Making crossing the US border a capital offence undermines the very basis of the US legal system

The fundamental issue at the bottom of all this nonsense over immigration in the US currently is that, in order to control immigration, it is necessary to treat all immigrants as if they were serial killers guilty of the most heinous crimes possible, because, otherwise, the force necessary to actually remove most of them simply is not justifiable. And, under these circumstances, the cure becomes much worse than the disease. We don't consider it appropriate to shoot people for jaywalking, and, of course, that makes jaywalking rather common. One is unlikely to be ticketed for it, because it generally isn't much of a problem, so, people tend to ignore this particular law all the time. To some extent, that has been traditionally the way we dealt with undocumented immigrants, as well. If they stayed in the country a while, and weren't a problem, there was no reason to deport them. They became part of the community, sometimes much valued members of the community. Now, it is often quite difficult to remove much valued members of the community, from their communities. People will protect them, and sometimes use force to do it. Forces of "law and order" will be in direct conflict with their communities, and, this is very dangerous indeed for both the communities, and for law enfocement, as we are now seeing. Claiming all these much valued immigrants are "criminals", and treating them as very dangerous criminals, will, inevitably, lead to a serious breakdown of law and order for everyone. Justifying extra-legal procedures on the basis of the "emergency" of apprehending these "criminals", will result in the discreditation of both law enforcement, and the law itself, as we are now seeing.

ICE aren't the Nazi SS, however, ICE are the Nazi Gestapo

The Jewish Anti-defamation Legue has made the point that ICE under Donald Trump aren't acting like the Nazi SS -- they aren't operating death camps causing millions of deaths in automated mass genocide. This is quite true, however, most people aren't saying that ICE are like the SS. They're saying that ICE are acting like the Nazi Gestapo, and, this is, actually quite accurate and true. ICE are acting extra-legally, they are terrorizing and brutalizing people regularly, they are killing people occasionally. That is exactly what the Nazi Gestapo did. The Nazi Gestapo had no direct role in the administration of the Nazi death camps, that was the job of the SS. ICE are the Gestapo, they aren't the SS. Yet, anyway. They might get to that level after another few years, of course. Now, to be fair, the Nazi Gestapo didn't really act much different from the secret police of any fairly brutal, authoritarian state, and there have always been plenty of those. It was the Nazi SS that was unique -- the professional masters of mass killing, of true genocide. However, that has no bearing on the fact that ICE, under Donald Trump, is acting very much indeed like the Nazi Gestapo.

Some useful reforms to federal law enforcement may come out of the current ICE issues

For all of its history, federal law enforcement has tended to possess near total immunity from oversight and prosecution. This may be about to come to an end, and that may be a good thing. The excesses of ICE, bordering on Nazi levels of abuse and oppression, has shocked the American people into demanding action from Congress, or even protection from state National Guards against violent ICE goons. This has gone so far now, that the Minnesota National Guard has actually been called out to defend innocent Minnesotans from the predations of ICE. Who knows, we might see the Minnesota National Guard moving down ICE agents in the streets, to defend the people of of MInnesota! So, now, as a result, Congress is finally debating serious action to reign in the behavior of federal agents. It may become much easier to press criminal charges against them, and to sue them. They may have much more systematic restrictions put on their activities, and almost certainly will, to some extent.

Conversation with an Oklahoma City police officer

I was talking to an Oklahoma City police officer today, a very Red state, and a sure Trump voter, and he assured me that Donald Trump did NOT say that people aren't allowed to carry guns on their persons during protests, even though all major news networks, including FOX news and other conservatives, acknowledge that this is exactly what Trump said. He said that this was "fake news", and "AI generated", even though no credible media site, or even Donald Trump, disputes that this is what was said. Law enforcement officers are so brainwashed in the US, that they simply can't accept the possibility that their "commander in chief" could be such a liar and a fool, and be so totally indifferent to the law. Trump is trying to justify the murder of Alex Pretti, because he had a gun on his person, and law enforcement will back Trump up 100%!

Life expectancy only increased by 0.18% in 2025 over 2024 in the US

Since the COVID epidemic, life expectancy has been increasing by a remarkable 1% a year in the US, as much as it was increasing in the early decades of the twentieth century, and vastly greater than it had been for three-quarters of a century. Of course, life expectancy actually went DOWN during the COVID epidemic, so, this isn't entirely surprising, now that the epidemic has eased. Obviously, when a plague ends, life expectancy rapidly increases. However, this trend appears to have ended. Between 2024 and 2025 life expectancy has increased by only 0.18% in the US, much more in line with the miniscule increases in life expectancy that have prevailed since the second half of the twentieth century. Another reason life expectancy would inevitably have increased following the COVID epidemic, is that this particular disease definitely tended to thin out the herd by attacking its weaker members. It was the old and the sick who were far and away the most vulnerable to dying from COVID, so, those on the verge of death were largely eliminated. Hence, with no one near death around following COVID, from any cause, death rates would have dropped not only because the epidemic had eased, but because there were no terminally ill people around to die for a few years. Again, this tendency seems to have ended, quite abruptly. The fact is, science and medicine have made little progress since perhaps 1950 or so, or, at least, little progress of significance, despite their frantic claims to the contrary. We still expect some rather slight increases in life expectancy over time, but, very slight ones. Perhaps a year a decade, if that. And, even that seems to be decresing over time. Doctors have new ideas, but, not effective new ideas.

The shootings in Minneapolis and the deployment of the Minnesota NG against ICE have destabilized the Trump regime

The obvious brutality and incompetence of ICE agents is becoming a major problem for the Trump administration, leading to intense finger-pointing and blame placing within the administration itself, making a partial government shutdown almost inevitable, hardening the opposition of Democrats and progressives, and leading to a general impression of the incompetence of the Trump regime as a whole. While not exactly a civil war situation, the situation is highly volatile and unstable. On the plus side, the US economy remains solid. Growth is predicted to have been 2.4% in 2025, and to be close to 3% in 2026. However, job growth remains slow, meaning that this solid growth rate is exclusively benefitting the rich. As a result, the vast majority of the US population remains shut out of any prosperity, and is becoming increasinly volatile and angry about it. Extreme disparities of wealth always lead to social instabiliy, which is exaclty what we are seeing at this time. The rich are happy, the poor, and what's left of the middle class, are very unhappy, and this can lead to escalating violent confrontations, as we are currently seeing throughout the US. It appears from the polls and the prediction markets that the Democrats will retake the House this year, and possibly the Senate. Will this help the situation at all? This is unclear. The Democxrats are slightly more sympathetic to the poor and middle class than the Republicans, but, the members of the federal congress, whether Republicans or Democrats, are all very wealthy men and women themselves, and they are all quite beholden to the rich, to maintian their own wealth.

