Timothy Birdnow

Contributor Bill H. and I had a discussion over comments I made on Jack Kemp's post on the closure of the Suez Canal.

Here is the thread.

Bill says:

It's not just a matter of "a lot more shipping," it’s that today there is far greater national dependency on that shipping.

We were highly dependent on Middle East oil in 1973, but oil did not, and does not, go through the Suez canal. The US trade deficit in 1973 was $6 billion, and was almost entirely due to oil. Today it is $83 billion and is virtually everything from tee shirts to computers.

When the San Onofre nuclear reactor needed a replacement steam generator, its management looked for someone to build it. This is 19th century technology, simply tubes in a tank heat exchanger, albeit quite large and operating at fairly high pressure and temperature. Still, nothing in any way outlandish. There was no one in this nation who could build it, and they had to have it built in South Korea. It came to California via ship.

The shutdown of the Suez Canal in 1973 was inconvemient, but major nations were self sufficient in those days, so it was nothing more than inconvenient. By shipping all of our manufacturing overseas to increase profits, we have rendered ourselves dependent on other nations, and on sea trade, and so closing the canal became a disaster.

I reply:

Bill, you're right; we've become too dependent on international trade.

I once read about the Bronze Age and the fall of the Bronze Age civilizations. One of their problems was they became too dependent on international trade (in the Mediterranean). When the Sea People came and piracy became unmanageable commerce ground to a halt and the economies of many of the old Bronze Age cultures collapsed.

We are in a similar boat today, I fear.

We're overspecialized. If you have to go to someone else for something as simple as a steam generator it means an unfriendly power can strangle you.

I think it's only partly about profit. I think the international order wants us dependent so as to help forge world government. That has always been a fond dream of the Left. They used this approach in Europe, first by creating the European coal and oil market, then the Common Market, then the E.U. It was intentional; to weld Germany's economy to the French so the Germans wouldn't dare fight a war with France again. Then the rest of Europe joined in and now Europeans would no more dream of going to war than Kentucky would fight a war with Arkansas. They see themselves as the same country. I think that is part of the purpose of all this international trade, to make it so we see ourselves as "citizens of the world" and not Americans.

Bill retorts:

"I think it's only partly about profit. I think the international order wants us dependent so as to help forge world government.”

Timothy, I think you are falling into the error of attributing something to evil plans when it actually can be explained by sheer stupidity. There are a vest number of instances where today’s "leaders” do things based on short term gains when the long term loss is as plain as the nose on their faces. They simply do not think long term. Short term advantage is everything.

Eliminating the filibuster is a case in point. Democrats were gleeful when they eliminated the filibuster on presidential appointments, then later complained that Republicans were not playing fair when that change got Republican appointments confirmed. Having learned nothing from that, they now are arguing to eliminate the filibuster altogether.

Sort of like hearing hoofbeats and looking for zebras. These guys are just not smart enough to plan some kind of world government. They cannot plan past the end of their collective pointy little nose.

I say:

Bill, that may be for some, but for others - for the real insiders in the Ruling Class - I think we are seeing decades of planning.

Case in point; Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, gave up the game of what was really happening - a way to create world socialism. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-a-back-door-to-communism-and-the-united-nations-admits-it/

"intentionally transform the economic development model” in place "since the Industrial Revolution.”. "This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history".

There are others. http://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/01/22/the-u-n-s-global-warming-war-on-capitalism-an-important-history-lesson-2/&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwj94bzgk9jvAhUGLs0KHWAqDfQQFjAEegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw0IsOyWKQy-l75WK0IKdYP0

She just slipped up, but it is clearly what the U.N. and so many of the international bodies - and world leaders - want.

Bill, why do corporations promote all this "social justice" nonsense, up to and including the transgender stuff? They aren't doing it to make money, that is clear. They are appeasing somebody besides their customer base and their investors. Who do you suppose that is?

Bill, it's not stupidity. Well, it is on the part of some of them, but why is it the Left keeps winning if they are so stupid? How is it they now control our government if they are such fools? That didn't happen by accident. Yes, they stole this election, but how?

