A.J. Cameron

When will whistleblowers ‎come forward from throughout the rogue government to expose every tyrannical traitor in all levels of government? Hopefully, we can flip a few so that we can also expose all of the predatory puppeteers who hide in the shadows while pulling the strings on politico puppets.

Keep Gitmo open. We need someplace to store all who are exposed, but away from the good citizens.


http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/04/justice-dept-manipulated-major-u-s-city-to-become-sanctu

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:31 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 76 words, total size 1 kb.

Selwyn Duke

"Inequality is the root of all evil,” said left-wing senator Barbara Boxer recently, while lecturing a Catholic priest about Catholicism. Boxer claimed to be quoting Pope Francis, referencing a tweet he sent in April 2014. Yet despite the fact she was reading prepared notes, she misquoted the pope, who actually said "Inequality is the root of social evil.” Defenders such as Ramesh Ponnuru have said that Francis’ words must be placed in perspective, that they allude to the evil of prenatal infanticide, along with many other things. Whatever the case, Boxer’s formulation is certainly an authentic Marxist idea — and this is not hyperbole.

In fact, Boxer’s spun quotation is a central tenet of Marxism. Marx (who was mentality ill) taught that if economic inequality could be eliminated, people would live so harmoniously in a state of economic bliss that the government could just melt away, at which point civilization would have reached the culmination of the socialist revolution — communism (yes, under Marxist doctrine, communism is when there is no longer any government). This gives us a window into Marx’s psyche: he likely was a very greedy, envious, covetous man. For just as only a person who is hung-up on race could believe that eliminating racial differences would yield a blissful world, only a man who cannot tolerate others’ being wealthier than he — and who is thoroughly hung-up on the idea — could believe that eliminating such differences would create Heaven on Earth. As Pope Benedict XVI put it, Marx made the mistake of viewing man as merely an "economic being.”

Speaking of mistakes, Boxer’s notion is the poorest of theology. Sin is the root of all evil, and inequality is not a sin. It’s simply a state of being and fact of life. Note that there is no mention of "equality” in the Bible, except in reference to weights and measures. Equality is a hang-up born of the "Enlightenment” and minted as a modernist faux virtue by socialists.

Moreover, equality simply is not a thing of this world. Do we see it in nature? There are alpha wolves and lesser wolves, silverback gorillas that run the show and lions that rule their prides. And even within species, there is variation, with some members being better fit to survive than others. This, mind you, is another irony of the evolutionist Left: they view man as just another animal, but then suppose that somehow, some way he is the one species that should be the exception to the universal norm of inequality.

And does inequality tell us any more about the economic health of a people than it does about the athletic-skill "health” of a group? Consider: there are two tennis centers training children. In the first all the kids end up being low intermediates; but there is greater inequality in the second, with some being low intermediates, some advanced and some tournament caliber. Which center is better off skill-wise? Which is doing a better job teaching the game?

So it is in economics. Inequality tells us nothing about quality — or overall quality of life. Nothing. Pope Francis and others have bemoaned the supposed "growing inequality” in the world, but perhaps they should listen to left-wing site Think Progress. It pointed out in 2013 that the standard of living worldwide is now the highest it has ever been in all of man’s history.

What this indicates is that the truth is precisely the opposite of what Boxer implies. Growing inequality doesn’t cause misery, but can be attended by improving quality of life. How could this be? It isn’t a causal relationship but is a correlation, in that what creates billionaires — free enterprise — also creates a robust middle class. To provide just one example, economic freedom gave us Bill Gates, but it also gave us the thousands of nicely compensated people Microsoft employs as well as the countless millions who use its software to facilitate other economic endeavors.

If anyone wants economic equality, he would have loved the caveman days. With no monetary system, agriculture or industry and everyone being a hunter-gatherer, man’s state was as close to economic equality as you may find. Would Boxer, Pope Francis or anyone else like to travel back in time?

This also raises a question: how did the world transform from Stone Age poverty to Industrial Age abundance? Where did all the wealth come from?

It obviously was created. This occurs when people grow crops, raise livestock, and obtain raw materials, which are then combined in unique ways to create a multitude of things that further improve our quality of life. Just think about the value of refrigeration, canned foods, plumbing, life-saving medicines and all the labor-saving machines wealth creation has given us. And wealth breeds more wealth: tractors and other agricultural equipment have increased crop yields so profoundly as to make Malthusian starvation predictions seem silly.

Now here’s the question: why did people create this wealth? Were they mainly driven by charitable instincts? While charity is wonderful and generous people exist, do a little exercise: see how many goods and services you can think of, that you need or want, that were created via charitable endeavor. Does McDonald’s produce hamburgers and fries, Ford produce cars, Apple produce computers, Boeing produce airplanes and Pfizer produce drugs out of the goodness of their hearts? We can enter a supermarket and access thousands of food products from the world over at reasonable prices. How many of them exist due to charity?

Most everything we need and want exists because of financial incentive — people can make money by creating it. This may not sound good to some starry-eyed (and sometimes stoned) idealists, but it’s not just that research has shown that those who protest money-hungry mindsets the most are themselves the most money-hungry (indicating that it’s envy, not charity, motivating them). It’s that we deny reality at our own peril: like it or not, most people will operate based on self-interest. Just ask yourself: would I still work at my job were there no money to be had? Most people wouldn’t. And, yes, greed exists, too — everywhere. Greed is a sin, and you don’t eliminate sin by changing systems, but by changing hearts.

What you can do is devise a system that takes into account the realities, and frailties, of man’s nature. Enter economic freedom. As economist Dr. Walter Williams has put it, economic freedom and its financial incentive ensure that my fellow man will serve me even if he doesn’t give a darn about me. So I get the supermarket stocked with thousands of goods, all provided by people who otherwise wouldn’t give a thought to whether my belly was full.

I didn’t describe the above system as "capitalism,” mind you, because that term was originated by socialists for the purposes of demonizing economic freedom. And it has worked. Tragically, college-aged millennials have a positive view of "socialism” and favor "capitalism” by a smaller margin than other groups. They also, however, generally have a very benign view of what socialism is.

Note that The Communist Manifesto would likely have been titled The Socialist Manifesto, but there was a problem: the term "socialist” not only had a very broad definition, but had already been tarnished by fools, frauds and failures. But as indicated earlier, under Marxist doctrine, socialism is the transitional phase between economic freedom and communism in which government owns the means of production. Thus did the U.S.S.R. stand for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

One reason socialism had already been discredited was because it had been tried. For example, Welsh industrialist and social reformer Robert Owen bought the town of Harmony, Indiana in 1825, renamed it New Harmony, and established a socialist commune.

It failed miserably after only about two years.

The problem? Unlike early Christian communes (Shakers, Oneida Community, etc.), some of which endured for a century or more and whose members often believed they were earning a place in Heaven, Owen’s godless "utopia” had neither financial nor spiritual incentive. And without incentive to act there is inaction, and inaction equals no wealth creation.

And that’s the result of emphasis on "equality.” It’s why Russia transitioned from being one of the world’s largest exporters of food under Tsar Nicholas II to one of its largest importers of food under the Soviets, why North Korea suffers similar woes today, and why oil-rich Venezuela can’t provide basic necessities for its people. As famed economist Milton Friedman put it, "The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with neither. The society that puts freedom before equality will end up with a great measure of both.”

"Inequality is the root of all evil,” said left-wing senator Barbara Boxer recently, while lecturing a Catholic priest about Catholicism. Boxer claimed to be quoting Pope Francis, referencing a tweet he sent in April 2014. Yet despite the fact she was reading prepared notes, she misquoted the pope, who actually said "Inequality is the root of social evil.” Defenders such as Ramesh Ponnuru have said that Francis’ words must be placed in perspective, that they allude to the evil of prenatal infanticide, along with many other things. Whatever the case, Boxer’s formulation is certainly an authentic Marxist idea — and this is not hyperbole.

In fact, Boxer’s spun quotation is a central tenet of Marxism. Marx (who was mentality ill) taught that if economic inequality could be eliminated, people would live so harmoniously in a state of economic bliss that the government could just melt away, at which point civilization would have reached the culmination of the socialist revolution — communism (yes, under Marxist doctrine, communism is when there is no longer any government). This gives us a window into Marx’s psyche: he likely was a very greedy, envious, covetous man. For just as only a person who is hung-up on race could believe that eliminating racial differences would yield a blissful world, only a man who cannot tolerate others’ being wealthier than he — and who is thoroughly hung-up on the idea — could believe that eliminating such differences would create Heaven on Earth. As Pope Benedict XVI put it, Marx made the mistake of viewing man as merely an "economic being.”

Speaking of mistakes, Boxer’s notion is the poorest of theology. Sin is the root of all evil, and inequality is not a sin. It’s simply a state of being and fact of life. Note that there is no mention of "equality” in the Bible, except in reference to weights and measures. Equality is a hang-up born of the "Enlightenment” and minted as a modernist faux virtue by socialists.

Moreover, equality simply is not a thing of this world. Do we see it in nature? There are alpha wolves and lesser wolves, silverback gorillas that run the show and lions that rule their prides. And even within species, there is variation, with some members being better fit to survive than others. This, mind you, is another irony of the evolutionist Left: they view man as just another animal, but then suppose that somehow, some way he is the one species that should be the exception to the universal norm of inequality.

And does inequality tell us any more about the economic health of a people than it does about the athletic-skill "health” of a group? Consider: there are two tennis centers training children. In the first all the kids end up being low intermediates; but there is greater inequality in the second, with some being low intermediates, some advanced and some tournament caliber. Which center is better off skill-wise? Which is doing a better job teaching the game?