Governor Tim Walz has effectively staged a military coup against Donald Trump

One aspect of the situtation in Minnesota that has not been much discussed in the media is the simple fact that governor Tim Walz has deployed elements of the 13,000 strong Minnesota National Guard against ICE in Minnepolis, and that these military forces are now effectively defending the protesters against ICE, so that ICE can no longer murder Minnesotans. We can debate the extent to which these protesters are violent or peaceful, but, clearly, the Minnesota National Guard is there to defend them, not ICE. This is highly signficant, because, it is unprecedented for the military to actually be actively defending citizens against federal law enforcement. In principle, Federal law trumps state law, in all cases. However, this issue is becoming very blurry and problematical in Minnesota at this time, with high profile cases of ICE agents murdering Minnesotans without cause. It seems very likely that the NG would legally have the right to interfere with cases of excessive force being applied, as is the situation rather frequently in Minnesota at the moment, on the grounds of ensuring public safety, and Donald Trump knows it. Now, in pricnciple, Donald Trump does have the right to federalize NG's in cases in which the troops are being used to oppose federal agents enforcing the law. However, Trump has abused this privilege to such an extent so far, crying wolf over and over again, that the courts have made it clear that his power to federalize state NG's is extremely limited in future. If the Minnesota NG does intervene to stop assaults on Minnesotans by ICE agents, the courts might not permit Trump to federalize them, this time. In that case, Trump has largely lost control over the military, and everyone would know it. This is not something that Trump can afford to let happen. Hence, Tim Walz' deployment of the Minnesota NG under these circumstances is extremely dangerous for Trump, almost tantamount to a military mutiny, that could spread!

The federal charges against Luigi Mangione are about to be dismissed

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/luigi-mangione-case-stalking-assault-204442839.html The federal case against Luigi Mangione was always pure fantasy on the part of Pam Bondi and Donald Trump, another product of their legal never-never land in which whatever they want to do, they can do, and if they can't, it's because of "far left radical lunatic judges". This was a murder committed in New York, by a New Yorker, of another New Yorker. It has no place in federal court, whatsoever. Sure, Luigi Mangione travelled outside of New York sometimes, but, his travels didn't happen to have anything to do with this murder. So, Luigi Mangione will be subject to New York State murder laws, and, I'm afraid, that's about it. That means Luigi Mangione will probably be out of prison in ten years or so. The only reason Trump and Bondi are so very anxious to have federal murder charges laid is in hopes of forcing the death penalty, or life in prison, because Luigi Mangione murdered a very rich man, runniig a very corrupt health insurance company, and Donald Trump relates quite intimately to rich men running corrupt companies, for rather obvious reasons, I do believe. This is, of course, completely consistent with the typical pattern of Trump and Bondi, to simply assert that something is true, because they say so, while completely ignoring the facts and the law. Luigi Mangione's travels oustide of New York were totally unnecessary for, and unrelated to the murder itself, but, true to form, Trump and Bondi insist that they were essential to it, in despite of all facts. Can prosecutors be tried for perjury under these circumstances? At the very least, this might shut Trump and Bondi up. What a relief, that will be!

The Minnesota National Guard is actively recruiting Minnesotans to fight ICE! Trump has totally lost control of his own military!

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/recruiter-pitches-joining-military-minneapolis-223020443.html Trump has totally lost control of his own military, which is in active revolt and mutiny against his arrogance, narcissism, violence and incompetence. The US military will never permit Trump to destroy NATO, commit war crimes for his own entertainment, and attack the American people. Trump has complained of "insurrection" every time any American politician has dared challenge him. Well, Trump's really got an insurrection this time! National Guard recruiters are now actively encouraging young Minnesotans in schools to join the Minnesota National Guard to defend their families against the predations of Donald Trump's ICE and FBI goons. This is perfectly in line with Governor Tim Walz' mobilization of the Minnesota National Guard to defend the people of Minnesota against ICE, and Donald Trump. There can be no question here that this is sedition and insurrection against the Trump regime, but, since Trump's actions are consistently illegal, the federal government has no way to respond to it. The Courts have already made clear the Trump has no authority to federalize NG's simply because the governor is using them to defend his state -- even against federal law enforcement! Trump is trying to play nice now, because he knows he's really in trouble this time. He knows that Walz doesn't really care if Trump's ridiculous DOJ tries to lay charges against him, he has the 13,000 strong Minnesota National Guard to defend him, as well as most of the other NG's in the nation!

Walz has mobilized the Minnesota National Guard against ICE

Governor Tim Walz has now officially mobilized the Minnesota National Guard to defend the right of Minnesotans to peaceful assembly and protest, with the support of local law enforcement, against the forces of federal oppression led by Trump and ICE. This is precisely the opposite of what Trump intended, who was planning on deploying them to attack the protesters! While they are not fully deployed yet, they are collecting equipment and coordinating with local law enforcement, for deployment. Won't it be fun to see the ICE gooons run in terror and hide when the Minnesota troops show up to defend the people against them! I'd love to see the looks on their silly faces!

SCOTUS is about to take away Trump's right to make tariffs

Doanld Trump likes the word "tariffs", and likes to say it, as much as possible. He also likes to apply tariffs, but is somewhat less inclined to do this, than to just say the word, particularly if there are economic consequences to himself. Currently, Trump wants to try to use tariffs as a way to force EU nations to submit to his wish to purchase Greenland. Thus, Trump is using tariffs as a military weapon, without the consent of Congress, to try to achieve territorial expansion. Obviously, if the SCOTUS justices have any interest in the US Constitution at all, they have no interest whatsoever in this approach! We can therefore expect SCOTUS shortly to declare Trump's tariffs totally illegal and unconstitutional, and a profound threat to the peace of the world.

