At this point, the U.S. government is spending 10% of its military budget just to keep its hand in, in Ukraine.

I'm old enough to remember the end of the Vietnam War, and the obsession of the Pentagon to achieving "Peace, with Honor." The original idea of South Vietnam, had been that Ho Chi Minh would be satisfied with the North, and would leave the South alone. By the early nineteen-sixties, it was quite clear that this was not the case, and the U.S. was becoming more and more involved, ultimately having more than half a million troops trying to hold the line in South Vietnam. They were able to do it, but, at terrific, and unsustainable cost. So, by the 1970's, the agenda had shifted somewhat. Instead of expecting the South to manage on their own, the hope was that expensive U.S. weapons and regular bombings of North Vietnam would be sufficient to control the situation, without the need for U.S. troops on the ground. This would be "Peace, with Honor." Of course, that didn't work either, and in April 1975 we saw the helicopters jammed with refugees taking off from the U.S. Embassy, as the South Vietnamese troops were routed by the Viet Cong. I've been comparing the U.S. intervention in South Vietnam, with the current U.S. intervention in Ukraine, for a couple of years now. And, again, as in South Vietnam, there have been stages and changes in the U.S. attitude. At first, the U.S. thought the Russians would be perfectly happy with the Ukrainians joining NATO, or, in any case, couldn't do anything about it. Then, when the Russians invaded, basically to defend their own space in the world, the U.S. thought they could overwhelm the Russians with their "superior" NATO weapons. This stage culminated last year, in 2023, when over 100 billion dollars were provided to Ukraine, much of it in the form of so-called "advanced", that is, incredibly expensive, offensive NATO weapons, like state of the art tanks. The idea was that these superb, invincible NATO tanks would quickly crash though the inferior Russian defenses, and rush to the Black Sea in a Blitzkrieg that would make the Crimea indefensible, and would force the Russians to realize that they were no match for the brilliant NATO scientists and engineers who designed them. Of course, we now know what actually happened. The NATO tanks were all scrap within weeks, hundreds of them, untold Ukrainians died for nothing, and the Ukrainians scarcely advanced an inch. In response to this abysmal failure, there has now been a major "paradigm shift", in terms of the American approach in Ukraine. Instead of seeking victory over the Russians, the entire theme, instead, is to emphasize that the Ukrainians are in immediate danger of being overwhelmingly defeated, and the U.S. must provide the Ukrainians the means to avert this supposed disaster -- again, as in the early 1970's, the U.S. is seeking "Peace, with Honor". There are no offensive weapons as part of the current 60 billion dollar support package to Ukraine -- just artillery, ammunition, training, intelligence and missiles. The Ukrainians cannot advance, and, indeed, they aren't even attempting to do so, anymore. Rather, supposedly, this should, at the very least, "slow the Russians down". What for, exactly? Well, quite frankly, I don't think anyone really knows. In a very general sense, the U.S. seems to want to stay involved to a significant degree, even if the only effect, as it has been so far, is to make the Russian military and the Russian economy much stronger, and to kill enormous numbers of Ukrainians. The U.S. just wants to keep its hand in, because, that's what the U.S. does!

What if Universities had retained their independence from the secular authority, as defined by their original charters in the Middle Ages?

The vast majority of universities originally founded in Europe, in the Middle Ages, actually had a very special exemption explicit in their charters which actually gave them independence and immunity from the secular authority in the States in which they were located, to some extent in the same way the Church had. They had a kind of "benefit of clergy", and this applied to all students and faculty, to the extent that many honest citizens tended to steer clear of University districts for fear of being raped, robbed and murdered with total impunity by the students, and even the faculty, therein. We can see this in the ribald behavior of students in Chaucer's Canterbury tales. We can see this in the behavior of the fifteenth century poet-scholar Francois Villon, perhaps France's greatest poet, author of Ou sont les neiges d'antan "Where are the snows of yesteryear". Villon was certainly a robber, rapist and murderer, as well as being a brilliant poet and scholar, but, as a student he was able to get away with it! As an adult, however, he was forced into banishment on pain of death! On a more positive note, this independence gave the University students and faculty a freedom of speech, thought, action and experiment that probably was quite helpful in terms of fostering independent thought and creativity, of a type that could be quite useful to the state. We can see this in the early genius of Roger Bacon, in England, or Thomas Acquinas, in France. These days, of course, Universities are the ultimate bastions of the status quo, serving the state, and submitting to the state. To a large extent, Universities have become precisely the opposite of what they once were, and, what they were originally intended to be -- bastions of independent thought and action. We can see this in the "zero tolerance" to sexual harassment rules on college campuses, resulting in the dismissal and humiliation of tenured professors merely for an off-color remark in class. Tenure used to be iron-clad, it was virtually impossible to fire a tenured professor, the idea being that tried and true scholars should have freedom and security. Not so, these days -- political correctness rules! Of course, one could argue that total social conformity means no social progress, creativity or originality at all, and, many futurists these days are complaining that we aren't getting any progress of real value in science or technology, to some extent because universities and colleges aren't doing their job -- producing new and original ideas. So, what if we'd never departed from the independence of universities? What if students and faculty at universities could still rape, murder steal at will, as well as saying and thinking whatever they wanted, and not having to be politically correct? Wouldn't they be more productive and creative, and would science and technology be much farther along than it is now? Interestingly, I think we have an echo of this Middle Age University ideal in the classic National Lampoon comedy Animal House (1978). Perhaps the most controversial sub-plot in this film involves a nerdy freshman who is trying to "get laid", and finds a cashier in a grocery store who likes him. He gets her drunk, but, he's too nice a guy to take her while she's dead drunk. So, he finally sleeps with her, and, she announces "I'm 13!" This got a huge laugh back in 1978, of course. But, in a way, this does hearken back to the Middle Ages, and the true original conception of the University -- total freedom! Obviously, Animal House couldn't possibly be made today! But, are we paying a price, in terms of social, scientific and technological progress, because of this?