So it is in economics. Inequality tells us nothing about quality — or overall quality of life. Nothing. Pope Francis and others have bemoaned the supposed "growing inequality” in the world, but perhaps they should listen to left-wing site Think Progress. It pointed out in 2013 that the standard of living worldwide is now the highest it has ever been in all of man’s history.

What this indicates is that the truth is precisely the opposite of what Boxer implies. Growing inequality doesn’t cause misery, but can be attended by improving quality of life. How could this be? It isn’t a causal relationship but is a correlation, in that what creates billionaires — free enterprise — also creates a robust middle class. To provide just one example, economic freedom gave us Bill Gates, but it also gave us the thousands of nicely compensated people Microsoft employs as well as the countless millions who use its software to facilitate other economic endeavors.

If anyone wants economic equality, he would have loved the caveman days. With no monetary system, agriculture or industry and everyone being a hunter-gatherer, man’s state was as close to economic equality as you may find. Would Boxer, Pope Francis or anyone else like to travel back in time?

This also raises a question: how did the world transform from Stone Age poverty to Industrial Age abundance? Where did all the wealth come from?

It obviously was created. This occurs when people grow crops, raise livestock, and obtain raw materials, which are then combined in unique ways to create a multitude of things that further improve our quality of life. Just think about the value of refrigeration, canned foods, plumbing, life-saving medicines and all the labor-saving machines wealth creation has given us. And wealth breeds more wealth: tractors and other agricultural equipment have increased crop yields so profoundly as to make Malthusian starvation predictions seem silly.

Now here’s the question: why did people create this wealth? Were they mainly driven by charitable instincts? While charity is wonderful and generous people exist, do a little exercise: see how many goods and services you can think of, that you need or want, that were created via charitable endeavor. Does McDonald’s produce hamburgers and fries, Ford produce cars, Apple produce computers, Boeing produce airplanes and Pfizer produce drugs out of the goodness of their hearts? We can enter a supermarket and access thousands of food products from the world over at reasonable prices. How many of them exist due to charity?

Most everything we need and want exists because of financial incentive — people can make money by creating it. This may not sound good to some starry-eyed (and sometimes stoned) idealists, but it’s not just that research has shown that those who protest money-hungry mindsets the most are themselves the most money-hungry (indicating that it’s envy, not charity, motivating them). It’s that we deny reality at our own peril: like it or not, most people will operate based on self-interest. Just ask yourself: would I still work at my job were there no money to be had? Most people wouldn’t. And, yes, greed exists, too — everywhere. Greed is a sin, and you don’t eliminate sin by changing systems, but by changing hearts.

What you can do is devise a system that takes into account the realities, and frailties, of man’s nature. Enter economic freedom. As economist Dr. Walter Williams has put it, economic freedom and its financial incentive ensure that my fellow man will serve me even if he doesn’t give a darn about me. So I get the supermarket stocked with thousands of goods, all provided by people who otherwise wouldn’t give a thought to whether my belly was full.

I didn’t describe the above system as "capitalism,” mind you, because that term was originated by socialists for the purposes of demonizing economic freedom. And it has worked. Tragically, college-aged millennials have a positive view of "socialism” and favor "capitalism” by a smaller margin than other groups. They also, however, generally have a very benign view of what socialism is.

Note that The Communist Manifesto would likely have been titled The Socialist Manifesto, but there was a problem: the term "socialist” not only had a very broad definition, but had already been tarnished by fools, frauds and failures. But as indicated earlier, under Marxist doctrine, socialism is the transitional phase between economic freedom and communism in which government owns the means of production. Thus did the U.S.S.R. stand for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

One reason socialism had already been discredited was because it had been tried. For example, Welsh industrialist and social reformer Robert Owen bought the town of Harmony, Indiana in 1825, renamed it New Harmony, and established a socialist commune.

It failed miserably after only about two years.

The problem? Unlike early Christian communes (Shakers, Oneida Community, etc.), some of which endured for a century or more and whose members often believed they were earning a place in Heaven, Owen’s godless "utopia” had neither financial nor spiritual incentive. And without incentive to act there is inaction, and inaction equals no wealth creation.

And that’s the result of emphasis on "equality.” It’s why Russia transitioned from being one of the world’s largest exporters of food under Tsar Nicholas II to one of its largest importers of food under the Soviets, why North Korea suffers similar woes today, and why oil-rich Venezuela can’t provide basic necessities for its people. As famed economist Milton Friedman put it, "The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with neither. The society that puts freedom before equality will end up with a great measure of both.”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:27 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 2906 words, total size 20 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Question; how do you have science if you start with a preconception, and then deny the results if they contradict that conception? You don't have science at all but rather superstition. This is the basis of astrology or spirit guides or studying chicken bones; it is based on faith and not reason.

What do you have when large amounts of money are involved in any enterprise? You have cheating, fudging, and outright corruption. It is as inevitable as the sun rising; where large amounts of money are concerned people frequently lose their ethical standards.

What do you have when government is funding research that they hope to use to grab more money and power? You have, well, this.

From the Free Press Standard:

"A three-year study by the University of Cincinnati in Carroll and surrounding counties determined hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, has no effect on groundwater in the Utica shale region, is not being released to the public.

Dr. Amy Townsend-Small, the lead researcher for the University of Cincinnati Department of Geology, released the results during the Feb. 4 meeting of the Carroll County Concerned Citizens in Carrollton.

During her presentation, which was videotaped and is available for viewing on YouTube, Townsend-Small stated, "We haven’t seen anything to show that wells have been contaminated by fracking.”
Rex Well March 14 WEB

A three-year study by the University of Cincinnati in Carroll and surrounding counties determined hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells like the Rex Energy well shown above, does not contaminate ground water.

When asked at that meeting if the university planned to publicize the results, Dr. Amy Townsend-Small, an assistant professor at the University of Cincinnati Department of Geology and the leader of the study, said there were no plans to do so.

"I am really sad to say this, but some of our funders, the groups that had given us funding in the past, were a little disappointed in our results. They feel that fracking is scary and so they were hoping this data could to a reason to ban it,” she said."

End excerpt.

It's good that Dr. Townsend-Small is scientist enough to admit that her findings contradicted the environmentalist meme and that they were burying the study out of pure commercial motives, but what does that say for the state of research in modern America?

When government took over the funding for most research in this country a fundamental change occured in science. Now instead of following where Nature leads we ask what the paymaster wants and then tailor our science to that. Government wants to restrict energy usage, to push people into higher density living arrangements and reduce the standard of living (based on the Agenda 21 agreements) and so we are told that hydraulic fracturing is deadly, deadly deadly! Why? America is down to a scant 13% importation of foreign fuels thanks to this technique, which has made us independent of the Middle Eastern Islamic radicals. But this also means no solar, no wind, no CONSERVATION which has been a cornerstone of the environmentalist movemment since the 1970's, so it must not be allowed to stand. The elites decided that energy would be the way to stitch the world together into a horrible geoopolitical Frankenstein's monster, that the path to world government would be paved with solar cells. The Endangered Atmospheres Conference hatched up the scheme of Global Warming, to use hte atmosphere to justify empowering world organizations. This is what many of the elites want, and both political parties in America have pursued this for a variety of reasons. If nothing else it means money in the pockets of politicians. The universities have gone along with Global Warming because it means lots of Federal dollars as well as money from rich foundations like the Rockefellar or Ford Foundations. It created a gravy train for them, and they have tailored their research to provide ammunition, not actually do science.

If you doubt that then why is Michael Mann still employed at Penn State?He was caught red-handed fudging data, yet he's still there, still fuding data, still collecting a nice salary. We have e-mails with the Hadley Center proving he pulled a fast one "Mike's Nature Trick" meant he spliced completely different data sets together because he had to "hide the decline" in temperatures that the real data showed. He's still working because he brings in the money.

So now we have one more piece of evidence showing that the scientific establishment is corrupted. Is it any surprise?

The person who pays is the boss. Science is little more than a high priced call girl in a white lab coat.

Hat tip; Thomas Lifson

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:18 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 794 words, total size 5 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

The Gang Green wants to put pretty pink parasols underwater to ostensibly protect the Great Barrier Reef from, you guessed it, Global Warming!

According to the U.K. Telegraph:

"The shade cloths proposed in the report would be anchored with ropes and float on the water surface to protect the corals from sunlight. In an experiment performed in Queensland several years ago, researchers deployed 15-feet by 15-feet sheets of plastic mesh, similar to those used by gardeners to protect vegetable patches.

Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg of Queensland University, Australia, writing with Greg Rau from the University of California and Elizabeth McLeod from The Nature Conservancy, calls for "unconventional, non-passive methods to conserve marine ecosystems".

"A much broader approach to marine management and mitigation options, including shade cloth, electrical current and genetic engineering must be seriously considered," the paper says. "The magnitude and rapidity of these changes is likely to surpass the ability of numerous marine species to adapt and survive."

The paper proposes a range of possible future options for ocean management, including selective breeding and adding base minerals and silicates to the water to neutralise acidity. The Barrier Reef includes about 900 coral formations stretching along 1,600 miles off Australia's east coast. Its coral formations and marine life attract about 2 million visitors each year. "

End excerpt.


Now. the notion of anthropogenic global warming, er, climate change, er. climate disruption, climate flatulence, etc. is that carbon dioxide in THE ATMOSPHERE holds heat, keeps it from re-radiating back into space from the troposphere. According to the hypothesis there is no change in the overall energy entering the system, just leaving it. The sun is considered largely immaterial, a big light bulb in the sky. The important thing is the balance of atmospheric gases, and an increase in carbon dioxide makes the air hold more heat. Not the water, but the air.

So how do underwater "umbrellas" change the dynamic in any way? That would only make a difference if there were increased solar irradiance OR severe ozone damage. It has nothing to do with global warming.

