.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
The Expansionist
Friday, July 28, 2017
 
Trump Is Right about (Nonexistent) 'Transgendered' People
In general, I detest Donald Trump in every regard, and do not want to call him "President Trump", in part because he LOST the popular vote, so is not legitimately President of the United States, in that he was REJECTED by the majority of the people of this country. But when he's right, which happens about once in every thousand things he does or says, I am perfectly willing to give credit where credit is due. Trump is right about so-called "transgendered" people in the military. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A TRANSGENDERED PERSON!
+
The human race comprises two approximate halves divided by gender, male and female, which are marked, indelibly and unmistakably, by chromosomal difference, XX for female, XY for male . There are a very, very few "intersexes" whose chromosomal configuration deviates from that pattern (some of whom are congenitally retarded) but they are NOT the people who demand "sex-change" or "sexual reassignment" surgery, or who dispense with such surgery and just demand that society 'accept' that they are not what they appear, physically or chromosomally.
+
Lest you think me a mindless, ignorant bigot who has only recently considered this matter, you need to understand that I am the man who, at age 25 in the spring of 1970, coined the term "Gay Pride" for events surrounding the first march in celebration of the Stonewall Riots the prior June. Even before that, on April 1st, 1969 (no fooling), I established the organization Homosexuals Intransigent! at the City College of New York. HI! was dedicated to helping gay men accept themselves, respect each other, and assert their right to be themselves and be intimate with each other.
+
I always understood that the most important thing for gay men was to understand and assert their manhood, which was always under attack. Gay men needed to REJECT all suggestions that they were somehow less than men, some kind of non-man, indeterminate thing rather than perfectly normal men who needed to be intimate with men. I created and edited a newsletter, originally mimeographed by Student Services at City College, in which I addressed the issues of identity, pride, and self-assertion. Many of the texts published by Homosexuals Intransigent! are preserved in a website to this day: http://mrgaypride.tripod.com/.
+
The first issue of the newsletter, published on November 12th, 1969, opened with a major article entitled, "I AM HOMOSEXUAL". It starts like this:
Homosexuals can effectively demand respect from others only if we first respect ourself as homosexuals. That requires that we admit to ourselves that we are homosexual; that we affirm it, understand it, realize it in all its implications: I am homosexual. Say it! aloud: "I am homosexual." Shout it, whisper it. Laugh it, cry it. State it, proclaim it, confess it in sobs, but say it: "I am homosexual." Say it today, say it tomorrow, say it the day after that. Say it when you wake up, when you go to bed, when you find yourself thinking of someone of your own sex. Say it as often as you need to until you realize that it is true and that the fact that it is true forces you to adjust your attitudes and actions to make the very best of your life as a homosexual. "I am a homosexual."

Not "Leonardo da Vinci was homosexual", but "I am homosexual." Not "Gore Vidal is homosexual", but "I am homosexual." Not "One man of every six, one woman of every eight is homosexual", but "I am homosexual." Not even, "Some of the finest, most beautiful, and most talented people in the world are homosexual", but "I am homosexual."

Your homosexuality affects you, not Leonardo da Vinci. You are the one who must come to terms with your homosexuality, not Gore Vidal. You need not justify yourself or console yourself in the homosexuality of others. Others don't have to respect and live with you — you do, and unless you adjust to your homosexuality, it doesn't matter if all the rest of the world is homosexual: you will still be uncomfortable. ...

