draft
Dear REDACTED,
I understand now, "hate speech" means calling for freedom in an obviously corrupt and failed republic with an illegitimate government. Didnt they teach you at Harvard that the little people dont like to be condescended to? Some of them wont have it. I sincerely hope that you and your family experience the full impact of the right wing theocratic dictatorship that your actions and the actions of, dare I say it, weak people like you have brought about. The republicans are who they are, its the weakness and the stupidity of the democrats that have brought this about. So many people will be hurt because of "your" inaction and fantasies. I, no doubt, will be put in prison for my so-called hate speech and murdered there by our security forces, as has happened to people like me so often in our country's past.
Good luck to you.
draft
I wonder how many democrats will figure out that this mishigas, Roe v. Wade, is 100% the democrats fault? The Dems could have prevented this anytime in the last 20 years. With a little luck this will mean the end of the democratic party as we know it. I have heard people talk about how since their vote doesnt matter and that since lots of people will die over this, why not take out a few senators and justices (so called) too? They are just blowing smoke. Americans are slaves and its time they realized it.
I like this article.
Female Chain Gang
draft
Its pretty obvious, the factions contend and they rely on their constituents at key times to do such things as show up to events, put on armor and attack the jews, or contribute to campaigns and do bake sales. Thus a leading Roman citizen would act as patron and in return his "clients" would walk around town with him to show how much the people loved him. But woe! Woe! Do not fail, oh patron, to deliver for your clients with bags of food or whatever it is you are contributing to each, in full measure, and prorated by their value to you in your quest to be elected magistrate of the local town, for whom you erected that lovely fountain in the center of our forum. Even with all your clients you may still fail at the so-called "fair election" of the white men of property by other white men of property, but at least you will have a chance. But if you are stupid like the mainstream Democrats then you will fail to deliver, deliver anything.... anything at all. Their president would not let a week go by without doing something for his people, whether that was to insult native americans or nominate a right wing nut to the supreme court. But our president and his wimpy administration cant even pretend to do anything but instead waste time squealing about "bipartisan" and "its not our fault" but thats not how it works and you have the power. It was your nominee to the Justice Department that failed to follow up on that silly independent investigation by whats his name, so lame I dont even remember his name. But now that statute of limitations (what a joke) has passed so another opportunity is lost. You cant even ship ammunition to Ukraine, you lame idiots. So why therefore should we vote for you? Why? At least the Republicans get something but Biden just lies there limp, and looks at the ceiling while we all get fucked.
There are various theories of government, about what makes a good government or how a government works or about when it is appropriate to change a government, and so forth. In this post we discuss the "Faction Theory of Government" but remember all models are wrong but some models are useful.
The "Faction Theory of Government" models government as a variety of factions, one or more of which seize control or partial control, and attempt to deliver for their constituents policies that hold to key shared values. Most if not all factions claim to represent the will of the people, or the great traditions of the roman republic, or the proletariat, or the white christian way of life given that jesus is going to be here soon, or the way of the Huron of the Great Lakes, or whatever, and sometimes they do, at least the way they see things. But at the end of the day, if the people who are supporting a faction believe that their leaders are not delivering what they have said they will deliver, then change is in the air. For example, if it is the duty of the leaders to put on the war paint, grab the sacred spear, and lead the wolf clan in a war against the hated ancient enemy, kill their men, steal and rape their women, and give the holy offering of the screaming sacrificial victims to the greatest of all gods, Baal Optimus Maximus, then that is what those who would lead must do. But those leaders that fail the Gods will endanger "rta", the order of the universe. Then another faction will rise up and lead the people on the path of righteousness. The Republicans understand this very well, but the Democrats not so much. To choose another example, "The British give me 20 gold guineas a month, but I myself am poor, because I am a river to my people!" but of course Anthony Quinn was not telling the whole truth here, but he was telling some of the truth and delivering, monthly, a lot of british gold to his vassals.