And what will eternal shade do to the plants (and animals) that dwell below?

And now these people are talking about dumping pollutants into the water to neutralize acidity, and electrocuting the poor corals to protect them. Sounds like Medieval medicine to me; leeches and blood-letting to purge the patient of "poison" that more often than not let to the demise of said patient.

By the way, the strong El Nino is the culprit in coral reef devestation worldwide, and the reefs recovered marvelously after the big 1998 El Nino season. It's warm WATER than hurts them, and the only way to protect them would be to build undersea walls to divert the warm water (see, walls DO keep out unwanted guests; take THAT all you who say fences and walls won't stop illegal aliens from crossing the border!) Of course, diverting the flow of water will have detrimental effects across the globe.

But then so too will this attempt at transgendering the coral reefs with dainty little parasols. I wonder which batrhooms the corals will be allowed to use? Will Australia pass a potty parity/peril law? Will corals be permitted to choose whether to be "hot" or "cold" fish? Will this be the new liberal civil rights campaign?

Will we have to have coral "safe spaces" where the effeminate coral can be protected from those mean jock coral who like to make fun of them?  Will we have coral "high heel drag races" and clubs established in New Orleans for the transgendered coral?

These people have truly lost touch with reality.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:04 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 615 words, total size 4 kb.

Wil Wirtanen

One of the comments hit the nail on the head.

He stated that the problem with the United States is that "Being stupid doesn’t hurt anymore.”

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/minimum_wage_maximum_stupidity.html

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:25 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

A.J. Cameron

It is so obvious that the predatory ‎puppeteers are accelerating the deployment of the agenda, because people are waking up to what is happening to purposely destroy our republic. It is a horse race to see if enough people will realize the truth and pray for a Passover vs. the total deployment of the agenda.

I continue to build my spiritual Ark!

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/04/25/report-u-n-pressing-alternative-ways-admit-syrian-refugees-u-s/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:23 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 77 words, total size 1 kb.

A.J. Cameron

We haven't heard about this in the U. S., but the propaganda media machine is not likely to expose any such heinous activity prior to the importation of 'refugees'.

While our agencies are not able to vet those being 'redistributed' onto our Terra Firma, don't you believe the U. N. is vetting those being sent here? If they are content with what is happening in Europe, why wouldn't they expand the pain to the U. S. & Canada?

Of course, ‎this is a diversion to keep our focus anywhere, but upon the predator puppeteers in the shadows and their concentrated attacks upon us.


A. J.

http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/04/disturbing-reality-muslim-sex-grooming-gangs/

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:03 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

These from Helen Dyer down in Australia:

http://www.trunews.com/united-nations-launches-global-data-collection-arm-of-agenda-2030/


United Nations launches global data collection arm of Agenda 2030

TRUNEWS) The United Nations Statistical Commission has released a document called "draft global indicators framework”, which adds an enormous global data collection program to their Agenda 2030 initiative.

The UN’s Agenda 2030 outlines 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and 169 targets to "free the human race from the tyranny of poverty,” "heal and secure our planet” and place humans on a "sustainable and resilient path” by the year 2030. Agenda 2030 replaced Agenda 21 in Sep. 2015 as a blueprint for nothing less than the global enslavement of humanity under the guise of promoting sustainable development.

DRAFT GLOBAL INDICATORS FRAMEWORK

Now, in addition to the robust requirements of Agenda 2030, the draft global indicators framework outlines 230 statistical indicators to measure progress toward SDG’s including familiar ones such as per-capital Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the proportion of populations living below national and international poverty lines.

In the U.N. General Assembly resolution that called for the creation of the draft global indicators framework, the new SDG indicators are intended to be "simple but robust.”

George Russell, the Editor-at-Large of Fox News, noted a few "novel” measurements that the draft framework proposed:

* The "proportion of government recurrent and capital spending going to sectors that disproportionately benefit women, poor and vulnerable groups”

* The "extent to which global citizenship education and education for sustainable development . . . are mainstreamed at all levels in national education politics, curricula, teacher education and student assessment”

* The "number of countries that have implemented well-managed migration policies”

* The "average income of small-scale food producers, by sex and indigenous status”

* The "proportion of persons victim of physical or sexual harassment, by sex, age, disability status and place of occurrence, in the previous 12 months”

* The "mortality rate attributed to unintentional poisoning”

* The "proportion of national Exclusive Economic Zones [200-mile ocean limits] managed using ecosystem-based approaches”

* The "number of plant and animal genetic resources for food and agriculture secured in either medium or long-term conservation facilities”

* "Progress by countries in the degree of implementation of international instruments aiming to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing”

ARCHITECT’S RESPONSE

John Pullinger, the National Statistician of Britain and immediate past chair of an expert group of national statistical agencies that pulled together the indicators for the UN Statistical Commission, said the indicators endorsed in the framework were "unprecedent[ed] in their scale and nuance.”

Though assumed to adhere to the data collection of the 230 decided statistical indicators, the U.S. was not an expert group member but did, however, participate in a grouping known as the Friends of the Chair of the Statistical Commission, that provided guidance for the draft framework.

Pullinger mentioned in the report that a "really strong push” had been made to ensure "disaggregation,” which has been defined by the U.N. as a breakdown of statistics by "income, sex, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability and geographical location, or other characteristics.”

Pullinger also said that there is currently no plan as to how the gigantic volume of information will be collected or analyzed, conceding that the process to refine and obtain the data is likely going to take participants up to 2030.

Brett Schaefer, a U.N. expert at the Heritage Foundation commented on the new UN draft framework, saying that though some of the huge arrays of indicators are "useful and practical,” many "are seriously flawed.”

Schaefer said that many are focused on "inputs like the level of government spending or the volume of development assistance devoted to a particular issue, rather than the results from those expenditures.”

Another alarming aspect Schaefer pointed out was the fact that many of the SDG’s were "transparently political objectives,” including those based on ratification of U.N.-generated treaties, like the Law of the Sea and an international biodiversity convention, both of which have been signed by American officials, but not ratified by the U.S. Senate, making them legally unenforceable on our nation.

Schaefer also said that other parameters "use imprecise or subjective terms that invite bias or data manipulation” noted that concerned that the immense data collection effort involved on a global scale — much of it unprecedented — "will consume significant resources and will likely outstrip the capacity of less developed countries.

"We have got what we have got,” Pullinger told Fox News — meaning, among other things, that the "technical task is to find a set of indicators that speak to the targets. We have to understand that there are a lot more things going on than just statistics.”

Pullinger agreed that "the data needs are vast” for the indicators, but added that "this is just the current case of a fact of life in the world of measurement. As scientists, we are working to understand the world better.”

Some targets "are more measurable than others,” Pullinger said, inferring that his team needed to continually refine the data-gathering process, choosing to specifically divide the indicators into three "tiers.”

The tiers were defined by whether the data required was "already widely available;” whether a method of determining the data existed but the data "are not easily available;” and where "an internationally agreed methodology has not yet been developed.”

Pulling said development on the first two tiers of data is planned for throughout the next full year while 12 months from now the experts group is expected to "provide a work plan for further development of Tier III indicators” — and to fill in other "data gaps” as they arise.



https://www.technocracy.news/index.php/2016/03/04/un-deputy-chief-2030-agendas-promise-well-managed-migration-mobility-must-become-reality/


UN Deputy Chief: 2030 Agenda’s Promise Of Well-Managed Migration And Mobility Must Become A Reality

TN Note: The UN has been the source of open-border policies in Europe and in the United States. Trilateral Commission member Peter Sutherland, who is also Special Envoy to the UN on Immigration, states that a prerequisite for Sustainable Development is a "multicultural society.” In other words, the kind of society that is happening in Europe right now. The UN calls this "well-managed migration” and mobility. Now that Europe is on the verge of collapse because of rampant immigration, the UN calls for more of the same to "fix” their problems. Yes, it is an insane policy any way you look at it.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/send-them-home-peter-dutton-tells-un-refugee-agency/news-story/7bfb803812022f6dbeba734d7c8c4569


Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has told a high-level United Nations refugee meeting that all borders have to be strengthened, and called for the speedy return of migrants not in need of protection in order to smash people-smuggling operations.

It comes as some migrants seeking to come to Australia under its 12,000-place Syrian ­humanitarian program have submitted false documents and have been "red-flagged’’ and rejected, The Australian has learned.

Mr Dutton told the UN Refugee Agency meeting on Syrian refugees in Geneva that economic migrants and others who did not qualify as refugees must be ­returned to their country of origin. Border systems must be enhanced to identify, register and process asylum applications and those found not to be in need of protection returned expeditiously.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2016/03/31/un-urges-resettlement-of-syrian-refugees.html


UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has called on countries to resettle nearly half a million Syrian refugees in the next three years, though only Italy, Sweden, and the United States have immediately announced concrete plans to play a part.

Ban, at the start of a ministerial conference hosted by the UN refugee agency UNHCR in Geneva on Wednesday, said: 'This demands an exponential increase in global solidarity.'

The United Nations is aiming to resettle some 480,000 refugees, about 10 per cent of those now in neighbouring countries, by the end of 2018, but concedes it is battling to overcome widespread fear and political wrangling.

Ban urged countries to pledge new and additional legal pathways for admitting the refugees, such as resettlement or humanitarian admission, family reunions, as well as labour and study opportunities.

- See more at: http://www.skynewscom.au/news/top-stories/2016/03/31/un-urges-resettlement-of-syrian-refugees.html#sthash.4rjtXz3a.dpuf


https://www.technocracy.news/index.php/2016/03/07/un-official-pleased-efforts-implement-sustainable-development-goals/

TN Note: The UN is sending teams to member nations in order to help each country implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Eliasson states, "In today’s world, we are interdependent and these goals are interrelated, so we need to take away that false – artificial, at least – line between national and international.” To a technocrat, the nation-state is a myth waiting to dissipate, while the system of global governance is the reality of it all.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:14 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 1394 words, total size 11 kb.

