Author: VD

Tinder, meet the sparks

Michael Snyder notes three very dangerous developments that have the potential to lead to significant large-scale conflict on Zerohedge.

  • Israel has been striking Iranian military targets inside Syria for months, but now the rules of engagement have apparently changed, because in recent days the IDF has started conducting airstrikes against Iranian targets inside Iraq. The reason this is being called “an unprecedented move” is because this is the very first time since 1981 that we have seen Israeli airstrikes inside Iraq. Needless to say, these latest airstrikes have absolutely enraged the Iranians.  It looks like the Israeli government has determined that any Iranian military targets outside of Iran itself are fair game, and it is probably only a matter of time before Iran strikes back in a major way.
  • The political protests that have made global headlines in Hong Kong in recent weeks have greatly angered the Chinese government.  They were probably hoping that the protests would quickly subside and soon be forgotten, but that hasn’t happened. So now China is faced with a decision.  If such protests were happening elsewhere in China, they would be brutally crushed, but Hong Kong is a special case. If the Chinese are too harsh with the protesters in Hong Kong, that could turn world opinion against them, but if they do nothing that could encourage protests to start happening in other area of the country. In the end, the Chinese will probably do what they always do, and that means crushing the opposition.
  • North Korea just fired two more missiles into the ocean. The North Koreans are greatly alarmed by the joint military drills that the U.S. and South Korea will soon be conducting, and whenever they get greatly upset about something they seem to express that displeasure by firing off more missiles.

Of the three, I think the Hong Kong situation is the most delicate and the North Korean one the most trivial. North Korea has carried out more than 80 strategic missile tests since Kim Jong-On became Supreme Leader in 2011, so what do two more signify? However, there is also a fourth major development that is probably as dangerous as all three of those situations combined, but is little noted in the USA as yet because it doesn’t involve Israel or China or nukes.

Turkey has threatened to re-open the floodgates of mass migration to Europe unless Turkish nationals are granted visa-free travel to the European Union. The EU agreed to visa liberalization in a March 2016 EU-Turkey migrant deal in which Ankara pledged to stem the flow of migrants to Europe. In an interview with Turkish television channel TGRT Haber on July 22, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Çavuşoğlu said that Turkey was backing out of the migrant deal because the EU had failed to honor its pledge to grant Turkish passport holders visa-free access to 26 European countries.

“We have suspended the readmission agreement,” he said. “We will not wait at the EU’s door.”

A day earlier, Turkish Interior Minister Süleyman Soylu accused European countries of leaving Turkey alone to deal with the migration issue. In comments published by the state news agency Anadolu Agency, he warned:

“We are facing the biggest wave of migration in history. If we open the floodgates, no European government will be able to survive for more than six months. We advise them not to try our patience.”

The migration deal, which entered into force on June 1, 2016, was hastily negotiated by European leaders desperate to gain control over a crisis in which more than one million migrants poured into Europe in 2015.

Under the agreement, the EU pledged to pay Turkey €6 billion, grant visa-free travel to Europe for Turkey’s 82 million citizens, and restart accession talks for Turkey to join the EU. In exchange, Turkey agreed to stop the flow of migrants to Europe as well as to take back all migrants and refugees who illegally reach Greece from Turkey.

Turkey currently hosts an estimated 3.5 million migrants and refugees — mainly Syrians, Iraqis and Afghans. Many of these people presumably would migrate to Europe if given the opportunity to do so….If the EU approves the visa waiver, tens of millions of Turks will gain immediate and unimpeded access to Europe’s passport-free zone. Critics of visa liberalization fear that millions of Turkish nationals may end up migrating to Europe. The Austrian newsmagazine, Wochenblick, reported that 11 million Turks are living in poverty and “many of them are dreaming of moving to central Europe.”

Not every European government will fall if the migration spigot is turned on again – those countries already fortunate enough to have solid anti-migration parties in government will see the strength of those parties skyrocket – but the German and French governments will most certainly fall and the collapse of the Berlin-Paris axis would suffice to account for the European Union as well.

Disavowing Reagan

It will be interesting to see which direction Republicans will choose to go in light of the latest Republicans R the Real Racists scandal. Will they stand by their icon Ronald Reagan or will they stand by their professed belief in racial equality.

The day after the United Nations voted to recognize the People’s Republic of China, then–California Governor Ronald Reagan phoned President Richard Nixon at the White House and vented his frustration at the delegates who had sided against the United States. “Last night, I tell you, to watch that thing on television as I did,” Reagan said. “Yeah,” Nixon interjected. Reagan forged ahead with his complaint: “To see those, those monkeys from those African countries—damn them, they’re still uncomfortable wearing shoes!” Nixon gave a huge laugh.