There's a wonderful, new, unlimited source of men for the Russan military -- American Sex Offenders!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/twist-case-ex-guardsman-fled-004430431.html Isn't is wonderful how the worm turns? All those men and women on the sex offender registries -- they are more than welcome in Russia! And, they can get Russian citizenship, and get clean records there. They can certainly join the Russian military, and probably work all kinds of other jobs there. Who knows, they might hire them as Russian schoolteachers! Because, you see, the Russians really don't give a damn about all the feminist anti-heterosexual nonsense in the U.S., and unless you're actually doing a lot of physical damage, they don't really see sex as a problem, at all. Unlike in the U.S. currently, where "sex crime" is, currently , the control strategy du jour, the means of terrorizing the population into total submission. It's not about protecting women and children of course, it's about control and power, it always is, with the law. So, we can see the Russian military expanding, and the Russian population increasing all thanks to the brilliant American sex crime laws. It's a beautiful thing. Long live Russia! Long live Vladimir Putin!

Punching women in the face is a terrific idea!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/men-punching-random-women-nyc-100005215.html There's a new craze sweeping New York these days -- punching women in the face! All kinds of men are doing it, and, who can blame them, really? After all, just trying to kiss a woman these days can get you ten years in prison or more as "sexual assault". You can't mess with women sexually, at all, it's the worst crime conceivable. But, just punching a woman, without doing serious damage? It's just common assault, a few months in jail, tops, even for a repeat offender. You might not get any time at all probably! And, there's absolutely nothing the feminist courts can do about it, either! Because, we can't really be wasting the police' and the courts' time simply for a simple common assault, can we? Doesn't make any sense with all kinds of murders and serious physical assaults going on. So, this is actually a way men can mess with women, and get away with it. Over, and over again! Isn't that great? At last, men have a way of fighting back against feminists. Just punch them in the face! They're asking for it, aren't they? Sure they are! Isn't it wonderful how men can adapt to female oppression, and find ways of fighting back? And, this is with total strangers, of course, so, it's not even domestic violence. No way of escalating the charges here. How very ingenious men are. Well done guys, you've finally figured it out! It's not even a hate crime, there's no indication they had any particular hostility to the particular woman, or women in general. They just felt like punching someone, and a woman happened to be there. Way to go, guys! Way to go!

Apparently, you can't even refer to pedophilic scenes in old films without being censored these days

https://www.quora.com/Did-National-Lampoons-Animal-House-break-any-barriers-when-it-came-out-in-1978/answer/Jerry-Kraus-9 I was responding to a question on Quora about the film "Animal House", about whether it broke any barriers, and said no, not particularly. However there were scenes that wouldn't go over too well these days. Like the scene in which one of the nerdy Animal House freshman has sex with a thirteen year old girl he met at the supermarket. These days, he'd go to prison for life. It was just treated as a joke in the film. Quora immediately censored the response, something they rarely do. Is merely referring, accurately, to a detail in a film that implies pedophilia unacceptable these days? Is that kind of weird? Have they edited that scene out of Animal House, these days?

Russia isn't invading or conquering Ukraine. Russia is devouring and absorbing Ukraine.

Much is made in the West about the fact that what was supposed to be a "three day war" in Ukraine is still going on. Well, that's a fair point. Why can't Russia "defeat" Ukraine more quickly? Well, fact is, Russia was never really trying to "defeat" Ukraine. Russia's initial intention was simply to stage a kind of lightning coup against the Zelensky government, and replace it with a more Russia friendly regime. As it happened, the NATO airlift of weapons forestalled this option. Instead, Russia has settled down to the process of systematically absorbing all the best parts of Ukraine, and, they may get around to the rest of the country, as well. Compare this to Napoleon's rather rapid conquest of European Russia -- in just five months -- and its disastrous aftermath. Or, pretty much the same deal for Adolf Hitler, over a century later. Sure, they conquered a lot of territory quickly, but, they couldn't hold any of it, and were ultimately crushed themselves. In contrast, Russia is solidifying its position, importing hundreds of thousands of Russian colonists into Crimea and Mariupol, among other territories. They're building bridges, railways, roads all linking these new territories to the rest of Russia. Sure, Ukrainian terrorists are trying to blow them up, with mixed success, but, Russia is turning these provinces back into Russian territories, in all senses of the word, very quickly indeed! Sure, Russian soldiers are dying in Ukraine. But, so are a lot of Ukrainians, and, it's Russia that's on the move, taking hundreds of square miles of Ukrainian territory daily. What NATO still doesn't quite get, is that all they're doing by "helping" Ukraine, is hurting the Ukrainian people, and hurting themselves, and their own economies. NATO is trying to teach Russia a lesson, and, they're doing it. NATO is impotent, incompetent, and corrupt, and the Russians can take whatever they want, and do whatever they want, and there's nothing whatsoever that NATO can do about it.

Elon Musk's big lie about Starship launch costs

If there's one thing the great deceiver Elon Musk knows about, it's highly creative, fantasy accounting. And, it's a great way to sell products. So, while spending 2 billion dollars a year to launch two Starships a year, he is claiming actual "launch costs" are mere millions. That's a discrepancy of three orders of magnitude! So, where on earth is he getting his figures from? Well, all he's counting is the fuel costs, and the immediate ground crew costs on the day of the launch. No preparation, refurbishment, development or maintenance costs, at all. So, basically, nothing! So, why do so many people believe him? Well, I guess people have to believe in something, don't they? That's why they say his falcon rockets are reusable, when they're not. They're actually just partially salvageable, not fully reusable, like your car, for example. They have to be massively restructured and refurbished, every time they're supposedly "reused". Actually, it costs a full 2/3 as much to "reuse" the falcon rockets as to build them from scratch. That's a good savings, of course, but, hardly spectacular. However, with so much money riding on Elon Musk's total technological incompetence, and systematic deception, there are an awful lot of people, investors in Tesla, for example, who don't want to believe that his inventions actually do not work, at all. Or, cost a thousand times more than he says they do! Is Elon Musk "too big to fail"? Well, probably not. And, it may be in the U.S.' best interests to recognize that fact, sooner rather than later. Rather than have the entire nation collapse, along with Elon Musk, and his drug-induced fantasies of "technological genius".