Fay Voshell

My son has given me a copy of the Iliad as an early birthday present. He'd like me to read three hundred pages before we discuss it. It’s been a very long time since I read even excerpts from Homer’s work, and quite a while since I’ve read Greek mythology.

I notice Homer didn't care much for political correctness. Even for Nestor the diplomat is not particularly careful about whom he offends. As it turns out, Achilles has anger issues. No pajama boy, he rails at his rival: "Drunkard, with the face of a dog and the heart of a fawn, you never dare to go out with the army to fight. You shun fighting as you do death.”

Nestor gives a speech, ending with pragmatic advice to Achilles: Well, yes, your mom is a goddess, but Agammenon has a bigger army. You probably should take that into account.

But in spite of his goddess mother’s and Nestor’s advice to quell his anger, Achilles nurses it and pines for battle. Peace did not ensue and the Trojan war came to be. Otherwise, the saga would not have been written.

It’s fascinating stuff. Human and divine natures are on display.

The Greeks conceived themselves as being in constant intimacy with the gods, consulting with them over everything. The gods, only slightly more elevated but more powerful than the humans with whom they consorted and slept, take pleasure in the songs of mankind; they enjoy the feasts at the temples; they accept the drink offerings. Jove is even portrayed as staying awake while he ponders how to do honor to Achilles. Mere men and their daily affairs were always on the minds of the gods--discussed endlessly and in detail. Everything mattered to the gods.

The belief that there was more to the struggle over Troy than mere men discerned; that there were superior spirits involved in the heat of battle and in its outcome; that the raw impulses of one’s heart must be tempered and mitigated by consultation with the gods; that Olympus and earth were connected in titanic struggles involving forces both good and bad meant the Greeks truly discerned the admixture of the tragic and the glorious inherent in the human condition.

There is something to be learned in the relationships of gods and men as portrayed in Homer’s Iliad and in the mythology that gave meaning to Greek culture; particularly in a day and age which has sought to excise the supernatural from every aspect of life: It is better to at least believe in gods than to believe we are mere beasts with no particular purpose but to eventually die to no end. It is better to believe in a superior being than to believe there is no God at all.

Or to believe you yourself are a god.

And that is where too many are today: Mere humans pretending to be gods who permit themselves everything. For without reference to anything or anyone other than self, any action can be and will be permitted.

Taking the burden of being gods upon ourselves is too great a burden for mere human beings. The consequence of our trying to make ourselves gods is that the gods go crazy. The gods believe anything and everything is not only possible and permitted, but that every other human being must recognize and worship the ever expanding pantheon of gods and goddesses among us. Crazy gods demand we worship them and allow them every expression of self will without quibbling.

Gods demand innocent life should be sacrificed. They demand they are sovereign over humans’ territories, even down to the use of privies. They disregard what mere humans regard as the sacred writings and sacred places. Nothing is sacred except themselves.

This is very dangerous stuff. In and of ourselves, in and by self will, we are not and cannot be gods. Denial of the limits of human beings always leads to oppression. Failure to recognize and to believe the human being is at once capable of being divine or demonic; that a human being is a creature who either answers to better angels of being or to the darkest forces of the universe leads to delusion and inevitably to oppression of those the gods consider mere mortals.

But as C.S. Lewis points out, the Christian view of mankind promises a redemption that augers a greater destiny than the flawed and fallible gods or goddesses some would make themselves out to be. He writes:

"It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare.

"All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations.

"It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics.

"There are no ordinary people.

"You have never talked to a mere mortal.

"Nations, cultures, arts, civilization—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat.

"But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendors.”

Immortality is a very different thing than making one’s self a god by an act of will. Immortality is a given. But it winds up in two differing places: Immortally pure evil or immortally pure good. We are destined for one or the other, and the path we take in this life is an indicator of our ultimate destiny.

Therein lies the difference in the Greeks’ concepts of gods and goddesses, which were an admixture of good and bad, little different than mere humans and often far more arbitrary. Therein lies the difference in the modern day concept that human beings can with infallible perception discern within themselves a deity, a god or goddess who does not have to bow to any other or to any law, a divine being whose dictates must be obeyed without question.

There are only human beings on this planet--no gods and no goddesses. As mere mortals with an immortal future, it behooves us all to see in each human being a creature of immense worth, a being we are either helping or hindering in the walk to eternity.

The measure, then, of our humanity and our destiny is how we love God and how we love our fellow human being. "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

That commandment is the best antidote for any god complex.

Fay Voshell holds a M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary, which awarded her its prize for excellence in systematic theology. She is a frequent contributor to American Thinker. Her thoughts have appeared in many online magazines, including National Review, CNS, Fox News, Russia Insider and RealClearReligion. She may be reached at fvoshell@yahoo.com

My son has given me a copy of the Iliad as an early birthday present. He'd like me to read three hundred pages before we discuss it. It’s been a very long time since I read even excerpts from Homer’s work, and quite a while since I’ve read Greek mythology.

I notice Homer didn't care much for political correctness. Even for Nestor the diplomat is not particularly careful about whom he offends. As it turns out, Achilles has anger issues. No pajama boy, he rails at his rival: "Drunkard, with the face of a dog and the heart of a fawn, you never dare to go out with the army to fight. You shun fighting as you do death.”

Nestor gives a speech, ending with pragmatic advice to Achilles: Well, yes, your mom is a goddess, but Agammenon has a bigger army. You probably should take that into account.

But in spite of his goddess mother’s and Nestor’s advice to quell his anger, Achilles nurses it and pines for battle. Peace did not ensue and the Trojan war came to be. Otherwise, the saga would not have been written.

It’s fascinating stuff. Human and divine natures are on display.

The Greeks conceived themselves as being in constant intimacy with the gods, consulting with them over everything. The gods, only slightly more elevated but more powerful than the humans with whom they consorted and slept, take pleasure in the songs of mankind; they enjoy the feasts at the temples; they accept the drink offerings. Jove is even portrayed as staying awake while he ponders how to do honor to Achilles. Mere men and their daily affairs were always on the minds of the gods--discussed endlessly and in detail. Everything mattered to the gods.

The belief that there was more to the struggle over Troy than mere men discerned; that there were superior spirits involved in the heat of battle and in its outcome; that the raw impulses of one’s heart must be tempered and mitigated by consultation with the gods; that Olympus and earth were connected in titanic struggles involving forces both good and bad meant the Greeks truly discerned the admixture of the tragic and the glorious inherent in the human condition.

There is something to be learned in the relationships of gods and men as portrayed in Homer’s Iliad and in the mythology that gave meaning to Greek culture; particularly in a day and age which has sought to excise the supernatural from every aspect of life: It is better to at least believe in gods than to believe we are mere beasts with no particular purpose but to eventually die to no end. It is better to believe in a superior being than to believe there is no God at all.

Or to believe you yourself are a god.

And that is where too many are today: Mere humans pretending to be gods who permit themselves everything. For without reference to anything or anyone other than self, any action can be and will be permitted.

Taking the burden of being gods upon ourselves is too great a burden for mere human beings. The consequence of our trying to make ourselves gods is that the gods go crazy. The gods believe anything and everything is not only possible and permitted, but that every other human being must recognize and worship the ever expanding pantheon of gods and goddesses among us. Crazy gods demand we worship them and allow them every expression of self will without quibbling.

Gods demand innocent life should be sacrificed. They demand they are sovereign over humans’ territories, even down to the use of privies. They disregard what mere humans regard as the sacred writings and sacred places. Nothing is sacred except themselves.

This is very dangerous stuff. In and of ourselves, in and by self will, we are not and cannot be gods. Denial of the limits of human beings always leads to oppression. Failure to recognize and to believe the human being is at once capable of being divine or demonic; that a human being is a creature who either answers to better angels of being or to the darkest forces of the universe leads to delusion and inevitably to oppression of those the gods consider mere mortals.

But as C.S. Lewis points out, the Christian view of mankind promises a redemption that augers a greater destiny than the flawed and fallible gods or goddesses some would make themselves out to be. He writes:

"It is a serious thing to live in a society of possible gods and goddesses, to remember that the dullest and most uninteresting person you talk to may one day be a creature which, if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship, or else a horror and a corruption such as you now meet, if at all, only in a nightmare.

"All day long we are, in some degree, helping each other to one or other of these destinations.

"It is in the light of these overwhelming possibilities, it is with the awe and circumspection proper to them, that we should conduct all our dealings with one another, all friendships, all loves, all play, all politics.

"There are no ordinary people.

"You have never talked to a mere mortal.

"Nations, cultures, arts, civilization—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat.

"But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendors.”

Immortality is a very different thing than making one’s self a god by an act of will. Immortality is a given. But it winds up in two differing places: Immortally pure evil or immortally pure good. We are destined for one or the other, and the path we take in this life is an indicator of our ultimate destiny.

Therein lies the difference in the Greeks’ concepts of gods and goddesses, which were an admixture of good and bad, little different than mere humans and often far more arbitrary. Therein lies the difference in the modern day concept that human beings can with infallible perception discern within themselves a deity, a god or goddess who does not have to bow to any other or to any law, a divine being whose dictates must be obeyed without question.

There are only human beings on this planet--no gods and no goddesses. As mere mortals with an immortal future, it behooves us all to see in each human being a creature of immense worth, a being we are either helping or hindering in the walk to eternity.

The measure, then, of our humanity and our destiny is how we love God and how we love our fellow human being. "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

That commandment is the best antidote for any god complex.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2391 words, total size 14 kb.