The past month has brought presidential racism back into the headlines. This October 1971 exchange between current and future presidents is a reminder that other presidents have subscribed to the racist belief that Africans or African Americans are somehow inferior.

Since most Republicans are, by nature, cowards, and since literally nothing terrifies them more than the possibility that someone, somewhere, will accuse them of being racist, I assume that they will not hesitate to obediently jettison Reagan from the Republican pantheon, as well as Lincoln, Jefferson, and Washington. At this point, there really isn’t any more room for anyone but Harriet Tubman, Martin Luther King, the Melting Pot, and, of course, the Holocaust.

I assume they’ll turn against the Constitution too, once they finally grasp that its very purpose is disinclusivitating.

REBEL’S RUN update

This post brought to you by Viral Films Media and its legal advisers.

The REBEL’S RUN campaign is progressing swimmingly.  Chuck and Vox have been hard at work on the script, and the Viral Films Media team is busy on various work streams to keep the project moving forward on schedule.

If you are still interested in supporting the REBEL’S RUN campaign, there is still room and time to do so.

And if you are already a supporter of the campaign, please check your email and make sure that you are following all the necessary steps to follow through and fund your pledge.  Both the Viral Films Media team and the campaign site are more than happy to answer any questions you might have and assist you in completing the process.

So, about that Thor idea

We may have to get a move on:

A new report suggests Marvel Studios will cast a transgender female character in one of their upcoming Phase 4 projects.

The report comes from Geeks World Wide, who indicate the character is currently using the codename “Jessica.” They go on to indicate that they are looking for a “transwoman actress of any ethnicity in her 20s to 30s.”

Geeks World Wide speculates that the character will appear in Thor: Love and Thunder as they state “the casting breakdown calls for ‘transgender actresses only.’” They go on to indicate the character will be Sera.

Sera first appeared in Angela: Asgard’s Assassin #1 back in 2015. Sera was created by Kieron Gillen, Marguerite Bennett, and Phil Jimenez. Sera was a member of a group of wingless male Angels from Heven called Anchorites that were being held by the Hierophants.

The Devil Mouse really does seem hell-bent on tearing down Stan Lee’s legacy as rapidly as possible.

Sophistry over time

NATIONALITY

1828 Webster’s Dictionary
National character; also, the quality of being national, or strongly attached to ones own nation.

1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica
A somewhat vague term, used strictly in international law (see International Law, Private) for the status of membership in a nation or state (for the conditions of which see State, Allegiance, Naturalization, Alien), and in a more extended sense in political discussion to denote an aggregation of persons claiming to represent a racial, territorial or some other bond of unity, though not necessarily recognized as an independent political entity. In this latter sense the word has often been applied to such people as the Irish, the Armenians and the Czechs. A “nationality” in this connexion represents a common feeling and an organized claim rather than distinct attributes which can be comprised in a strict definition.

2019 Wikipedia
Nationality is a legal relationship between an individual person and a state. Nationality affords the state jurisdiction over the person and affords the person the protection of the state. What these rights and duties are varies from state to state.

You cannot hide

If you are a white male, it doesn’t matter what your hobby is. Diversity is coming to destroy it.

Does craft beer have a diversity problem? Of course it does….

Given that big beer makers for decades courted male consumers with sexist TV ads featuring women in bikinis, it perhaps surprises no one that the craft beer business has become a haven for white males — most of whom happen to be hipsters. Sadly, what counts as diversity in this industry is the clean-shaven minority mixing with the bearded majority….

While Boston Beer may be mum about what more could be done on diversity, the Brewers Association, the trade group for small and independent American brewers, is not. Since 2016, the association has been on a mission to figure out how the industry can be more welcoming to everyone, whether as a consumer or a brewer.

Measures include updating advertising standards to ban sexually explicit, lewd, and demeaning language, graphics, and images; forming a diversity committee; hiring a “diversity ambassador;” and giving out grants to encourage brewers to promote diversity and inclusion.

Unlike big beer companies, which rely on expensive TV ad campaigns, craft brewers depend on word-of-mouth and grass-roots marketing to build their brands. Through its diversity grants, the Brewers Association is supporting Fresh Fest 2019 in August in Pittsburgh — the nation’s first black brew fest, featuring 28 black-owned breweries, and Beers With(out Beards), an event series in Brooklyn, N.Y., that promotes women in the craft beer industry and women-owned breweries.

Whether you obediently cuck or whether you try to hide in your basement and brew your beer in solitude, Diversity will hunt you down and try to inclusivate you. So, you’d better learn how to stand up and fight for your interests before they are demolished through diversification.