Canadian Government authorizes lifetime imprisonment for those "advocating genocide".

https://news.yahoo.com/canadian-law-endorsed-trudeau-government-015837943.html Isn't it time for the U.S. to have another go at invading Canada? I mean, just for the benefit of Canadians. This is a country that euthanizes the mentally ill, and wants to imprison people for life who "advocate hatred". Ummmm...say what? I mean, does Justin Trudeau want to imprison himself for life? Or, does he think he should be euthanized? The Canadian government's policies are so self-contradictory, irrational, and self-destructive, that, it really sounds like they're asking for help from the U.S. Like, "we're totally insane, stop us before we kill again!" So, maybe the U.S. government, and the U.S. military should do just that?

Ukraine is manufacturing and controlling its drone boats from civilian apartment buildings in Odessa

You've probably noticed that Russia is launching a great many missiles at Odessa lately, including one that came within half a kilometer of President Zelensky's motorcade in which the President of Greece was also travelling. It destroyed a civilian apartment building, and killed five people. Zelensky's comment was "they don't care who they kill." Well, maybe, and maybe not. Russians online are claiming that, with the intelligence assistance of Russian sympathizers in Ukraine, Russian missiles are specifically targeting drone boat factories and drone boat controllers located in civilian apartment buildings in Odessa. In other words, the Ukrainians are using Ukrainian civilians, in very large numbers, as human shields for their drone boat activities against the Russian navy. If you think about it, where else could these drone boat factories, and drone boat controllers, really be? If they were out in the open, the Russians would have annihilated them long ago. Where else could they be but Odessa, hidden amongst the civilian population, since the rest of the Black Sea Coast, and all other ports where the drone boats could be readily and systematically released from in the large numbers required, are occupied by Russia? So, effectively, once again, the Ukrainians are reduced to Hamas-like terrorist activities against the Russians, all heavily subsidized by Europe and America. Is this really the kind of war we should be supporting? Should we be sacrificing the needs of our own citizens for pure terrorist destruction of this type? Why, exactly?

Translation of Vilya song from Franz Lehar's "The Merry Widow" Operetta

Come, all ye gathered here, Let's sing together loud and clear, Of a good fairy, you've all heard, Sure her name's Vilya, that's the word! Vilya's a pretty maid of the wood, A hunter espied her by the cliff where she stood, The poor boy was stricken, He shouted out loud, With a terrible shudder He sighed to the clouds -- "Vilya, O Vilya, my wood nymph divine! Embrace me forever Your true love is mine. Vilya, O Vilya my life's in your hands, I'm dying for love's gentle balm." The Wood nymph lent him Her soft, sweet hand, And showed him to her stony home. The poor boy nearly lost his mind! So lovingly kissed No child of Earth Evermore.

Why don't female teachers accused of "inappropriate relationships" with male students simply cry "rape"?

I mean, I've never heard of a single case of a female teacher accused of an inappropriate sexual relationship with a male student simply saying that they were assaulted, and that it wasn't consensual. Why not, exactly? Surely, it would be perfectly possible, even rather likely, for a sixteen year old boy to physically force a 24 year old lady teacher. And, who could possibly prove that this isn't exactly what actually happened? So, why aren't these lady teachers simply crying "rape" to defend themselves in cases of accusations from male students?

What if the Athenian Sicilian Campaign , 415 -- 413 B.C. , had been successful, during the Peloponnesian War?

There were two great and devastating disasters that are particularly credited for Athens' loss to Sparta during the great Peloponnesian War, 431-404 B.C. The first was the Great Plague of Athens, striking just one year into the war, that wiped out 25% of the population of Athens. The second was Athens' devastating defeat during the Sicilian Campaign, some fifteen years later. The purpose of this extremely ambitious campaign was, apparently, to establish an overwhelming and invincible Athenian overseas empire stretching over perhaps a thousand miles of land and sea, and the control of the extremely rich land of Sicily, and the great city of Syracuse. In principle, control of all of this territory might have made Athens virtually invincible, and might even have led, eventually, to Athenian control over the city of Carthage, and the Carthaginian Empire. Given this level of power, would Rome have ever even have arisen to become a great power? Would we have the prospect of a Greater Athens stretching over most of Eurasia, larger even than Alexander's Empire? How durable could such an Empire have been, given the nature of Athenian democracy? The campaign itself was crushed, eventually, with massive loss of men, ships and military power, and it was this defeat that clearly led to the ultimate defeat of Athens some ten years later. Nevertheless, it's by no means clear that the Athenians couldn't have won. They won many battles, and took much territory. So, let's suppose they did succeed in taking full control of Sicily. What happens, historically?

What if Pol Pot had become leader of Communist China?

I don't think this is quite as impossible/implausible as many people might think. Pol Pot was, I believe, attempting to reunite Indochina with China again. And, if Mao Zedong had lived a few years longer, or if Maoist policies had still been in place and Deng Xiaoping hadn't moved China to a more centrist approach quite quickly, he might well have achieved his goals. Almost certainly, Mao Zedong would not have given up his invasion of Vietnam after just a month the way Deng did, in 1979. That really wasn't Mao's style, at all, when he did things. Mao did not do things by halves! Mao would have pursued his invasion of Vietnam to the end, even if it cost millions of Chinese casualties, and, he would have totally conquered Vietnam. And, the USSR would not have started a war over it, if only because the U.S. had a limited alliance with China at the time, to counterbalance the USSR. So, Indochina would have been reunited with China again, and Pol Pot, as the instigator of this achievement, would have almost certainly been the Chinese lieutenant in charge of Indochinese integration into the greater communist Chinese commonwealth. And, no doubt, as the "hero" responsible for this great achievement, within five or ten years, Pol Pot might well have found himself as leader of China as a whole. So, we have an enormous Maoist communist China running from the Siberian wastes to Indonesia, all under the control of our very good friend, Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot, by 1985 or so. What happens next? First of all, the USSR is definitely NOT going to appoint a bureaucratic windbag like Mikhail Gorbachev to run their nation under these circumstances. They'd be much, much too scared of China! More likely, the USSR goes neo-Stalinist. And there are indeed "reforms" in the USSR, but not in terms of liberalization. Instead, the USSR becomes more centralized and controlled. And, needless to say, communism does NOT fall in the Soviet Union. Thoughts?

What if Civilization hadn't developed some 2,000 years later in China than it did in the West?