A.J. Cameron forwards this:

From Judicial Watch.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/04/u-s-gives-680000-green-cards-to-migrants-from-muslim-nations

Meanwhile, with Islamic terrorism on the rise, the Obama administration has issued around 680,000 green cards to foreigners from Muslim countries over a five-year period, according to data published by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The stats show that the U.S. government admits more than double the number of immigrants from Muslim nations than from the European Union:


This disturbing information was circulated by the Senate Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on Immigration ... a committee announcement reminds us "a green card entitles recipients to access federal benefits, lifetime residency, work authorization, and a direct route to becoming a U.S. citizen." Some of the recipients are admitted to the U.S. as refugees so they immediately qualify for federal welfare benefits like food stamps and Medicaid.

The DHS stats include a breakdown of the countries where the migrants came from. Pakistan and Iraq sent over the most with 83,000 apiece and Bangladesh had 75,000. Seventy-three thousand came from Iran, 45,000 from Egypt, 31,000 from Somalia, 24,000 from Uzbekistan, Turkey and Morocco had 22,000 each, Jordan and Albania 20,000 each and Lebanon and Yemen each had 16,000. Rounding out the five-digit club is Indonesia (15,000), Syria (14,000), Sudan (13,000), Afghanistan (11,000) and Sierra Leone (10,000). The rest, including Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Kosovo and Libya, only sent over a few thousand during the five-year period covered by the DHS data. By contrast, only 65,000 green cards were granted to migrants from the European Union country (United Kingdom) with the highest number during this period. The Senate committee reveals that DHS has not yet published statistics covering fiscal year 2014 and fiscal year 2015 so we'll be on the lookout for that.

I personally would prefer that my tax dollars be used to benefit U.S. citizens first! It is one thing to welcome immigrants. It is clearly another to provide for their food, clothing, shelter, medical care, education, child care, and transportation.

FYI--In 2015 There were 20 appropriations related votes in the House. Yoder voted in favor of 17 of them. https://www.congress.gov/resources/display/content/Appropriations+for+Fiscal+Year+2015
For all of his rhetoric about reducing spending and balancing the budget he VOTES to spend more and more money every year on such things as the above!

He plans to be a career politician so the only way to get him to stop spending more and more of our tax dollars (and the subsequent necessity, increasing our taxes) is to pressure him to see the light and stop this nonsense!!! The question you need to ask yourself is what do you get free from the government? Or are you one of us who pays (or did pay before retiring) our fair share and the share of others who do get free benefits?

Dave Losey

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:44 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 467 words, total size 4 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority has been upset for some time now with the practice of "manspreading", where a fellow allows his legs to sit comfortably apart. Oh, the horror! Well, the California Transit people aren't going to take this lying down! From Weasel Zippers:

"Last week, the agency’s board voted 5-4 to adopt a new "one ticket, one seat” rule imposing a $100 fine on commuter train riders who, after a warning continue to use a seat for something other than sitting.

Subway riders who park a backpack on a seat or spread out in wide-legged oblivion have long been the bane of the rush-hour crowd in major commuter cities across the United States."

The effort to prevent these faux pas in California follows similar campaigns launched by transit agencies in New York, Philadelphia and Seattle with slogans such as "Two seats? Really?” and "Dude … Stop The Spread. Please

End excerpt.

Now, this is an odd concern for a place where the City of San Francisco intends to fight a lawsuit aimed at shutting down an open-air urinal in a park; seems it is hunkey dorey to hang out your genitals in Frisco and maybe splash urine on fellow park-goers but it's NOT okay for a man to spread his legs on a public conveyance. Personally I'd rather be next to the leg spreader.

This is the city where public nudity has been elevated to an art form. I wonder; if the bus rider is naked will these laws still apply? For that matter, is it only applicable to men? It's not called womenspreading, after all. And what of the transgendered, of which San Francisco has more than it's fair share; will a dude in a dress be ticketed for Manspreading? After all, California passed a law allowing students to choose the bathroom/locker room based on how they feel that day.I guess spreading the man is different from manspreading.

Last year New York spread the word, enacting a manspreading ban and actually arresting people - cowboys, motorcyclists, hookers, public mound waxers, and any others who suffer from bowed leg syndrome. They have done this even while relaxing a ban on public urination. So New York will be a citywide toilet, but at least people will sit with their legs uncomfortably together! Now THAT'S progress!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 03:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 399 words, total size 3 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Graduate students at the University of Missouri system have voted to unionize, despite the fact that they aren't employees of the University system.

KTVI Fox 2 has the story:

"The Columbia Missourian reports about 84 percent of the 795 graduate students who voted were in favor of allowing the Coalition of Graduate Workers to represent them in collective bargaining. Voting took place on Monday and Tuesday.

University administrators still must recognize the union before negotiations can occur."

End excerpt.

This is interesting because my brother Brian worked for the UM system at UMSL as an adjunct professor, and he was called by a union organizer and pressured to sign the petition months ago - before the eruption of racial animosity on the Mizzou campus. At the time Brian told the young lass who called him at home that this would have the effect of reducing the number of adjunct positions and cut hours, which are not guaranteed in un-tenured positions. He subsequently received a cut in the number of classes he was contracted to teach - then laid off entirely when the Mizzou protests erupted.

And now we have this. Strange, don't you think?

The Socialist Worker discussed this last fall:

"FGR quickly issued a list of demands, including immediate reinstatement of insurance subsidies, the provision of affordable graduate housing, the return of free on-campus child care facilities, a reduction in supplemental fees, and a "guarantee that no graduate student employee be paid at a rate below the individual poverty line regardless of their appointment status, department or college." (The minimum subsidy for a graduate employee at Mizzou is about $12,000 per year).

Graduate employees gave the administration until August 26 to meet these demands or face a university-wide walkout by graduate employees."

(Editor's note; most "graduate employees" are actually receiving tuition remission and other aid in return for volunteer labor. They are not employees in any real sense.)

Here's more:

"More than a thousand red-clad graduate employees, faculty and supporters gathered at Mizzou's iconic columns for a march to Traditions Plaza. Demonstrators chanted "M-I-Z-Shame on you!" and "Grads do!" and held signs pleading, "We need a union!""

End excerpt.

So, better red than fed seems to be the motto at Mizzou. Let us continue:

"Combined with the reduction of resources for public universities is the steady increase in the number of highly paid administrators, outpacing the growth of full-time faculty by about 35 percent since the 1960s. It's not uncommon for upper-level administrators at large research institutions to be paid in excess of $250,000 per year. In fact, many university "CEOs" (the title says it all) are compensated as much as $500,000 per year.

Wage increases for this technocratic administrative class have greatly outpaced the modest gains for professors and graduate workers, who actually perform the core function of the university: educating students.

Since 1980, the cost of college tuition in the U.S. has increased by about 260 percent, translating to a leap from an average annual cost of $9,438 for a four-year post-secondary institution to $23,872. During that time, the amount of student loan debt has skyrocketed to a sickening $1.2 trillion."

End excerpt.

Sooo...

Seems there is trouble in paradise as all are equal but some more equal than others. But one must ask who is driving this? Certainly not the professors or grad students, who have much to lose if they make too many waves. In point of fact these administrators are joining with the tenured professors to promote this idea. Why? Well, for starters, they no doubt believe they can squeeze more funding out of the government, meaning the taxpayers.

Here is where my brother Brian comes in:

"AS PART of their mission to cut costs from the bottom, university managers have increasingly replaced full-time tenured faculty with adjuncts, who work for the university on a part-time basis, are paid by the course and receive no benefits.

In 1975, tenure-track faculty accounted for roughly 45 percent of university teaching staff. Since 1975, that percentage has declined to less than one-quarter. Part-time faculty now account for more than 40 percent of university instructors. Teaching jobs in higher education have become increasingly precarious, and often fail to provide anything close to a livable wage"

End excerpt.

This is absolutely true; the '60's radicals took over the university system and have closed it to new blood, parity out of pure selfishness but also to keep new blood from coming in to undo the work they have done. Brian is a classic example of this; a sharp conservative thinker, he has been blackballed for years from getting any sort of tenure-track position, despite being eminently qualified,, with several books published an numerous scholarly articles. His students always praise him highly on class reviews, and yet he can't receive so much as the time of the day when he applies for positions. Actually that isn't quite true; sometimes he hears back from a lazy administrator who failed to run a Google search on him and he is courted like a supermodel - until the inevitable day when they stop communicating with him. They've pulled up his file and found he didn't meet the qualifications of political thought. No conservative is going to get a tenured position in modern academia.

This is why the universities have gone so much to adjuncts; they need the labor, and the professors are lazy, wanting to dump the grunt work on others, but they don't want new blood to undo what they have done. It really is like the communist party has taken over academia; nobody but a communist is going to be on the ballot.

And these socialists don't want to open the system either, but simply intend to use the crisis they themselves have created to further the leftist cause. It is the typical Hegelian tactic.

What should interest everyone is the timing of this. And isn't it strange that this is something straight from the Obama playbook. Barack Obama would have been down there at Mizzou organizing had he not been in the White House.

Where is the money coming from the fund this campaign? I wonder.

In a related story we find that a private exchange between St. Louis University baseball players has started a firestorm on campus; the allegedly racist comments were "accidentally" discovered by a black student, who then forego any action for the better part of six months before finally succumbing to his better nature and making the insults public.

From The U. News, SLU's student newspaper:

"The conversation took place in a pitchers-only GroupMe, a group messaging application, while the team was on a trip to Washington D.C. The thread of messages included insensitive racial comments and stereotypes.

One player took a photograph of the messages and sent it to his roommate, Brenden Twomey, an African-American senior at SLU and former manager of the baseball team. Twomey viewed the message, but he kept the photograph to himself for almost a year."