So revise it as you must to feel that what you say is the absolute truth. But if what you arrive at is essentially "I am homosexual", then say it: "I am homosexual. And I will live my life as I choose — as a homosexual."
Never did HI! accept the insane notion that gay men were not men. Never did we suggest that self-hatred and delusions about being "a woman trapped in a man's body" were anything but INSANE. Somehow, the gay movement went off-the-rails INSANE, accepting the RIDICULOUS assertions of our ENEMIES that gay men are not really men, and started to PROMOTE the monstrous idea that people can "change sex", in order to accept and accommodate to antihomosexual bigotry.
+
Part of this was the artificial and all-around destructive notion of a nonexistent "LGBT" and then ~Q, "community" that never existed and never can exist. Gay men have no use for lesbians, "bisexuals" (gutless gay people who don't have the integrity to be homosexual), or nonexistent "transgendered" people, who used to be called simply "transvestites" but who have, in the era of mad scientists, insisted on clothing themselves with surgery, not fabric. But a drag queen is a drag queen is a drag queen, and nothing more.
+
The legitimacy of gay men's attraction to men, something found in every culture in every era throughout human existence, was subverted and used by people we had no reason to even TRY to identify with. We formed an alliance with the devil, and are now surprised that he betrayed us! He's the devil. Of course he betrayed us! Choose your friends, or even allies who are NOT your friends, wisely, because they may commit you to things you do NOT subscribe to but will be held responsible for, and compelled to defend, even tho you don't believe a word of what they insist you say..
+
There is no more such a thing as a "transgendered" person than there is a "transspecies person". If someone presented him- or herself as a "squirrel (or zebra, or chimpanzee or dolphin) in a human body", everyone on Earth would have the good sense to say, "That's crazy!", and treat that person as a lunatic. People of good will would try to help them get over their insane delusion. Others, less caring, might simply confine them to a mental institution and let them rot there if they cannot let go of their mad delusion even with talk therapy or psychoactive drugs.
+
In any case, if s/he demanded "transspecies" or "species-reassignment" surgery to make him or her into a squirrel or zebra or chimpanzee or dophin, not one doctor anywhere on this planet would undertake such surgery. And no government on Earth would PAY for it! — within the military budget or outside it.
+
This brings us back to Trump's tweet about ending participation by "trans" people in the U.S. military, which cites in part the enormous medical costs entailed in accommodating "transgendered" people's sex-change surgeries. Hell no! There is no way society should underwrite a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY, mutilating the insane. Let's call it what it is: "sex-change" surgery on men is CASTRATION. Why would we smile upon, much less pay the costs of, CASTRATING unhappy men? That is not caring for people. It's ATTACKING them.
+
How did society get to be so crazy? It's a matter of two issues gone terribly awry. First, sympathy for unhappy people led tenderhearted, but soft-headed, people, to want to help desperately unhappy people. Second, uncritical generalization led some people to think that if homosexuality is normal, because it's found everywhere, and lesbianism is normal, because it too is found everywhere (but not nearly as commonly as homosexuality in men), and gay men and lesbian women align themselves in a single community, which they call "LGBT" and sometimes "Q", therefore the people represented by the "T" must also be normal, and legitimate. But the one thing does NOT follow from the others.
+
Gay men and lesbians must accept the blame for misleading people. We "came out", bit by bit over decades, to our friends, families, and then society in general, and got them to accept us as just being ourselves. That was good. But it went too far, in making people think, uncritically, that if homosexuality is normal, and lesbianism is normal, therefore the people covered by the T in LGBT (and sometimes Q), then "transsexuality", or "transgendered" people, are also normal.
+
We shall, for this purpose not deal extensively with the "B", so-called "bisexuals", who are NOT normal and NOT natural, but cowardly, worthless, subhuman scum who can't make up their mind as to what the f* they are!
+
In any case, the term "LGBT" and sometimes "Q", has been catastrophic for common sense and social good. There is in fact no universal agreement as to what the Q stands for. Is it "queer", an atrocious and inexcusable INSULT? If so, why would anyone in the other groups of the class accept that? Or is it "questioning"? Even then, why would anyone accept THAT? Don't question endlessly. Make up your god*mned f* mind as to what the f* you are, and move on!
+
The "LGBT(Q) community" does not exist. That artificial "community" was intended to be a temporary alliance to try to overcome a common enemy, heterosexual society's narrow-mindedness. It was like the alliance between the United States and Soviet Union during World War II, completely unnatural, but necessary at the time. Alas, it turned out to be worse. After Nazism was defeated, we had the good sense to stop pretending we were on the same side. Rather, we accepted that the wartime alliance ended with the defeat of Nazism, and we became enemies to each other immediately thereafter. We have never come to that realization as regards the "LGBT(Q)" "community".