Aquinas on nation vs state

Yet another proof, if another one was required, to prove that the nation is not and can never be the state. Contemplate Summa Theologica Question 95. Human Law Article 4.

Article 4. Whether Isidore’s division of human laws is appropriate?

Objection 1. It would seem that Isidore wrongly divided human statutes or human law (Etym. v, 4, seqq.). For under this law he includes the “law of nations,” so called, because, as he says, “nearly all nations use it.” But as he says, “natural law is that which is common to all nations.” Therefore the law of nations is not contained under positive human law, but rather under natural law.
Objection 2. Further, those laws which have the same force, seem to differ not formally but only materially. But “statutes, decrees of the commonalty, senatorial decrees,” and the like which he mentions (Etym. v, 9), all have the same force. Therefore they do not differ, except materially. But art takes no notice of such a distinction: since it may go on to infinity. Therefore this division of human laws is not appropriate.
Objection 3. Further, just as, in the state, there are princes, priests and soldiers, so are there other human offices. Therefore it seems that, as this division includes “military law,” and “public law,” referring to priests and magistrates; so also it should include other laws pertaining to other offices of the state.
Objection 4. Further, those things that are accidental should be passed over. But it is accidental to law that it be framed by this or that man. Therefore it is unreasonable to divide laws according to the names of lawgivers, so that one be called the “Cornelian” law, another the “Falcidian” law, etc.
On the contrary, The authority of Isidore (Objection 1) suffices.
I answer that, A thing can of itself be divided in respect of something contained in the notion of that thing. Thus a soul either rational or irrational is contained in the notion of animal: and therefore animal is divided properly and of itself in respect of its being rational or irrational; but not in the point of its being white or black, which are entirely beside the notion of animal. Now, in the notion of human law, many things are contained, in respect of any of which human law can be divided properly and of itself. For in the first place it belongs to the notion of human law, to be derived from the law of nature, as explained above (Article 2). In this respect positive law is divided into the “law of nations” and “civil law”, according to the two ways in which something may be derived from the law of nature, as stated above (Article 2). Because, to the law of nations belong those things which are derived from the law of nature, as conclusions from premises, e.g. just buyings and sellings, and the like, without which men cannot live together, which is a point of the law of nature, since man is by nature a social animal, as is proved in Polit. i, 2. But those things which are derived from the law of nature by way of particular determination, belong to the civil law, according as each state decides on what is best for itself.
Secondly, it belongs to the notion of human law, to be ordained to the common good of the state. In this respect human law may be divided according to the different kinds of men who work in a special way for the common good: e.g. priests, by praying to God for the people; princes, by governing the people; soldiers, by fighting for the safety of the people. Wherefore certain special kinds of law are adapted to these men.
Thirdly, it belongs to the notion of human law, to be framed by that one who governs the community of the state, as shown above (I-II:90:3). In this respect, there are various humanlaws according to the various forms of government. Of these, according to the Philosopher (Polit. iii, 10) one is “monarchy,” i.e. when the state is governed by one; and then we have “Royal Ordinances.” Another form is “aristocracy,” i.e. government by the best men or men of highest rank; and then we have the “Authoritative legal opinions” [Responsa Prudentum] and “Decrees of the Senate” [Senatus consulta]. Another form is “oligarchy,” i.e. government by a few rich and powerful men; and then we have “Praetorian,” also called “Honorary,” law. Another form of government is that of the people, which is called “democracy,” and there we have “Decrees of the commonalty” [Plebiscita]. There is also tyrannical government, which is altogether corrupt, which, therefore, has no corresponding law. Finally, there is a form of government made up of all these, and which is the best: and in this respect we have lawsanctioned by the “Lords and Commons,” as stated by Isidore (Etym. v, 4, seqq.).
Fourthly, it belongs to the notion of human law to direct human actions. In this respect, according to the various matters of which the law treats, there are various kinds of laws, which are sometimes named after their authors: thus we have the “Lex Julia” about adultery, the “Lex Cornelia” concerning assassins, and so on, differentiated in this way, not on account of the authors, but on account of the matters to which they refer.
Reply to Objection 1. The law of nations is indeed, in some way, natural to man, in so far as he is a reasonable being, because it is derived from the natural law by way of a conclusion that is not very remote from its premises. Wherefore men easily agreed thereto. Nevertheless it is distinct from the natural law, especially it is distinct from the natural law which is common to all animals.
The Replies to the other Objections are evident from what has been said.