[...]

"According to the bias-related incident-report log, the investigation into the incident was closed on April 7 and referred to Dr. Jonathan Smith, the Special Assistant to President Pestello for Diversity and Inclusion. It was also labeled not applicable for disciplinary action.

Due to the nature of the incident, since it was a private conversation rather than a message directed at one person, Hicks did not believe that it met the criteria for adjudication.

"If I were to directly state to you, ‘You suck because of all of your social identities that God gave you.’ That would be wrong. That would require some adjudication,” said Hicks. "We also need to respect laws. This was a private conversation, or at least the perception of private between in-group parties.”

Since the messages went public, the baseball team met with Hicks, Smith and other administrators to discuss the incident and the steps that would follow. The individual players involved and Head Coach Darin Hendrickson could not be reached for comment. However, the baseball team, collectively, has taken responsibility for the messages."

[...]

"The baseball team has agreed to participate in a restorative justice process to make amends for the messages. This process will require the team, as well as the affected individuals, Morgan and Twomey, as well members of BSA, to engage in a facilitated dialogue.

"In this instance, we want to bring together parties that have been responsible for degree of harm with parties that have been harmed. In a restorative justice process, we bring those groups together to decide both what the nature of the harm is and what needs to be done in order for the community to be restored and in order for justice to be attained,” said Smith."

End excerpts.

Interesting; this whole incident marked the implementation of the "Clocktower Accords" that President Pestello agreed to impose on the University as part of his settlement with "Occupy SLU", the trespassers who invaded the SLU campus last year after the Vonderrit Myers shooting in the Shaw neighborhood (an adjunct of the Mike Brown shooting in Ferguson.) In point of fact I smell a rat here; SLU is not some hillbilly hotbed of racism,, and IF this were actually an incident rather than a faked hate speech then it still should fall under the First Amendment, which hasn't been repealed as far as I am aware. It was not directed, as the article notes, at a particular person but was a private conversation. This still is America, isn't it?

Do you doubt me that this is a setup of some sort? The St. Louis Post-Dispatch gives the offending chat:

""I heard they got a colored running the country.. This Tru?”

"Unfortunately, it is,” responds another player.

"(Expletive) watermelon eatin baboon,” reads the following text."

End excerpt.

This offensive commentary stinks; no white people speak this way, but it may be the way a black person THINKS a white racist would speak. And Obama has been President since 2008, so it makes absolutely no sense. The world "colored" has been out of use since the 1970's.

Does anybody believe this is a real incident? I don't.

This is allowing the implementation of the Clocktower Accord. See the details [/link=http://tbirdnow.mee.nu/liberalism_destroying_colleges]here.

There appears to be a concerted, sustained effort to drive societal change through upheaval at the Universities. Pestello, the first non-Jesuit President of St. Louis University and a former Sociology professor, sent out a letter to alumni saying the Ferguson riots were in line with Jesuit values, and SLU actively promoted "participation" in them, even giving safety tips and helping arrange transportation to the "events". Now we have this "proof" that SLU is eaten away by racist whites.

Right.

Truth is the first mission of the University, not social justice, not fairness, not inclusiveness. Truth. American universities have lost sight of that mission, preferring to push a social gospel of Marx onto students who must pay huge amounts to attend. The University of Missouri system has lost large sums of money and has empty dorms thanks to the Young Pioneer tactics employed there, and SLU is probably going to see a drop-off in donations and attendance as well.

But it may be too little too late; so much damage has been done, so many young minds have been twisted and distorted by the lies and propaganda of the Left.

In Philippians the Apostle Paul says:

"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things."

Sadly the Bible is out, truth is out, purity is out, justice is out, virtue is out on our modern socialist college campuses. Relativism is very in. So are lies, deceit, ugliness, and hatred are very in. Why should our kids think on those things?

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1992 words, total size 14 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Here is an update on the embezzlement at the Ethical Society of Police here in St. Louis. (Yes, you heard that right.) In an interesting turn of events we learn that the head of the primarily black police organization with the now quite ironic name has been the culprit in the $200,000 and change heist. His name is Darren Wilson.

Not THE Darren Wilson of Ferguson infamy, but the man who everyone thought was the officer involved when the police first announced his name. This Officer Wilson laughed it off at the time - but it turns out he was the worse of the two.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has the story:

"Sgt. Darren Wilson, 41,was suspended without payin March 2015, amid ongoing internal and criminal investigations into "financial irregularities” discovered by the Ethical Society of Police in December. As muchas $200,000 went missing from the organization.

A federal grand jury indicted Wilsonon Thursday on nine felony counts of wire fraud. The indictment remained sealed until Monday when he turned himself in, according to a press release from the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri."

End excerpt.

This whole story is just wrong on so many levels.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp

Fay and Martha (For those that don't know, that's Dana's wife) and other women will now have another reason not to shop at Target. I needed a new mattress cover and am glad I bought it yesterday at Amazon rather than go Target. Not that the Target restroom represents a problem for me personally but I don't care to support their mishigass (Yiddish for "craziness"). I also saw an article online saying that even the female cast and crew of the transsexual web-based show "Transparent" are "up in arms" about the new gender fluid bathrooms on the production company's film set. Apparently Hollywood liberals don't want to have to live with their own rhetoric applied to themselves. http://www.tmz.com/2016/04/19/transparent-transgender-bathrooms/
We've gone from the political Tea Party to the Mad Hatter's Tea Party.
Jack
http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2016/04/20/add-target-list-places-dont-respect-privacy-sexual-safety-daughters/?utm_source=rsmorningbriefing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl
FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR
Add Target to the List of Places That Don’t Respect the Privacy or Sexual Safety of Your Daughters
By: Caleb Howe (Diary) | April 20th, 2016 at 07:03 PM | 25


Mega-retailer Target Corp. has opened the door today, literally, to the endangerment of children in service of a fake cause. They have a newly restated policy that says you can basically go into whatever bathroom you want, for whatever reason you want, because inclusivity.
From the Minneapolis Star Tribune:

Target Corp. made it clear Tuesday that transgender people who visit its stores are welcome to use the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity.
The statement by the Minneapolis-based retailer comes amid debates in many state legislatures over restricting public restroom use to the sex listed on a person’s birth certificate.
While many of those conversations have centered around restrooms in public schools and government buildings, Target appears to be one of the first big-box retailers to take a proactive stance in declaring its position on the matter when it comes to its own restrooms.
While they may not be technically public, restrooms in stores are often the most easily accessible and widely available options outside of people’s homes and workplaces.
Target’s position also extends to its fitting rooms.
"Inclusivity is a core belief at Target,” the company said in a statement on its corporate website. "It’s something we celebrate. We stand for equality and equity, and strive to make our guests and team members feel accepted, respected and welcomed in our stores and workplaces every day.”

Like other do-good liberal idiots, Target honchos suffer from the delusion that are making some bold step toward tolerance of an oppressed minority by removing rules dividing the bathrooms by gender. But make no mistake, it is a delusion, and a perfectly silly one. It is the same liberal-minded pseudo-hippie social justice warrior philosophy casting aside barriers to entry for bathrooms that simultaneously demand written letters of consent be in the possession of any man seen standing close to a woman. The same movement that rails against "manspreading” is perfectly fine with manpeeing, it seems, in a virtually perfect display of the nutbaggery of their entire pretend, college-hobby-turned-pain-in-the-ass-for-normal-people "movement”. And yes I said normal, please find a safe space and wet yourself. But use whatever safe space corresponds with your self-wetting genderdentity.
This nonsensensical, babble-driven collective of charlatans, posers, and virtue-signalers are not normal. Normal people think practically about things like the safety of children and the proclivities of mankind and the frivolity of language policing and the needs of the many and pretty much everything else. Normal people don’t drum up fake movements by way of shaming and shunning to force the greatest amount of people into the most inconvenience for the sake of a fabled few who simply whined the most. That’s not practical. It’s what scientists used to call damn foolishness.
Let me stop you. Let me stop you right there. If you are about to say to me "why can’t a trans person pee where they feel comfortable” then I ask you this: why can’t a little girl? What if a bearded guy in a trench coat claiming to identify as a woman while standing in the corner of the bathroom smiling makes a little girl uncomfortable? Why does trenchie win? Oh you think that’s absurd? It isn’t. SJWs tell us EVERY SINGLE DAY that college campuses and sporting events and even grade schools are packed to the gills with potential rapists awaiting only the means and opportunity. Well what makes Target so special? Or North Carolina? What, those places are magically rapist-free? What’s your message, oh sage corporate executives? Oh wise and benevolent music dictators? Tell us! Tell us Hollywood, why colleges are dangerous rape-villes but Target is full of persecuted transgender individuals who just need a place to take a leak in peace??
And SJWs offer no distinction. Because it is a heresy among their abnormal kind to transgress or question the feelings of someone who is claiming persecuted minority status. So now anyone can claim it. Why are you in the women’s bathroom, Nazi-tattoo-covered skinhead biker with a five o’clock shadow in men’s clothes? Oh it’s because you identify as a woman and this makes you more comfortable? Okay. Okay then … Adolf is it? Well carry on then. Also don’t forget we’re having a sale on melon-ballers.
Why can’t a person who identifies as their scientific gender drop a few parcels off where they feel comfortable? As in, not amid the opposite gender? And isn’t it also the SJW movement who is quick to offer the defense that "no on is there to watch you pee”? Well then by all means the reverse is true. Nobody is there to watch your penis either, so it should be perfectly comfortable in the penis bathroom.
…
Target can do whatever they want. They are a business. They can even do what they want with their bathrooms right here in North Carolina, despite demagoguery about our laws. But they aren’t immunized from criticism, though. And certainly you don’t have to shop there. And you shouldn’t. Maybe it will impact their business, maybe it won’t. But your children will be safer. And that’s really the only reason you need. Because Target has chosen to play social justice with the other immature, unreasonable, flower power idiots of our stupid, sick culture instead of looking out for your kids.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:58 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1051 words, total size 7 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

America in these modern times has become a farce. From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

"ST. LOUIS • Police Chief Sam Dotson said Wednesday that as much as $200,000 had been stolen from the organization representing black St. Louis police officers, and a particular individual is under investigation."

