble
From the article:
Not a national emergency? I would call it a shitpot mother of an emergency. America is teetering on insolvency. Just because it has been ongoing does not mean it does not constitute an emergency. A guy bleeding from a cut on his leg isn't an emergency - until he bleeds out two quarts of blood. Then he's on life support with a transfusion.
Dufuses.
And exactly WHO determines if it is an emergency or not? The President of the United States is invested with that power, not some damned three judge panel based in Manhattan.
Yes, the Constitution does indeed directly grant the power to impose a tariff to Congress. Congress didn't want it and gave it to the President. To remedy the abuse of the tariff by the President it is CONGRESS that needs to take action - not the courts. The court has no legal jurisdiction here.
Why, pray tell, didn't this court or some other court issue an identical ruling over tariffs in the last fifty years? Every single President since has imposed them. In America we have a thing called precedent. It's part of English Common law. If something is done long enough it becomes enshrined into law whether there is a formal statute or not. For example, there is no law, not one single law, granting the power of judicial review to the courts. That power was usurped by John Marshall in his SCOTUS opinion in Marbury v. Madison. He simply stated he thought it a good idea, and nobody objected. It is defacto law now. But where in the Constitution does it say anything about judicial review?
For that matter, where is this court in the Constitution. The President's office is there, but not a court of international trade.
This is a ruling Trump needs to simply ignore. He can appeal if he likes, but win or lose I think Trump needs to tell this court to go and,well, this is a family blog,after all.
Basically these judges are imposing a new and novel interpretation of the law,one based on their personal opinion and not on legal precedent.Itis THEY who are overstepping their authority.
Congress should dissolve this court. They have the power to do that.
This court did not issue an injunction, they granted summary judgment against the Administration. If this edict is obeyed it means ALL tariffs are stopped.
What does that mean? Does it mean even the tariffs that had been in place during the Biden Adminstration will be gone?
The Administration will have to appeal to the D.c. Court of Appeals (where they will probably lose) or directly to SCOTUS, and with Roberts and conehead Barrett it's a crapshoot there.
Now is the time to draw a line in the sand. Yes, the Democrats will try to impeach Trump, but at this point that is a foregone conclusion. Something has to be done now.
The whole point of course has been to use the courts to block everything Trump is trying to do to buy time until the midterms. The party in power almost always loses seats in the midterm elections and if the Democrats can take the House then all of the investiggations and harrassment come back. And all the money dries up for Trump's policies. That is ultimately all that is happening here; this is a prevent defense by the Democrats.
And it illustrates how effective they have been in putting partisans in key judicial positions over the years. This would never have happened had the Republicans not employed the principle of "he won, he gets what he wants" every time a Democrat becomes President. The Democrats never extended the same courtesy to Republican presidents, fighting tooth-and-nail to stop every good appointee by any POTUS with an R behind their name. It's now clear the donkeys have a majority in the judiciary and that majority is now being called on to run interference. Like the Godfather, they got their judgeships with the caveat "some day, and that day may never come, we'll call upon you for a service". Well, that day has come and now the judges are being forced to act in openly partisan ways.
We have to work out ways to stop this judicial power-grab. Congress can dissolve their coursts. Congress can pass laws limiting the scope of their power. After all there is not one single court actually created by the Constitution save the Supreme Court.
This shows quite clearly that these courts are way, way out of control and must be reined in.
And if the Supreme Court stands in the way of dissolving these lesser courts? Their new home can be placed in East St. Louis with the other thugs.
Time to stop pussy-footing around.
Congress granted the power to issue tariffs to the President in Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. That act has not been repealed.
This court is accusing Trump of "exceeding his authority". Yet it is ignoring the law and replacing it with his personal opinion. Who is exceeding their authority?
Court Intervenes in Trump's Economic Agenda, Tariffs in Major Trouble
From the article:
The decision came from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade, based in New York City, according to the Associated Press.
On what he billed as Liberation Day on April 2, Trump announced a universal 10 percent tariff and higher reciprocal tariffs for those countries his administration identified as being particularly egregious in blocking U.S. products from their markets.
The AP noted there were at least seven plaintiffs who challenged the levies in court.
"Tariffs must typically be approved by Congress. Trump has said he has the power to act to address the trade deficits he calls a national emergency,” the outlet said.
The plaintiffs argued that the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorize the president to impose tariffs.
Further, even if it did, they contended that the record trade deficit of $1.2 trillion in 2024 did not constitute an emergency, saying the U.S. has had a trade imbalance for the last 49 years.
On what he billed as Liberation Day on April 2, Trump announced a universal 10 percent tariff and higher reciprocal tariffs for those countries his administration identified as being particularly egregious in blocking U.S. products from their markets.
The AP noted there were at least seven plaintiffs who challenged the levies in court.
"Tariffs must typically be approved by Congress. Trump has said he has the power to act to address the trade deficits he calls a national emergency,” the outlet said.
The plaintiffs argued that the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not authorize the president to impose tariffs.
Further, even if it did, they contended that the record trade deficit of $1.2 trillion in 2024 did not constitute an emergency, saying the U.S. has had a trade imbalance for the last 49 years.
Not a national emergency? I would call it a shitpot mother of an emergency. America is teetering on insolvency. Just because it has been ongoing does not mean it does not constitute an emergency. A guy bleeding from a cut on his leg isn't an emergency - until he bleeds out two quarts of blood. Then he's on life support with a transfusion.
Dufuses.
And exactly WHO determines if it is an emergency or not? The President of the United States is invested with that power, not some damned three judge panel based in Manhattan.
Yes, the Constitution does indeed directly grant the power to impose a tariff to Congress. Congress didn't want it and gave it to the President. To remedy the abuse of the tariff by the President it is CONGRESS that needs to take action - not the courts. The court has no legal jurisdiction here.
Why, pray tell, didn't this court or some other court issue an identical ruling over tariffs in the last fifty years? Every single President since has imposed them. In America we have a thing called precedent. It's part of English Common law. If something is done long enough it becomes enshrined into law whether there is a formal statute or not. For example, there is no law, not one single law, granting the power of judicial review to the courts. That power was usurped by John Marshall in his SCOTUS opinion in Marbury v. Madison. He simply stated he thought it a good idea, and nobody objected. It is defacto law now. But where in the Constitution does it say anything about judicial review?
For that matter, where is this court in the Constitution. The President's office is there, but not a court of international trade.
This is a ruling Trump needs to simply ignore. He can appeal if he likes, but win or lose I think Trump needs to tell this court to go and,well, this is a family blog,after all.
Basically these judges are imposing a new and novel interpretation of the law,one based on their personal opinion and not on legal precedent.Itis THEY who are overstepping their authority.
Congress should dissolve this court. They have the power to do that.
This court did not issue an injunction, they granted summary judgment against the Administration. If this edict is obeyed it means ALL tariffs are stopped.
What does that mean? Does it mean even the tariffs that had been in place during the Biden Adminstration will be gone?
The Administration will have to appeal to the D.c. Court of Appeals (where they will probably lose) or directly to SCOTUS, and with Roberts and conehead Barrett it's a crapshoot there.
Now is the time to draw a line in the sand. Yes, the Democrats will try to impeach Trump, but at this point that is a foregone conclusion. Something has to be done now.
The whole point of course has been to use the courts to block everything Trump is trying to do to buy time until the midterms. The party in power almost always loses seats in the midterm elections and if the Democrats can take the House then all of the investiggations and harrassment come back. And all the money dries up for Trump's policies. That is ultimately all that is happening here; this is a prevent defense by the Democrats.
And it illustrates how effective they have been in putting partisans in key judicial positions over the years. This would never have happened had the Republicans not employed the principle of "he won, he gets what he wants" every time a Democrat becomes President. The Democrats never extended the same courtesy to Republican presidents, fighting tooth-and-nail to stop every good appointee by any POTUS with an R behind their name. It's now clear the donkeys have a majority in the judiciary and that majority is now being called on to run interference. Like the Godfather, they got their judgeships with the caveat "some day, and that day may never come, we'll call upon you for a service". Well, that day has come and now the judges are being forced to act in openly partisan ways.
We have to work out ways to stop this judicial power-grab. Congress can dissolve their coursts. Congress can pass laws limiting the scope of their power. After all there is not one single court actually created by the Constitution save the Supreme Court.
This shows quite clearly that these courts are way, way out of control and must be reined in.
And if the Supreme Court stands in the way of dissolving these lesser courts? Their new home can be placed in East St. Louis with the other thugs.
Time to stop pussy-footing around.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:43 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1023 words, total size 6 kb.
Was Jill's Chief of Staff Running the Country?
Timothy Birdnow
So who was pulling the strings in the Biden Administration? David Hogg says it was DOCTOR Jill Biden's Chief of Staff Anthony Bernal in an undercover sting interview by Project Vertitas.
FTA:
And Jill controlled both Biden and this Warlock of Oz character.
More and more Jill seems to be at the center of much of the criminality of this gangland enterprise. BTW I don't believe Jill ever received a pardon via the autopen, did she?
Of course Hogg is hardly an official source for this; he was not personally involved in any of it, and he's not liked by the Democrats for challenging the Establishment. But he IS on the inside and has access to many people who were. I wouldn't discount what he says although there is nothing actionable by the Trump Administration. On the other hand this could be used to open an investigation.
The DOJ and FBI and Congress all need to get moving on these things.