Parallels between Donald Trump, and Don Quixote

Although Dolnald Trump is no great lover of Hispanics, is it possible, at this stage of his life anyway, Trump bears a close resemblance indeed to the greatest of all Spanish heroes in literature, Don Quixote himself? Trump isn't totally insane, but, he's getting there, certainly, as was Don Quixote. Like Don Quixote, Donald Trump is from a privileged background, but, he's getting very old, and he's losing his wits, and is confusing his fantasies with reality, and his wishes with the will of God, to a somewhat disconcerting degree. Donald Trump also, very much like Don Quixote, is addicted to physical violence, and very much enjoys indulging in it, and encouraging others to be violent, at every possible opportunity. Donald Trump, again like Don Quixote, is rather creative and arbitrary in his uses of violence, abducting heads of state, murdering fishermen at sea, murdering innocent women for defying his authority, and claiming in all cases that these represent divine retribution for supposed wrongs against himself or, perhaps America itself. Often, again like Don Quixote, Donald Trump rather inverts reality, seeing war as peace, pure destruction as "good business", and his own personal whims as the most important things in the universe. How does such a man attract followers? What does MAGA see in Donald Trump? Well, what exactly did Sancho Panza see in Don Quixote? Bear in mind, Sancho Panza did quite well by his association with Don Quixote. All these violent confrontations gave Sancho Panza ample opportunity to profit quite well by stealing everything he could find while Don Quixote was engaged in insane and violent quarrels with almost everyone he ever encountered. Similarly, Donald Trump's violence and disruptions are, no doubt, giving certain MAGA busnessmen opportunities they would certainly not have had without him.

Both Governor Walz and Donald Trump are threatening to deploy the 13,000 strong Minnesota National Gaurd.

In a perfect sign of the chaos of the Trump administration, both the Governor Walz and Donald Trump are simultanesouly threatening to deploy the Minnesota National Guard, against each other! This isn't very likely to happen, of course, because it's not really clear what the NG would do with the 2800 ICE deployed there, or even what Walz or Trump might want them to do there. It is a sign of the complete incompetence of the Trump administration, of course. All of Trump's actions seem to just have the effect of causing disorder, strife and confusion, and, Trump thoroughly enjoys it!

How Donald Trump is being reined in by the courts, Congress and Democratic States

Donald Trump has been pushing the boundaries of executive power, to the point that the American people are shocked and frightened. He is openly and commonly described as a dictator, and a fascist. His federal law enforcement officers are doing so much damage, that they have had to, literally, go into hiding, just to survive, and avoid rough mob justice. So, what is being done about it? Trump was forced to release control of the state NG's he was trying to manipulate by all levels of the court system, inluding SCOTUS. The state national guards were determined not to be for the protection of federal agents, or federal buildings, but, exclusively for the protection of the citizens of the state. And, this protection extends to protection against federal agents, if they are posing a threat to the citizens of the state. Far from having absolute power over state NG's, the President only has power to assist in defending the citizens against an imminent, existential threat, and very temporarily, for perhaps a week or less. And, it is the role of the courts to evaluate this threat. In normal circumstances, the state governor alone makes this decision, and, the governor has the right to attack federal agents, if they pose a threat to the state's population. This is exactly what Governor Walz of Minnesota is considering doing at this time. If any more Minnesotans are murdered by federal agents, Governor Walz is fully legally justified in using the state NG to order the federal agents to surrender, and, if they refuse to do so, to neutralize the threat they pose to the good citizens of Minnesota. And, he will do so! Furthermore, the US Congress, under the impetus of the Democrats, may simply refuse to fund further any federal agents at all, by simply excluding their funding from further budget extension approval bills, passed every two months or so. Currently, Donald Trump is threatening to invade Greenland, a NATO ally, and territory of Greenland. This would certainly destroy NATO, and mnight even lead to a catastrophic thermonuclear war with Europe. In order to deal with this prospect, Democrats and Republicans are joining together to craft new legislation, to deal with this particular contingency. Specifically, they are propopsing to pass legislation, by veto-proof majorities, which would effectively allow the US to go back to the orininal conception of the Founding Fathers, and the Constitution, if the US military was preparing to attack, or had attacked a NATO ally. Effectively, the US would immediately cease to have any standing army at all. Ths US military would cease to exist. No further funding would be provided again, ever, for anything related to a US military. Current and former members of the US military would cease to have any connection with the US government at all. You're on your own, guys.

ICE funding is likely to be cut severely in a partial government shutdown starting in February

The Democrats don't want a full government shutdown again, but, they've had enough of the ICE follies across the country. ICE will have to behave itself, or ICE will be dissolved as an agency. There will be no funding for ICE unless and until they leave the Democratic states alone. They can only work without pay for so long, and, that may not be very long. The Democrats can quite easily maintain a partial shutdown of the government till the November election, effectively crippling ICE, and they will gain popular support from doing so. The ICE goons have done enough damage, people want an end to their nonsense!

The Ayatollahs have ridden out the storm

I'm no big fan of the Iranian regime, however, there's no reason to think there's a preferable alternative to the Ayatollahs. The current regime has survived for almost half a century, largely because it is at least semi-democratic, the elected officials do have some influence, and the Ayatollahs do try to meet the needs of the people, up to a point anyway. This is probably preferable to the rule of the Shah, which was a totally undemocratic monarchy. The current regime is a cross between a parliamentary democracy and a theocratic meritocracy, in which the toughest, smartest cleric rises to the top of the heap. There are worse ways of running a government, after all, however brutal they may be at times. The current failings of the regime are essentially economic, and that's what the rioting has been about. However, the regime has powerful friends like China and Russia, and, these nations can assist the regime economically to stabilize the economic difficulties, to some extent. No doubt, currently they are working hard to do just that. Of course, Iran's direct competitors, particularly Israel and the US, would very much like to see the collapse of the Iranians regime, and are undoudtedly doing everything in their power to do just that. The CIA and Mossad are instigating these riots in Iran, at least to some extent, unquestionably. However, they are failing. Why are they failing? Obviously the Iranian regime is far from perfect. However, how exactly can and should it be improved? Does anyone really know? Sure, everyone would have some ideas. Less religion, a more open economy, more democracy etc. But, how well would these work to improve the economy? The Russians tried to "lighten up" after communism, and, it was a total disaster. They've had to move somewhat back the other way, to stabilize their government and economy. So, I'm really doubtful that anything useful will come from US and Israeli efforts to destabilize the Iranian regime. Why bother, with no real altnerative plan, at all.