One of the points fairly well accepted by most historians about early civilization, but not much discussed, is the fact that civilization actually developed in Sumeria and Egypt about 3600 B.C., but did not fully flourish in China until about 2,000 years later, under the Shang Dynasty, around 1600 B.C.. Now the reasons for this are almost certainly geographical. China is rather isolated from the rest of the world, and probably more importantly, there simply weren't any locations in China comparable to the Nile Valley or the region between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in terms of their suitability for the intense early agricultural cultivation necessary to sustain civilization, with minimal technology or social organization. The river valleys in China are simply more difficult to manage in terms of irrigation, flooding etc. than were those of the early centers of civilization in Egypt and Sumeria. So, it took a very long time for people to adapt and develop the means necessary to exploit them in China. What have been the consequences of this, exactly? Almost everyone would agree that civilization in China is rather different from the West. But, is civilization in China in advance of the West, or, is civilization in China behind the West? Or, is it both, in particular ways? So, in China, civilization developed later, but, special skills were necessary to sustain it which probably were not necessary in the West. So, let's suppose that China did, indeed, have something like a Nile Valley or the fertile plain between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. How would history be different, both for China, and for the world as a whole?

If you're wondering whether the advancing Russian troops in Ukraine will inflict reprisals on the Ukrainian population -- they certainly will!

This series on criminal activity and collaboration with the Nazis during WWII, and its consequences for those involved decades later in the USSR, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUm0BzsD5WM "The Exteriminator/Rat-Catcher" current this year, 2024 in Russia, makes clear that the Ukrainians in Ukraine will certainly pay a price for their rebellion against the Russians. Now that it appears fairly clear that NATO has tired of full scale support for the Ukrainians, the Russians know that they are going to win in Ukraine. They are advancing on all fronts, relatively unopposed, and are taking villages and towns relativity easily. There are no "game-changing" weapons good enough in the NATO arsenal to alter this self-evident fact. Fact is, NATO never had the slightest intention of engaging in a "war of attrition" against Russia for Ukraine. That would involve devoting most of their entire economies to this war, something their populations would never support in a million years. NATO was simply hoping that their engineers and scientists were so much better than the Russians, that for one or two percent of their GDP's they could defeat the Russians. Ain't a gonna happen! NATO scientists and engineers are simply con artists who couldn't design their way out of a paper bag, and the NATO weapons are no better than WWII era Soviet weapons. So, what are the Russians going to do with the rebellious Ukrainians whose populations they annex as they systematically advance in Ukraine? Now, Josef Stalin would have taken a very simple and direct approach. He would simply "liquidate" all the police officers, all the senior civil servants and all the military officers. Nyet chelovek nyet problema -- no man, no problem! Kill all the potential leaders, no revolt is possible. This was his approach in Poland and the Baltics, for example. And, it really works! Now, the fact is, it isn't really necessary to go this far, and, Vladimir Putin, being a reasonable man, certainly knows this. He doesn't need to exterminate 5% or more of the remaining Ukrainian population to get them under control. He probably does need to kill the actual leaders of militant Ukrainian groups responsible for terrorist activities -- i.e. "freedom fighting" -- within Russian territories, and, he will. He also is likely to systematically torture -- with no permanent debilitating effects -- the lower level members of these groups, to intimidate them into submission to Russian authority. So, lots of fingernails getting pulled out and electroshock torture for the men, lots of rapes of the ladies involved in actual fighting and killing. The same will likely apply to most of the actual members of the Ukrainian military, male or female. So, on the whole, those involved in Ukraine in this rebellion against Russia do have a fair amount to fear from the advancing Russians. They probably won't be killed, in most cases, but, they have a pretty good chance of being tortured, I'd say, unless they were totally uninvolved in the opposition to the Russians. If I were Ukrainian and anti-Russian, at this stage, I'd get the Hell out of Ukraine, while I could. Just a suggestion, of course!

What if Josef Stalin's mother hadn't brought him up to believe he was anointed by God to save the Russian people?

Now, how, you ask, do I know she did this? What historical documents am I referring to, I hear you mutter to yourself. Well, let's take a look at this poem Stalin wrote when he was 15 years old, and was studying at a seminary to be a Russian Orthodox Priest. The Wanderer He knew all their homes Spurned from their doors His old balalaika Strumming its tones His song -- As pure as the rays of the sun! A subtle truth A silent dream And, of a sudden Their stony hearts Beat in time! Their minds Immured in darkness. No greater glory For the people of his land "Here's your bowl of Hemlock," they said, "You are damned, Drink deep, Your song, we know not, And your truth, is NOT!" Now, clearly the writer of this poem has one Hell of a Messianic Complex for a 15 year old boy, even one studying to be a Priest! There's some persecution mania there too, of course. If you think you're Jesus Christ, there are likely to be a lot of people who don't quite agree, and you're going to find yourself rejected a fair amount. But, where is this coming from? Well, let's consider Stalin's situation. A five foot three inch tall ethnic Georgian with webbed feet and a useless left arm, whose wastrel father had deserted the family and been killed in a drunken brawl. Stalin is supported by his devoted mother doing odd jobs to keep them alive. What is Stalin's mother going to tell her son? "Josef, you are special. You will be a priest and save our people. That's why God has made you as you are. You are bearing your Cross, to bring God's truth and light to the world, Josef. You will endure and survive, Josef, to save the Russian people. That is your quest and purpose, my dear Josef." And, thus, we have Stalin's career, personality, and life, in a nutshell. As expressed in his own poetry. Thoughts?

The Wanderer -- A translation of a poem written by the 15 year old Josef Stalin

He knew all their homes Spurned from their doors His old balalaika Strumming its tones His song -- As pure as the rays of the sun! A subtle truth A silent dream And, of a sudden Their stony hearts Beat in time! Their minds Immured in darkness. No greater glory For the people of his land "Here's your bowl of Hemlock," they said, "You are damned, Drink deep, Your song, we know not, And your truth, is NOT!"