So who was pulling the strings in the Biden Administration? David Hogg says it was DOCTOR Jill Biden's Chief of Staff Anthony Bernal in an undercover sting interview by Project Vertitas.
FTA:
"Like, Jill Biden’s chief of staff had an enormous amount of power,” Hogg continued.
"Jill Biden?” a perplexed reporter asked in follow-up. Hogg reiterated that he was talking about Jill Biden’s chief of staff.
Deterrian Jones, a former Biden White House staffer who was also in attendance, chimed in, "That was an open secret. I would avoid him. He was scary.”
Identified as Anthony Bernal, the reporter noted that he had never seen him before.
"Exactly,” Jones answered.
"What do you mean?” the reporter asked.
"He’s just a shadowy, ‘Wizard of Oz’-type figure,” Jones said. "That’s what made him like so …
"… I knew how he looked, but the general public wouldn’t know how this man looked.
"But he wielded an enormous amount of power. And I can’t stress to you how much power he had at the White House.
"Jill Biden?” a perplexed reporter asked in follow-up. Hogg reiterated that he was talking about Jill Biden’s chief of staff.
Deterrian Jones, a former Biden White House staffer who was also in attendance, chimed in, "That was an open secret. I would avoid him. He was scary.”
Identified as Anthony Bernal, the reporter noted that he had never seen him before.
"Exactly,” Jones answered.
"What do you mean?” the reporter asked.
"He’s just a shadowy, ‘Wizard of Oz’-type figure,” Jones said. "That’s what made him like so …
"… I knew how he looked, but the general public wouldn’t know how this man looked.
"But he wielded an enormous amount of power. And I can’t stress to you how much power he had at the White House.
And Jill controlled both Biden and this Warlock of Oz character.
More and more Jill seems to be at the center of much of the criminality of this gangland enterprise. BTW I don't believe Jill ever received a pardon via the autopen, did she?
Of course Hogg is hardly an official source for this; he was not personally involved in any of it, and he's not liked by the Democrats for challenging the Establishment. But he IS on the inside and has access to many people who were. I wouldn't discount what he says although there is nothing actionable by the Trump Administration. On the other hand this could be used to open an investigation.
The DOJ and FBI and Congress all need to get moving on these things.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:43 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.
Toe Fungus at Defense
Timothy Birdnow
Deep State games at the Pentagon.
Mystery Deepens Over Claims a Trump Ally was Illegally Wiretapped Inside the Pentagon
This story is fluid and unclear and so it's best for you to go and read the article and decide for yourself. There is much toe fungus - something is foul a-foot!
Deep State games at the Pentagon.
Mystery Deepens Over Claims a Trump Ally was Illegally Wiretapped Inside the Pentagon
This story is fluid and unclear and so it's best for you to go and read the article and decide for yourself. There is much toe fungus - something is foul a-foot!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:28 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.
Civil Service Mafia
Timothy Birdnow
Revolver has a story this morning discussion the assassination attempt on Trump in Butler P.A. and how Patel and Bongino seem to be covering it up.
As the author asks, if there is "nothing there" as the FBI is asserting why are there two cases in Federal court. while the details of those cases aren't given it seems likely they are about security breeches and who was involved.
Let us not forget; Crooks was walking around earlier with his rifle over his shoulder and in fact was photographed by law enforcement. The building he shot from was just outside of the perimeter the fBI drew, and well within rifle range. There were law-enforcement in that building (a building owned by a corporation wit deep ties to the Democratic Party) but not one single person on the roof, the logical spot to shoot from. Crooks had to be the absolutely luckiest human being alive to make it that far.
Then there is the matter of how it was handled. A policeman came on the roof, saw Crooks with a gun, and promptly left instead of doing his job. Then the Secret Service shot and killed Crooks. Within days the Secret Service had completely scrubbed the crime scene, and in fact they ordered the body of Crooks to be cremated before the medical examiner had given it a proper examination.
Then the FBI hemmed and hawed and the head was forced to resign, but apparently nobody else was sacked - not in the Secret Service,not anywhere. The story was quickly brushed under the rug.
And now Paatel and Bongino are saying "nothing to see here" and closing the case.
If there is nothing to see here why don't they release all the records? I'm sorry but they are lying to us.
So why would they lie? I see several possible reasons:
1. They've been Wrayasized, gone native. Christopher Wray did this, turned into a company man after being appointed. There is great peer pressure to be "one of the guys" and it's easier to protect them than to prosecute their own.
2. They fear damaging the reputation of the agency.
3. They are trying to dig all the way to the roots and hope not to frighten off anyone, not to tip their hand.
We all know Patel and Bongino's bonafides; that is not in question. But We've seen good men turn bad once in positions like this in the past. Just look at Jeff sessions after he became Attorney General.
I don't believe it. I also don't believe it when the administration said Biden was telling the truth about the drones flying all over the place; those were NOT hobbyist drones. Too many eye-witnesses, even people who know such things, disagreed.
I don't like secrets, especially from an Administration that promised transparency. This is just another secret.
If it was not, why aren't heads rolling in the Secret Service and FBI for the gross incompetence of that day? It's one thing to say "there was no conspiracy" but it's another to let dereliction of duty go unpunished. We need an accounting of exactly who was involved and how they screwed it up. Why aren't the heads of the FBI providing that.
If you believe they have told us the truth I have a very lovely bridge that spans the river from Manhattan to Brooklyn...
I've argued this is exactly what a hit by the CIA would look like. Because of it's high profile they would HAVE to make it look like an amateur production. So they find some idiot do to the job for them. It's even in their manual, if you care to look it up (I once posted it; it says plainly that assassinations should generally be carried out in a manner that avoids direct involvement by the Company when possible.) What the CIA would do (or another agency) is facilitate - clear the path for the assassin. Somebody sure did seem to clear a path for this pinhead.
Remember too Patel and Bongino have hostages to fate - wives, parents, children, sisters and brothers, nieces and nephews. Be a shame if anything happened to them.
Who can stand up to pressure like that? I couldn't. I'd probably let it go too to save the lives of my loved ones. This is how the mafia works and how the CIA works overseas.
I imagine we'll never know the Truth. But of course if they are allowed to get away with this they will do it again. You can't come to an arrangement with people like that.
Our government is like the Mafia only it's making laws to make what they do all legal and cover what they do that isn't. Don Corleone could only dream of such power.
Revolver has a story this morning discussion the assassination attempt on Trump in Butler P.A. and how Patel and Bongino seem to be covering it up.
As the author asks, if there is "nothing there" as the FBI is asserting why are there two cases in Federal court. while the details of those cases aren't given it seems likely they are about security breeches and who was involved.
Let us not forget; Crooks was walking around earlier with his rifle over his shoulder and in fact was photographed by law enforcement. The building he shot from was just outside of the perimeter the fBI drew, and well within rifle range. There were law-enforcement in that building (a building owned by a corporation wit deep ties to the Democratic Party) but not one single person on the roof, the logical spot to shoot from. Crooks had to be the absolutely luckiest human being alive to make it that far.
Then there is the matter of how it was handled. A policeman came on the roof, saw Crooks with a gun, and promptly left instead of doing his job. Then the Secret Service shot and killed Crooks. Within days the Secret Service had completely scrubbed the crime scene, and in fact they ordered the body of Crooks to be cremated before the medical examiner had given it a proper examination.
Then the FBI hemmed and hawed and the head was forced to resign, but apparently nobody else was sacked - not in the Secret Service,not anywhere. The story was quickly brushed under the rug.
And now Paatel and Bongino are saying "nothing to see here" and closing the case.
If there is nothing to see here why don't they release all the records? I'm sorry but they are lying to us.
So why would they lie? I see several possible reasons:
1. They've been Wrayasized, gone native. Christopher Wray did this, turned into a company man after being appointed. There is great peer pressure to be "one of the guys" and it's easier to protect them than to prosecute their own.
2. They fear damaging the reputation of the agency.
3. They are trying to dig all the way to the roots and hope not to frighten off anyone, not to tip their hand.
We all know Patel and Bongino's bonafides; that is not in question. But We've seen good men turn bad once in positions like this in the past. Just look at Jeff sessions after he became Attorney General.
I don't believe it. I also don't believe it when the administration said Biden was telling the truth about the drones flying all over the place; those were NOT hobbyist drones. Too many eye-witnesses, even people who know such things, disagreed.
I don't like secrets, especially from an Administration that promised transparency. This is just another secret.
If it was not, why aren't heads rolling in the Secret Service and FBI for the gross incompetence of that day? It's one thing to say "there was no conspiracy" but it's another to let dereliction of duty go unpunished. We need an accounting of exactly who was involved and how they screwed it up. Why aren't the heads of the FBI providing that.
If you believe they have told us the truth I have a very lovely bridge that spans the river from Manhattan to Brooklyn...
I've argued this is exactly what a hit by the CIA would look like. Because of it's high profile they would HAVE to make it look like an amateur production. So they find some idiot do to the job for them. It's even in their manual, if you care to look it up (I once posted it; it says plainly that assassinations should generally be carried out in a manner that avoids direct involvement by the Company when possible.) What the CIA would do (or another agency) is facilitate - clear the path for the assassin. Somebody sure did seem to clear a path for this pinhead.
Remember too Patel and Bongino have hostages to fate - wives, parents, children, sisters and brothers, nieces and nephews. Be a shame if anything happened to them.