I know; you're claiming that it's just a quest for money and power and with some of the DEMOCRATS and most Republicans it is. But they aren't the ones who I am talking about, and they aren't the ones who matter. I'm talking about the true Deep State, the big corporate guys like Gates or Steyer or Buffet or Soros. I'm talking about the people behind guys like Obama or Joe Biden, the ones in the shadows. I'm talking about the people promoting so much of this radical agenda. I'm talking about the people who run the media (not the talking heads, who are fools.)

There are people and companies who are looking at this as a matter of profit, but the real insiders, the planners, the guys who go to Davos every year or to Renaissance Weekend or the other Ruling Class Woodstocks have a much bigger plan in place.

Or do you really think most people actually love this stuff? The Left gets a lot of deadheads, certainly, but why? How is it that Black Lives Matter is cool to young people?

Bill, I gave the example of the European Union above. That was in fact a CONSCIOUS strategy by France to keep the Germans off their backs. The idea was to tie the two economies together so the Germans wouldn't ever go to war with them. On May 9, 1950 French foreign minister Robert Schuman proposed the creation of the Coal and Steel Market. His exact words were that it was to "make war not only unthinkable but materially impossible". He got his way, and this led to the creation of the E.U. It was NOT about making money. Granted, money was a big issue and the internationalists always set it up so they can make lots of it, but there is an ideological bent amoynt these people. They all went to the same schools, read the same newspapers and magazines, and hang out in the same circles. They are true believers.

I don't see how this is really debatable.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:02 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 1221 words, total size 8 kb.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:08 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 136 words, total size 2 kb.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 02:01 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 379 words, total size 3 kb.

This from Michael McKee:

This is where we are heading Kiwis....

https://www.nzcpr.com/the-final-step-to-separatism/

"The United Nations Indigenous Peoples Declaration… is the final step on the road to separatism. This is the road to Zimbabwe.”
– Winston Peters, 2011

Rosemary Banks, New Zealand’s Permanent Representative to the UN, outlined these concerns to the General Assembly: "Article 26states that indigenous peoples have a right to own, use, develop or control lands and territories that they have traditionally owned, occupied or used. For New Zealand, the entire country is potentially caught within the scope of the Article. The Article appears to require recognition of rights to lands now lawfully owned by other citizens, both indigenous and non-indigenous, and does not take into account the customs, traditions, and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned.

"In addition, the provisions on redress and compensation in Article 28, are unworkable in New Zealand. Again, the entirecountry would appear to fall within the scope of the Article and the text generally takes no account of the fact that land may now be occupied or owned legitimately by others or subject to numerous different, or overlapping, indigenous claims. It is impossible for the State in New Zealand to uphold a right to redress and provide compensation for value for the entire country.

"Finally, the Declaration implies that indigenous peoples have a right of veto over a democratic legislature and national resource management, in particular Articles 19 and 32(2). We strongly support the full and active engagement of indigenous peoples in democratic decision-making processes. We also have some of the most extensive consultation mechanisms in the world, where the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are enshrined in resource management law. But these Articles imply different classes of citizenship, where indigenous have a right of veto that other groups or individuals do not have.”

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:02 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 307 words, total size 3 kb.

This from Jim Church:

Long before modern industry really ramped up Arctic ice fluctuated — as it has "forever” — but "scientists” arrogantly locked in their cultural now ignore history or deliberately change the data and findings of the past to deceive the public.
This post reveals some actual history which the public is being kept in the dark about because dishonest scientists want to keep everyone in fear and dread over things totally out of our human control.

Chester McAteer adds:

Few, obviously, look deeper than what they are told, is far easier to assume that because something is labeled Scientific it must be correct, but the recent history of Science proves it must not be above the prudence of skepticism, criticism and brutal scrutiny. The question should arise that if Scientists have been so wrong in the past, why would we be asked to have so much confidence in the predictions of a few today?

NEW YORK TIMES-February 14, 1895: "Geologists think the world will be frozen up again…”

LOS ANGELES TIMES-May 23, 1902: "Disappearing Glaciers…deteri

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:00 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1231 words, total size 9 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

With Covid now we are being told that masking up with somehow "fight the virus" and a bunch of dopes actually believe that.