Since the law of nations cannot be contained under human civil law, the national should never be confused with the citizen. There can be overlap, but the two identities are clearly distinct. The false conflation of national with citizen is profoundly dishonest and philosophically false, indeed, it is a prime example of the sophistic technique that Aristotle calls “amphiboly”, which is “a fallacy of relevance that relies on an ambiguous word or grammatical structure to confuse or mislead an audience.”

Consider this: if the nation was the state, there would be no need for the construction “nation-state” to ever have been created. Furthermore, there would have been no need for economists to make the change from “Gross National Product”, which sums the economic activity of an entire nation regardless of the geographic location of the nationals, to “Gross Domestic Product”, which sums the economic activity of all the people within a specified geographic location.

A Democrat disaster in the making

Matt Taibbi’s article on the Democratic presidential candidates is pretty much all you need to know about the 2020 sacrificial lambs:

Four years ago, the rank inadequacy of the Lindsey Grahams and Scott Walkers and Jeb Bushes who tumbled into the pastures of Iowa made great sport for snickering campaign journalists, myself included. We dubbed the field of governors, senators, and congressgoons who couldn’t beat a game-show host the “Clown Car,” and laughed at what many of us thought was the long-overdue collapse of the Republican Party. The joke turned out to be on us.

The GOP error was epic in scale. The Republicans sent twice the usual number of suspects into the buzz saw of a Throw the Bums Out movement they never understood, creating the comic pretext for the Clown Car: twice the canned quips, twice the empty promises, double the rage, frustration, and eye rolls.

Nobody will want to hear this, but Democrats are repeating the error….

Williamson is a small, almost ethereal figure with silver-streaked hair and intense eyes that 19th-century authors would have described as being “like coals.” Her superficial eccentricities and occasional incautious statements (she once said “there’s a skepticism which is actually healthy” on the issue of vaccines) have caused reporters to chortle at her run.

But her speech is not a lifeless collection of policy positions. It’s an interesting, tightly written diagnosis of the American problem. Precisely because socioeconomic stresses have pushed them into heightened awareness, she says, the American public sees what she calls “a transition from democracy to aristocracy,” and the corporate sector’s “insatiable appetite” for money that dominates American life.

Williamson is not a traditional orator, with a voice that fills the room. You can barely hear her without a microphone. But she grabs crowds. Nobody is checking sports scores or Twitter. They’re in.

Williamson goes on to say that most Americans are aware that their government is now little more than a handmaiden to sociopathic forces. She describes a two-party system that, at its worst, operates in perfect harmony with the darkest impulses of corporate capitalism, and at best — presumably she refers more to Democrats here — sounds like institutionalized beggary.

“ ‘Pretty please, can I maybe have a hundred-thousand-dollar grant here?’ ” she says. “ ‘Pretty please, can we maybe have a million dollars in the budget for all this?’ ”

Heads are nodding all over the place.

“They say, ‘I can get you a cookie.’ ”

This elicits a few yeahs from the crowd.

Christ, I think. This woman is going to win the nomination.

Ironically, a lunatic candidate like Williamson is probably the only one with a legitimate chance of beating President Trump in the general election. Because she’s the only one speaking even a modicum of the truth; the US government really is little more than a handmaiden to sociopathic forces.

My kind of Catholic

ZhukovG perfectly expresses my perspective:

Here we are, Satan’s hosts arrayed against us and we spend more time shooting at one another than at the enemy.

If any man confess that Jesus is Lord; he is my brother, my comrade. I don’t care how he prays or the manner of his worship.

I only ask that he hold his place in the line of battle against the Powers and Principalities that have come against us.

Amen and a-fucking-men. Evil is aggressively attempting to erect the Tower of Babel 2.0, the Synagogue of Satan is shamelessly attempting to subvert language, nations, religions, and history itself, and yet various retards from every church and denomination prefer to engage in theological disputation rather than stand united against the god of this world under the banner of Jesus Christ.

Shut up and get thee to the battlefront.

Shaking the Deep State

That’s the basic idea, gentlemen and traitors:

US President Donald Trump’s nomination of an inexperienced but loyal partisan to become the director of national intelligence (DNI) is an attempt to “neutralise” US spy agencies as an independent and objective voice on global affairs, former intelligence officials warned. It follows the announcement that Dan Coats, one of the most senior national security officials willing to contradict Trump, is to leave the post next month after disagreements with him over policy and intelligence, including on Russian interference in the US election and on North Korean nuclear capabilities.

Step by step, the Storm approaches. C(oates) before D(eclas). US spy agencies aren’t supposed to be independent and objective and self-serving. They’re supposed to be loyal to the US President and dedicated to the national interests of Americans.