The Globalist Plans?

I thought I’d do something a little different with this article then the normal political stuff.   In the past a site called has been linked showing some interesting population predictions.  With what has been going on with North Korea as of late, I wondered what the updated predictions may be saying about them and us by the year 2025, just 7 short years from now. has been called a CIA run site and also attributed to the Globalist Deep State.  Are they sending a warning?

deagle usa

The U.S. predictions have worsened with the expected population down to 65 million.  That’s a loss of 254 million souls.  That would mean there would be a pretty bad series of events heading our way, or maybe not  🙂

As for North Korea, this is where things become a bit shocking:


Nearly wiped from the face of earth.  What event could possibly cause this?




  1. There are other countries where the prediction are dire, including South Korea and Japan. On a good note, this was predicted long before Trump emerged in politics, so he can’t be blamed should this stuff come true, which is unlikely, I think.

    • Does give any reasons to back up their predictions?

    • Germany, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, Israel, and France have big losses. India, Pakistan, Russia, and China remain almost constant. There are only a few events that could cause such a calamity. Asteroids would impact the whole world. Unleashing a virus would impact some areas initially but more than likely would go world wide as well. Crop failures can cause mass die offs but the impacted countries all have strong agriculture that feeds much of the world. They would stop exportation and save it for themselves. That leaves only nuclear conflagration. But given that the US, Britain and France are nuclear countries, their retaliatory capability would need to obliterated in a first strike. All this in 7 years would be astounding.

  2. Not even close to happening. They need as many people working as possible to keep that money supply coming.

    • Sounds like de-federalization to me. It is just mob rule of the whole with no local representation by either local peoples or states. We in CA already have problem with the large coastal cities dominating the state government. If we elected all state reps at large, it would not be 2/3 domination but 100% domination. Only like minded people would get elected.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      I would like to point out that the following sums up the old Progressive movement and its impact on governance.

      “Armstrong said the “priority would then, in theory, be given to the professional competence of the candidates rather than representing member states.””

      Remember my post of last week on this topic from Mises? The Progressives came to town with a theory that new “educated, trained, techno crats” would rule. This was not really new then nor is it today. See Plato’s Republic for a similar discussion of “who should lead” the rest of us gerbils.

  3. Just A Citizen says:
  4. I know we have some staunch pro-lifer's in here, so I'd like to ask your take on a hypothetical scenario I've seen going around:

    You work in an in-vitro fertilization clinic. One day, a fire breaks out. You turn to flee, when you notice a 5 year old child who has been separated from his mother. At the same time, you see a rack of fertilized embryos awaiting implantation. They are in opposite directions, and you have time to save one or the other.

    Turn left, save the 5 year old. Turn right, save a rack of hundreds of fertilized eggs. There are no other options. All other options end with everyone dead.

    Please tell me what you choose and why.

    • This isn’t as much of a moral issue as it is made to be. The embryos could only survive in a controlled, stable environment. Thus, removing them would not save them. So, save the 5 year old. That is a simple one.

      • Please consider the scenario in the spirit in which it is intended. The embryos are in a self-stable fridge on wheels - all you have to do is get them to the office next door and plug it in. They will survive if you opt to rescue them. They will suffer no damage and will go on to be implanted at another clinic at a later date.

        This is not a trick question where can gimmick the answer by saying "the embryos will die anyway, thus the 5 year old is the better choice." Similarly, the 5-year old is a perfectly normal and healthy child who is neither evil nor possessed by the devil, nor in any otherwise-imminent fear of death. If you save the embryos, they will all survive, but a 5 year old child will die. If you save the 5 year old child, the embryos will all be destroyed. If you try any other option, they will all go up in flames (and you probably will, too).

        The choice is this: save 100 embryos or save one five year old or save neither.

        No gimmicks. Don't make me nail down every conceivable "out" in the scenario. I've had enough of that for one lifetime (arguing with Black Flag). Answer the question as stated. There are no "outs." Save eggs. Save child. Save neither. Pick one.