I remember back during the AIDS epidemic a lot of younger people were all on-board with the condom business. A lot of them were demanding married couples wear condoms when engaging in sexual congress on the off chance one of them had caught AIDS from somewhere. This kind of myopia is how the Left moves this sort of thing forward; panic the ignorant into ridiculous notions.

I think the AIDS epidemic was the dress rehearsal for this Covid stuff; there was panic in the general population, even though virtually no heterosexual non-intravenous

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:40 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 249 words, total size 2 kb.

Bob Clasen observes:

Claiming various groups are victims is the cultural Marxist way of fomenting hatred and division and then suggesting that only an all powerful government can save all the "victims” from being "oppressed.” Stop already with the victimhood and take responsibility for your choices.

Feminist Author: Women Need to Stop Playing the Victim

Tim adds:

As the Bible says "as a man thinketh so shall he be". If you think yourself a victim you will always be a victim. And then you need Big Brother to make it all better, but what Big Brother giveth Big Brother can taketh away.

And in the process each victim group is at war with every other victim group. Look at what is happening now with the "transgendered" fighting the feminists over who competes in women's sports.

It is the age old tactic; divide and conquer.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:30 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 148 words, total size 1 kb.

From Richard Cronin:

Lunatic Bill Gates is funding another lunatic, David Keith of Harvard, to implement "Solar Radiation Management”. That is, spray coal fly ash and sulfates up at the elevation of cirrus clouds to block solar radiation.

Ohh, wait !!

In 2004, NASA concluded that aircraft contrails at that elevation contribute to "heat trapping” and they further concluded that these contrails are entirely responsible for the warming observed between 1975 to 1994.

So what is it ?? Warming via contrails or blocking the sun via Chemtrails. Lunatics.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:24 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 233 words, total size 2 kb.

From Richard Cronin:

I read a biography of Andrew Carnegie a long time ago. An interesting anecdote about Carnegie in his younger years was his employment as a railroad dispatcher, keeping track of rail movement by telegraph.

One night the wheels of a boxcar overheated and froze up, stopping the entire train. The boxcar was empty. The crew telegraphed Carnegie asking what they should do. Carnegie immediately responded to burn the boxcar down to the wheels and throw the trucks off the line.

When Carnegie’s superiors heard of what he had done, they were initially horrified. Then with a bit of reflection, they realized that keeping the line open and freight moving was far more valuable than the cost of the boxcar. Carnegie’s actions became standard practice for disabled/ immobile freight cars.

Fast forward to the Evergreen ship blocking the Suez Canal. Stand back and drop a MOAB. Get the film crews out. It’ll be just like the time that they blew up the dead whale washed ashore in Oregon.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:58 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Joe Biden's Gun Control is Class Warfare.

From the article:

Under the plan Biden teased on the campaign trail, "assault weapons” and "high-capacity magazines” would come under the National Firearms Act. The definition of "assault weapons” would extend to semi-automatic rifles, handguns, and some shotguns. High-capacity magazines are those that hold more than ten rounds—or most standard magazines.

Gun owners would have two choices: either surrender their property to the government or pay a $200 tax to keep each item, which will be added to a national registry. For many people, this would quickly turn into thousands of dollars paid to keep their own property. A hunter, for example, with just one AR-15 and four standard capacity magazines would owe the federal government $1,000. Failure to comply could mean up to ten years in federal prison and a $10,000 fine.

There are now more gun owners than ever. Even before record firearm sales in 2020, the National Shooting Sports Foundation estimated one out of every five firearms purchased in this country is an AR-style rifle and that Americans own fifteen million AR-15s. Two-thirds of Americans own more than one gun; millions are middle- and low-income—people whose taxes Biden said he wouldn’t raise. "The president remains committed to his pledge from the campaign that nobody making under $400,000 a year will have their taxes increased,” White House press secretary Jen Psaki said on March 15. And yet, his gun control plan amounts to a massive tax on the working class.