Of course this is a very brief description of a nuance-filled theory of government. It is not about good or bad in some objective sense, it is about whether a faction is serving its constituency sufficiently that they can retain power. In some cases it may be that all that is required is sincerity of purpose, but generally factions need to achieve results as those results are defined by that community the faction claims to represent. No faction is perfect. But some leaders seem to get complaisant and think that the rules do not apply to them and then it is proper and correct for them to experience the "threefold death" and a new god king, or faction, to arise.
There are many examples from the last 2500 years or so of western history that can illuminate this model. I think it works pretty well.
The factions contend for the honor of leading the people!
draft
draft
Dear REDACTED,
As you know there are many elements of the current political situations(s) that I dont understand or perhaps incompletely appreciate. Certainly I am not at all concerned whether the debate over an originalist interpretation of the constitution is political or not, of course it is. Not even a stupid moron could doubt that. My problem (well one of them) is that I dont understand what the originalist position actually is. I want to try to understand the originalist position better and nothing I have read has helped me much. So lets take the 2nd amendment, which is apparently more important than issues of racism or the right to vote among our fellow citizens.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
1. What is a well regulated militia? Whatever it is, I am pretty sure that it never was intended to be a bunch of yahoos forming vigilante squads to shoot at whoever they want whenever they want because "they need killin". To the best of my knowledge, militia's were self generating (unlike for example a regiment which usually had a designated officer responsible for raising a body of troops), but even so I am pretty sure that they were sanctioned (or not sanctioned) by official authority. Yes, no, maybe? Therefore outside of a "well regulated whatever" why does this amendment even apply?
2. By "state" here, I presume they mean the individual states & commonwealths, e.g. 13 of them. Not the federal govt, or did they mean the federal govt?
3. I am not sure what "arms" means here in an originalist sense. Are we talking about unrifled muskets, presumably flint locks or similar technology, muzzle loaded? How about artillery, which in this case would mean muzzle loaded single piece unrifled cannon firing shot or metal balls, those are certainly arms. It would not be an originalist position to say this refers to rifled, semi automatic, weapons which are wildly different in capability to a flintlock. If we are interpreting the constitution to refer to "modern personal firearms" then that would have to include antitank and antiair weapons as those are every bit as much a personal kinetic weapon as updated to our times. Certainly a modern semi automatic hand gun would not be considered to fall under this amendment in any originalist sense as the handgun as a useful technology pretty much did not exist at that time.
So which is it, original or interpreted?
"At the request of one of my subjects who must remain nameless, We have consented to suggest a policy or approach for the situation in Ukraine to defeat the False Vladimir, the so-called "Vladimir the Bringer of Peace", and encourage him and his degraded Boyars to reenter civilization and turn away from their bloodthirsty celebration of the most hateful of pagan devils: Belobog and Cznerobog with their obscene hand gestures in defiance of the True Way of Our Savior who died on the Cross, the murdered God of Two Natures, indivisible, who opened the Door back to God. May the Blessed Virgin, Immaculate and Chaste, preserve us!"
For what it is worth, here are my impressions of the Academy Awards 2022. I have no special insight but I have been around for a while.
People who dont know how this works should realize that the real test of skill is to be invited to, and be noticed at, one or more of the extremely glamourous parties after the awards ceremony itself. Of course anyone holding an oscar from that year is automatically granted entry to any party (including the Governor's Ball). Attending the awards itself is certainly a privilege and has a variety of entertaining aspects, but ultimately it is best to realize that it is "work" to the people who are there. Most of them have to be there.
My observation is that in spite of all the complaints about the various versions of the Academy Awards ceremony, that the award itself retains both its glamour and its practical career benefits. If you receive an Oscar then it is likely that your career will receive a boost and you will be more marketable. This differs from branch to branch, I think, at least that would be logical.
The thing to keep in mind is that the Academy funds its entire operation for a year out of that one night. They do a lot of good work from what I can tell. Of course I presume there are always politics and some waste, how could there not be? But they definitely spend their money on things that help us all. Things like film restoration, for example.