Let's consider John Bolton's view of Donald Trump

While the world's mass media is attempting to make some sense of Donald Trump's actions, and trying to see this as some kind of "new world order", his former national security adviser, John Bolton sees in this a fundamental error. Trump has no strategy whatsoever Bolton says, no vision, no idea of the future. He's simply doing whatever he feels like, or whatever he thinks, rightly or wrongly, might yield some political or financial advantage in the short term. There's nothing else whatsoever to his thinking, at all. There is no vision, or new world order, there is just Donald Trump, and whatever he wants at this particular point in time. Trump's abduction of Maduro certainly falls into this category. Maduro cannot possibly be put on trial, let alone convicted. He has absolute immunity as a head of state, his defence could quite easlily point out the fact that Donald Trump committed far more crimes in this abduction than Maduro has committed in his entire life! Maduro could call foreign ministers from dozens of countries from around the world in his defense, all demanding his relase. The trial would be a joke. Effectively, Trump will now have to release Maduro within a few months. The only reason Trump kidnapped Maduro was because Maduro was ridiculing him in public. While Trump claims full control of Venezuela, in fact, the only control he has is the partial blockade of oil tankers being enforced at great expense by a large flotilla of ships off the coast of Venezuela. And, this is now being curtailed by the US Congress. Trump claims full control in Venezuela while his own state department orders all Americans to leave the country immediately, because they are in grave danger! Trumps talk of annexing Greenland also sounds pointless and destructive. He simply cannot do it. The US Congress would impeach and imprison any and all members of Trump's cabinet before they would permit the US to fall into a potentially thermonuclear war with Europe over Greenland. It is a ridiculous whim, and nothing more. Trump's obsession with the violent forced deportation of immigrants is also little more than an arbitrary and meaningless obsession, that is hurting the US economy and traumatizing the US population as a whole. He is doing it purely out of whim, and for purpoes of political manipulation.

Trump's threats have resulted in a marked shift back to the EU and Denmark for the people of Greenland, and away from Independence

Frequently, actually more often than not, Trumps threats and manipulations achieve precisely the opposite effect from what was intended. This is certainly the case with Greenland, which is now quite systematically moving towards a much closer relationship with the EU, and Denmark. The US is actually in no position whatsoever to engage in any acts of war against the EU, all eighty thousand US soldiers in Europe would effectively be hostages, and the 100 US nuclear weapons in European nations would certainly be seized. The Europeans have more than sufficient forces in Greenland already to seize the occupants of the US base there as hostages, and to repel a mid-sized invasion force. The Europeans can send tens of thousands of troops there quite easily, if this proves necessary. All that Trump is doing is ensuring that it will be much, much more difficult for the US to do any business in Greenland at all, in the future, and that other nations will be favored to exploit their mineral resources as more suitable business partners. Who really wants to do business with an animal like Donald Trump, or his ridiculous toadies? What exactly is all this business about Trump "forcing" Greenland to become part of the US, one way, or the other? I guess it's kind of like Trump insisting he now "controls" Venezuela. It's pure fantasy intended to prop up his own ego, and it's supported by those who are dependent on him, or who "believe" in Trump. True, in Venezuela, Trump does maintain a partial blockade, at enormous expense, and, this gives him some limited influence over the regime, for the moment. Not nearly what he wants, or claims of course, but, enough to gratify himself, and his more ardent supporters. This is unlikely to go on for long. A combination of international pressure and Congressional action is moving to reign this in. Certainly, in the case of Greenland, the US Congress, despite being Republican controlled, is well on the way to prohibiting any and all actions against Greenland, or other EU territories, by veto-proof majorities. If Trump ignores these orders, they can simply defund the military, and, they will. Far better to have no military at all, than to have Trump getting the US into a thermonuclear war with our own European allies! Trump's mental illness may continue to dominate the headlines for some time yet, but, we are clearly moving to a time that the madness of Trump and his supporters will no longer be a threat to the peace of America, and the world.

There were a comparable number of illegal border crossings in 2015 to what there were in 2025, in the US

While Donald Trump touts to the skies his "astonishing achievement" of "closing the border", actually, the last years of the Obama administration saw a comparable number of illegal border crossings to what is the case now. In 2015 there were 591,000 undocumented immigrant encounters, while in 2025 there were 440,000 undocumented immigrant encounters, in the US. This is hardly "closing the borders", and it doesn't represent that big a change. This, despite the lack of any police brutality, in 2015, or the immense expense incurred, massive civil rights violations of American citizens and non-citizens alike, which we are all currently experiencing. No American citizens were murdered in 2015 by ICE, while now this is a regular occurrence. No public unrest, no big fanfare, no violence, at all. Everything was fine. It's not possible to close borders. It is possible to control borders, to some extent. So, what's the problem now, exactly? Why is Donald Trump making such a total mess of things? I think Trump actually enjoys violence and brutality, and, indeed, many of his supporters do too. So, quite naturally, they will claim how "wonderful" these "techniques" are for controlling immigration. In reality, immigration patterns vary over time, whatever the government does, in ways we do not fully understand, and for reasons we do not fully understand, and probably never will fully understand. If some pattern of government activity temporarily coincides with an increase or decrease in rates of immigration, naturally many people and politicians will credit or blame the government accordingly. However, immigration is a very complex pattern, and we cannot possibly fully control it, just influence it, to some degree. It's very important to understand this, and not try to overcontrol the process, which inevitably does more harm than good, as is certainly the case now. Obviously, the Trump approach is doing far more harm than good, and must be terminated immediately, or, in any case, as soon as possible. ICE should probably be disbanded in its current form, its effects are purely destructive. Far better to have a completely open border, than a border and nation subject to the predations of an ICE Gestapo, as we have now.