+
There are two actual communities lumped together stupidly and dishonestly under that rubric, gay men and lesbian women, but there is no reason the two very different groups should be lumped together. They don't LIKE each other and do not hang out together. They feel they have NOTHING in common and have nothing to do with each other, in fact or logic. They spend NO time together, and RESENT impositions by each other upon their own group.
+
So why does this wartime alliance persist? Why are we still allied with the Soviet Union? Is it just mental laziness, or is it something worse? Are we afraid of being alone in the world, with no friends? Gay men, lesbian women, (nonexistent) "bisexuals" and (nonexistent) "transgendered" people are NOT friends. They have NOTHING to do with each other, do not RESPECT each other, and do not advocate that people become something they are not. If no one has told you that heretofore, I now HAVE. We must not generalize between things that are not the same. The Soviet Union was NOT a force for democracy in World War II. The U.S. made a TERRIBLE MISTAKE in permitting the Red Army to take over Eastern Europe. But this is the kind of idiotic error that can occur when people don't think things thru, but allow the human tendency to generalize, to go hog-wild. You'd think we'd have learned from that catastrophic mistake not to generalize uncritically. We did not.
+
Apart from the injury to individual lunatics who pretend to be of the opposite gender from what they were born — and they ARE pretending, because no one can REALLY believe they are not what they were born — there are issues of public safety. It is insane to give crazy people GUNS and teach them how to KILL!
+
There is also a very large issue here that I have not seen anyone in media address: the reaction of people in the traditional societies we are mainly concerned with in our military operations nowadays. Many, if not even most of them, already HATE us for sending WOMEN to kill men, women, and children in their countries. And, so, BILLIONS of people in the Third World want tu KILL us. How do you think those BILLIONS will react to an army of 'TRANSSEXUALS' killing their men, women, and children?
+
Why would we go out of our way to inflame passions against us? Is it our intent to recruit terrorists to kill us?
+
It is bad enuf that there are some people so astonishingly crazy that they can look in a mirror and see plainly that they are one gender, but persuade themselves that they are of the opposite gender. This is the same phenomenon as in anorexia nervosa: where people look into a mirror and see not skin stretched out over bones on a body wasting away from starvation, but FAT over fat, so continue to starve themselves until they die. The extreme confusion of "transgendered" people is exactly that pathological. But nobody says that people with anorexia nervosa, at the edge of death, are sane, or normal, and CORRECT in starving themselves to death. And nobody objects to intervening to STOP anorexic loons from killing themselves. So why does anyone pretend that "transgendered" people are anything but self-destructively deluded, and advocate that society HELP them destroy themselves?
+
"Trans" people are profoundly insane, but they can't help themselves. Society can, and does not have to go crazy too. People who cannot accept their biological reality need help. Mutilating them surgically or even rhetorically doesn't HELP them, but HURTS them, sometimes to the point where they KILL THEMSELVES because they cannot find peace in their own body or mind. Society needs to find ways to GET THRU to these extremely sad, extremely troubled individuals and wake them to reality. The very LAST thing society should do is play along with their insane, self-destructive delusions and co-conspire in mutilating them psychologically and even surgically.
+
There is another issue here that has not been addressed by media: innocent people being TRICKED into homosexual or lesbian relationships they NEVER intended to engage in. A man supposedly turned, as if by magic — poof! — into a woman so he can have sex with a man "normally", remains a man chromosomally. The only way there could be an actual sex change is if EVERY CELL in his body were somehow to expel his XY chromosomal configuration and take on an XX configuration, which cannot happen. So he remains a man, and if he fools another man into having sex with him, that other man will have been cruelly abused for being tricked into sex with a man, which he never intended. That is criminal activity, and should be punished severely.
+
At end, if someone is so unhappy that he or she cannot bear being who and what s/he is, we can end their misery, by ending their miserable LIFE. Take them in hand, tissue-type them, match them to people who need organ or tissue transplants, then put them out of their misery on an operating table and chop them up for parts for sane people. Every year in this country, thousands or tens of thousands of decent people die while waiting on transplant lists. Euthanizing "transgendered" loons and transplanting their organs to save well-adjusted people would be extremely useful socially. Maybe the prospect of being put to death and chopped up for parts will concentrate what remains of the mind of "transgendered" "people", and make them see things right, clear of delusions.
+
So, Mr. Trump, thank you for trying to shake this country out of its madness on gender, and saying NO to the insane agenda ("agender"?) of the people out to mutilate the insane. I don't want any lunatic to be handed a gun and trained how to use it to kill.
+
I am reproducing this post in my gay blog.