The Will Smith incident is just unfortunate. People are really highly stressed in these circumstances. I dont know the man, but I know people who have worked with him on projects and no one has said he is a monster. He probably just had a bad night which is a shame.
draft
Against all expectations, Piddles the Squirrel has emerged from the forest to bless us with her presence on the archery range. With Piddles still with us, how can we lose hope?
Of all things, I really did not expect Vladimir the Great to actually recreate Munich before Europe's horrified eyes. And Vlad knows that whatever Biden does, he can use the Republicans to destroy him and the Democrats and put their stooge in power, just like they did in 2016.
Dear REDACTED,
draft
I predict that the Democrats will prove to be inept on the supreme court nomination, with huge infighting, and that Biden will either not achieve his goal of a black woman, or will do so only with immense effort. This is because of the inability of the Democratic party to actually elect people loyal to the party or the nation. With Manchin and Sinema on board, the Democrats only won the Senate in a very perfunctory way, we needed to have a minimum of two more senators before they claimed a victory. But that is what I expect from the Democrats and my fellow liberals: wishful thinking to avoid having to deal with the failures of their model to result in anything effective on any topic of interest to me. Infrastructure, yeah sure, but how about voting rights and getting the right wing nuts off the supreme court and the appeals courts, and prosecuting the real criminals of the Trump assault on democracy? How about ending institutional racism? Biden is similar to Obama, and Obama was a nearly complete failure although he was good for annoying some Republicans because of his race.
And of course the Republicans are racist and sexist and will go nuts about a black woman on the court to arouse the anger of their equally racist and sexist base. You know, "the Democrats want Communism and to destroy Christmas!"
One thing is clear, voting for the Democrats is not in any way a useful thing to do except in that you might annoy a Republican. My prediction that the Democrats would self destruct whether or not they "won" congress is coming right along. They are failing and will continue to fail. At least Trump achieved his goals, or some of them.
draft
Somewhere in the first three episodes of HBO's Peacemaker, our hero, who has collapsed in stress earlier in the episode, regains his moral outrage and willingness to kill to keep the peace and says something like "Eat peace, motherfuckers!" before he blows the bad guy's head off. The best way to do what Vladimir, the Keeper of Peace, is doing is to not let anyone, even your own side, know what you plan to do.
But there is a list of things that people have learned to do before battle begins and one can observe these things and get a sense for what is about to happen. Different sides do different things, but basic principles apply. This is more about guidelines than it is about inflexible rules. All of these are pretty logical in retrospect and will make sense to you as well. All of these have relevant historical precedent. And it is because of these things that people after the war ask "how could you not have known?" Hindsight has perfect vision.
Here is a short list in the context of the Russian/Ukraine situation. Russia pulls most of its personnel out of their embassies and consulates. Citizens are warned to leave the country. Classified papers and other material in these embassies are destroyed. Someone sends special forces to the potential site of conflict to help get their diplomats and citizens out. Live ammunition is released to the units. Leaves are cancelled. The logistics of war are completely over the top amazing and even if you are not sure war is happening, certain really big things have to be put into motion (e.g. Russian amphibious ships are sortied and people are not sure where they are going... maybe they are just going on vacation). Various countries start running around the clock missions to provide critical munitions to their ally, munitions that they might have kept a very tight grip on previously, but not now. "Here" they say, "Take these antitank weapons. They are our very best and God Speed". Border incursions by air and ground increase in tempo until they seem to be almost continuous.
Units start disappearing. Brigades, Divisions, maybe Corps, go to radio and electronic silence and move and you dont know where they went. Units show up where you didn't expect them. People at the front start reporting noises of equipment that they had not heard before. The listening posts report in, something is happening. Airplanes and other assets are dispersed. Your networks say that war begins in 3 days but you know they have been wrong before. Warnings are issued. Alert levels are raised. People lose sleep and they are armed and nervous. Mistakes happen.
War is not inevitable, but at some point information entropy takes over and you either give the "go order" or you dont. And if you say "go", at some point you may not be able to pull them back.