Who can stand up to pressure like that? I couldn't. I'd probably let it go too to save the lives of my loved ones. This is how the mafia works and how the CIA works overseas.
I imagine we'll never know the Truth. But of course if they are allowed to get away with this they will do it again. You can't come to an arrangement with people like that.
Our government is like the Mafia only it's making laws to make what they do all legal and cover what they do that isn't. Don Corleone could only dream of such power.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 804 words, total size 5 kb.
Patel and Bongino are Lying
Timothy Birdnow
Revolver has a story this morning discussion the assassination attempt on Trump in Butler P.A. and how Patel and Bongino seem to be covering it up.
As the author asks, if there is "nothing there" as the FBI is asserting why are there two cases in Federal court. while the details of those cases aren't given it seems likely they are about security breeches and who was involved.
Let us not forget; Crooks was walking around earlier with his rifle over his shoulder and in fact was photographed by law enforcement. The building he shot from was just outside of the perimeter the fBI drew, and well within rifle range. There were law-enforcement in that building (a building owned by a corporation wit deep ties to the Democratic Party) but not one single person on the roof, the logical spot to shoot from. Crooks had to be the absolutely luckiest human being alive to make it that far.
Then there is the matter of how it was handled. A policeman came on the roof, saw Crooks with a gun, and promptly left instead of doing his job. Then the Secret Service shot and killed Crooks. Within days the Secret Service had completely scrubbed the crime scene, and in fact they ordered the body of Crooks to be cremated before the medical examiner had given it a proper examination.
Then the FBI hemmed and hawed and the head was forced to resign, but apparently nobody else was sacked - not in the Secret Service,not anywhere. The story was quickly brushed under the rug.
And now Paatel and Bongino are saying "nothing to see here" and closing the case.
If there is nothing to see here why don't they release all the records? I'm sorry but they are lying to us.
So why would they lie? I see several possible reasons:
1. They've been Wrayasized, gone native. Christopher Wray did this, turned into a company man after being appointed. There is great peer pressure to be "one of the guys" and it's easier to protect them than to prosecute their own.
2. They fear damaging the reputation of the agency.
3. They are trying to dig all the way to the roots and hope not to frighten off anyone, not to tip their hand.
We all know Patel and Bongino's bonafides; that is not in question. But We've seen good men turn bad once in positions like this in the past. Just look at Jeff sessions after he became Attorney General.
I don't believe it. I also don't believe it when the administration said Biden was telling the truth about the drones flying all over the place; those were NOT hobbyist drones. Too many eye-witnesses, even people who know such things, disagreed.
I don't like secrets, especially from an Administration that promised transparency. This is just another secret.
If it was not, why aren't heads rolling in the Secret Service and FBI for the gross incompetence of that day? It's one thing to say "there was no conspiracy" but it's another to let dereliction of duty go unpunished. We need an accounting of exactly who was involved and how they screwed it up. Why aren't the heads of the FBI providing that.
If you believe they have told us the truth I have a very lovely bridge that spans the river from Manhattan to Brooklyn...
Revolver has a story this morning discussion the assassination attempt on Trump in Butler P.A. and how Patel and Bongino seem to be covering it up.
As the author asks, if there is "nothing there" as the FBI is asserting why are there two cases in Federal court. while the details of those cases aren't given it seems likely they are about security breeches and who was involved.
Let us not forget; Crooks was walking around earlier with his rifle over his shoulder and in fact was photographed by law enforcement. The building he shot from was just outside of the perimeter the fBI drew, and well within rifle range. There were law-enforcement in that building (a building owned by a corporation wit deep ties to the Democratic Party) but not one single person on the roof, the logical spot to shoot from. Crooks had to be the absolutely luckiest human being alive to make it that far.
Then there is the matter of how it was handled. A policeman came on the roof, saw Crooks with a gun, and promptly left instead of doing his job. Then the Secret Service shot and killed Crooks. Within days the Secret Service had completely scrubbed the crime scene, and in fact they ordered the body of Crooks to be cremated before the medical examiner had given it a proper examination.
Then the FBI hemmed and hawed and the head was forced to resign, but apparently nobody else was sacked - not in the Secret Service,not anywhere. The story was quickly brushed under the rug.
And now Paatel and Bongino are saying "nothing to see here" and closing the case.
If there is nothing to see here why don't they release all the records? I'm sorry but they are lying to us.
So why would they lie? I see several possible reasons:
1. They've been Wrayasized, gone native. Christopher Wray did this, turned into a company man after being appointed. There is great peer pressure to be "one of the guys" and it's easier to protect them than to prosecute their own.
2. They fear damaging the reputation of the agency.
3. They are trying to dig all the way to the roots and hope not to frighten off anyone, not to tip their hand.
We all know Patel and Bongino's bonafides; that is not in question. But We've seen good men turn bad once in positions like this in the past. Just look at Jeff sessions after he became Attorney General.
I don't believe it. I also don't believe it when the administration said Biden was telling the truth about the drones flying all over the place; those were NOT hobbyist drones. Too many eye-witnesses, even people who know such things, disagreed.
I don't like secrets, especially from an Administration that promised transparency. This is just another secret.
If it was not, why aren't heads rolling in the Secret Service and FBI for the gross incompetence of that day? It's one thing to say "there was no conspiracy" but it's another to let dereliction of duty go unpunished. We need an accounting of exactly who was involved and how they screwed it up. Why aren't the heads of the FBI providing that.
If you believe they have told us the truth I have a very lovely bridge that spans the river from Manhattan to Brooklyn...
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:03 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 570 words, total size 3 kb.
May 27, 2025
Charles Meddling
Timothy Birdnow
Chuckie Cheese, the ridiculous British monarch and former husband to Lady Diana Spencer, has gone to Canada to lead the glorious resistance to Donald Trump in the 51st state.
FTA:
So Charlie Bucket hopes to galvanize the Canucks into resisting Trump so his benighted little rock in the Atlantic can continue to suckle at the prominent bosom of Auntie Samantha.
As Sundance argues, this is ultimately all about the money and the GOP will resist Trump as ferociously as the Democrats or the Canadians. It certainly is a losing battle for the Canadians, and the Brits too. But they have to do their part to restore the old order where the American citizens get soaked.
King Charles is a buffoon, but a dangerous buffoon.
Chuckie Cheese, the ridiculous British monarch and former husband to Lady Diana Spencer, has gone to Canada to lead the glorious resistance to Donald Trump in the 51st state.
FTA:
In advance of the U.K positioning itself as the skirt behind which Canada can hide from the horrible Trump, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer extended an invitation for President Trump to attend a state visit in his honor later this year. The effusive praise from Starmer during the White House meeting was keenly strategic, so too was their urgency in creating the first new-era free trade agreement with the USA.
Perhaps President Trump’s embrace of Qatar, the UAE and Saudi Arabia should be viewed through this financial prism where the EU, U.K and Canada will ultimately go to war (together) against the efforts of President Trump. Within the partnership of the UK, EU and Canada, the Snow Mexicans are the weakest link, the most vulnerable to collapse from Trump’s economic policy.
Canada no longer has any substantive ability to create heavy machinery industrial goods. Most of the Canadian manufacturing equipment is imported from China and the EU.
Perhaps President Trump’s embrace of Qatar, the UAE and Saudi Arabia should be viewed through this financial prism where the EU, U.K and Canada will ultimately go to war (together) against the efforts of President Trump. Within the partnership of the UK, EU and Canada, the Snow Mexicans are the weakest link, the most vulnerable to collapse from Trump’s economic policy.
Canada no longer has any substantive ability to create heavy machinery industrial goods. Most of the Canadian manufacturing equipment is imported from China and the EU.
So Charlie Bucket hopes to galvanize the Canucks into resisting Trump so his benighted little rock in the Atlantic can continue to suckle at the prominent bosom of Auntie Samantha.
As Sundance argues, this is ultimately all about the money and the GOP will resist Trump as ferociously as the Democrats or the Canadians. It certainly is a losing battle for the Canadians, and the Brits too. But they have to do their part to restore the old order where the American citizens get soaked.
King Charles is a buffoon, but a dangerous buffoon.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:56 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 285 words, total size 2 kb.
From Russia with Love
Timothy Birdnow
The Euroweenies and leftist German Rotenfuehrer er, Chanceller Froederich (that's Frederich) Mertz have given Ukraine permission to lob long range missiles into Russia in what can only be described as an act of provocation and an escalation of the war.
Yes, Putin has not respected the cease fires, but this pretty much gums up all the efforts by Trump to settle this thing as amicably as is possible. Every effort at attaining a peaceful resolution of the war has been stymied by the Europeans, who want this war for reasons that are unclear. I suspect they want to force Russia into their orb as a vassal, but that doesn't explain their obstinacy in the face of so much death and destruction.
The article states:
Got that? The CIA is STILL the driving force behind this! Where the hell is John Ratcliffe? He was appointted to reform the agency, not continue it's manipulation of foreign policy.
And if this IS policy coming from Trump? The media lie about Trump being bought and paid for by the Russians certainly falls apart here.
I doubt it's from Trump though; he's been the guy who has been trying to make peace in the region. Remember, his word is on the line; he said the war would end on day one of his Administration and it's dragged on for months now.