Monday, July 24, 2017
 
Learning from the Riots
This month marks the 50th anniversary of Riots that erupted in the center of my (present) city, Newark, New Jersey, and there are various commemorations and evaluations going on in this city about that time. A friend of mine, Joe from Belleville, a suburb on the northern border of Newark, sent me link to one of the stories he has seen about this reconsideration of The Riots. I sent him this reply.
I have little interest in the Newark Riots or Uprising or Revolution, or whatever people want to call that crisis. I was living in Manhattan at the time. Channel 13 [WNET, a Newark station stolen by New Yorkers] has talked about the riots in Detroit as the most important event in that summer's tumult. You have to remember that in 1967, there was still a lot of influence by a COMMUNIST Fifth Column on U.S. domestic political events. The Cold War was very much in play; indeed, we were in the midst of a hot war, in Vietnam.
+
NEVER did blacks assume responsibility for the mess they made of their lives — not in 1967, not now. it was much easier to blame whitey, even tho the bulk of problems in black neighborhoods had nothing to do with white people, who were NOT THERE. Blacks STILL do not accept responsibility for the mess they have made of their lives and neighborhoods. White people provide free schools, free books, snd free in-class supplies, but black pupils (not "students") do not USE the resources GIVEN to them to allow them to make something of their lives. To this day, an appalling proportion of urban blacks drop out, tune out, hook THEMSELVES on dangerous, life-ravaging drugs, and otherwise do everyhing in their power to make a mess of their lives and the lives of the children they should never have had unless and until they were willing to provide WELL for them, financially, intellectually, and morally.
+
Blacks have been PERMITTED to destroy the bulk of the great cities of the United States. If outside invaders had done to Detroit and Newark what Southern blacks have done, we'd have called out the military and EXTERMINATED the invaders. But white Americans were not allowed even to THINK of regarding blacks as enemies to be exterminated, or even arrested and compelled to change, as in "boot-camp" programs to retrain their brain and establish new habits.
+
Liberals were told that they must not judge, must not hold blacks (and Latinos, and other poor people) responsible for their own bad choices. How contemptibly paternalistic: blacks are not to be held responsible for their own behavior! Why not? Why are whites not given a pass for their personal failures, but blacks must be?
+
Conservatives did not identify with the humanity of their impoverished and screwed-up fellow-citizens, to help them reshape their present and future, but just turned away (tho I would not say "turned their back on" them, because that could be suicidal).
+
Here, as in so many matters, nobody did the right thing. Everybody acted stupidly; nobody acted intelligently; and nothing has changed drastically for the better. Oh, there has been incremental improvement over the DECADES, but only incremental — and sometimes reversible. All these "protests" over this and that of late, all these demonstrations about one abuse or another, end up setting us BACK, not moving us forward.
+
It is very difficult, for intelligent people, to see how STUPID everything is. It seems that no one ANALYZES what the problems are and solutions might be. As a Nation, we are pretty good at complaining, but not at all good at sustaining interest in social problems, nor in coming up with ideas to address the problems. There are private organizations, foundations, and civic-action initiatives that do wonderful work, but their scale and impact are trivial. You have presumably seen those values.com PSA's ("Public Service Announcements") about this and that, which continue the work of similar PSA's by "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints" (the Mormons). Governmental policy just about everywhere in this country is, alas, appallingly inappropriate, irrelevant, ineffective, or counterproductive.