There is a lot of history here. War is perfectly plausible in this part of the world. You may not agree, but Russia has interests here. Obviously so does Ukraine. Personally I think they are going to do it. God Speed.
The Academy Scitech Awards in 2014. Two of these couples are sadly no longer together. I am terrible at names, but of course this is Josh Pines, David Coons, Carlye, Nicky Kaiser and Rick Sayre. I will get the names of the others and get back to you.
draft
A friend asked if California would be able to protect its citizens from a fascist federal government. Well, probably not, but its not black and white.
1. Any proactive blue state that can control their republican nuts in their state legislature should be able to pass laws that protect people, or their state attorney general can declare that they will not enforce a law, and the state police forces technically work for the governor. Then the DOJ can sue the state and tie things up in court.
2. But who controls the National Guard and can they be called out in spite of the Governor of the state saying no? Yes, they can. The president can declare that there is an insurrection and send in guard units from any state, not just the state with the insurrection, so called. Now when you have a shit-for-brains fascist like Trump, why would he ever be limited by the law or the constitution?
3. The FBI works for the DOJ and COINTELPRO and other history proves that under the right circumstances they will violate any law, any constitutional right, and not be punished for it. We dont know how many people the internal security forces framed and sometimes killed during the 1960s.
4. The judiciary has been stuffed with right wing nuts who will do whatever the right wants, no matter how egregious. See for example Kavanaugh and Barrett but at the appeals court level as well as the Supreme Court. Do you trust Kavanaugh or Barrett to protect your rights?
5. Fascists do not recognize any law that interferes with their power. The standard play is to call their supporters to "protect the country", see Jan 6. Why not send the various right wing militia groups into california to "restore order"?
So, IMHO, if we lose congress or the presidency, I am very skeptical that our institutions will protect us. I looked in vain as the country failed to protect us during the Trump administration.
A friend explained it to me, please excuse the semi-sexist language. "The Constitution is a gentlemen's agreement", my friend said. The whole thing fails when you have low class shits like Trump, Barr, Kavanaugh, etc.
draft
Dear REDACTED,
How did we get here? That you would suggest that I was overly simplistic about matters of principle? Me? I merely want to remind my friends what is at stake here. This is not your everyday serial rape of children by rich people in public flying their powerful friends, like Trump or Clinton, around to do so, and then making a deal with the Florida DA to avoid any semblance of justice or compensation for the victims. As if the law were a joke to be flouted unless you were black or poor. This is nothing trivial like that. This is a series of crimes against the republic, not one crime (and I mean that in some sort of literal, legalistic sense) but a whole series of them. You say its more complicated than I realize, but I am trying to communicate, and failing, that I think that I know very well what a clusterfuck this is, even if I may indeed be ignorant of the details of what the SDNY or the DOJ may face. My response is that this is why they get paid the big bucks. And now, having been paid, many of us wish them to do their goddamn job. I am certainly not right about everything. I never thought in a million years that Trump would, again in plain sight, try to overturn the election in which Gore, excuse me, I meant to say Biden, obviously won. That he would on network television incite his followers to overthrow the constitution, attack the Congress and attempt to murder the leading Democrats in the House, defecate in the halls of congress, both literally and figuratively, and then people would say, "we must not overreact". You have got to be kidding me. I want my money back.
At the end of "No Sudden Moves" by Soderbergh, the Aldrick character says "They have eyes but they just cant see".
Hollywood is at fault. Yes, the glamourous and rewarding motion picture industry lied to me. Well, some of them did. I guess we all see what we want to see. I am a goofy idealist who ignored Hammett and Chandler and without realizing it, believed that it wasnt that bleak, that justice would be done. I am a fool. A naive idiot. Instead I believed Brimley in that fabulous courtroom drama, Absence of Malice (1981), that completely goofy Paul Newman and Sally Fields melodrama nominally about the freedom of the press in the form of Sally Fields as she attempts to increase newspaper readership and bring down Paul Newman with the help of an ambitious "jew lawyer" from the DOJ. Then in a nearly perfect justice ex machina, Wilford Brimley, cast as the aw shucks US assistant attorney general, sweeps in like an "Old Testament" Angel of the LORD and smites the wicked.