        (I should disclose that this scenario was presented with the comment that "in 30 years of asking this question, I have never once gotten a straight answer.")


        Does it change your answer if you consider this as a trolley problem? This time, it's not inaction but action that is required of you which results in the loss of one option.

        Trolley version: A runaway trolley is headed toward a pile of explosives carelessly left on track B. If it strikes the explosives, it will destroy everything one tracks A, B, and C. You are standing at a lever and may pull it to divert the trolley to tracks A or C. If you divert to track A, it will destroy a rack of fertilized embryos. If you divert to track C, it will run over a 5 year old child tied to the tracks there. You have no means of stopping the trolley and no time to rescue the one you do not save. Thus, your choice is ((A) "kill five year old," (B) "destroy rack of embryos," or "do nothing, but both blow up").

        As before, no "gimmick" answers are permitted. A, B, or C, only.

        • I would still save the child. I wouldn’t think twice about letting the embyos burn, even if one were intended for a love one.

          • Well, I am not a pro-lifer…….but I would save the five year old. The five year old is there and viable and immediately productive. You cannot make an emotinal decision…you make a practical one.

    • I would save the 5 year old. Why because it is a born child who feels fear and pain. Because a child that we can see and interact with is always gonna touch our hearts more than an embryo in a box.

      • I would do the same.

        But now the inevitable followup: you have offered an emotional justification for your answer. Yet, presumably, you still consider those embryos to be alive. Further, presumably, you consider all innocent lives to be of equal worth. But you have valued one life over one hundred lives. Did you make the "emotionally right, but morally wrong" choice?

        Or did you tacitly admit that an "embryo in a box" is less important than a five year old child?

        • Yes, a five year old child is of more value than an embryo in my opinion. Just as a woman should be allowed to have an abortion if her life is truly at risk.

          Now you tell me, what do you think these statements prove?

          • "Prove?" Nothing. Not a thing.

            But, to me, I am willing to stipulate that an embryo is "alive" and even that it has "worth" but that it does not rise to the level of "human moral worth" until much later in the pregnancy. An embryo is a clump of cells, but at some point it shifts into a child - I will make no assertion as to when or how that shift occurs, only that it does occur.

            If we can take that position to the logical end, then we might consider (as I do) that the well-being and interests of a pregnant woman supersede any "right to life" of a fetus up to a certain point.

            If that "embryo in a box" isn't worth 1/100th as much as a child, then is it worth "forcing a woman to carry it to term and impacting the rest of her life, plus all the economic consequences thereof"?

            It's the old saw: if you're willing to open the door a crack that an embryo is anything less than 100% equivalent to a born human baby, we're now just talking about questions of extent and not moral absolutes.


            Sorry to run, but that's it for me.. busy day. I really wish I had more time for this.. maybe tomorrow we can pick it up.

            • where did my link disappear to? Will try again.

              • Gasp!!!! Why won’t it appear. Now I’m pissed and I’m gonna post some relevant things from the link:

                How a Formerly Pro-Choice Nursing Instructor Discusses Abortion with her Students

                blah blah blah

                I am also a nursing instructor and have taught obstetrics to hundreds of young men and women, our future nurses. My students often ask me what my opinion is regarding abortion. “Are you pro-life or pro-choice?” they ask me. I do not ask them the same, as I don’t want them to fear that their position might affect how I grade them.

                blah blah blah

                Without fail, my students ask me the questions that they hear argued in the media. My students ask these questions even though they, having studied biology, human anatomy, and physiology, already know the answers.

                They ask, “When does life begin?” I respond with, “You know the answer to this question. How do you tell if something, such as a cell, is alive or not?” The students answer correctly that “living cells grow and multiply.” And so of course I must remind them of what they already know: that growth and multiplication is exactly what is happening after the egg and the sperm join to form the zygote. Within twenty-four hours of conception the zygote is dividing rapidly into many cells which will differentiate to form different parts of the human body.

                Dead things do not do this. Dead cells do not replicate their DNA and multiply into more cells. They do not differentiate to become a brain, a heart, the liver, the skin, muscle and bone. Life begins at conception, when the fertilized egg begins to grow.