Stalin poems for translation

Ходил он от дома к дому, Стучась у чужих дверей, Со старым дубовым пандури, С нехитрою песней своей. А в песне его, а в песне – Как солнечный блеск чиста, Звучала великая правда, Возвышенная мечта. Сердца, превращенные в камень, Заставить биться сумел, У многих будил он разум, Дремавший в глубокой тьме. Но вместо величья славы Люди его земли Отверженному отраву В чаше преподнесли. Сказали ему: “Проклятый, Пей, осуши до дна... И песня твоя чужда нам, И правда твоя не нужна!” ЛУНЕ Плыви, как прежде, неустанно Над скрытой тучами землей, Своим серебряным сияньем Развей тумана мрак густой. К земле, раскинувшейся сонно, С улыбкой нежною склонись, Пой колыбельную Казбеку, Чьи льды к тебе стремятся ввысь. Но твердо знай, кто был однажды Повергнут в прах и угнетен, Еще сравняется с Мтацминдой, Своей надеждой окрылен. Сияй на темном небосводе, Лучами бледными играй И, как бывало, ровным светом Ты озари мне отчий край. Я грудь свою тебе раскрою, Навстречу руку протяну И снова с трепетом душевным Увижу светлую луну. Иверия. 1895. № 123 (на груз. языке). Иосиф Сталин. Стихи. М., 1997. С. 1. Примечание Мтацминда – горный массив. [c.1] Поэту, певцу крестьянского труда, князю Рафаэлу Эристави Когда крестьянской горькой долей, Певец, ты тронут был до слез, С тех пор немало жгучей боли Тебе увидеть привелось. Когда ты ликовал, взволнован Величием своей страны, Твои звучали песни, словно Лились с небесной вышины. Когда, Отчизной вдохновленный, Заветных струн касался ты, То, словно юноша влюбленный, Ей посвящал свои мечты. С тех пор с народом воедино Ты связан узами любви, И в сердце каждого грузина Ты памятник воздвиг себе. Певца Отчизны труд упорный Награда увенчать должна: Уже пустило семя корни, Теперь ты жатву пожинай. Не зря народ тебя прославил, Перешагнешь ты грань веков, И пусть подобных Эристави Страна моя растит сынов. Иверия. 1895. № 203 (на груз. языке). Иосиф Сталин. Стихи. С. 3. [c.2] * * * Ходил он от дома к дому, Стучась у чужих дверей, Со старым дубовым пандури, С нехитрою песней своей. А в песне его, а в песне – Как солнечный блеск чиста, Звучала великая правда, Возвышенная мечта. Сердца, превращенные в камень, Заставить биться сумел, У многих будил он разум, Дремавший в глубокой тьме. Но вместо величья славы Люди его земли Отверженному отраву В чаше преподнесли. Сказали ему: “Проклятый, Пей, осуши до дна... И песня твоя чужда нам, И правда твоя не нужна!” Иверия. 1895. № 218 (на груз. языке). Иосиф Сталин. Стихи. С. 6. Примечание Пандури – трехструнный щипковый музыкальный инструмент. Известен другой перевод этого стихотворения, принадлежащий Ф.И. Чуеву (См.: Чуев Ф. Молотов: Полудержавный властелин. М., 2002. С. 314): Он бродил от дома к дому, словно демон отрешенный, и в задумчивом напеве правду вещую берег. Многим разум осенила эта песня золотая, и оттаивали люди, благодарствуя певца. Но очнулись, пошатнулись, переполнились испугом, чашу, ядом налитую, приподняли над землей и сказали: – Пей, проклятый, неразбавленную участь, не хотим небесной правды, легче нам земная ложь. [c.3] * * * Когда луна своим сияньем Вдруг озаряет мир земной И свет ее над дальней гранью Играет бледной синевой, Когда над рощею в лазури Рокочут трели соловья И нежный голос саламури Звучит свободно, не таясь, Когда, утихнув на мгновенье, Вновь зазвенят в горах ключи И ветра нежным дуновеньем Разбужен темный лес в ночи, Когда беглец, врагом гонимый, Вновь попадет в свой скорбный край, Когда, кромешной тьмой томимый, Увидит солнце невзначай, – Тогда гнетущей душу тучи Развеют сумрачный покров, Надежда голосом могучим Мне сердце пробуждает вновь. Стремится ввысь душа поэта, И сердце бьется неспроста: Я знаю, что надежда эта Благословенна и чиста! Иверия. 1895. № 234 (на груз. языке). Иосиф Сталин. Стихи. С. 4. Примечание Саламури – грузинский духовой музыкальный инструмент, род свистковой флейты. [c.4] УТРО Раскрылся розовый бутон, Прильнул к фиалке голубой, И, легким ветром пробужден, Склонился ландыш над травой. Пел жаворонок в синеве, Взлетая выше облаков, И сладкозвучный соловей Пел детям песню из кустов: “Цвети, о Грузия моя! Пусть мир царит в родном краю! А вы учебою, друзья, Прославьте Родину свою!” Иверия. 1995. № 280 (на груз. языке). Иосиф Сталин. Стихи. С. 2. Примечание Известен другой перевод этого стихотворения: Рядом с фиалкой-сестрой Алая роза раскрылась. Лилия тоже проснулась И ветерку поклонилась. В небе высоко звенели Жаворонка переливы, И соловей на опушке Пел вдохновенно, счастливо: “Грузия, милая, здравствуй! Вечной цвети нам отрадой! Друг мой, учись и Отчизну Знаньем укрась и обрадуй”. (Громов Е.С. Сталин: искусство и власть. М., 2003, С. 27; РГАСПИ, Ф. 558, Д. 669, Л. 46-47). [c.5] * * * Постарел наш друг Ниника, Сломлен злою сединой. Плечи мощные поникли, Стал беспомощным герой. Вот беда! Когда, бывало, Он с неистовым серпом Проходил по полю шквалом – Сноп валился за снопом. По жнивью шагал он прямо, Отирая пот с лица, И тогда веселья пламя Озаряло молодца. А теперь не ходят ноги – Злая старость не щадит… Все лежит старик убогий, Внукам сказки говорит. А когда услышит с нивы Песню вольного труда, Сердце, крепкое на диво, Встрепенется, как всегда. На костыль свой опираясь, Приподнимется старик И, ребятам улыбаясь, Загорается на миг. Квали. 1896. № 32 (на груз. языке). Иосиф Сталин. Стихи. С. 5.

What if Ted Kennedy hadn't gotten Mary Jo Kopechne killed at Chappaquiddick in 1969?