The article continues:
So this remains a proxy war being run by the CIA and the Europeans. This is not freedom fighters trying to save their country from alien invaders. The Russians know this as well as the Ukrainians; if they pull out of Ukraine they hand over all of Eastern Europe to a cabal of the CIA and they know it.
I suspect Trump is trusting Rubio and Gabbard and Ratface, er, cliff. That will be his undoing. You would think he would have learned not to trust anyone who has been embedded in D.C. all these years.
At any rate this is a very, very dangerous war and escalation could lead to disaster for everyone. Putin is taking the blame for violating any truce, but one wonders if in his mind at least he's not justified. This war was never between Russia and Ukraine.
The Euroweenies and leftist German Rotenfuehrer er, Chanceller Froederich (that's Frederich) Mertz have given Ukraine permission to lob long range missiles into Russia in what can only be described as an act of provocation and an escalation of the war.
Yes, Putin has not respected the cease fires, but this pretty much gums up all the efforts by Trump to settle this thing as amicably as is possible. Every effort at attaining a peaceful resolution of the war has been stymied by the Europeans, who want this war for reasons that are unclear. I suspect they want to force Russia into their orb as a vassal, but that doesn't explain their obstinacy in the face of so much death and destruction.
The article states:
"Factually, as previously admitted and outlined by reporting from the New York Times, it is U.S. military and intelligence assets in the region who are leading the attacks from bases in Germany and the front lines within Ukraine.
The New York Times published two articles {HERE and HERE} revealing: 1) that U.S. military boots are on the ground in Ukraine. (2) The U.S. military is actively involved in the ongoing targeting of strikes into Russia. (3) The CIA is operating in Ukraine and conducting targeted strikes into the Russian Federation mainland.
The New York Times published two articles {HERE and HERE} revealing: 1) that U.S. military boots are on the ground in Ukraine. (2) The U.S. military is actively involved in the ongoing targeting of strikes into Russia. (3) The CIA is operating in Ukraine and conducting targeted strikes into the Russian Federation mainland.
Got that? The CIA is STILL the driving force behind this! Where the hell is John Ratcliffe? He was appointted to reform the agency, not continue it's manipulation of foreign policy.
And if this IS policy coming from Trump? The media lie about Trump being bought and paid for by the Russians certainly falls apart here.
I doubt it's from Trump though; he's been the guy who has been trying to make peace in the region. Remember, his word is on the line; he said the war would end on day one of his Administration and it's dragged on for months now.
The article continues:
"As we have outlined for several years, including our own research by driving through Ukraine, the CIA has been operating on the ground in Ukraine from the outset of the conflict. Over time the CIA took over most of the strategic operations, and as it currently stands the United States CIA is organizing the majority of the Ukraine war against Russia.
So this remains a proxy war being run by the CIA and the Europeans. This is not freedom fighters trying to save their country from alien invaders. The Russians know this as well as the Ukrainians; if they pull out of Ukraine they hand over all of Eastern Europe to a cabal of the CIA and they know it.
"The operatives who leak to the NYT want distance between Trump and Putin. This admission of CIA involvement puts Trump in an awkward place.
The awkwardness expands, when you understand how the CIA is authorized to conduct these operations. The President, Biden, signed a "finding memo,” authorizing the CIA to conduct missile strikes into the Russian Federation.
Senator Marco Rubio as SSCI vice-chair and a Gang of Eight member, was ‘read in’ to that CIA authorization.
Senator Rubio is now Secretary of State facing Sergey Lavrov, and the Russians know exactly how these things are done.
The awkwardness expands, when you understand how the CIA is authorized to conduct these operations. The President, Biden, signed a "finding memo,” authorizing the CIA to conduct missile strikes into the Russian Federation.
Senator Marco Rubio as SSCI vice-chair and a Gang of Eight member, was ‘read in’ to that CIA authorization.
Senator Rubio is now Secretary of State facing Sergey Lavrov, and the Russians know exactly how these things are done.
I suspect Trump is trusting Rubio and Gabbard and Ratface, er, cliff. That will be his undoing. You would think he would have learned not to trust anyone who has been embedded in D.C. all these years.
At any rate this is a very, very dangerous war and escalation could lead to disaster for everyone. Putin is taking the blame for violating any truce, but one wonders if in his mind at least he's not justified. This war was never between Russia and Ukraine.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:44 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 626 words, total size 4 kb.
The Weeping Man
Timothy Birdnow
The increased feminization of men.
This is a very womanly type of thing, calling friends to wish them a good night. Men don't do this sort of thing.
That's why the Left wants them doing it; it's just another thread pulled out of masculinity. I suppose next they'll have us all saying "I love you" to drinking buddies, and not when they are at the bar.
The article speaks of emotional connections. THAT is our problem in modern America; we have too many emotional connections. People don't have any real problems these days; they chase after their emotions. Americans have become narcissistic and weepy and pathetic. The male virtues, which we need now more than ever, have been eclipsed by the therapeutic cultture which values weakness and emotionalism.
Frankly, if a friend of mine called to wish me a good night I'd ask him what closet he came out of. But if he called to call me an SOB I'd be content.
No wonder the American testosterone levels are dropping precipitously; we are all acting like teenage girls now.
The increased feminization of men.
This is a very womanly type of thing, calling friends to wish them a good night. Men don't do this sort of thing.
That's why the Left wants them doing it; it's just another thread pulled out of masculinity. I suppose next they'll have us all saying "I love you" to drinking buddies, and not when they are at the bar.
The article speaks of emotional connections. THAT is our problem in modern America; we have too many emotional connections. People don't have any real problems these days; they chase after their emotions. Americans have become narcissistic and weepy and pathetic. The male virtues, which we need now more than ever, have been eclipsed by the therapeutic cultture which values weakness and emotionalism.
Frankly, if a friend of mine called to wish me a good night I'd ask him what closet he came out of. But if he called to call me an SOB I'd be content.
No wonder the American testosterone levels are dropping precipitously; we are all acting like teenage girls now.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:09 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.
Elephants All the Way
Timothy Birdnow
Increasingly animal rights is becoming a legal matter.
How?
Recently the Colorado Supreme Court had to rule elephants are not people. My question is, how was this case ever in court? Elephants cannot file the peitition themselves, and nobody else had standing.
This is PRECISELY what standing is intended for; to keep third parties from intervening in legal matters that do not concern them.
FTA:
And this while every attempt to deny personhood has been made in the case of fetuses. The hypocrisy and inconsistency off the Left is breathtaking.
And yet a fetus is a human being. It will turn into that remarkable entity if given time and the right environment and proper care. An elephant or a gorilla will never be anything but an elephant or gorilla. (BTW Gorillas are the smartes of animal, smarter than elephants, and yet they eat their own waste and wander around naked, humping a female whenever it suits their fancy. I would speak to Orcas but they are pretty much the same.)
What makes someone human? DNA first off. (It's amazing how the Left hates that inconvenient little molecule.) There are many other aspects of humanity though; our intellect, even of the stupidest of us, is WAY above the smartest animal. It's high enough to where we have free will, and can and must make all sorts of choices. (It's not so high we lose free will beause we always know the right answer.) Animals don't do that; they live by their instincts. Intelligence may help them solve basic problems but that's the extent of it. Animals do not progress. There is no culture of animals that changes and grows. There is no improvement of animal technology.The life of an elephant is pretty much the same as the life of it's parents and this goes back all the way. Only environmental changes matter to the beasts. They do not have cultural or political or technological changes because they do not think, not the way humans do. It seems doubtful there is any introspection among them. They lack hopes and dreams - they just are. Their existence is entirely bound by their circumstances and the NOW. They do not live in past, present, and future as do humans.
They may have some sort of love but you won't find it being as complex a thing as human love. The Greeks had 7 different words for love and all of them meant something different. I rather doubt elephants have agape love, or any of the more distinct forms. Yes, they have eros, and probably Philia, but it's doubtful they had any of the rest.
And while they can communicate with one another in some fashion they lack formal language and thus cannot communicate complex ideas as do we. Humans have a specific speech centers in the brain known as the Wernicke's and Broca's areas, among a few others. No animal has that. Animals CAN communicate and Gorillas have been taught to use basic sign language, but it's always pretty simple stuff. Research on Chipmonks showed they have a kind of language and can communicate things like color. But they can't possibly communicate things like Relativity theory or Shakespearean sonnets.
Animals do not create or enjoy music.
Animals do not laugh. Whether they have a sense of humor or not is questionable too. I believe my cats did,but I can't prove it. At any rate there are no Jewish comedians in the animal kingdom.
Animals do not write. Animals do not make fire. Animals do not worship. I don't know if animals have a sense of the existence of God or not, but they clearly don't do anything about it. Only Man seems to be cognizant of God and practices religion.
Some animals do have crude funeral rituals, but they don't seem to be much. Elephants do have graveyards, but they don't bury their dead; they are content to just let the flesh of their fathers and mothers and children rot in a big pile of bones.
I could go on but the point is made; there is a distinct differnce between "personhood" which is a way to get around the non-human nature of critters, and being human. (Personhood,by the way, has long been the philosophical argument used by leftists to justify abortion and euthenasia both. They claim sound minds are necessary for "personhood" which frees them from the moral obligations of human beings - thus putting them into the class of animals, which also do not seem to be too constrained by any moral code.)
And there is absolutely no reson for any court of law to hear such cases. Until an elephant can actually sign it'sname to a legal complaint the point is moot.