Brimley starts off the show here (in low quality youtube video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btqBJJF2yvE
And Newman and Brimley finish it off here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMj3uqFKG84
What a fool I have been. There is no Brimley and there is no Justice. I have been lied to and those of us who pinned our hopes on elections and the justice system have been betrayed.
/****************************************************************************/
/* VECTMATH.H: include file for vector/matrix operations. */
/* Copyright (c) 1999 by Joshua E. Barnes, Tokyo, JAPAN. */
/****************************************************************************/
#ifndef _vectmath_h
#define _vectmath_h
#include "vectdefs.h"
/*
* Vector operations.
*/
#define CLRV(v) /* CLeaR Vector */ \
{ \
int _i; \
for (_i = 0; _i < NDIM; _i++) \
(v)[_i] = 0.0; \
}"Motherfucker's got eyes, they just can't see."
This post is to bring to your attention that something has happened recently that has almost certainly caused concern and sleepless nights for many people. It may sound innocuous if a little aggressive but it may actually signal that something important is about to happen. The particular event involves the silencing of a Norwegian underwater sensor system which probably had the ability to track Russian submarines which work very hard not to be tracked.
See the following story. These people have a good reputation for discussing things of interest without using secret sources.
Even when rivals do not intend to go to war, they do things we might call provocative and not all that trusting or friendly. So for example, since WW2 we have flown jets somewhere close to the Russian border to see how long it takes for their radar to light up, where they are, and a bunch of what is sometimes called "signals intelligence", which means we may not know what they are saying but we know they are talking. Russia might fly a strategic bomber towards the UK to see how long it takes for them to be intercepted. This is all normal peacetime activities. If you want peace, they say, prepare for war. So far so good. But there is more to it than that. When JFK was assassinated and people asked why the pentagon did not go on alert, the guy in charge of that said something like "the board was clear", the board probably referring to something called NMIC. in other words, yes, the president had been assassinated which could be the opening stage of a war, but none of the other things they look for had happened. What sort of things? Well there is a list of things. Assassinations for example, mobilization of the ground forces which are in maneuver near the border. Important reconnaissance systems becoming inoperative. The satellites go dark. The relevant embassy or embassies starts destroying classified material. All of these things happen now and then, sometimes for innocent reasons (e.g. a satellite went dark but thats because it simply broke, no need to get your panties in a bunch over it.) But there is more history here.
When Israel was about to do the 1967 preemptive strike they told us to take a listening post, a ship in the Mediterranean, away. We refused or ignored them and they blew up the USS Liberty so that we could not hear the fighters being scrambled for Egypt (even if we did not know what the pilots were saying, they wanted surprise so no warnings). There is a fuzzy line between what you might normally do, try to catch spies for example, and things you might do if you were about to attack and needed tactical surprise (or in some cases strategic surprise, a whole other thing). Its one thing for Russia to roll up an amphibious tank onto a beach in Sweden to spy on a naval base in the middle of the night, but its a whole other thing to cut underwater cables, revealing they have that ability, which is a big deal independent of the cables actually cut. We knew they had that capability but they had not demonstrated it on operational cables of a strategic listening system by a neighbor. You only do that right before you need to do something you dont want people to see. Something fairly big.
So in deterrence theory we say that if there is nuclear war it is very important to have a few days notice, if you can, because all kinds of things can be moved around for safety. So we keep a 24/7 team in the basement of the pentagon connected to a bunch of different sources to ask what is going on. Are the satellites mysteriously going silent? Have NATO generals suddenly disappeared? Are the bad guys on maneuvers near the border. Are the underwater cables going out?
The job of the people on the ground is to read the clues and form the right conclusions about what is going on. Thats what they get paid for.