Friday, July 21, 2017
 
Spelling Reform Eased by Computers
I have been an adamant advocate of spelling reform for English since at latest 1972. In that year, I issued the first version of my own system, "Fanetik". I submitted it to the newsletter of Mensa, the high-IQ society, of which I was then a member, and the editor, in Britain, was inclined to publish a presentation on it in the Society's international newsletter. BUT he wanted me to start with Traditional Orthography (T.O.) / Traditional Spelling (T.S.), and introduce the principles bit-by-bit. I found that a preposterously artificial and unworkable way to deal with the matter, so demurred.
+
Instead, once the Internet became a major means for disseminating ideas, I created, in 1998, a website in which I spelled-out the principles, with sample texts. Over the course of the intervening years, I developed variants of Fanetik for different applications, for instance, guidance for children and foreigners as to how English should be pronounced in extended texts ("Augmented Fanetik" or, with accents, "Augméntad Fanétik"); in pronunciation keys, as in dictionaries, with accents for syllabic stress and dots to show where syllables separate ("Fanetik for Pronunciation Keys"); and, most recently, "Streamlined Fanetik", or "Compressed Fanetik", which drops unnecessary letters in adjoining vowels. I have not yet put up on the Fanetik website a comprehensive presentation on that FINAL version of this System.
+
All these versions are just variations on a basic theme: that there should be a SINGLE way to spell every sound in English; that every vowel should be complete within its syllable (that is, before the next consonant) and not depend upon an extension into another (apparent) syllable (e.g., kleerstaure", not "clerestory", which many readers of English will see as a four-syllable term, kler.és.ta.rèe), (Actually, there is some "give" in Fanetik to distinguish between many homonyms; and there is one vowel-consonant sound combination, now spelled five ways — ER (most commonly), OR, IR, UR, and AR in T.O. — that Fanetik permits to be spelled three ways, ER (most commonly), UR, and, in a relative few words, AR (e.g., "dounward"). But in general, Fanetik employs ER for that sound, unless there be good reason to wander from it, as to distinguish between homophones.)
+
Except as regards spelling, English is the simplest major natural language on Earth. It has no difficult sounds, like the French-U and German-Ü (U-umlaut), which I have seen described as being made with the lips rounded as tho to say "ooh" but then the sound long-E being pronounced) or the clicks of languages like Xhosa). The sound system of English is extremely simple. The spelling, however, is insanely complicated.
+
Everyone raised in an English-speaking country is acutely aware of the most preposterous spellings, such as OUGH in "though", "through", "enough", "cough", "hiccough", and "thought", which are pronounced, respectively, as "tho", "tthru", "eenuf", "kauf", "hikup", and "tthaut"; and "freight" vs. "sleight": fraet, sliet. We also know about ridiculous numbers of silent letters: (gnat, wrap, fraught, benign, and knight, which are pronounced naat, raap, fraut, beenien, and niet). Children trying to learn how to read that MESS spend YEARS trying to make sense from this NONSENSE. Some kids never do adjust to such absurdity, but remain functionally illiterate. They are right in not accepting madness. They are the smart ones, not the idiots. The fault is NOT in them, but in the insanity they are required to try to memorize.
+
The costs to functionally-illiterate people and to society are high. Horrendous (industrial) accidents, that cause multiple deaths, can occur when people cannot make sense out of printed warnings. But there is no public pressure to ABOLISH current insane spellings and replace that chaos with systematic good sense. In fact, there are some demented people in the educational Establishment who DEFEND traditional spelling. Why is that?
+
The Computer Age has given us the first realistic opportunity to replace, wholesale, the madness of traditional orthography, but there are people still lost in the past who do not understand that computers make it possible for us easily to FINALLY end the madness.
+
There is a man in India, Madukar N. Gogate, who used to be a wholehearted spelling reformer. Realize that India is now the 2d most populous English-speaking country on Earth — well, that is, if you accept absurd Indian mispronunciations as "English". There are some 75 million speakers of Indian "English", many more than the 66 million people in the United Kingdom who speak a form of English that we in the GREATEST English-speaking nation, the United States, would accept as "English", even tho many British speakers are barely intelligible to us. Alas, Mr. Gogate (is that pronounced as it looks, góe.gàet?) has in the past year or so surrendered to a feeling of helplessness. I replied today to an email from him that effectively gave up on English spelling reform. This is his text.
School children in UK US are bewildered to see illogical English spellings. We in India are not much bothered. English is our second language. We have mother-tongues, mother-scripts to guide. Example> Butter is illogically spelled. Its pronunciation and meaning can be seen in Hindi script. Watch it while reciting spelling Butter 10 times. Brain gets trained ! Of course use words in sentences etc to master them. English spellings problematic but grammar is easier. Nonliving things too have grammatical gender in Hindi. So adjectives, verbs vary accordingly. No such complication in English. I thought of reformed spellings, but now consider them unpractical [s/b "impractical", but he is not a native speaker of English, so we can cut him some slack.] (though good in principle). Huge investment made by many countries (training courses, books, encyclopedias etc[.]). By process of history, English is a World link for higher knowledge and business. Do not disturb it.
I immediately sent him this response.
I COULD NOT DISAGREE MORE. "Butter", in English conventions, is a PERFECT spelling. I don't know why you would see problems with that spelling.
+
As for the vast investment the traditional English-speaking world has made in traditional spelling, you do not appreciate that the great preponderance of materials we see today are CREATED TODAY, NOW, every day. Wikipedia has replaced printed encyclopedias for most people who have Internet access, and Wikipedia can be revised every single day, and indeed several times a day. So bringing everything that people ACTUALLY deal with into alignment with a proper, rational spelling SYSTEM would be relatively EASY, and QUICK, given the ability of computer programmers to replace texts automatically. They would simply create two sets of spelled vocabulary and issue the command to go systematically thru traditionally spelled text and replace every single word with the rationally spelled version.
+
So we could start with "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" and in less than a second — or tenth of a second — it could be changed to "Tha kwik broun foks jumps oever tha laeze daug." A personal computer of the kind in BILLIONS of households could convert book-length texts (say, 75,000 words for a novel, and 200,000 words for a major work of serious nonfiction) in a very short time, perhaps as little as 6 minutes. An online supercomputer could probably respell 200,000 words in SECONDS.
+
All we need to do is agree on HOW to respell things, and computer programs could do ALL the respelling we need in a TRICE.
We really do not need to surrender to madness. The spelling of English CAN be changed, all around the world, in a matter of weeks. Let's do it, and save generations of children the pains of trying to master illogical and mutually contradictory spellings.