Of course the elephant can't take the witness stand and raise it's right hand when so instructed either.
This is all part of the desacrilizing of Mankind. We used to rightly understand we were not animals except in the basics of our flesh. But there are those who rejected Christianity, indeed, all religions and thus they must drag us down to the mud. The only way we can operate a society run by "the best and brightest" without restraint is to make Man no differnt than the animals. Man is not a glorious spirit, a little less than the angels, inside a physical body but rather the body and the corporeal universe is all there is and they intend to prove this by giving "personhood" to animals. If their view becomes the majority view then they can do anything to anybody at any time. The only restrictions are those a majority of people agree with, or which the oligarchical rulers of society allow. If you are a guy who wants to be a girl so be it! Natural law and the sacredness of humanity doesn't enter into the decision, nor does accepting any role put forward by nature. We can kill human beings if we deem them non persons (remember the Holocaust) which makes ruling the public a lot easier. In fact you can be a god unto yourself if you follow this route; just will it so! But to get to that point one first must reject anything beyond this immediate existence. Raising up animals to equality with Man is simply another tool of the Devil.
Well, if we are to give elephants rights then I insist they take the same responsibilities as we all must bear. They should pay taxes. They should be forced to go to jury duty. They should have to register for the draft (I suppose Hannibal drafted elephants in his army, but I rather doubt the animals registerd for it first.) They should have to wear clothing, defecate in private, and obey all pedestrin traffic laws.
Somehow I suspect they won't be able to do that.
The reality is our society has become batcrap crazy and the very fact we are pushing animal rights is proof of that. Animals do not have rights. Humans have responsibilities for treating animals ethically. There is a huge difference.
Increasingly animal rights is becoming a legal matter.
How?
Recently the Colorado Supreme Court had to rule elephants are not people. My question is, how was this case ever in court? Elephants cannot file the peitition themselves, and nobody else had standing.
This is PRECISELY what standing is intended for; to keep third parties from intervening in legal matters that do not concern them.
FTA:
The Colorado Supreme Court did not hear from the elephants directly. They heard from the Nonhuman Rights Project, which filed a habeas corpus petition on behalf of the pachyderms, arguing that their confinement in a Colorado Springs zoo violated their right to bodily liberty.
Over the past decade, the Nonhuman Rights Project and several other animal rights groups have waged a novel campaign to extend legal "personhood" to animals, which would allow them to be plaintiffs in civil lawsuits. Many of these cases have attempted to free large, charismatic animals such as elephants and chimpanzees from zoos under the great writ of habeas corpus, which allows individuals to challenge unlawful imprisonment.
Other courts around the world have recognized fundamental rights for animals. In Pakistan, the Islamabad High Court declared in 2020, in the case of a shackled and mistreated elephant, that it "is a right of each animal, a living being, to live in an environment that meets the latter's behavioral, social and physiological needs." In 2022, Ecuador's Constitutional Court ruled that animals were subject to "rights of nature" enshrined in the country's constitution. And last year, indigenous leaders of New Zealand, Tahiti, and the Cook Islands signed a treaty recognizing whales as legal persons.
Critics scoff that this amounts to little more than absurdist lawfare and that legal recognition of animal personhood would almost certainly empower busybody environmentalists—and might not even improve conditions for the animals. There are also public pressure campaigns and existing legal avenues that could improve animal welfare without attempting to shift one of the bedrock principles of Western law.
But the question at the heart of these cases—whether a nonhuman entity can have a cognizable liberty interest—has surprisingly deep implications, not just for animals but for human freedom and flourishing. Research into artificial intelligence (AI) may eventually run into similar ethical considerations.
Over the past decade, the Nonhuman Rights Project and several other animal rights groups have waged a novel campaign to extend legal "personhood" to animals, which would allow them to be plaintiffs in civil lawsuits. Many of these cases have attempted to free large, charismatic animals such as elephants and chimpanzees from zoos under the great writ of habeas corpus, which allows individuals to challenge unlawful imprisonment.
Other courts around the world have recognized fundamental rights for animals. In Pakistan, the Islamabad High Court declared in 2020, in the case of a shackled and mistreated elephant, that it "is a right of each animal, a living being, to live in an environment that meets the latter's behavioral, social and physiological needs." In 2022, Ecuador's Constitutional Court ruled that animals were subject to "rights of nature" enshrined in the country's constitution. And last year, indigenous leaders of New Zealand, Tahiti, and the Cook Islands signed a treaty recognizing whales as legal persons.
Critics scoff that this amounts to little more than absurdist lawfare and that legal recognition of animal personhood would almost certainly empower busybody environmentalists—and might not even improve conditions for the animals. There are also public pressure campaigns and existing legal avenues that could improve animal welfare without attempting to shift one of the bedrock principles of Western law.
But the question at the heart of these cases—whether a nonhuman entity can have a cognizable liberty interest—has surprisingly deep implications, not just for animals but for human freedom and flourishing. Research into artificial intelligence (AI) may eventually run into similar ethical considerations.
And this while every attempt to deny personhood has been made in the case of fetuses. The hypocrisy and inconsistency off the Left is breathtaking.
And yet a fetus is a human being. It will turn into that remarkable entity if given time and the right environment and proper care. An elephant or a gorilla will never be anything but an elephant or gorilla. (BTW Gorillas are the smartes of animal, smarter than elephants, and yet they eat their own waste and wander around naked, humping a female whenever it suits their fancy. I would speak to Orcas but they are pretty much the same.)
What makes someone human? DNA first off. (It's amazing how the Left hates that inconvenient little molecule.) There are many other aspects of humanity though; our intellect, even of the stupidest of us, is WAY above the smartest animal. It's high enough to where we have free will, and can and must make all sorts of choices. (It's not so high we lose free will beause we always know the right answer.) Animals don't do that; they live by their instincts. Intelligence may help them solve basic problems but that's the extent of it. Animals do not progress. There is no culture of animals that changes and grows. There is no improvement of animal technology.The life of an elephant is pretty much the same as the life of it's parents and this goes back all the way. Only environmental changes matter to the beasts. They do not have cultural or political or technological changes because they do not think, not the way humans do. It seems doubtful there is any introspection among them. They lack hopes and dreams - they just are. Their existence is entirely bound by their circumstances and the NOW. They do not live in past, present, and future as do humans.
They may have some sort of love but you won't find it being as complex a thing as human love. The Greeks had 7 different words for love and all of them meant something different. I rather doubt elephants have agape love, or any of the more distinct forms. Yes, they have eros, and probably Philia, but it's doubtful they had any of the rest.
And while they can communicate with one another in some fashion they lack formal language and thus cannot communicate complex ideas as do we. Humans have a specific speech centers in the brain known as the Wernicke's and Broca's areas, among a few others. No animal has that. Animals CAN communicate and Gorillas have been taught to use basic sign language, but it's always pretty simple stuff. Research on Chipmonks showed they have a kind of language and can communicate things like color. But they can't possibly communicate things like Relativity theory or Shakespearean sonnets.
Animals do not create or enjoy music.
Animals do not laugh. Whether they have a sense of humor or not is questionable too. I believe my cats did,but I can't prove it. At any rate there are no Jewish comedians in the animal kingdom.
Animals do not write. Animals do not make fire. Animals do not worship. I don't know if animals have a sense of the existence of God or not, but they clearly don't do anything about it. Only Man seems to be cognizant of God and practices religion.
Some animals do have crude funeral rituals, but they don't seem to be much. Elephants do have graveyards, but they don't bury their dead; they are content to just let the flesh of their fathers and mothers and children rot in a big pile of bones.
I could go on but the point is made; there is a distinct differnce between "personhood" which is a way to get around the non-human nature of critters, and being human. (Personhood,by the way, has long been the philosophical argument used by leftists to justify abortion and euthenasia both. They claim sound minds are necessary for "personhood" which frees them from the moral obligations of human beings - thus putting them into the class of animals, which also do not seem to be too constrained by any moral code.)
And there is absolutely no reson for any court of law to hear such cases. Until an elephant can actually sign it'sname to a legal complaint the point is moot.
Of course the elephant can't take the witness stand and raise it's right hand when so instructed either.
This is all part of the desacrilizing of Mankind. We used to rightly understand we were not animals except in the basics of our flesh. But there are those who rejected Christianity, indeed, all religions and thus they must drag us down to the mud. The only way we can operate a society run by "the best and brightest" without restraint is to make Man no differnt than the animals. Man is not a glorious spirit, a little less than the angels, inside a physical body but rather the body and the corporeal universe is all there is and they intend to prove this by giving "personhood" to animals. If their view becomes the majority view then they can do anything to anybody at any time. The only restrictions are those a majority of people agree with, or which the oligarchical rulers of society allow. If you are a guy who wants to be a girl so be it! Natural law and the sacredness of humanity doesn't enter into the decision, nor does accepting any role put forward by nature. We can kill human beings if we deem them non persons (remember the Holocaust) which makes ruling the public a lot easier. In fact you can be a god unto yourself if you follow this route; just will it so! But to get to that point one first must reject anything beyond this immediate existence. Raising up animals to equality with Man is simply another tool of the Devil.
Well, if we are to give elephants rights then I insist they take the same responsibilities as we all must bear. They should pay taxes. They should be forced to go to jury duty. They should have to register for the draft (I suppose Hannibal drafted elephants in his army, but I rather doubt the animals registerd for it first.) They should have to wear clothing, defecate in private, and obey all pedestrin traffic laws.