Biden’s policies would make it prohibitively expensive for everyday Americans to own firearms, effectively pricing them out of self-defense and hunting tools. Wealthy Americans—and criminals—would be far less affected by their implementation. Democrats don’t seem to have a problem with that, as Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) is also calling for legislation to renew the Assault Weapons Ban.

"We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence,” a definitive Department of Justice-funded study of the 1994 law concluded in 2004. "Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” Lois Beckett, a reporter covering gun violence and gun policy at left-leaning ProPublica, points to a study by Duke University policy experts that came to a similar conclusion. "There is no compelling evidence that it saved lives,” they wrote. Indeed, this seems to be one of the rare issues that can bring people from across the political spectrum together.

"Regardless of one’s opinion on guns and gun control, it is obvious that this proposal will disproportionately impact poor and working-class communities,” wrote Kim Kelly in the Washington Post about Biden’s assault weapons ban. Kelly is a left-wing labor organizer; she likens the "war on guns” to our failed wars on "poverty” and "terror” that merely served to swell the size and scope of the federal government. On cue and without a hint of irony, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin said Tuesday that the government could tackle gun violence the same way it successfully handled the opioid crisis.

History doesn’t repeat, but it does rhyme, to paraphrase Mark Twain. Just as in the 1990s, the narrative about assault weapons is a largely media-driven fabrication. According to Gary Kleck, the David J. Bordua Professor Emeritus of Criminology at Florida State University, assault weapons were only used in 1.4 percent of gun crimes before the implementation of national or state assault weapons bans in the 1990s. The same is essentially true now. As Democrats call for another ban, FBI data show you are more likely to be killed by a club, a foot, or a knife, than an AR-15-style rifle.

[...]

It’s difficult to overstate the power of the media’s ability to manufacture consensus on issues like gun control. A recent study in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence found that the "perpetuation of potentially inaccurate stereotypes not only misguides future research on [mass shootings], but also shapes the social construction of mass murder.” In other words, statistically rare acts of violence are propagandized as systemic social problems. How rare? "Put another way, being the victim of a mass shooting is just about as unlikely as being struck by lightning, which occurred at a rate of 0.035 per 100,000 people in 2016,” explains Jaclyn Schildkraut, Associate Professor of Criminal Justice at the State University of New York at Oswego. You are far more likely to die in a car crash, in a fire, or choking on food, she notes.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:36 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 803 words, total size 9 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

I just found this 1980 article by E.L. Doctorow about the rise of Ronald Reagan. It spends quite a bit of time on The Gipper's early career.

Here is a snippet:

Ronald Reagan was born in 1911 in rural Illinois. His father, John Edward Reagan, was a store clerk and erstwhile merchant whose jobs took the family to such towns as Galesburg, Monmouth and Dixon–just the sorts of places responsible for one of the raging themes of American literature, the soul-murdering complacency of our provinces, without which the careers of Edwin Arlington Robinson, Sherwood Anderson, Sinclair Lewis and Willa Cather, to name just a few, would never have found glory. The best and brightest fled all our Galesburgs and Dixons, if they could, but the candidate was not among them.

The Reagans were a poor, close, hard-working family. With his older brother, Neil, Reagan sold homemade popcorn at high school football games and was charged with the serious business of maintaining the family vegetable garden. For many summers he worked as a lifeguard at Lowell Park on the Rock River in Dixon, pulling seventy-seven people out of the water by his own count and socking away most of his salary to make up college tuition.

The candidate attended Eureka College in Eureka, Illinois. He was no student. He had a photographic memory, and it was this trait, rather than application to books or innate cleverness, that got him through his exams. What really interested him was making the football team, pledging a fraternity, debating and acting in campus theatricals. But his priorities were correct. Eureka, a fifth-rate college, provided meager academic credentials to its graduates. But a third-rate student at a fifth-rate college could learn from the stage, the debating platform, the gridiron and the fraternity party the styles of manliness and verbal sincerity that would stand him in good stead when the time came to make his mark in the world. In fact, the easy, garrulous charm Reagan developed at Eureka got results very quickly. Graduating in the depths of the Depression, he had no trouble finding a job as a radio announcer.