Thursday, July 06, 2017
 
Ending the North Korean Threat
The United States must not tolerate the insanity of a tiny country 5,626 miles from the most populous state of the Union, California, being ALLOWED to threaten to kill MILLIONS of Americans. This is truly an existential crisis. That is, the very EXISTENCE of millions of Americans, and even, thus, the continuation of our civilization if we cannot and will not defend ourselves, depends on how we respond to this appalling and unprecedented threat. If the United States will not protect California, the Union will disappear, because it will cease to have any value to anyone anywhere in the (present) Nation.
+
The United States today is controlled by pussies, but even housecats have more courage than our current leadership. I have two beautiful cats. They would never consent to be cowed into yielding their home to outsiders. But the current leadership — Republican, Democratic, and nonpartisan advisors on foreign policy — is uniformly cowardly. They are united, as far as we can tell, in the belief that only diplomacy, thru Communist China, can save us from nuclear attack. Bull.
+
There ARE options other than living into the indefinite future with the threat of a theremonuclear attack. We do NOT have to live like that. Even if North Korea should have one or a few intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of delivering a hydrogen-bomb warhead — and that is dubious — the U.S. has some 1,800(!) such missiles. Why on Earth would we permit tiny, insignificant North Korea to threaten us?
+
The United States MUST tell the PEOPLE of North Korea that we will have no choice but to kill them by the million, possibly to the extinction of the entire population of North Korea, unless they rise up in revolution to remove the current regime and replace it with a government that threatens no one. The U.S. must urge the people of North Korea to save themselves from being vaporized or, worse, killed by agonizing days or weeks of radiation sickness, in which they must watch their children die in agony, by overthrowing the current regime.
+
Nor can we even consider the effects upon South Korea or Japan of such a thermonuclear attack upon North Korea. Frankly, if the choice is for South Koreans and/or Japanese to die or Americans to die, I have absolutely no hesitation in choosing to have South Koreans and/or Japanese die RATHER than Americans. That is not a quandary for me.
+
Mutual Assured Destruction ("MAD") works as restraint only if both parties to a potential conflict are sane. We have no such assurance in the case of the present North Korean regime, which has been ruled by one family of lunatics for decades. So we have no reason to believe that MAD will restrain the present North Korean regime. We have no idea if Kim Jong-Un is even remotely sane, or if he is off-the-wall nuts. He has murdered his own relatives, so why would we think he'd be any gentler with us?
+
Let us be plain here. I do not consent to have ANYONE in the United States murdered by a nuclear attack from North Korea, much less a MILLION Americans or MANY MILLIONS of Americans. That is not even remotely acceptable to me. If to prevent a nuclear attack by North Korea, we have to KILL EVERY SINGLE NORTH KOREAN, all 25 million and more of them, that is a price we MUST be willing to pay. And we must TELL the people of North Korea that we WILL kill ALL of them, if need be, to protect ourselves. Their lives mean NOTHING to us. OUR lives mean EVERYTHING to us.
+
Forget about nudges from Communist China. Communist China is not our FRIEND! It has NEVER been our friend and WILL never be our friend. We need to work for the overthrow of that government too. Unless Communist China tells North Korea, both publicly and privately, that it will militarily INVADE North Korea to oust the present government, and starts massing millions of troops at the border, no one should believe that Communist China is hostile to North Korea's behavior.
+
Where, after all, has North Korea gotten the MONEY for its missile and nuclear-weapons programs, if not from Communist China? No one else does business-as-usual with the North Korean regime.
+
Where has North Korea gotten the TECHNOLOGY for its highly advanced weapons and missile programs? Are we to believe that a country of 25 million has within its own territory and population the brilliance to do all this without outside help? I don't believe that. Do you?
+
North Korea is now, and has long been, at the edge of mass starvation. At times, it has gone over that edge, and mass starvation has occurred. How does a starving society spend billions on nuclear-weapons and ballistic-missile technology? And why don't the media even ask?
+
No sane person in the leadership of the United States could for an INSTANT consent to give a nothing little country like North Korea the power to control the greatest country in the history of the world. NO. We must crush North Korea like a bug. If that means we must rain a hundred thermonuclear-tipped ballistic missiles on every part of North Korea, then that is what we must do. Maybe a thermonuclear attack upon the research facilities and test facilities of the North Korean military would suffice. But I'd rather be safe than sorry. The stakes are too high to permit ANY weapons facility to remain after a U.S. attack. Destroy them all. If need be, KILL THEM ALL. We didn't start this, but we sure as hell can end it