Times have certainly changed since 1969, and, if Ted Kennedy had done today what he did to Mary Jo Kopechne in 1969, he would certainly have gone to prison, quite possibly for murder, and quite possibly for life. However, as it was, her death resulted in scarcely a pause in his career. He remained a powerful and influential Senator for decades, and, in 1980, he almost took the Democratic presidential nomination from incumbent Democratic President Jimmy Carter. What if Ted Kennedy hadn't killed anyone? I suspect, absent Chappaquiddick, Ted Kennedy would, almost inevitably have been the Democratic Presidential candidate on one or more occasions in the 1970's or 1980's. Despite his obvious limitations, he actually was a very, very good politician, probably as good as his older brothers were. Also, let's face it, Teddy had terrific survival skills! Mary Jo may have drowned in 1969, but, not Teddy. How many drunken guys can crash their cars into a river in the middle of the night and swim to safety without getting a scratch? I could be wrong, but, I really don't think if he had been elected President, Teddy would have suffered from the Kennedy curse. No assassination for him, he would have been too careful! So, when exactly would Teddy have run for President, and would he have won? I would say, he had a very, very good chance of winning, but, when, exactly -- 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988? Would he have knocked off Richard Nixon? Do Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan even enter the picture absent Chappaquiddick? What kinds of policies would President Teddy Kennedy have pursued, and what effects would those have had on the American economy, and the international scene? How is the world different today, if we had had Ted Kennedy as President of the United States, and not someone else who actually was President OTL?

The only reason rape is taken seriously these days, is government fear of overpopulation

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovation/book-incited-worldwide-fear-overpopulation-180967499/ Much is made these days of the "trauma" of female rape, in contrast to the past, in which rape was generally taken as being something of a joke. While, of course, the government and the powers that be are presenting this as a great sign of social progress, the actual reason for it is very simple. Governments are, probably rightfully, terrified of overpopulation. Overpopulation is the greatest danger governments and the planet are currently facing, so, quite naturally, anything that can produce children is a source of horror for governments. All heterosexual sex and production of children are considered anathema, thus the "worship" of homosexuality. And, of course, children are "protected" now, so that any parent so much as slapping a child is a major felon. While, in the past, when child mortality rates often hovered around 80%, governments really didn't care how women got pregnant, as long as they did, to keep the species going, now, reducing fertility is the number one goal of most governments worldwide. It's not about protecting women or children, it's just about keeping the population down, period. Governments never care about protecting individual rights, they care about control agendas. Period. And, currently the horror of "rape", and, "sex crime" in general, is just a government control strategy to frighten both men and women away from having sex, and producing more of those nasty little babies we currently have far, far too many of, in the world.

Are American parents actually training their children to have sex with schoolteachers, as a means of guaranteeing their financial future?

I'm just wondering about this. Are there manuals on the Dark Web, perhaps, explaining how parents can get their children to induce emotionally vulnerable, immature teachers to touch them inappropriately, and get intimate with them, so they can have a solid gold lawsuit against the local school board, and be set for life financially? It's not inconceivable, you know. With diminishing opportunities and expanding inequalities of wealth, what other opportunities are any children likely to have nearly as good as simply being able to sue the local school board for sexual assault for millions of dollars? After all, in the past, college training was the route to financial security for children. Now, of course, college training, even at the best schools, is well known to be worse than useless. And nothing seems to have really taken its place. This could certainly explain the delight of parents at these massive lawsuits for sexual assault. It's so empowering, you know! https://seberbulgerlaw.com/when-is-a-school-responsible-for-a-sexual-assault/

Why is Danny Masterson being compared to Charles Manson?

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/danny-masterson-transferred-charles-mansons-233555437.html https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/danny-masterson-moved-charles-manson-000720570.html https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/danny-masterson-moved-same-maximum-181043715.html Yahoo news is making much of the fact that Danny Masterson is being moved to the same prison that Charles Manson did time in, the implication being, I suppose, that Danny Masterson is at least as dangerous to society as Charles Manson was. Now, Manson led a serial murder cult that was trying to start a race based civil war in the U.S. Danny Masterson was convicted of using drugs to make some women more amenable to sex at his home. Now, I believe it is rather common for both women and men to use drugs and alcohol prior to sexual activity and while, technically, this may now be rape, it is very, very rarely treated as such. So, why is Danny Masterson suddenly such a threat to American society, on the same level as Charles Manson? By the way, I literally posted dozens of comments asking this question in various ways on the Yahoo news articles, and, they were removed every time because they "violated community standards", and were a threat to the "safety" of Yahoo readers. HUH??? I'm not really sure Danny Masterson raped anyone, but, I am quite certain a number of women are planning on cashing in very big on this indeed. I'm also well aware that Danny Masterson was a prominent member of the Church of Scientology, and the Church of Scientology is very, very unpopular with more conventional Churches. L. Ron Hubbard got sick of being paid a penny a word to write novels, and decided that religion was where the real money was, so he started his own -- Scientology. Other churches don't like that competition much, at all. So, why exactly is Danny Masterson the new Charles Manson, now?

I've never understood

I I've never understod why he thought that way, It seemed such a simple way to play, No concept of when or why, Just a game of never, never die, But, really It all comes down to nothing, anyway, He played the game, and never understood, He tried his time with endless reason and rhyme, But, it seemed to mean something at the time, Despite the endless vituperations, And mindless incinerations, I always tried to see. II Perhaps we'll work it out better now, With our newer visions of extra time, These help in understanding our perceptions of the next versions, As they spin their endless contortions Into nothingness. But, still, I remain a skeptic To the last. After all, what else is there? I tried to fathom it all through prisms of space, They held their form miraculously well, But, still, It didn't quite seem to work, at all.

The reason governments hate AI generated images -- they blind Big Brother!