We have these facts from a biography, The Rise of Ronald Reagan, by Bill Boyarsky, a California journalist, and from the candidate’s autobiography, Where’s the Rest of Me?, the title of which is taken from his most memorable line as a film actor. In the picture King’s Row, he played the role of a young rake who is careless with his attentions to the daughter of a surgeon; when he lands in the hospital after a car accident, the vengeful surgeon amputates his legs. Reagan delivers the memorable line coming to after the operation.

It was when he became a sportscaster for WHO in Des Moines that Reagan’s peculiar affinity for simulated life began to emerge. He was called on to describe baseball games played by the Chicago White Sox and the Cubs on the basis of Western Union messages telegraphed from the ballpark. These were characteristically brief–a hit, a walk and so on–but the chatty Reagan made an art of describing the game as if he were sitting in the stands, faking the scene in all its drama with only a sound effects man to help him. He became quite popular with the regional audience and did promotional work on the side as the station’s celebrity speaker, giving talks to fraternal lodges, boys’ clubs and the like, telling sports stories and deriving from them Y.M.C.A. sorts of morals.

In 1937, Reagan went to Santa Catalina Island to cover the Chicago Cubs in spring training. The proximity to Hollywood reawoke his collegiate ambition to act, and he managed to get himself a screen test. He didn’t really expect anything to come of it but was offered a contract by Warner Brothers for $200 a week. An agent had persuaded the studio that he was another Robert Taylor. Considering that actor’s negligible store of animation, one can wonder now at the inducement. In any event, the candidate acted in more than twenty "B” pictures before his big break came. In 1940, he persuaded Jack Warner to give him the role of George Gipp, the doomed Notre Dame football hero, in Knute Rockne, All American, a film about the famous football coach. His means of persuasion was a photograph of himself in his Eureka College jersey and helmet.

Subsequently, he was sanctified to play the role of a pubescent Shirley Temple’s first screen beau in That Hagen Girl. There is no evidence that between takes they exchanged Republican philosophies. Thereafter his career ascended to such heights as the aforementioned King’s Row, The Voice of the Turtle and The Hasty Heart; descended to the likes of Bedtime for Bonzo, in which the lead was a chimpanzee, and sank forever in Hellcats of the Navy, a black and white 1950s film about submarines. All in all, Reagan acted in close to fifty movies over a twenty-year period and the relevance of this achievement to a Presidential candidacy should not go unexamined.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:09 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 867 words, total size 6 kb.

From Stephen Heins:

While the European Union is trying to reduce carbon emissions to honor its Paris Accord commitment, they are inadvertently ensuring that most African nations will continue to live in energy poverty.
…

African countries deem EU carbon border levy ‘protectionist’

From the article:

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:19 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Oh my.

Ex-CDC Director Robert Redfield Alleges 'Cover-Up' in China Covid 19 Response

For the love of all things holy give this stupid virus a name already! I am so sick of "Covid"; it's the Wuhan virus. That's how these things are named, after their point of origin.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:53 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.

James Doogue

NAZISM killed about 21 million. MARXISM killed about 100 million. Today Nazis are villified, while Marxists teach Marxism at our universities.

Promoted below in the local paper, the Marxism Conference will run for five days at the University of Western Australia, appropriately commencing on April Fool's Day.

Can you imagine the outrage if they held a Nazis Conference at you local government funded University?

Marxists assumed that vastly increasing government power was the key to liberating humanity. Glorifying command-and-control was the flipside of demonizing prices and profits. But all-powerful regimes quickly became ends in themselves. In 1932, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin decreed the death penalty for any theft of state property. As millions of Ukrainians were starving due to the brutal collectivization of farms, even children poaching a few ears of corn could be shot.

Marx continues to appeal to social justice warriors thanks to axioms such as "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” And who determines "need”? The presumably omniscient, benevolent State. Marxism promised to end the "class struggle” but did so by subjugating almost everyone to officialdom. Abolishing private property left people hostage to petty government officials who punished anyone who failed to kowtow to the latest dictates.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/05/05/karl-marx-communism-death-column/578000002/

If you want to quibble about the death tolls, I've provided some further reading.