Thursday, June 22, 2017
 
Russia, Shmusha
I have been waiting for weeks and weeks to hear if Russian "meddling" or "interference" in the U.S. election of 2016, or, as Rachel Maddow of MSNBC keeps saying, hyperbolically, "attack" on our election, actually occurred, or is all speculation. We now (June 21, 2017) know that U.S. intelligence agencies believe, after extensive investigation, that NOT ONE VOTE was altered. Not one. So much for an "attack" upon our election.
+
Plainly, election-vote information should NOT be on the Internet. Not everything needs to be, or should be, on the Internet. If this information is NOT on the Internet, it CANNOT BE HACKED from afar.
+
Why is that not obvious to everyone? The solution for concerns about the security of voter records is to KEEP IT OFF THE INTERNET!
+
Moreover, as you should know if you vote, you do NOT log on to a website to vote at a polling precinct. Rather, you show up and SIGN A PRINTED (looseleaf) BOOK before you are allowed to vote — PRINTED pages, on paper, not electronic records in possibly-fictitious cyberspace. So why are so many people yelling about 'dangers to our democracy'?
+
In like fashion, if we are concerned about the security of our electric utilities and other things, just TAKE THEM THE F* OFF THE INTERNET, you morons! There are, obviously, perfectly simple ways to segregate different kinds of information and operations into different electronic boxes. We can have electric-utility customer information in one box, accessible from the Internet so you can check your account and pay your bill, that is entirely separate from control operations of the various power plants and distribution systems for electric service, of those same utilities. They do NOT all have to be on the Internet. Some operations can be entirely "off the grid", electronically speaking, or on an "INTRAnet", not the InTERnet. Why is anyone so stupid as to put everything on an Internet that can be hacked from THOUSANDS of miles away?

Thursday, April 20, 2017
 
Making Lite of Drugs
Today is "420 Day", a celebration of marijuana by antisocial morons. Such celebrations should be punished with extreme severity. Some 50,000 Americans DIE from drugs each year, yet media entertainers and newscasters are constantly making jokes about drugs, as tho absolutely no harm has ever resulted from drug use, and marijuana is, if anything, GOOD for people, even if it is indisputably a "gateway drug" that leads people to think that all drugs are at worst harmless and at best actually beneficial.
+
An antidrug Public Service Announcement being broadcast now shows a teenage girl saying "Prescription drugs aren't as bad as street drugs, right?" Altho the scene is scripted, the question is indeed the kind of thing that scores of millions of Americans are now asking, or believing without saying aloud. Enormous confusion has resulted from the mixed messages that society is constantly sending out, as thru legalizing marijuana. Entertainers who joke about ALL drugs contribute mightily to the insane misperception that all drugs are harmless. Nothing could be further from the truth.
+
Most people are profoundly simpleminded. They can't make distinctions between one thing and another on their own, but tend to generalize, lumping together things that do not belong together. Gone is the concept of "The Golden Mean", and the maxim "all things in moderation" does not apply to drug use. There is no moderate use of heroin, and minor or "moderate" use of many drugs, definitely including marijuana, distorts people's perceptions and erodes their ability to know when enuf turns to too much. Then the substances in the drugs they use might alter the very operations of their brains. So there may be no safe level of use of ANY reality-distorting drug, precisely because it DOES alter perceptions, esp. in some individuals who are more susceptible than most..
+
American society has been sapped of energy and perseverance by the huge expansion of marijuana use. Millions of people who should be focusing on their education and current job, and preparing for a better job, prefer not to think about any of that. They do slipshod work, possibly near dangerous equipment. Many can't even wait until they get home after work to smoke or eat "weed", but do so during breaks. Unknowable numbers of people DRIVE or operate dangerous machinery in the workplace under the influence of marijuana, but we don't have a breathalizer for marijuana use to test people involved in accidents. Multitudinous Americans are becoming unfit for work by virtue of being partly or wholly zonked-out on "pot". How are American pot-heads supposed to compete against hardworking, non-drug-using Chinese and other workers in the countries that threaten to destroy our economy? Answer: American pot-heads CANNOT compete against people who work "clean".
+
The greatest harm to individuals from marijuana is the loss of ambition and initiative, such that in many cases people lose YEARS of their lives to drifting aimlessly. Then one day, at age 45, they wake up in their parents' basement, to get ready for a menial job delivering pizzas. They can't get a better job because they dropped out of college, or even high school, because they got lost in a haze of marijuana smoke. Altho that may serve them right, it does not serve their parents right. All the hopeful expectations they had of their child were destroyed by drugs — and often not just marijuana, esp. if the 'friends' they make while under the influence of marijuana, urge them to try other drugs too. This is why marijuana IS a "gateway drug", because it makes naive people distrust medical and Governmental warnings NOT to experiment with drugs. "That's what they said about marijuana, but marijuana never did me any harm" — meaning that use of marijuana did not KILL them.
+
Statistics about marijuana smokers' moving on to harder drugs are extremely fuzzy, with words like "most" do not move on to ever more dangerous drugs, rather than hard figures. Still, there are studies that do show an inclination of marijuana users to experiment with other drugs. Part of the problem is that people LIE about drug use, so "studies" can include only people who admit to such drug use or who have been caught using drugs.
+
There is a universally known expression we all need to bear in mind when considering whether marijuana is hazardous to health, educational success, financial achievement, and other long-term aspects of life: "Better safe than sorry." The consequences can be so dire that the 'benefits' are not remotely worth the risks.