For many decades now, governments have been perfecting security surveillance through advanced photographic and computer technologies. In the last decade or so, it appeared that, at last, governments had perfected this technology completely. Microscopic, invisible cameras that could identify anyone through facial recognition technology. Perfect! At last, no one could ever escape Big Brother, anywhere. The government was all powerful, the citizen was helpless in its awesome grasp. But, you know, technology has a habit of going where it wants to go, not necessarily where we want it to go. And, precisely the same technologies that the government found useful, now, the government finds very threatening indeed. Because AI generated images upset the whole government surveillance applecart. Suddenly, what appears to be real, on camera, is not. And, this can happen anytime, anywhere, to anyone. How can the government pursue court actions on the basis of images that cannot possibly be proven to be real, under any circumstances? They can't! We're back to highly questionable eyewitness testimony, and government power is broken, forever. There are wonderful ways you can make this point clear to government officials and accelerate this process. Send AI generated images of important public officials engaged in all kinds of illicit sexual activity. Send AI generated images of the entire U.S. Supreme Court engaged in a group sex orgy together. Wouldn't that be great! Imagine how Senate Majority Leader Chuck Shumer would react to receiving AI generated images of himself having sex with his daughter sent to him by his very constituents! Imagine how Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell would react to receiving AI generated images of himself having sex with Capitol Hill pages, straight from the good citizens of Kentucky. Way to go, Mitch! Because, the message would be quite clear. Big Brother is blind, assholes!

Vadimir Putin's next legitimate military target is Latvia.

As the Russians continue to make steady progress in their winter offensive, and as the prospects for continued aid to Ukraine from NATO wither on the vine, it's becoming clear what Russia's next legitimate military target will be -- Latvia. Latvia bars clear access to Kaliningrad, which is a part of Russia, and Russia would like that situation rectified. They don't need all of Latvia, but, they do need a viable rail link to their territory in Kaliningrad. If this can be arranged by peaceful negotiations, all the better. If not, then some type of military action by Russia, will, of course, be necessary. Now, of course, from the standpoint of NATO, this would be an attack on a clear NATO member, and would trigger Article 5. So, what exactly would NATO do about it? I think that is far from clear. I could certainly imagine them doing nothing whatsoever, as long as the territory demanded was fairly limited. I cannot imagine a massive call-up of troops in France, Germany, Italy and Britain on Latvia's account, let alone in the U.S. I could certainly imagine some arms being sent, but, the fighting in such a small country would probably be over rather quickly. Then what? I would imagine that Russia probably could get what if wanted from Latvia, and hold onto it, NATO membership or no. I can't really see a perpetual state of war existing between all NATO members and Russia merely over a corridor to Kaliningrad, if that's all Russia wants, and that's all Russia takes. Sure, NATO might formerly refuse to acknowledge the Russian acquisition of territory in Latvia, but, who really cares? I'm sure the Russians don't. So, sometime within the next three to five years, I would say the Russians will get their corridor to Kaliningrad through Latvia, by hook, or by crook. And, NATO won't really do a damn thing about it.

Charles Lindbergh may himself have been responsible for the death of his own "kidnapped" child!

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/chilling-twist-lindbergh-baby-mystery-205900594.html “My theory is that the child was operated on,” Pearlman said. “We think at the very least that his carotid and probably his thyroid were taken out and kept viable for 30 days. We think he died on the operating table.” Pearlman is basing her theory on medical reports from the case and papers written by both Charles Lindbergh and French biologist Alexis Carrel, along with statements Lindbergh made publicly, per Biography. The author believes Lindbergh sent his 20-month-old son to Carrel for speculative operations that ended up killing the child. The theory goes that Lindbergh, who was a proponent of eugenics—the science of promoting desirable qualities in the human race, usually through some kind of controlled breeding—may have been working with Carrel to somehow fix the baby, who was considered sickly. The operations may have been some sort of experiment to figure out a cure or transplant. The kidnapping and ransom, then, was a cover for the operating table-turned-murder. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Charles Lindbergh was a total fruitcake, albeit a very talented and determined man. He supported Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, and did everything he could to prevent the U.S. from supporting Britain during WWII. His fascist leanings could very well have made him think that killing his "sickly" child was the right and moral thing to do, that was a Nazi position. And, he had the money, resources and power to cover the whole thing up when it went wrong, and get someone else to pay the piper!

Russia is producing superb historical war films on the basis of Zelensky's propaganda gaffes

"ПОЛЕ СМЕРТИ" Field of Death 2023 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8z4INc1EZM As we know, President Zelensky of Ukraine is making a point of trying to outlaw any, and all forms of Russian culture worldwide. Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninoff, Pushkin and Tolstoy are pure evil, and must be outlawed, because they synthesize the evil of Russia itself, which Zelensky portrays as absolute. To suggest that Tchaikovsky's ballet "Swan Lake" is somehow a threat to the West is ridiculously funny, of course, but, Zelensky doesn't quite seem to get the joke. However, the Russians apparently do. Of course, Zelensky's hostility to Russian culture extends to physical culture, and all athletic events. Russia must be barred from all athletic competition, lest the stain of Russia spread internationally, by any means. Such Russophobia is interesting, and, of course, very funny. So, the Russians have taken a very interesting perspective on this issue, from an historical perspective. They have found a very interesting incident in the history of the Nazi wartime occupation of Ukraine, in Kiev. An actual public soccer game between Nazis and Russians, in Kiev, promoted by the Nazis to improve relations between the occupiers, and the occupied! And, the Russians won! And, the Nazis accepted the Russian victory with good grace! Now, I should emphasize, that this film does not portray the Nazis, in general, in a positive light, at all. They are ruthless, brutal, and totally controlling. They execute the Russians at will, and exterminate Jews and mental patients systematically in mass graves. However, even the Nazis, did have the common sense to not totally dehumanize their enemies. Unlike President Zelensky. Now, unlike President Zelensky, the Russians do propaganda right. And, the best way to go good propaganda, is simply to tell the truth, in ways that highlight the lies of your enemy. And that's precisely what the film "Field of Death"(2023) does. We actually see the Nazis having some respect for Russian culture, unlike President Zelensky. We see them actually trying to get along with the Russians in occupied Kiev, unlike Zelensky, who seeks to escalate his conflict with the Russians into an apocalyptic world conflict, every chance he gets. What this film is really saying, is that President Zelensky is much, much crazier than Adolf Hitler ever was! And, unfortunately, that is quite correct.

What if the Chinese Sea Goddess Mazu were real?