Somehow I suspect they won't be able to do that.
The reality is our society has become batcrap crazy and the very fact we are pushing animal rights is proof of that. Animals do not have rights. Humans have responsibilities for treating animals ethically. There is a huge difference.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:58 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1495 words, total size 9 kb.
NPR Suing Trump
Timothy Birdnow
I thought the Federal Government cannot be sued unless it allows itself to be sued.
NPR Sues Trump Over Federal Funding
Sovereign Immunity grants blanket immunity from civil lawsuits.
And Article II of the Constitution grants abosolute immunity to the President from lawsuits while he is in office.
So by what right does NPR sue over ending funding? For that matter how have most of these lawsuits continued?
I'm no lawyer so maybe one can explain it to us? Anybody?
I suspect the judge they went to to file this with is the one who authorized the go-ahead. But by what authority does a minor judge allow this?
Our legal system is totally out-of-control.
I thought the Federal Government cannot be sued unless it allows itself to be sued.
NPR Sues Trump Over Federal Funding
Sovereign Immunity grants blanket immunity from civil lawsuits.
And Article II of the Constitution grants abosolute immunity to the President from lawsuits while he is in office.
So by what right does NPR sue over ending funding? For that matter how have most of these lawsuits continued?
I'm no lawyer so maybe one can explain it to us? Anybody?
I suspect the judge they went to to file this with is the one who authorized the go-ahead. But by what authority does a minor judge allow this?
Our legal system is totally out-of-control.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:16 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.
Reopening Cases
Timothy Birdnow
The FBI is reopening several politically charged cases that the Biden DOJ had closed. They include the January 6 pipe bomb incident, the 2022 Supreme Court draft opinion leak, and the 2023 cocaine discovery inside the White House.
We need more than jawboning and hearings. We need answers. We need prosecutions. We need prison sentences.
It's time for Bondi and Patel and Borngino to put up or shut up.
The FBI is reopening several politically charged cases that the Biden DOJ had closed. They include the January 6 pipe bomb incident, the 2022 Supreme Court draft opinion leak, and the 2023 cocaine discovery inside the White House.
We need more than jawboning and hearings. We need answers. We need prosecutions. We need prison sentences.
It's time for Bondi and Patel and Borngino to put up or shut up.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:47 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 73 words, total size 1 kb.
Machine Farming
Timothy Birdnow
So, how does America find farm labor without brining illegal aliens in to do "the work Americans just won't do"?
Here's how:
John Deere Addresses Farm Labor Shortages with Autonomous Tractors
Innovation has always been the key to American success and mechanized farming was a big part of it. Amerian farmers make up just 2% of the population, way, way down from a hundred years ago, yet these same individuals feeed not only America but the whole world. Why? Because they worked out new ways of doing things, utilizing machines to turn a long, slow, laborious process into a relatively light and speedy one. Tractos made ploughing easy. Machines plant the grain. Machines harvest the grain, by and large. Yes, there are some crops that still require hand cultivation and harvesting, but there are fewer and fewer of them, and the only reason machines weren't invented to handle them is because we began letting in so much cheap labor that there was no pressure to do so. But now, with the alien labor drying up, Americans are going to find new ways of doing things. It's how we traditionally succeeded.
Take wineries. There are grape harvesting machines, but most winemakers don't want to use them. Why? These machines harvest grapes by smacking the grapevines, knocking the fruit off the vine and then sucking them up. This bruises and damages the fruit and the resultant wine tastes like it too. You can make cheap jug wine with that but not quality wine. So winemakers have to rely on hand harvesting, and in California that means illegal laborers. (In other states too.) But there is no reason why, with modern technology, a true robot grape picker cannot be produced, one that doesn't beat the grapes to pulp first. We have technology that would allow such a machine to recognize grape bunches and then send up a small saw to cut the bunches loose and then just move the bunches into a bucket. Just like a laborer only they don't have to be fed or watered or given rest breaks or paid. Sure; the machines would probably cost a lot, especially at first, but they would pay for themselves several times over. Nobody has built one because the need just didn't seem there as long as Mexicans and Central Americans were coming to do the job.
You know, slavery in the antebellum South had been dying out until Eli Whitney invented the cotton Gin. Cotton was a semi-precious material because it was full of seeds that had to be laboriously removed by hand. Whitney found a way to make cotton affordable, but he didn't find a way to harvest it by machine. The end result was cotton plantations had a terrible labor shortage, and so owning slaves became lucrative. It was well-recognized back then that slave labor was inefficient and immoral, but anyone who paid laborers to pick cotton was going to go broke; he couldn't compete with FREE labor. Slavery hollowed out the entire Southern economy. It disincentivized innovation, and it sucked away all decent jobs that poor whites could have taken. That is why the South was almost feudal in nature; vast plantations controlled much of the wealth and political power. All of this was on the backs of the slave economy, and that economy was only profitable because nobody had every invented a cotton-picking machine.
This mechanized tractor by John Deere is just the next step in the American agricultural revolution. And it is a welcome development indeed. It means we can end the wage slavery and feudal orderthat was being established in America to "do the work Americans just won't do".
So, how does America find farm labor without brining illegal aliens in to do "the work Americans just won't do"?
Here's how:
John Deere Addresses Farm Labor Shortages with Autonomous Tractors
Innovation has always been the key to American success and mechanized farming was a big part of it. Amerian farmers make up just 2% of the population, way, way down from a hundred years ago, yet these same individuals feeed not only America but the whole world. Why? Because they worked out new ways of doing things, utilizing machines to turn a long, slow, laborious process into a relatively light and speedy one. Tractos made ploughing easy. Machines plant the grain. Machines harvest the grain, by and large. Yes, there are some crops that still require hand cultivation and harvesting, but there are fewer and fewer of them, and the only reason machines weren't invented to handle them is because we began letting in so much cheap labor that there was no pressure to do so. But now, with the alien labor drying up, Americans are going to find new ways of doing things. It's how we traditionally succeeded.
Take wineries. There are grape harvesting machines, but most winemakers don't want to use them. Why? These machines harvest grapes by smacking the grapevines, knocking the fruit off the vine and then sucking them up. This bruises and damages the fruit and the resultant wine tastes like it too. You can make cheap jug wine with that but not quality wine. So winemakers have to rely on hand harvesting, and in California that means illegal laborers. (In other states too.) But there is no reason why, with modern technology, a true robot grape picker cannot be produced, one that doesn't beat the grapes to pulp first. We have technology that would allow such a machine to recognize grape bunches and then send up a small saw to cut the bunches loose and then just move the bunches into a bucket. Just like a laborer only they don't have to be fed or watered or given rest breaks or paid. Sure; the machines would probably cost a lot, especially at first, but they would pay for themselves several times over. Nobody has built one because the need just didn't seem there as long as Mexicans and Central Americans were coming to do the job.
You know, slavery in the antebellum South had been dying out until Eli Whitney invented the cotton Gin. Cotton was a semi-precious material because it was full of seeds that had to be laboriously removed by hand. Whitney found a way to make cotton affordable, but he didn't find a way to harvest it by machine. The end result was cotton plantations had a terrible labor shortage, and so owning slaves became lucrative. It was well-recognized back then that slave labor was inefficient and immoral, but anyone who paid laborers to pick cotton was going to go broke; he couldn't compete with FREE labor. Slavery hollowed out the entire Southern economy. It disincentivized innovation, and it sucked away all decent jobs that poor whites could have taken. That is why the South was almost feudal in nature; vast plantations controlled much of the wealth and political power. All of this was on the backs of the slave economy, and that economy was only profitable because nobody had every invented a cotton-picking machine.
This mechanized tractor by John Deere is just the next step in the American agricultural revolution. And it is a welcome development indeed. It means we can end the wage slavery and feudal orderthat was being established in America to "do the work Americans just won't do".
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:44 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 616 words, total size 4 kb.
The Russians AREN'T Coming
Timothy Birdnow
Russia is building up her military forces in a move that is making Finland very nervous.
The Fins have confirmed a major expansion of Russian forces along their border with Finland, and the Fins - a NATO member - are taking appropriate action.
What does this tell us?
It tells us that 1.Russia is probably worried about NATO sending trooops into the region via Finland, an o bvious attack route. If not a direct invasion route it at least is a good covert operation base.
2. It suggest Russia may be getting serious about negotiating a settlement and may trying to put up a show of force to get the Euroweenies to back off during negotiations. It has been Europe that has thrown monkey wrenches into prior peace negotiations.
Does Russia plan to invade Finland? How. They couldn't even take out Ukraine. Finland is a much more modern society and has full NATO membership.
No, this is either an act to secure a vulnerable flank, or it's a negotiating tool, or it's both. But the Russians have to know they do not have the manpower to fight a two front war right now. And they know they can't tackle NATO. Putin may be crazy (as Trump recently stated) or more likely is tactical (just as Trump is happy to be thought crazy by his enemies) but even he can't argue with basic mathematics. The Russians cannot do this; it's mathematically impossinle.
According to Statista:
NATO has 3.3 million.Also, it has been expressed by many NATO members that the organization should send troops into the war. Is it any wonder the Russians are securing their northern flank?
Russia has been begging allies for trooops for some time now to aid them in their fight with Ukraine, and North Korea in particular has sent troops in to fight for Mother Russia. Russia has over half a million troops tied up directly in the war at present.