NAZIS
By genocide, the murder of hostages, reprisal raids, forced labor, "euthanasia," starvation, exposure, medical experiments, and terror bombing, and in the concentration and death camps, the Nazis murdered from 15,003,000 to 31,595,000 people, most likely 20,946,000 men, women, handicapped, aged, sick, prisoners of war, forced laborers, camp inmates, critics, homosexuals, Jews, Slavs, Serbs, Germans, Czechs, Italians, Poles, French, Ukrainians, and many others. Among them 1,000,000 were children under eighteen years of age.1 And none of these monstrous figures even include civilian and military combat or war-deaths.
https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NAZIS.CHAP1.HTM also https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/documenting-numbers-of-victims-of-the-holocaust-and-nazi-persecution also
https://www.statista.com/chart/24024/number-of-victims-nazi-regime/

MARXISTS
Estimates may vary, but communism is responsible for the deaths of up to 100 million people, perhaps more. From Josef Stalin’s "Great Purge” and the Holodomor to Mao Zedong’s famines to Pol Pot’s killing fields, the legacy of Marx is one of death. The authors of The Black Book of Communism estimate the deaths by country or region are as follows:

China: 65 million deaths
Soviet Union: 20 million deaths
North Korea: 2 million deaths
Cambodia: 2 million deaths
Vietnam: 1 million deaths
Africa: 1.7 million deaths
Afghanistan: 1.5 million deaths
Eastern Europe: 1 million deaths
Latin America: 150,000 deaths

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_killings_under_communist_regimes

In 2016, the Dissident blog of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation made an effort to compile updated ranges of estimates and concluded that the overall range "spans from 42,870,000 to 161,990,000" killed, with 100 million the most commonly cited figure.

According to anthropologist Kristen Ghodsee and professor Scott Sehon, the 100 million estimate favored by the organization is dubious, as their source for this is the controversial introduction to the The Black Book of Communism by Stéphane Courtois.

Ghodsee and Sehon also write that "quibbling about numbers is unseemly. What matters is that many, many people were killed by communist regimes."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Communism_Memorial_Foundation also, https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674076082

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:21 AM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 526 words, total size 4 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Check this; the city of Oakland is giving $500 monthly aid checks to families making under 5
$50,000 a year - but only if the recipients aren't white.

Poor whites need not apply.

This is open discrimination. I thought that was banned years ago.

When we started doing set-asides and preferences it was obvious we would start openly discriminating against white people. Now we are.

Reminds me of the old days "Irish need not apply".

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:02 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge.”

― Daniel J. Boorstin

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:24 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:34 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

The Nazis were Socialists. Here they admit it:

"To be a socialist is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole”
--Joseph Goebbels

"We are Socialists, we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions.”
--Gregor Strasser, one of the founding fathers of the National Socialist German Workers Party

"National Socialism derives from each of the two camps the pure idea that characterizes it, national resolution from bourgeois tradition; vital, creative socialism from the teaching of Marxism.” – January 27, 1934, Hitler interview with Hanns Johst in Frankforter Volksblatt

"There is a difference between the theoretical knowledge of socialism and the practical life of socialism. People are not born socialists, but must first be taught how to become them.” – October 5, 1937, Hitler speech in Berlin

"Socialism as the final concept of duty, the ethical duty of work, not just for oneself but also for one’s fellow man’s sake, and above all the principle: Common good before own good, a struggle against all parasitism and especially against easy and unearned income. And we were aware that in this fight we can rely on no one but our own people. We are convinced that socialism in the right sense will only be possible in nations and races that are Aryan, and there in the first place we hope for our own people and are convinced that socialism is inseparable from nationalism.” – August 15, 1920, Hitler speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus.