Trump's "law enforcement" catch-22 about defying him is starting to get a bit tiresome

Donald Trump has an irritating habit of simply claiming that everything he does is "law enforcement", simply because he chooses to do it. Naturally, this tendency is becoming more and more tiresome to Americans, and, indeed, to the entire planet, these days. We can see this in the national outrage to the cold blooded murder of a young mother demonstrating in Minnesota, and Trump calling her a terrorist, simply for trying to escape assault by ICE agents. We can see this in his criminal abduction of the legitimate President of Venezuela for no reason other than that he insulted him, while leaving his regime otherwise intact. We can see this in his piracy on the high seas, sometimes even aided and abetted by other nations, like Great Britain, because it's consistent with their own political agendas against Russia and Iran. We can see this in his demands that Greenland become part of the US, either for nothing, or for fractions of pennies on the dollar. Trump is thinking, "hey, I can make every single one of the 57,000 inhabitants of Greenland multi-millionaires, and still get trillions of dollars in oil and mineral assets for virtually nothing. Great deal! If they don't like it, I can kidnap their Prime Minister, and force him to agree. I could even send several divisions of US troops to Greenland, take the whole island by force, and give them nothing. Great deal!" Of course, France and Germany in particular are not pleased about the idea of Greenland's assets being stolen from Europe, although Greenland is indeed in the Western Hemisphere, falling under the legally meaningless "Monroe Doctrine". Britain has always played a somewhat double game regarding the Monroe Doctrine, effectively enforcing it in the nineteenth century, when the Americans didn't have the navy to do it, and now, to some extent acquiescing to it, perhaps because their financial interests are so closely allied to that of the US. However, the UK is no longer the power that it was, France has 280 H-bombs deployed on nuclear submarines, and Germany is reemerging as a potential world military power, as most of Europe sees the necessity of them playing more of a role in defending the continent from both Russia and the US. France and Germany combined, probably with further assistance from another 150 million or more wealthy, technologically advanced EU citizens could probably make it quite impossible for Donald Trump to seize Greenland, whether he wants to, or not. It may be for this reason that the Republican GOP leadership is quite openly warning Trump to stop threatening Greenland, and indicating quite clearly that Trump's military wings will indeed be clipped if he takes any steps towards the military acquisition of Greenland, and he will have his toy soldiers taken away from him, and he will be sent up to his room without supper. Indeed, Trump's attacks on the shipping around Venezuela are becoming sufficiently unpopular that the Senate -- despite being Republican controlled -- has just passed a war powers resolution 52-47 barring any further military action against Venezuela, thus effectively making the abduction of Maduro even more of a ridiculous joke than it already was. Sure, Trump can veto it. Maybe they can override the veto, maybe they can't, but, the majority has spoken. The politicians in SCOTUS will be taking note -- and judges are, of course, politicians -- and they will start aligning their votes on issues related to Donald Trump in an effort align more closely with Congress, and the will of the people, and Trump will not like the results. I think Trump's days of wine and roses are swiftly coming to an end, and his power will be severely curbed, if not his freedom itself.

Whither Greenland? Trump's mental instability makes his attack on a fellow NATO member a real possibility.

While the ridiculous abduction of President Maduro of Venezuela is a problem that can be, and will be corrected simply by returning him to his position, the quite real possibility that a US attack on Greenland is imminent is another kettle of fish entirely, as they say. The attack on a fellow NATO member by a mentally ill US President could have quite catastrophic consequences for the world as a whole. We could actually have the prospect of a nuclear war between France and Britain on one side, and the US, on the other. No doubt, this prospect would thoroughly excite the MAGA wack jobs of this world, seeing this as a "cleansing", or, perhaps some variation on the Book of Revelation, leading to the second coming of Jesus Christ! As for the rest of us, it might seem very desirable indeed to take some action to avoid such a consequence. We simply don't care for the idea of a madman like Donald Trump leading his US GI storm troopers like lemmings going over a cliff, into a genocidal international conflict against our traditional friends and allies for no particular reason, other than his own massively oversized ego. While a Senate War Powers resolution to prevent further US military action against Venezuela is on the table, and is very likely to fail -- after all, the US is quite literally in no position whatsoever to actually invade Venezuela to any effect, so, who really cares? -- a comparable Senate War Powers resolution to prevent any US attack on Greenland is much more likely to gain considerable support from the Republican Party itself. Not all Republicans are totally insane. Some are, but not all. So, it may be possible to actually garner sufficient support not only to pass a War Powers Resolution preventing any military action by Trump against Greenland, but even to override an inevitable Trump veto of such a legal restriction. Of course, Trump may simply then say "Oh, but this doesn't apply to me, so, I'll just ignore it." In that case, the Congress could possibly just cut off the funding stream to the military, effective immediately. Trump could try to ignore that too, of course, but, he really can't raise money just by waving his hands, and, at some point, most states might just stop sending money to Washington D.C., one way or another, and there wouldn't be that much Trump could actually do about it. As a last resort, there's always impeachment, and removal. If no such action is actually taken, it's very, very unclear what's going to happen. Trump is directly threatening whatever action is "necessary" if Greenland is not ceded to the US within the next few weeks. One possibility is that a few thousand NATO troops from Canada, Britain, France and/or Germany could be landed in Greenland, to deter any potential US attack. This probably would be sufficient, given the logistical difficulties of the US actually mounting a full scale assault on Greenland, and maintaining forces there, to deter any attack on Greenland for the immediate future. I would suggest that NATO nations should seriously consider placing a substantial force of at least a few well armed and provisioned battalions in Greenland for the immediate future, to deter any of Trump's rather insane whims, for the immediate future, anyway.

Is it becoming fairly clear that Trump has no idea what he's doing in Venezuela?