So how could Russia possibly invade Finland? They cannot spare the resources and manpower.
Not that the Fins aren't correct in worrying about it or in preparing for it. You prepare for war so you don't have to fight. But I see no way the Russians would dare make such a move given their war machine is pretty well exhausted and they STILL haven't crushed Ukraine. THAT is their primary objective, or at least winning the peace.
Russia is building up her military forces in a move that is making Finland very nervous.
The Fins have confirmed a major expansion of Russian forces along their border with Finland, and the Fins - a NATO member - are taking appropriate action.
What does this tell us?
It tells us that 1.Russia is probably worried about NATO sending trooops into the region via Finland, an o bvious attack route. If not a direct invasion route it at least is a good covert operation base.
2. It suggest Russia may be getting serious about negotiating a settlement and may trying to put up a show of force to get the Euroweenies to back off during negotiations. It has been Europe that has thrown monkey wrenches into prior peace negotiations.
Does Russia plan to invade Finland? How. They couldn't even take out Ukraine. Finland is a much more modern society and has full NATO membership.
No, this is either an act to secure a vulnerable flank, or it's a negotiating tool, or it's both. But the Russians have to know they do not have the manpower to fight a two front war right now. And they know they can't tackle NATO. Putin may be crazy (as Trump recently stated) or more likely is tactical (just as Trump is happy to be thought crazy by his enemies) but even he can't argue with basic mathematics. The Russians cannot do this; it's mathematically impossinle.
According to Statista:
The Russian Armed Forces had 3.57 million troops as of 2025, with 37 percent of them, or 1.32 million, being active military personnel. Two million were reserve service members, and 250,000 were paramilitary forces.
NATO has 3.3 million.Also, it has been expressed by many NATO members that the organization should send troops into the war. Is it any wonder the Russians are securing their northern flank?
Russia has been begging allies for trooops for some time now to aid them in their fight with Ukraine, and North Korea in particular has sent troops in to fight for Mother Russia. Russia has over half a million troops tied up directly in the war at present.
So how could Russia possibly invade Finland? They cannot spare the resources and manpower.
Not that the Fins aren't correct in worrying about it or in preparing for it. You prepare for war so you don't have to fight. But I see no way the Russians would dare make such a move given their war machine is pretty well exhausted and they STILL haven't crushed Ukraine. THAT is their primary objective, or at least winning the peace.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:18 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 441 words, total size 3 kb.
The Limp Wrists of Hollywood
Timothy Birdnow
"So Johnnie, do you like movies about gladiators?"
Gladiator2 Actor Cheers Hollywoods War on Alpha Males and Traditional Masculinity
You know, Hollywood has always been full of effeminate men and radical homosexuals. They all want a limp-wristed America. But so too do our enemies. It would behoove China, say, to promote the feminization of American men. China puts a lot of cash into American films.
BTW the quote at the start is from the movie Airplane where Peter Graves, the plane's pilot, is speaking to the young boy who came to visit the cockpit. He also asks him "have you ever seen a grown man naked" and "have you ever been in a Turkish prison". Back in 1980 we could still joke about such things.
"So Johnnie, do you like movies about gladiators?"
Gladiator2 Actor Cheers Hollywoods War on Alpha Males and Traditional Masculinity
You know, Hollywood has always been full of effeminate men and radical homosexuals. They all want a limp-wristed America. But so too do our enemies. It would behoove China, say, to promote the feminization of American men. China puts a lot of cash into American films.
BTW the quote at the start is from the movie Airplane where Peter Graves, the plane's pilot, is speaking to the young boy who came to visit the cockpit. He also asks him "have you ever seen a grown man naked" and "have you ever been in a Turkish prison". Back in 1980 we could still joke about such things.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:57 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 132 words, total size 1 kb.
Calling Us Terrorists
Timothy Birdnow
The Biden Administration labeled anyone who opposed Covid vaccine mandates as potentially violent extremists granting DHS, the FBI, and the Counterterroism Center the authority to treat everyday Americans as possible domestic terrorists and to spy on them and run other investigations of them.
FTA:
This is more like the Stasi or KGB or Gestapo than American law enfforcement agencies.
See, we have this niggling little thing called the Constitution. I know it's passe' but it's still there. And in that document we have a few guaranteed rights, like the right to freedom of speech, freedom of "the press" meaning what we write, and the right to be secure in our houses, persons, papers and effects. We cannot be spied upon without a warrant.
All of these guaranteed rights were broken here.
And for what? To promote an untested, unproven drug that may or may not have worked (it didn't) and may or may not have been dangerous (it was).
Interesting; I do not see forced vaccinations as one of the enumerated powers of the United States government, nor the authority to suppress dissent from a health or scientific viewpoint.
Heads not only need to roll, but need to roll into the bottom of a pit outhouse.
The Biden Administration was tyrannical, there is no other word for it. Had America elected Harris how far down the road of authoritarianism would we have gone? We would have the Chicoms trying to catch up with US.
The Biden Administration labeled anyone who opposed Covid vaccine mandates as potentially violent extremists granting DHS, the FBI, and the Counterterroism Center the authority to treat everyday Americans as possible domestic terrorists and to spy on them and run other investigations of them.
FTA:
Newly declassified documents released Friday by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard show that federal agencies under the Biden-Harris administration labeled Americans who opposed COVID-19 mandates as potential "Domestic Violent Extremists” (DVEs), sparking new scrutiny over the government’s response to political dissent during the pandemic.
The documents, first obtained by Public and Catherine Herridge Reports, reveal that the FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) jointly produced an intelligence assessment on December 13, 2021, titled "DVEs and Foreign Analogues May React Violently to COVID-19 Mitigation Mandates.”
The reports declassified by @DNIGabbard suggest the Biden administration’s political goals, such as full compliance with the COVID vaccine mandates, drove intelligence collection requirements so that raw data would reinforce, not undercut the policy.
This approach… https://t.co/eWgiEo7mtu
— Catherine Herridge (@C__Herridge) May 23, 2025
Former FBI agent Steve Friend told Public that the DVE label gave federal authorities an "articulable purpose” to initiate assessments on individuals—a preliminary step in launching investigations.
The documents, first obtained by Public and Catherine Herridge Reports, reveal that the FBI, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) jointly produced an intelligence assessment on December 13, 2021, titled "DVEs and Foreign Analogues May React Violently to COVID-19 Mitigation Mandates.”
The reports declassified by @DNIGabbard suggest the Biden administration’s political goals, such as full compliance with the COVID vaccine mandates, drove intelligence collection requirements so that raw data would reinforce, not undercut the policy.
This approach… https://t.co/eWgiEo7mtu
— Catherine Herridge (@C__Herridge) May 23, 2025
Former FBI agent Steve Friend told Public that the DVE label gave federal authorities an "articulable purpose” to initiate assessments on individuals—a preliminary step in launching investigations.
This is more like the Stasi or KGB or Gestapo than American law enfforcement agencies.
See, we have this niggling little thing called the Constitution. I know it's passe' but it's still there. And in that document we have a few guaranteed rights, like the right to freedom of speech, freedom of "the press" meaning what we write, and the right to be secure in our houses, persons, papers and effects. We cannot be spied upon without a warrant.
All of these guaranteed rights were broken here.
And for what? To promote an untested, unproven drug that may or may not have worked (it didn't) and may or may not have been dangerous (it was).
Interesting; I do not see forced vaccinations as one of the enumerated powers of the United States government, nor the authority to suppress dissent from a health or scientific viewpoint.
Heads not only need to roll, but need to roll into the bottom of a pit outhouse.
The Biden Administration was tyrannical, there is no other word for it. Had America elected Harris how far down the road of authoritarianism would we have gone? We would have the Chicoms trying to catch up with US.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:41 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 411 words, total size 3 kb.
Make America Fed Again
Timothy Birdnow
Anyone who's old enough remembers the '80's ad campaign by Wendys with the old woman who is looking at her "hamburger" "where's the beef!"
So, where IS the beef?
New USDA Report Paints Troubling Picture for America’s Cattle Industry
This Zeero Hedge article leans extensively on a USDA report which is saying tariffs and other measures to bring back beef production to the U.S. is leading to shortages at the moment, shortages that will end as we rebuild our industry.
Of course, this fails to mention the war on beef, one waged by the Biden Administration, that decimated the industry. Biden's camp told us we should eat bugs and veggies and not beef.
We know there have been multiple attacks on the cattle industry. Take the case of Cliven Bundy, the rancher whose family had grazed cattle on land owned by the government for decades. The government decided he couldn't do it anymore, and he did it, and there was a military standoff and eventually death and jail time. Bundy was the most dramatic case of it's kind but you know full well the Feds have been doing this for years now, systematically squeezing the family ranch.
There are other issues at work too. For instance, most states have property taxes. And with more people - and more money - those taxes continue to rise. Eventually ranchers can't afford to own the giants ranches they need to keep their cattle fed. Taxes take it away from them.
I would add my great grandmother wasn't a rancher but a farmer in southern Missouri and she lost her farm in just this way; taxes went up and she had to sell it piecemeal to pay them.
In fact I was just watching a marathon of Yellowstone this weekend and that is the premise of that show; the Dutton ranch was beset by investors who wanted to take the land by hook or by crook, and one of the tools to do it was building stuff to drive the taxes up and make ranching economically unviable.