"In the course of history periods of capitalism and socialism alternate with one another; capitalism is unnatural, socialism the natural economic system... The National Socialists and the Red Front have the same aspirations.”
--Heinrich Himmler

"We must on principle free ourselves from any class standpoint.” – April 12, 1922, Hitler speech in Munich

"There are no such things as classes: they cannot be. … here there can be no class, here there can be only a single people and beyond that nothing else.” – April 12, 1922, Hitler speech in Munich

"Because it seems inseparable from the social idea and we do not believe that there could ever exist a state with lasting inner health if it is not built on internal social justice, and so we have joined forces with this knowledge.” – August 15, 1920, Hitler speech in Munich at the Hofbräuhaus

To put it quite clearly: we have an economic program. Point 13 in that program demands the nationalization

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:46 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 1132 words, total size 7 kb.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 03:55 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 493 words, total size 3 kb.

Timothy Birdnow

This post will be both philosophical and religious and if you don't like it well...start paying me and I'll write something you do.

The only thing we know exists for certain is light. Light is the foundation of all our science. See, we can't know anything except through things interacting with photons https://scienceblogs.com/principles/2010/08/05/whats-a-photon-and-how-do-we-k which are the building blocks of light. See here if this link does not work for you.

In fact, Albert Einstein's famous equation e=mc2 verifies this basic truth. Energy is equal to mass times the square of the speed of light. They are in fact the same thing. Matter is essentially slow light, acquiring other properties we associate with matter (such as mass and spin and sometimes charge.) Crash matter together at extremely high energy states and it breaks down...and new particles of matter form. There are things called virtual quanta which are particles and their anti-particles forming spontaneously in the vacuum of space and just as quickly disappearing as the two opposing forms of matter annihilate each-other, returning to the light that spawned them.

In the Bible it was God's word "Let there be light" that formed the perceptual universe. Before that, well, there was something He created, but it is described as "malformed, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep." God spoke Creation into existence when He said "let there be light". This comports with modern cosmological theory; scientists believe there was a universe of sorts that existed for a timeless time (there can be no time without light to allow you to measure events.) That ended with the Big Bang, which started the great clock of the universe. https://www.livescience.com/65254-what-happened-before-big-big.html We know from Einstein that time slows down as you approach the speed of light (slows for the observer). We also know the mass of said observer actually increases as he approaches the speed of light. It appears lightspeed is some sort of absolute limit; you can't ever reach it. If you accelerated at one gravity the whole way you could reach the center of the Milky Way in 21 years ships time, despite it being 33,000 light years away. That's because time compresses for you as you get arbitrarily closer to the speed of light. Light presents some ultimate barrier, appears to be the foundation of all reality.

And while we have no firm Unified Field theory we believe the four fundamental forces - electromagnetism, gravity, the strong nuclear, and the weak nuclear are in fact one. Light is a function of electromagnetism. Electromagnetism has been successfully linked to the weak nuclear (the force that promotes the decay of atoms.) It seems likely light is at the heart of all four forces (although it's hard to see how it ties in with gravity, except that gravity is a function of mass and mass of matter - which we know is what you get when a virtual quanta forms a particle and it's anti-particle. https://www.universetoday.com/129471/what-are-virtual-particles/

Jesus is the Light of the World. Most people just think it means he allows people to see, but given the above isn't it clear this means far more, that Jesus is actually the very cornerstone of all reality? If reality is entirely based on light then that makes Jesus the absolute basis for everything that is real.

And if Satan is the Prince of Darkness what does that say? He's out to destroy all reality. And those who follow him seek to becoming shadows.

So what brings all of this to mind? Well, my wife is getting cancer treatments. Cancer is a malignancy that hides inside the body, seeking the darkness and stalking it's prey in secret. So how are they treating it? Using radiation aka light. Jesus is the light of the world, and it is that light that is fighting her cancer. The carcinoma wants to remain in darkness, in shadows, and the light of the radiation oncology machine is killing it. (Such machines use light or electrons, which can ultimately be called a kind of light if Einstein's famous equation is correct.) My wife's life is in the hands of doctors who are using light to save her.

So light is composed of photons and photons convey information. Our knowledge of reality is predicated on that information, meaning on light. And now a beam of light is being employed to save my wife's life. Knowledge, time, reality, and now life itself for my wife.

It's a beautiful and wondrous thought.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:51 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 754 words, total size 5 kb.