Trump's unprecedentedly goofy kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro appears more a temper tantrum on the part of a spoiled child than the act of a statesman. There is no particular reason to think that the new President, close Maduro ally, Delcy Eloína Rodríguez Gómez, will be any more cooperative with the US than Maduro was. On the other hand, she is probably more intelligent than Maduro, being a highly trained and fairly successful finance minister, so, actually, Trump may have done the leftist Maduro regime a bit of a favor, by giving her more power, until international pressure forces the US to release Maduro. Nor is this likely to put any pressure on Cuba, since any supposed "blockade" of Venezuela will be largely unenforceable, and they can just ship the oil through Brazil, or other countries, in any case. This "precision military operation" does not appear to have accomplished anything of value or signficance, at all. Other than irritating people, and further convincing the world of Trump's mental instability, that is. I guess some people might think that's a good thing, right? It's quite clear that Maduro's "trial" -- if it ever actually occurs that is -- will be more of a trial for Donald Trump, than for Nicolas Maduro. International pressure will be brought to bear, all those involved may face retaliation from countries around the world, the blatant illegality of the operation will be brought to bear, the leftist regime in Venezuela will inevitably be involved. Any such "trial", again, if it ever occurs, will be far more of a circus than legal proceeding. Of course, we're rather used to that under Trump. Trump actually appears to be more interested in discrediting the justice system itself when he goes to court, than in achieving any particular objective within it, and, he usually loses, even when judges he himself has appointed are presiding in court! Venezuela remains totally independent, intact, and inviolable, whatever Trump may say to the contrary, or attempt to imply with stunts like the Maduro kidnapping. Trump hasn't the forces, the support, the means, or the technology to actually defeat the Maduro regime. Stunts of this type are all he can achieve, and, he may be hoping more to distract Americans, or perhaps create a "rally around the flag" effect with them, than anything else. However, polling suggests that Americans have by this time learned to see through Trump's P.T. Barnum like stunts, and simply resent his attempts to distract them from reality itself. What's the next step? With Trump, of course, one never knows, he is highly creative and extremely unpredictable, and prides himself on this fact. He may do nothing. He may do something. However, as with this act, he probably won't really do a great deal of any significance at all. He'll just talk a great deal about it, whatever he does, or, even if he does nothing whatsoever. The real question is, how Americans will react to all this nonsense in November of the current year. Will they reward Trump for behaving like a spoiled brat, by keeping the GOP in power? Or, will Americans have had enough of Trump's tantrums and irrationality, and decide to throw the GOP out, and hope the Democrats will impeach and remove Trump and his entire cabinet, to really make America great again? While the polling moderately favors the Democrats, all analysts agree that the polls are broken. What is much more significant, is that Democrats have been massively outperforming the polls in recent elections, all over the country. And, that is why the GOP is getting very nervous these days.

Donald Trump's ridiculous stunt in Venezuela -- P.T. Barnum strikes again!

Donald Trump is nothing if not predictable. Put on a show, make a lot of noise, claim an incredible success, and accomplish nothing whatsoever. And, he's done it again! Basically, Trump has now kidnapped Venezuelan President Maduro and his wife. And, that's really about it. He doesn't control the government, he doesn't control the military, he doesn't control the economy, and he doesn't control the oil. He most certainly does not control Venezuela. He'd like to control all of the above, but, he doesn't actually control any of them, he has no ability to control any of them, and he doesn't know how to go about controlling any of them. As with the US economy, as with immigration, as with crime control, as with politics, Trump talks a great game, and talk is all he's got. Sure, he can do some damage sometimes, he can mess things up a bit, but, that's the limit of his capacities. Trump doesn't have nearly the level of forces to actually successfully invade Venezuela, and there's no way he can get the level of forces necessary to invade Venezuela. He cannot possibly land the hundreds of thousands of troops necessary, that would require a whole level of landing craft that the US actually doesn't have, at all. All he can do is hope, somehow, to intimidate the Venezuelan government into submission, just like he likes to intimidate everyone else. But, usually, this doesn't work very well at all. It only makes people very angry, it makes them more resistant, it makes them fight back. If anything, this operation is simply going to make Maduro much more popular, worldwide, as another of Trump's victims. There is no possibility of any actual invasion of Venezuela. Trump can send a few troops to raid, this, or that, but, again, it will only increase popular resistance. What happens next? Well, what Trump hopes happens is that the Venezuelan people simply agree to do whatever he tells them to do. This seems highly unlikely, since it would amount to slavery, and most people don't enter into slavery voluntarily, even when intimidated. Another interesting question is how the upcoming show trials of Maduro is his wife -- his wife for God's sakes!! -- is going to go. I have no idea what they're going to charge his poor wife with, of course. I'm sure they'll charge with Maduro with everything under the sun. However, how likely is he to be found guilty, given the international condemnation of this flagrant violation of all international law in kidnapping him? I think Donald Trump's main use, is that by being such a total jerk, and so obviously, he does shed some light on other international leaders who, while not being quite as openly ridiculous as Trump is, are also probably doing some things that they really shouldn't be doing, although not quite as obviously, and quite as openly, or quite as extremely.

David Hume's stunning observation in "The Standard of Taste": hard science is vastly more irrational than the arts!

"Though in speculation, we may readily avow a certain criterion in science, and deny it in sentiment, the matter is found in practice to be much more hard to ascertain in the former case than in the latter. Theories of abstract philosophy, systems of profound theology, have prevailed during one age: In a successive period, these have been universally exploded: Their absurdity has been detected: Other theories and systems have supplied their place, which again gave place to their successors: And nothing has been experienced more liable to the revolutions of chance and fashion than these pretended decisions of science. The case is not the same with the beauties of eloquence and poetry. Just expressions of passion and nature are sure, after a little time, to gain public applause, which they maintain for ever. Aristotle, and Plato, and Epicurus, and Descartes, may successively yield to each other: But Terence and Virgil maintain an universal, undisputed empire over the minds of men. The abstract philosophy of Cicero has lost its credit: The vehemence of his oratory is still the object of our admiration." David Hume, "The Standard of Taste" (1760). ..................................................................... This observation, fairly obvious and inevitable when understood, is far, far from the normal way we think of things, at all. We hear in the Universities of the perfections of Einstein's Theory of Relativity, how it cannot be improved on, how our entire world is absolutely dependent on it. We hear how all progress is dependent on science, in an inevitable progress, based on the perfections of the scientific method, which, if it is not perfect, must be, by far, the finest instrument for creating systematic progress in our understanding and mastery of reality. We hear that the evidence for Einstein's theory of relativity is so overwhelming, that it cannot possibly be disproven, but, must merely be slightly modified, at most, for certain circumstances that Einstein and his successors were unaware of. Whereof comes this massive discrepancy, between David Hume's rather self-evident observations about the ephemeral nature of all science and mathematics, and contemporary views of the absolute perfections and indestructability of modern science and mathematics? How can we possibly reconcile them? I think, as is often the case in human affairs, we have recourse to psychology, and human motivation, in understanding this fundamental principle of human social behavior, as regards science, mathematics and the arts. While a great work of art may indeed have some influence on the minds of men over the decades and centuries, and many have, they are generally by no means essential for survival on a day to day basis. The works of art influence and mold over time, but are not existential in their necessity, the way the rules of science or religion may be. Has anyone died for failing to read a great work of art in time? Perhaps, but, it would require very special circumstances indeed! On the other hand, failing to follow the moral precepts of a religion, or the practical laws of physics, could precipitate almost anyone into a very early death, almost under any circumstances. As a result, there is a strong social tendency to take the rules of abstract philosophy much more seriously than anything in the arts. However, if this be the case, how can we possibly explain the endurance of art, but the intensely ephemeral nature of the rules of science and mathematics. If something is essential to our survival, how can it simultaneously be so easily discarded as absurd? This is a true paradox. It is revolved by understanding that there are wheels within wheels, that our self-evident and essential observations only apply because of prejudice, and failing to see a broader picture. For example, what could be more existential and essential than victory in war? Yes, we all know the uncertainties of war. Anatole France observes that "all armies are the best in the world. If not, it would be impossible for them to exist at all." This statement is ridiculous, but profoundly accurate at the same time. It is so essential for us to believe that our army is invincible, simply to function as a society, that we must believe that it is. And every nation in the world is exactly the same way. Similarly, we must believe that 2 + 2 = 4. This cannot be denied, it is essential to our entire existence to believe this. Anyone who believes otherwise must be insane. It is basic arithmetic, it must be true, or our entire system of knowledge collapses, and with this, what are we, but mindless dust blowing in the wind?