[...]

"Dotson emphasized that there was no public money missing — all of it came from dues of members of the Ethical Society of Police."

End excerpt.

Yes, you read that right; the Ethical Society of Police has been defrauded of member dues by one of it's own!

You can't make this stuff up!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 111 words, total size 1 kb.

Brian Birdnow responds to Kathleen Parker, who thinks public restrooms should be open on a purely first come-first serve basis sans any consideration as to your genitalia or chromosomes:

http://www.galesburg.com/article/20160414/OPINION/160419845

Here is a brief excerpt from Parker:

" Thanks to North Carolina's anti-LGBT legislation (HB2), also referred to as the "bathroom bill," the state effectively has begun redefining itself from its long-popular characterization as a "valley of humility between two mountains of conceit" (South Carolina and Virginia).

The new law, which ludicrously requires transgender people to use the restroom consistent with the sex on their birth certificates, has liberated South Carolina from its persistent place as the brunt of late-night jokes. Remarking on the law, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said her state doesn't have "that problem." Brava.

The law in question was hurriedly passed last month and signed by North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory in response to what one state official called a restroom free-for-all, referring to sudden hysteria over the possibility of transgender individuals using the "wrong" restroom. How would anyone know? Will officials now post monitors at public restrooms to check birth certificates and human bladder-evacuation portals?

This would be riotously funny if it weren't so patently discriminatory."

End excerpt.

Brian's reply:


Dear Ms. Parker,
In your Washington Post column last week bashing the state of North Carolina for its pending anti-LGBT law you seem to be reaching a point of hysteria rare even for the Post. You caustically mention that "...the new law, which ludicrously requires transgender people to use the restroom consistent with the sex on their birth certificates." May I ask you , why is it considered "ludicrous" by limousine liberals of your set that people should use the public restroom consistent with their born gender? Most right-thinking people would consider this to be the very picture of normality, and not a subject fit for discussion, let alone argument.

You go on to ask, how a state that "...boasts several of the nation's top universities and is home to the famed Research Triangle, could codify what is so plainly a discriminatory law." Perhaps the citizens of North Carolina, despite the leftward drift of our culture, exemplified by the universities and the proliferation of Yuppies in Research and Development positions, have decided that the buck stops at gender as an optional choice. They quite sensibly believe that a person is born male or female.

It is the Washington Post type of thinking that has created the world we live in now, wherein a person can "adopt" gender on a whim, or where a Caucasian can claim to be African-American for professional employment advantage, and can be defended by certain African-Americans when she is caught, because she is said to "self-identify" as "Black." Is this they type of world you really want?

Brian Birdnow
St. Louis, Missouri

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:49 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 479 words, total size 4 kb.

Jack Kemp

The full piece is at http://townhall.com/tipsheet/christinerousselle/2016/04/15/watch-sen-barbara-boxer-tries-and-fails-to-explain-catholicism-to-a-priest-n2148874 and is titled as WATCH: Sen. Barbara Boxer Tries and Fails To Explain Catholicism To A Priest by Christine Rousselle.

My Comments:

At the 1:16 mark until the 3:19 mark of the included YouTube video of a U.S. Senate hearing, Boxer tries to grill a priest on the Catholic position on global warming (a non-theological issue). Boxer, who is Jewish, tries to essentially lecture Catholic morality to a priest. Father Sirico goes on to defend his educational intitute's funding against accusations by both Boxer and another U.S. Senator, Republican John Barrasso. The Father bluntly says that his organization's actions were being distorted to make it seem the organiztion's members were like "moral prostitutes."

You can watch the entire U.S. Senate bitter exchange here, with all its seething anger on both sides:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxGZb2GgdaM

There is an expression I heard about in Hebrew when I was in Israel as a young man. It was used to quiet an obnoxious woman working in a canning factory on a kibbutz. It is the most vulgar expression I know in any language and I can curse in several. For that reason I won't repeat it here, but I will just say it would be most appropriate to say to Barbara Boxer at this time - or any other time.

Boxer is the so-called feminist who after joining with the NOW crowd for decades, attacked Condoleezza Rice at her Sec. of State confirmation hearings because Ms. Rice didn't have children and thus was not invested in the next generation, an argument Boxer never used in public - or perhaps anywhere - against Gloria Steinem. And, of course, there was Boxer getting angry at a U.S. General for addressing her by the standard military form of "Ma'am," a form used to address a woman of superior rank, a military term Boxer was entirely unfamiliar with.

I'm glad Boxer is retiring from the Senate but we may not have seen the last of her in public life or just making public statements.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 01:52 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 351 words, total size 2 kb.

Jack Kemp makes this observation about the Peabody Energy bakruptcy:

Do you think the coal company Peabody can claim that the oil, gas and nuclear energy companies are using monopolistic practices to get the federal EPA to drive coal companies out of business? Then Peabody could file a lawsuit under the Sherman Antitrust Act!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 60 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Recently Baltimore County came to a settlement with the City over a scheme to colonize affluent County neighborhoods with HUD housing. According to Fox News:

"With crime in the inner city soaring and many of Baltimore’s neighborhoods plagued by gang violence, there was a push to integrate those communities into neighborhoods in the surrounding county. The NAACP and others sued Baltimore County over alleged housing segregation – and the county has now settled, agreeing to spend $30 million over the next 10 years to build 1,000 homes in affluent neighborhoods.

On top of that, the Baltimore County executive is planning to put forward legislation outlawing the practice of landlords denying – or as some see it, discriminating against – Section 8 tenants.

"I think it's important that we make sure that opportunities are available to everyone within the region," County Executive Kevin Kamenetz said."

End excerpt.

First it should be pointed out that integration was never the primary purpose of the Fair Housing Act or any subsequent legislation; the purpose was to grant civil rights to protected classes, allowing them to live where they choose. Integration was a tool used to enforce civil rights in education, not in housing. Nowhere is integration even implied as a fundamental right in the Constitution, nor is the benefits of living in a good neighborhood.

What is very interesting is that the County plans to force landlords to accept government funding of unqualifiable tenants via Section 8. Section 8 is a difficult program to deal with; they require a series of inspections, often very demanding and far above what local municipalities require of landlords, and they have a bad habit of simply stopping funding at inopportune moments for any and every reason. This should not stand in court, but in the era of Obama - who has appointed fully 324 Federal judges as of April 12 of 2016 - chances are good that it will not be struck down.

And since when is opportunity a civil right? Opportunity is the fallout of civil rights, not a right in itself, and property rights are by far the cornerstone of all civil rights. President Calvin Coolidge once said;

"Ultimately property rights and personal rights are the same thing. The one cannot be preserved if the other be violated."

And the philosopher John Locke, so influential to the Founding Fathers, said;

"Government has no other end than the preservation of property."

Or as John Adams put it:

"The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence."

Yet here we are in modern America promoting the idea that property rights must be abridged to "grant" civil rights to a certain protected class. And this is not just a quirk of Baltimore; HUD has been pursuing a scheme to build low-income housing in affluent neighborhoods nationwide, ostensibly as a way to redress discrimination. According to CNS News

"On Wednesday, two weeks after getting the Supreme Court's okay, the Obama administration issued a final rule intended to
move poor people "into communities that are rich with opportunity," as HUD Secretary Julián Castro phrased it in his news release.

The new regulation is all about "affirmatively furthering fair housing," HUD says."

In short, the Administration plans to colonize predominantly white and Asian communities with likely Democratic voters. This is a dirty political trick, one designed to overcome the predominance of Republicans in governorships and state legislatures, who control redistricting. The Obama Administration found an easy way to make the power to control districts mute by simply colonizing those districts and thus diluting the vote. It is a sort of reverse gerrymandering, where instead of creating districts they create demographics.

Blockbusting is illegal. Blockbusting is a conscious attempt to trigger panic selling by suggesting something dire is coming - like large low-income housing being built in a neighborhood thus reducing property values. Essentially HUD is blockbusting on a national scale here. This can also be seen as a due process violation, because the construction of HUD housing will lower property values, thus constitute an eminent domain taking without due compensation.

Not content to rest on his laurels with this triumph over America's fundamental right,HUD director Julian Castro (fitting name) now wants to force landlords to rent to convicted criminals, a non-protected class. 

His reasoning is that, since minorities make up the preponderance of convicted criminals, a prudent policy of denying criminals tenancy is de facto an act of racial discrimination and thus grounds for punitive action by HUD.

"Right now, many housing providers use the fact of a conviction, any conviction, regardless of what it was for or how ong ago it happened, to indefinitely bar folks from housing opportunities,” Mr. Castro said in a statement.

"Many people who are coming back to neighborhoods are only looking for a fair chance to be productive members, but blanket policies like this unfairly deny them that chance,” added Castro."

End quote.

Mr. Castro intends to use the full power of his office to compel property owners to rent to people they would never rent to otherwise, and to put their good tenants in jeopardy in the process. There have been a number of court rulings on this very thing, and in point of fact it has been made plain that landlords are legally responsible for knowingly renting to potentially dangerous felons.