I've recently completed a stunningly beautiful 38 episode Chinese television series on the traditional Chinese Sea Goddess Mazu https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojyCgL9AKuo If you're interested, there's also an hour and a half film in English that's been produced on her https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PPuPVUJOdQ Bear in mind, the Chinese have always been a true polytheistic culture. The "Goddess" Mazu was actually a local Shamaness, a girl from a fishing village, who manifested unusual powers. She was ultimately deified, and became the Supreme Goddess of the sea, and is worshipped in China, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazu Now, you could well ask, why is the communist government of China producing A lushly beautiful TV series and movies devoted to a traditional Chinese Goddess -- the same government that will never allow any movie or television program at all to represent any kind of supernatural phenomena such as ghosts, despite the large role they play in traditional Chinese culture. Well, I think I have an explanation here. The communist Chinese are making a bid to become once more a supreme naval power, and, Mazu is indeed credited with divine intervention in support of the Chinese navy historically, on numerous occasions. In addition, and, in particuclar, Mazu is credited with assisting the Chinese to conquer Taiwan. Does that make things a bit clearer here? So, the communist Chinese are promoting the view among the Chinese people that Mazu is going to intervene directly in support of the Chinese navy in all their doings -- the enemies' guns will fail, their ships will be destroyed by typhoons, their rail guns will fire backwards, the nuclear reactors on their aircraft carriers will go super-critical and explode, sending the crews to the bottom of the sea -- all through the divine intervention of the supreme Goddess of Heaven, Mazu. And bear in mind here, this is a far more intimate relationship between China and the Goddess Mazu than could possibly exist between man and God in Christian, Muslim or Buddhist nations. After all, Mazu is actually a Chinese girl, Mazu's blood flows in the Chinese people themselves, she grew up amongst them, and loves them as her kinfolk. So, what if the Goddess Mazu were real? What if the Chinese people believe that she is real?

NASA now has the means to make huge profits colonizing the entire solar system!!

For decades now, we've heard Elon Musk declaiming on how he was going to colonize Mars, the Moon and the asteroids. And, recently, NASA has taken up the same tune, with scientists worldwide declaiming on the lunar "Anthropocene". Human beings will be living throughout the solar system, mining, exploring and making money, hand over fist. Actually, this is all just a red herring. As we've seen with the absolute failure of Elon Musk's Starship, liquid fueled rockets are far too unstable, expensive and inefficient to do anything much with live humans beyond lower earth orbit. However, in the following article, we can see what's really going on, and, NASA is being rather low-key about it. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/human-remains-are-headed-to-the-moon-despite-objections/ Regarding the future of humanity in space, don't think "Metropolis". Think "Necropolis"! Yes indeed, my friends, human colonization of outer space is more than feasible, it is immediately highly practical, and highly profitable -- human colonization with corpses! And, there's money to be made here. Big, big money. Not just the mere twelve thousand dollars or so for your ashes going to the Moon, either, like with the current mission. Imagine the money the super-billionaires would pay for their intact bodies being sent whole to Mars, or the Moons of Jupiter! Why, they'd spend billions and billions of dollars, they might give over their entire fortunes to setting up Mausoleums for themselves on the far side of the Moon, along with their entire families. Imagine the money Elon Musk might spend to send his body, and the bodies of perhaps a half-dozen or so of his favorite girlfriends on a journey to Proxima Centauri! My friends this is the future of humanity! This is the future of big business! Human Necropolises for the super-rich in outer space. Quit your jobs, mortgage your houses, invest your life savings, everyone has to get in on the ground floor on this. You can't miss this incredible opportunity! What would Mr. Spock have to say -- "Star Trek, eat your heart out. This is, indeed, the final frontier!"

Instead of bombing and killing the women of Gaza, why don't the Israelis just rape them?

These days, no war crime is deemed as heinous as "sexual violence". You can kill people, torture them, stick needles in their eyes, cut the digits of their fingers off one by one, flay them alive, crucify them, impale them on stakes, napalm them, maim them in large numbers with anti-personnel bombs and mines, sever their spinal cords, but, don't you dare get near those private parts, that's a terrible offense! Now, the reasons for this are obviously related to the government population control and feminist agendas worldwide. Ever since the spectacular drop in child mortality in the late nineteenth century from perhaps 75% to near zero by 1950 in the developed world, sexuality itself has become progressively more of a "heinous crime" worldwide. Centuries ago, rape was scarcely considered to be a crime at all. After all, women had to be kept pregnant constantly to maintain the human species, so, who really cared much who did it, or how? However, now, all this has changed. Nevertheless, in traditional ancient societies, rape was considered a most excellent, humane, and effective weapon of war. When a town was taken, the men were all put to the sword, but, the women were all taken "captive". And, what being taken "captive" meant was, that they were repeatedly, ferociously, and systematically raped, for perhaps entire decades! This had the effect of controlling them, subduing them, and also, the benefit of maintaining the population. Also, of infusing the population with more of the victorious conquerors' own, native blood. It was win-win! The Russians of course, direct lineal descendants of the great Mongol empires of the past, have never really left off using rape as a highly effective weapon of war. That all-wise master of manipulation, our great friend Josef Stalin, had the wisdom to virtually order his victorious troops in Berlin to go on raping expeditions amongst the local Frauleins. If a red army soldier raped a Russian or Polish woman he would be shot, but, if he raped and impregnated enough German women, he could well be awarded the Gold Star of Lenin! What a terrific means of total and absolute de-Nazification! Now, in traditional Jewish culture, there is ample precedent for this behavior. In the Holy Bible itself, the Jewish Torah, Abraham founds the entire Arab race by raping his wife's maid Hagar, and giving birth to Ishmael. The Talmud tolerates prostitutes "outside the tribe". In other words, rape all the Arab women you want! Indeed, the Talmud also supports this view, by conferring Jewishness only on those who are born of a Jewish mother. The whole of Jewish traditional law is telling the people of Israel exactly how they should subdue the people of Gaza, and it's not by killing them! So, instead of bombings and killings and flooding tunnels, here's what the Israeli Defense Force really has to do: "Shalom, Allahu Akbar, hi guys. We don't want to hurt anybody here, we're the IDF, so send out your ladies, and, we're going to screw all of them. It's nothing personal, this is just a military control exercise, like in the good old days, and, to bloody hell with the UN, right?" This really gives a whole new meaning to the term "military offensive", right?