At any rate the internationalists have largely succeeded:
Another point to ponder; American ranchers have been unable to sell beef in Europe and elsewher thanks in no small part to the overuse of antibiotics and radiation to sterilize the meat. So we simply stopped raising the beef and started importing more of it from places without these regulations and procedures.
We have to start raising cattle hormone and antibiotic free, or as free as possible anyway.
While it's easy to blame the ranchers for this the fact remains the FDA has a tight grip on the handling of beef, from the field to the table, and the ranchers are doing all of this primarily to provide a product that comports with the health and safety regulations imposed by the Federal Government.
I've written about how the government squeezes the dairy industry, a closely related industry. Regulations have always been at the root of the problems in cattle and dairy farming.
As has the desire to force Americans to stop chewing the fat. I wrote about it here.
We've all heard the phrase "an army moves on it's stomach" and that is true; a well-fed army will be strong - a hungry army will not. But it applies to society in general; a well-fed nation will prosper, a starving nation will be in the stone age.
which is why the first thing Japan did when it decided to break it's isolation in the 19th century and modernize was stabilize it's farming, stabilize and modernize food production. The Japanese did NOT start building industries first, or arms manufacturing plants, as so many nations that tried and failed to modernize attempted. They concentrated first on food. And it worked beautifully; now Japan is a First World nation. And it grew strong enough to threaten the United States itself. All of that was because they wwere wise enough to make sure everyone had enought good food to eat.
Food is the very heart of civilization, and in fact civilization was founded around agriculture. Everyone could be well-fed and happy, own things and be comfortable, provided the farms and ranches could be protected. The old way of wandering around hoping to find food or steal it from others faded away as the agricultural revolution gave us a superior way of life. In the final analysis all Man's proud civilization was because of a desire to fill our bellies.
And with the way the Left has tried to change our diets, tried to reduce our "footprint" so the world can become what we labored for it not to be, we were on our way to deindustrialization. Hatred of industrialization was at the root of the utopianism of the Left. Having rejected God and the hope of Heaven the Left seeks to create paradise on Earth, and to do that they must believe there WAS a paradise on Earth. They have stolen many things from Christianity; a belief in a paradise that was and a fall from grace by Man as he rejected the joys of the natural in favor of agriculture and technology, and a dream of restoring paradise by destroying the forbidden works of Man, so Mother Earth can restore some mythical balance.
But it's all lies; Nature never was beneficient. Naature is pure material, doesn't care if we live or die, and in fact order is much harder to achieve than disorder (entropy) so everything breaks down, falls apart. A food source we enjoy now simply disappears as minute changes occur. It's why civilization was created in the first place. Civilization is a war against entropy.
As Hobbes observed, Nature is sharp of claw. In a state of nature one lives a pitiable existenOce; hot in summer, cold in winter, wet when it rains. Hungry, thirsty, naked. Food is scarce and often tainted with disease. Ditto water. People die young; by their mid thirties a stone age person is pretty much geriatric. No medical care.
It was not Heaven; it was hell.
Hell is what these people seek to restore, and killing beef was their prime objective for now. If they could kill beef they could systematically kill off all meat. Bugs woud replace meat, then even the bugs would be protected.
But where does it stop? I can easily see a movement to ban eating plants too. What right have we to kill plants? Aren't plants a part of nature too?
Teh Voluntary Human Extinction Movement is ultimately where such thinking leads; Human beings should simply 86 themselves "for the good of the planet". Then an empty world can continue to spin around the sun without the molestation of Man!
And all of this starts with beef. Beef is the Original Sin to many of these moonbats.
So let us rebuild American beef, reconstruct the ranches and Make America Fed Again!
Anyone who's old enough remembers the '80's ad campaign by Wendys with the old woman who is looking at her "hamburger" "where's the beef!"
So, where IS the beef?
New USDA Report Paints Troubling Picture for America’s Cattle Industry
This Zeero Hedge article leans extensively on a USDA report which is saying tariffs and other measures to bring back beef production to the U.S. is leading to shortages at the moment, shortages that will end as we rebuild our industry.
Of course, this fails to mention the war on beef, one waged by the Biden Administration, that decimated the industry. Biden's camp told us we should eat bugs and veggies and not beef.
We know there have been multiple attacks on the cattle industry. Take the case of Cliven Bundy, the rancher whose family had grazed cattle on land owned by the government for decades. The government decided he couldn't do it anymore, and he did it, and there was a military standoff and eventually death and jail time. Bundy was the most dramatic case of it's kind but you know full well the Feds have been doing this for years now, systematically squeezing the family ranch.
There are other issues at work too. For instance, most states have property taxes. And with more people - and more money - those taxes continue to rise. Eventually ranchers can't afford to own the giants ranches they need to keep their cattle fed. Taxes take it away from them.
I would add my great grandmother wasn't a rancher but a farmer in southern Missouri and she lost her farm in just this way; taxes went up and she had to sell it piecemeal to pay them.
In fact I was just watching a marathon of Yellowstone this weekend and that is the premise of that show; the Dutton ranch was beset by investors who wanted to take the land by hook or by crook, and one of the tools to do it was building stuff to drive the taxes up and make ranching economically unviable.
At any rate the internationalists have largely succeeded:
5th Generation Cattle Rancher Steve Lucie: I think at this point, we should be all-in on what's happening… We have the lowest beef herd that we've had since 1950 and that's because so many people have gotten out of the industry. If we could've exported more of our beef, I don't… pic.twitter.com/Hmkq30KmYa
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 7, 2025
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) April 7, 2025
Another point to ponder; American ranchers have been unable to sell beef in Europe and elsewher thanks in no small part to the overuse of antibiotics and radiation to sterilize the meat. So we simply stopped raising the beef and started importing more of it from places without these regulations and procedures.
We have to start raising cattle hormone and antibiotic free, or as free as possible anyway.
While it's easy to blame the ranchers for this the fact remains the FDA has a tight grip on the handling of beef, from the field to the table, and the ranchers are doing all of this primarily to provide a product that comports with the health and safety regulations imposed by the Federal Government.
I've written about how the government squeezes the dairy industry, a closely related industry. Regulations have always been at the root of the problems in cattle and dairy farming.
As has the desire to force Americans to stop chewing the fat. I wrote about it here.
We've all heard the phrase "an army moves on it's stomach" and that is true; a well-fed army will be strong - a hungry army will not. But it applies to society in general; a well-fed nation will prosper, a starving nation will be in the stone age.
which is why the first thing Japan did when it decided to break it's isolation in the 19th century and modernize was stabilize it's farming, stabilize and modernize food production. The Japanese did NOT start building industries first, or arms manufacturing plants, as so many nations that tried and failed to modernize attempted. They concentrated first on food. And it worked beautifully; now Japan is a First World nation. And it grew strong enough to threaten the United States itself. All of that was because they wwere wise enough to make sure everyone had enought good food to eat.
Food is the very heart of civilization, and in fact civilization was founded around agriculture. Everyone could be well-fed and happy, own things and be comfortable, provided the farms and ranches could be protected. The old way of wandering around hoping to find food or steal it from others faded away as the agricultural revolution gave us a superior way of life. In the final analysis all Man's proud civilization was because of a desire to fill our bellies.
And with the way the Left has tried to change our diets, tried to reduce our "footprint" so the world can become what we labored for it not to be, we were on our way to deindustrialization. Hatred of industrialization was at the root of the utopianism of the Left. Having rejected God and the hope of Heaven the Left seeks to create paradise on Earth, and to do that they must believe there WAS a paradise on Earth. They have stolen many things from Christianity; a belief in a paradise that was and a fall from grace by Man as he rejected the joys of the natural in favor of agriculture and technology, and a dream of restoring paradise by destroying the forbidden works of Man, so Mother Earth can restore some mythical balance.
But it's all lies; Nature never was beneficient. Naature is pure material, doesn't care if we live or die, and in fact order is much harder to achieve than disorder (entropy) so everything breaks down, falls apart. A food source we enjoy now simply disappears as minute changes occur. It's why civilization was created in the first place. Civilization is a war against entropy.
As Hobbes observed, Nature is sharp of claw. In a state of nature one lives a pitiable existenOce; hot in summer, cold in winter, wet when it rains. Hungry, thirsty, naked. Food is scarce and often tainted with disease. Ditto water. People die young; by their mid thirties a stone age person is pretty much geriatric. No medical care.
It was not Heaven; it was hell.
Hell is what these people seek to restore, and killing beef was their prime objective for now. If they could kill beef they could systematically kill off all meat. Bugs woud replace meat, then even the bugs would be protected.
But where does it stop? I can easily see a movement to ban eating plants too. What right have we to kill plants? Aren't plants a part of nature too?
Teh Voluntary Human Extinction Movement is ultimately where such thinking leads; Human beings should simply 86 themselves "for the good of the planet". Then an empty world can continue to spin around the sun without the molestation of Man!
And all of this starts with beef. Beef is the Original Sin to many of these moonbats.
So let us rebuild American beef, reconstruct the ranches and Make America Fed Again!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:04 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1217 words, total size 8 kb.
<< Page 1 of 918 >>
97kb generated in CPU 0.0248, elapsed 0.3632 seconds.
39 queries taking 0.3511 seconds, 217 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
39 queries taking 0.3511 seconds, 217 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