Wednesday, April 19, 2017
 
Prove Something, or Let Go of the Russian Bugaboo
Rachel Maddow has an apparently insane fixation on trivial 'Russian interference' in the 2016 Presidential election. UNLESS someone can prove that Russians invaded voting machines or boards of elections to CHANGE voting statistics, nothing else mentioned amounts to a hill of beans. As I have said here before, revealing Clinton-campaign emails amounts, qualitatively, to NOTHING MORE than would a full-page ad in The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and a handful of other major newspapers. It was just information. Information is not subversion. It is not sabotage. It is not interference in our election. All it is, is information. And perhaps a bit of argumentation, tho the information released about the Clinton campaign by Russian hackers, WikiLeaks, etc., didn't even include argumenttion, as for instance saying "You need to vote for Donald Trump because of X, Y, and Z revealed in these emails." It was just bare email text.
+
For all the Russian Government or WikiLeaks knew, Americans might have reacted FAVORABLY to what they learned from the Clinton campaign's emails. That is to say that the information releases could have impelled Hillary into a landslide victory. But you have never heard that in this public discussion, have you? Why not? I haven't even seen proof that the leaked emails had ANY EFFECT on voting whatsoever.
+
The issue is PHONY. Russia and WikiLeaks did NOT "interfere in our election". They selectively released apparently genuine emails from members of the Clinton campaign. That is all. If that is NOT all, if the Russians actually hacked into boards of elections to change vote totals, or in any other way actually altered the DATA of the vote, TELL US THAT, and PROVE it. If you have no such proof because no such thing happened, SHUT UP about Russian "interference" in the election, and find a GENUINE, DEFENSIBLE issue to crusade on.
+
You want an issue? How about CORRUPTION, all the manifest and potential conflicts of interest by Trump, his family, and other members of his Administration. That is, um, "uge"!
+
How about Trump's betraying campaign promises? That, too, is "uge".
+
Democrats, Liberals (and the evasive euphemism "Progressives"), Libertarians, moderate Republicans, Independents, and watchdogs on possible corruption, should all unite in sounding the alarm over the role of MONEY in Government. Oddly, Rachel Maddow today raised the issue of contributions of $1 million (or even more?) from each of some 45 super-rich individuals and corporations to events surrounding the Trump inauguration. But Maddow did NOT say that such contributions were obvious BRIBES for favors from the Trump Administration, at least for ACCESS to the President himself, his family, or highly placed members of his Administration. Who gives a million dollars to anyone without expecting something in return?
+
That is a genuine scandal. Land hard on that, Ms. Maddow and everyone else concerned about the wrongheadedness of the Trump Administration. Investigate to see exactly what those donors have already gotten and stand to get in the future from their well-placed largesse. Raise a stink about how much good those $45 million in donations to a one-day celebration in Washington could have done for actual good works across the Nation: food pantries; Meals on Wheels and housekeeping aid to shut-ins; tutors for struggling public-school pupils; prosthetics for adults and children who have lost limbs to accidents, war, and disease; hearing aids and sign-language teaching for deaf children, their families and teachers; and a thousand other good causes — NOT including medical research, because $45 million is unlikely to produce any breakthru of consequence with regard to any major disease. All possible results of medical research are iffy. The other things I mention, however, speak to demonstrably beneficial impacts that $45 million could actually have on the lives of tens of thousands of people, not in a single day of partying but on things that will make a difference for years, even an entire lifetime.
+
So, Ms. Maddow, PUT UP some actual PROOF of "meddling" by Russia in the 2016 election, or SHUT UP. Follow the money that seems to be seeping into private pockets in the Trump Administration. Reveal appearances of impropriety and find out if they are realities, more than just appearances. Let go of spurious and actually ludicrious accusations of "Russian meddling", and find something else to talk about. The public is very tired of all this Russia nonsense. We don't want to hear ONE MORE WORD unless you can PROVE that Putin changed vote totals as to swing the election fraudulently away from Clinton to Trump. Not ONE MORE WORD.


Powered by Blogger