Eugene Volokh gives us the rundown on that:

"According to the case that I cited (a case where the University of Kansas knowingly rented to an ex-convict who raped another resident), a landlord’s duty of reasonable care to his tenants would require him to take steps to protect the tenants against criminal attack by cotenants — presumably, according to some of the commenters who were defending the Kansas decision, by evicting the tenant, and (I take it) by not renting to the tenant in the first place if the landlord knows or has reason to know of the past conviction. And if indeed criminal background checks are cheap, it would be reasonable for the landlord to do that check and learn of the conviction."

Indeed, landlords are liable for illegal activity on the premises, and can face the following penalties:

* You could face fines for allowing the illegal activity to continue to occur
* You could face criminal penalties for knowingly allowing the illegal activity to occur
* The rental property can be confiscated by the government, but this is only in extreme cases
* In addition to criminal penalties, there can be other negative consequences for landlords. These can include:
o Rental property value can drop, thus making it hard to find and keep tenants
o If a tenant or anyone else in the neighborhood is injured or annoyed by the drug dealing, you could be sued on the grounds that the rental property constitutes a public nuisance that threatens public safety and morals.

The most potent defense in the landlord's arsenal is the application process; the landlord has the power to deny tenancy. It is the most prudent and logical course of action. Yet HUD is going to force landlords to accept criminals, and do so in a manner that will keep the government's hands clean; no legislation or executive orders involved, so the landlords wind up bearing all of the legal liability.

Interestingly enough, this will have the reverse of the desired effect; landlords will have to tighten their screening process, making credit and employment requirements far stricter. The end result will be that poor people will be denied more frequently, as will the self-employed or under employed. Right now there are a number of places that specialize in low income housing and they will have to change that, driving retirees into the streets. Contractors and other seasonal workers will find it hard to rent property since their credit is often less than perfect during the slow season. The self-employed will be out. And always the applications will have to be run, lest an accusation of bias be leveled by HUD, so a person who is likely to be denied cannot be told that is the case, and he or she will have to lose the application fee, costing them money.

This will destroy low and middle- income housing.

It is also a violation of a number of state and local ordinances. Here in St. Louis an unconstitutional law that required landlords to obtain licenses from St. Louis County (see here ) over and above obtaining clear occupancy inspections - even when letting a relative live on the premises for free - requires the following:

" The [Director of the Department of Public Works] may provide written notice to the owner of residential rental property licensed under this Code that an occupant thereof, within a period of one year, has been convicted of having violated a felony, misdemeanor or ordinance related to the following acts:

a. illegal sale, manufacture, storing, possession, distribution or use of narcotics or other controlled substances or

precursors;
b. illegal sale, manufacture, storing, possession, distribution or use of drug paraphernalia or precursors;
c. illegal sale, storing, possession, use or distribution of a firearm, weapon or explosive device, or other

violation of law related to use or possession of the same;
d. prostitution;
e. illegal gambling;
f. illegal sale, distribution and consumption of alcoholic beverages.

Within 30 days of receipt of such notice from the Director, the owner shall initiate eviction proceedings against such occupant or occupants, and shall thereafter diligently pursue them... An owner who fails to begin eviction proceedings with regard to such occupant or occupants within 30 days of receipt of the Director’s notice, or who fails diligently to pursue such eviction proceedings, shall be subject to license suspension.

And here are the penalties the bill would levy on a landlord for not evicting a tenant who, for example, had been convicted in the past year of violating the county ordinance prohibiting consumption of alcohol in a massage parlor — or something equally innocuous:

Every person or entity convicted of a violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall be fined not more than

One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or imprisoned in the St. Louis County Jail for not more than one year, or be punished by both such fine and imprisonment.

Each day in which a person or entity allows occupancy of residential rental property in violation of any provision of this chapter shall constitute a separate violation."

This law was passed by the County but has not been implemented pending a legal challenge. But it should be pointed out that a landlord will be in a terrible bind if he rents to a tenant who has a criminal background. It is not easy to evict tenants, by the way.

Couple this with the war being waged in conjunction with the EPA on large landholders, on farmers and developers, and it becomes obvious that whole scale redistribution of land is the overarching scheme.

Of course, there is more to it than political and social engineering; the Left has always taken delight in rubbing the noses of prosperous whites in their powerlessness to stop this. It was once said that whites wouldn't be allowed to retreat to the suburbs and school busing was designed precisely to force this on the white community. Here in St. Louis we've had a court-ordered city/county desegregation. Black children are bused out of the failed City district to what were once excellent suburban schools, and now many of these schools suffer from crime and declining test scores. The Julian Castro idea that people will be uplifted by a better environment is astonishingly wrong and has been proven so by decades of forced integration. Man is not inherently good, and it worth noting that poorly educated and ill behaved children are rarely lifted up but rather tend to bring others down, and forced integration empowers the very worst of human impulses. And with the decline in the ability of schools to punish unruly children, with the pressure on the schools to make the transfer students appear to succeed, standards of behavior that applied to well-off children are downgraded to accommodate the "cultural diversity" of the new students. It is what Patrick Daniel Moynihan once referred to as "defining deviancy down".

There is an all-out assault on what was considered traditional America, and the white community is where the idea of America still lies. Whites cannot be allowed to cluster, in the liberal mind, because they will start talking about the old days and perhaps stop kowtowing to the progressive scheme of "imagine there's no country" and everyone is mixed up in a multicultural hodgepodge where they retain their own particular culture while living cheek-by-jowl. I remember the 1980's where the liberal college professors (and back then you did have to still preface that) were all a-twitter about "cultural diversity". I remember how insane I thought the concept; the Balkans were one example of how you cannot have different cultures occupy the same space, and history is replete with endless warfare between peoples who are stuck together in too close a proximity without sharing a common cultural tradition. But the left can only think about how to break things, and they realize that they can break America with diversity and "tolerance". They want to isolate and bully white America since that is the repository of the old ideas.

Integration without first enculturating peoples is one of their tools. It breaks down any resistance from anybody since they feel threatened and will simply keep quiet. That immigration may be external or it may be internal, forcing the poor and criminal classes into close proximity with the mainstream in order to isolate and atomize the mainstream culture. Divide and conquer is an old adage for military success, and this is the goal of these abrogations of the most fundamental of human rights, the right to own property. American property rights extend to our nation as well as our individual holdings, and it extends to ourselves. We own ourselves. That is a fundamental concept that is increasingly under assault in these modern times by the Left. Obamacare, for instance, is a direct assault on self-ownership. If one wants to establish a socialist mindset one must break the notion of ownership - and that includes ownership of country and of family and of self. President Obama and his Democratic allies are busily doing exactly that, with the complicity of a Republican Party that prefers to stand silent. Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

Evil is on the march.

By the way, I have worked in property management for 19 years, so know a thing or two about this subject.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:49 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2477 words, total size 19 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

I've argued in the past that the polar ice sheets that the Gang Green-ous Global Warming hysterics point to as "proof" that we are experiencing unprecedented planetary warming caused entirely by industrial emissions of carbon dioxide are really melting because of geothermal activity. It makes no sense otherwise; the warming is IN THE IAR if it is caused by AGW, and as such any melting would be surface-first, or at best you may have some melting starting under the floating ice in the Antarctic or along the coasts - not melting of the big glaciers on the land. Yet that is what we have witnessed, and in fact a "ring of fire" was discovered under the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, which explains why the sheet has been shrinking while it's brother in eastern Antarctica has been growing. This while sea ice in the Antarctic has been growing as well (and there is no logic to "warm currents" in the Antarctic as a cold circumpolar current keeps the continent from enjoying a warming ocean with the exceptions of some minor warming along the Antarctic Peninsula.) The Gang Green has turned their attentions to the Arctic, since Antarctica has not cooperated, and there is a continual drumbeat about thin pack ice and about shrinking glaciation in Greenland. Well...

Here she blows!

From the article:

"BERLIN: Greenland sits over an area of abnormally hot mantle material that drives a widespread melting beneath the ice sheet and rapid ice flow over a distance of several hundred kilometres, a new study has found.

Greenland's lithosphere has hot depths which originate in its distant geological past and cause the island's ice to rapidly flow and melt from below.

An anomaly zone crosses Greenland from west to east where present-day flow of heat from the Earth's interior is elevated.

With this anomaly, researchers from GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences (GFZ) could explain observations from radar and ice core drilling data that indicate a widespread melting beneath the ice sheet and increased sliding at the base of the ice that drives the rapid ice flow over a distance of 750 kilometres from the summit area of the Greenland ice sheet to the North Atlantic Ocean."

End excerpt.

That's right; Greenlandic ice melt is caused by geothermal activity and not carbon dioxide emissions.

It was discovered in 2013 that there was an enormous canyon in Greenland buried beneath the ice, something suggestive of a volcanic place. We know that Iceland, a scant 752 miles away, and Iceland is tremendously volcanic. We know that you don't really find a single volcano but rather there are parts of the Earth that are volcanic and there are Shields, places where no volcanism is found. The idea that Greenlandic melt is caused by volcanoes is perfectly logical.

But don't expect this to get much media attention; the Global Warming debate was supposed to have been won by the year 2000 and an international regime was to have been put into place to regulate industrial emissions and redistribute wealth. It didn't happen, but those who stand to profit by it (and that includes many climatologists who would be forced back into obscurity should the Global Warming bandwagon suffer a flat tire - and all the money dry up) are going along as if they had never lost the argument. Increasingly they resemble the Iraqi Information Minister who claimed to journalists in Baghdad during the U.S. invasion that the Americans had been driven back to the border, even as bombs fell and the sound of funfire could be heard just a couple of miles away.

It's become a complete denial of reality.

Liberals don't like the concept of God, and they prefer to place themselves at the godhead. It comes as no surprise that people who are their own god refuse to believe in reality. We are seeing the fruits of this here.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:31 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 658 words, total size 4 kb.