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's deal with the Devil

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was actually a rather fine writer, perhaps not quite at the top level of all English writers, but, fairly close. Say, at the level of his fellow doctor-writer Somerset Maugham, if not a Shakespeare or a Charles Dickens. However, the fine writing we can see in his historical novel "The White Company", or his superb ghost story "The Captain of the Polestar", simply didn't earn him as good a living as he wished to have. In these, his more "literary" works, which he much preferred writing of course, because of their variety and subtlety, Conan Doyle manifests his real personality and understanding of the world as it actually is. And, the world is not a simple place, at all. The world is not a simple place morally, it is not a simple place materially, people are not simple psychologically, and cannot easily be classified into "good", and "bad". Put simply, we really almost never know exactly what is happening, or why, around us, ever. And, people always find this very frustrating, and unsatisfying. And, Conan Doyle understood this very well indeed, much better than most, I should say. And, this brings us to the world of the Sherlock Holmes novels. Because, this, most certainly, is not the real world, at all. And, Conan Doyle certainly knew this better than anyone, much better than he would have liked to, no doubt, referring to by far his most popular creation as "cheap fiction". Put simply, Conan Doyle was reduced to creating upscale "penny dreadfuls", in order to become rich. And, he did just that, and was very unhappy doing just that, and was immensely successful doing just that. Because people know they are uncertain, and are frightened, virtually all the time, the illusion of the serene, detached, all-knowing sage -- the Sherlock Holmes -- is immensely satisfying. Conan Doyle got the idea for Holmes from Edward Allen Poe's Auguste Dupin, an eccentric, intuitive young genius who uses his perceptive mind to solve crimes by means totally invisible to the police. The Poe character of Dupin is, in fact, a perfectly plausible one, in real life. However, Conan Doyle did something to the character to make him much more appealing, and much less realistic. He turned him into an invincible superman. While Dupin is a talented amateur who sometimes can do things the police cannot, Holmes literally can do anything. He's not merely an intellectual superman, he's a physical superman too, something Dupin certainly was not! Holmes cannot be defeated, if you have Sherlock Holmes on your side, in any situation, you cannot possibly lose, Sherlock Holmes is your Good Shepard, your Talisman, your Messiah, your God! And, we can well understand just how very uncomfortable the good Doctor Doyle must have been with that idea. It wasn't Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's idea to create a religion, I suspect. He just wanted to make money. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wasn't at all like science fiction writer L. Ron Hubbard, founder of the Church of Scientology, was he? Or, was he?

A short poem

If you want to understand something, You feel deeply about, But don’t fully understand, You might want to write a poem about it. When you understand it, Your poem is complete.

The real nature of Israeli policies to their neighbors in the Middle East

I was thinking in terms of Israeli policies in general in the Middle East, with respect to their neighbors there, and, for some reason the song about women gossiping in Iowa, USA about 1900, from the musical "The Music Man", came to mind. The song is called "pick-a-little, talk-a-little", from its main line and chorus. In terms of the Israelis, the correct paraphrase would I think be as follows: Kill a little, talk a little Kill a little, talk a little Kill, kill, kill, Kill a lot, Talk a little more. Doesn't this sound like a pretty accurate description, in terms of Israeli behavior with respect to their Arab neighbors, in general?

This should be an SNL skit on what menopausal women should not do

Today I heard the funniest NPR documentary I've ever heard. I was quite literally on the floor with hysterics. The narrator introduced it as a very moving, and important story, that they put a lot of heart into. It's about "what do you do, when the worst thing possible happens?" The story starts with her family hearing that Jen Angel, the owner of a local bakery has been injured in a car accident. They visit the scene, and, oddly, it's in the parking lot of a bank, and her car is still there, and relatively intact. What happened? She was robbed, the robbers broke her window, took her things, she ran after the car, got caught in the door, was dragged for fifty feet, and was grievously injured. Sad, ed? And, it gets worse. She ends up being declared brain dead after a couple of weeks. Really sad, eh? Especially for her withdrawn, sensitive highly intelligent boyfriend, Ishmael. It was his intelligence that attracted Jen to him, and his sensitivity. He's really broken up. And, he gets even more broken up over the next few weeks. Until, they arrest Ishmael for Jen's murder. It seems he was the car's driver, and he wanted to rob his own girlfriend. Weird, eh? Well, maybe not that all weird. You see, about halfway through his hour documentary we find out that Ishmael is only 18 years old. And, Jen Angel was 48 years old. No law against that of course, but, particularly with an "intelligent and withdrawn" -- i.e. mentally unstable -- young man in an intimate relationship with a much older woman, the probability of violence gets rather high, doesn't it? And, I would hazard a guess, it wasn't his intelligence that attracted Jan Angel to Ishmael, but having a little stud-muffin to be her little boyfriend, who she could "mother", or, something like that, anyway. And, Ishmael wanted a sugar momma. And, he got one. But, he wanted more money. And, that didn't work out too well, did it? So, what can we learn from this story? Older women should not get involved with much younger men, barely legal men, particularly if they're mentally unstable. It won't work out. It might get them killed. It probably will get them hurt. What's really hysterically funny is that NPR tries to turn this into a profound story about social justice, and why people shouldn't be sent to prison, but reintegrated into society. As it turns out, eventually, the prosecutor offers Ishmael a plea bargain, and he gets just seven years in prison -- he could have gotten life in prison -- and the judge agrees. Of course, the reason they do this, is that the judge and the prosecutor are well aware that Jen Angel was the effective instigator of this incredibly sordid story by her stupidity the menopausal lust! And, that Ishmael was just a kid being manipulated by her. However, NPR seem to think it was their arguments for the evils of incarceration that got Ishmeal the light sentence! Don't think so, folks.

Neanderthals didn't go extinct because they were inferior to humans. Neanderthals went extinct because they were superior to humans.

I've always been rather puzzled about exactly why the Neanderthals went extinct. When they were first discovered, some two centuries ago, the assumption was that Neanderthals represented an inferior branch of humanity, more brutish than modern man, that inevitably was superseded by the superior traits of modern human beings. Various explanations were provided for why this might have occurred. There might have been wars between the two groups, resulting in the ultimate extermination of Neanderthals by armed force. Our own human ancestors would obviously have been in direct competition with the Neanderthals for food and resources of various types. Perhaps modern human beings were simply better at hunting and gathering than the Neanderthals were, and consumed all available resources, leaving the Neanderthals to die from starvation, or perhaps from exposure to the elements for lack of proper clothing and shelter. Various explanations were presented for this possibility. Possibly human beings were better at communicating verbally than Neanderthals were, for anatomical reasons related the structure of their brains, throats or tongues. This might have allowed them to work better with each other in hunting and gathering activities, and made them more effective than the Neanderthals. It might have also made them better at making tools useful in hunting and gathering. However, none of these explanations seemed to be particularly compelling. The Neanderthals appeared to have brains as large, or even larger than those of human beings. Neanderthals were at least as intelligent, or more intelligent than modern human beings. Neanderthals were as big and strong, or stronger, than modern human beings. So, why would human beings have been able to defeat Neanderthals in war, had superior communication skills, or been able to out-compete Neanderthals, in any way whatsoever? In recent decades, with the development of sophisticated DNA technologies for the analysis of human, and non-human remains, it's become quite clear that Neanderthals and modern humans certainly did interbreed, and that perhaps as much as 5% of modern human genetics is derived directly from this inter-species mating between Neanderthals and humans. This interbreeding, perhaps on a rather massive scale, may provide a rather interesting and simple explanation for the apparent "extinction" of Neanderthals. Neanderthals were a highly specialized species, localized in Northern Europe during the Ice Age, and specialized in dealing with the climatic difficulties of surviving in this region, at that period of time. They were never particularly numerous, because of the extreme challenges of survival in this region, at that particular time. This, of course, meant they were left alone, and hadn't any competition. However, modern human beings spread out of Africa throughout Eurasia, they lived in Africa, India, China, Southeast Asia, and, ultimately, some of them braved the challenges of Ice Age northern Europe, where they encountered the Neanderthals. The Neanderthals were the masters of this region, so, really, our ancestors probably had no choice but to get along with them, to survive. And, that inevitably led to interbreeding. Far from exterminating the Neanderthals, or even competing for scarce resources with them, our ancestors might well have been little more than slaves to the Neanderthals. And, of course, slaves make perfectly legitimate breeding stock. And, with large numbers of modern humans infiltrating their territories from around the world, and working as slaves for them, and being used as limitless breeding stock, eventually, of course, the master Neanderthals would come to resemble modern man, more and more. Until, they became modern men, more or less, anyway.

Russia's Tsar Nicholas II problem

Since his execution -- or, if you like, his martyrdom -- by the Bolsheviks at Yekaterinburg in 1918, Tsar Nicholas II has been a somewhat problematic character historically for the world as a whole, and for Russia particularly. During the Soviet Era, in Russia, and in the world as a whole, Nicholas II was presented as a totally incompetent leader, out of touch with reality, and a repressive authoritarian who failed to provide for the needs of the Russian people, while embarking on futile and self-destructive military ventures like the Russo-Japanese War, and, of course, World War One. In Russia, since the fall of communism in the early 1990's, and particularly under the regime of Vladimir Putin, this image has been turned around 180 degrees, and Tsar Nicholas II is now presented as a great and noble hero, a martyr and actual canonized Saint of the Russian Orthodox Church. The Tsarist Russian Empire is idealized, and presented as the best of all possible worlds, a mixture of elegant nobility and happy, productive peasants. In contrast, the world as a whole hasn't actually departed too much from the Soviet picture of Nicholas II -- a totally incompetent leader, out of touch with reality, embarking on futile and destructive military ventures, and not providing for the needs of the Russian people! So, what's going on here, exactly? I think the problem is, that liberal democracy didn't work too well at all, when it was tried under Boris Yeltsin, in Russia. The economy collapsed, life expectancy dropped spectacularly, and, rather than becoming a highly successful liberal democracy like Germany or Britain, Russia simply was reduced to a kind of semi-colonial status with respect to the West, and the US, in particular. While this was, of course, perfectly acceptable to the West, and the US in particular, it was by no means satisfactory to the Russian people, or their leaders. Thus, the rise of a "strongman", Vladimir Putin, to rectify the situation, and return Russia to its rightful place in the world. How could this be done? How could Russia become a great, and successful nation once more? They'd tried the communist model, and had decided to reject that completely. It was, it seemed, impractical, and too authoritarian, and repressive. They'd tried liberal democracy, and, that had failed for them as well, the Russians were not Germans or Britons. So, what to do? It would seem that the only option they really had, was to look back at Russian history, and see the comparative success of Tsarist Russia, a great power for many centuries in the world. So, Vladimir Putin is attempting to make himself the new Russian Tsar, of the new Russian Empire. Now, the problem here, is that the rest of the world really doesn't want a new Russian empire, at all. In particular, the nations that broke away from the USSR when it collapsed in the early 1990's, haven't the slightest interest in being forced back into this union, as we are seeing currently in Ukraine. And, they are willing to fight very hard to avoid this fate, as we are seeing, and much of the world will support them, with arms and economic assistance, so that they can remain independent of Russia, no matter how much Mother Russia wants them back. So, is it possible, that Russia can possibly get beyond seeing Tsar Nicholas II as their quintessential ideal, because, if they do not, they are going to keep repeating Nicholas II's disastrous errors, over, and over again?