                The next question they ask is “When can it be considered a human?” I answer, “What determines whether we are a human, rather than a bird or a zucchini?” The answer to this is simple and they correctly reply that it is “our genetics, our DNA.” When the egg and the sperm join, this is the beginning of a new human, with its own set of DNA which also includes hair color, eye color, skin tone, fingerprints, and a multitude of other individual characteristics. The baby is genetically different from the mother, having only half of the DNA coming from her, and half from the father; a distinct human being.

                “So now we all can agree that we have established that abortion is killing a living human.”

                Of course, the conversation is not complete without “Why shouldn’t a woman be able to do what she wants with her body?”

                blah blah blah

                “However, once a pregnancy occurs, it is no longer only the woman’s body that is in question, as the baby is not a part of her body,” I explain. “Tell me how we know that the baby is not a part of the woman’s body.”

                The students then explain to me that the placenta and the umbilical cord are what separate the baby from the mother. This is important, as most people would view the placenta and the umbilical cord as a means by which the baby is connected to its mother and so make the fetus “part of her body.” While it is true on the surface, a better and more truthful understanding is that it’s the placenta and umbilical cord which separate the mother from the baby and prove that the fetus was never part of its mother’s body. This is because the placenta and umbilical cord exist precisely because the baby has a different and separate circulatory system from the mother and their blood must not intermingle. If something happens, such as a traumatic injury, that causes their blood to mix, it can cause serious complications.

                If the fetus were not a separate human being but were only another part of its mother’s body, it would not need a placenta and umbilical cord to separate them. It could simply grow inside one of her body cavities like a tumor without any barriers between the two to protect each of them.

                “Now you have established that even though the baby and the placenta are in the uterus, they are not a part of the woman’s body. And even though the placenta is attached to the uterus, it is no more a part of her body than an earring or a watch is when you wear them. So now we have determined that the baby is a genetically distinct human, not a part of the woman’s body, and that it is alive, growing, and developing.”

            • Matt, the decisions one makes in a life and death situation does not in any way make it okay to intentionally kill in another. It certainly doesn’t make doing so, a moral decision.

            • I think most pro-life people wouldn’t have much difficulty answering that question. Most people can see and admit that while an embryo is a unique, living human being, it is not exactly the same as a five year old child because it cannot yet think and feel. There are a few people who would argue that there is no difference, but I think those people are a minority among pro-lifers. Now, why do some pro-choice people not recognize that an eight month old fetus is virtually the same as a newborn and therefore deserving of protection?

            • Just A Citizen says:


              The reason BF would eat your hypothetical for lunch is because they are agonizingly constructed to make a point which is not even supported by the example. Notice how quickly you jumped from “judgement calls” using “emotion” to assigning “value” then to “moral or immoral” and then to “forcing a woman to carry a child to term”.

              First and foremost. A decision to act to save one vs. another is not a “moral decision”. A “moral decision” would be to deliberately kill the child or the embryos. That is not the choice on the table, unless you also started the fire for that purpose.

              To assign some kind of intangible value to the child over the embryos does not assign a value that holds in other examples. And it certainly does not transfer to whether a fetus should be “deliberately killed” for convenience.

              To better understand why the example is flawed just change the scenario. What if 100 children stood on one end and a single 5 yr. old on the other? Or how about 100 pregnant mothers on one end and a single child on the other?

    • First off, this is a trap question which I hate just as much as you hate my anecdotal whatever, but at least my anecdotes are real life experiences.

      Second, I personally disagree with in vitro..even tho I have a sister who went this route 3 times to no avail…then conceived naturally only to have the baby live about 2 minutes before passing. I consider in vitro a form of trespassing on the master plan. Then I wonder…seriously , seriously wonder…why I was blessed with two children while being unwed and not hoping for a pregnancy at the time, while my sister, a devoted, successful wife, was not allowed.

      Now. There is such a thing as priorities. Seems to me that a 5 year old is higher in the pecking order than an embryo. Here is where you can spring the trap in many directions. What if the choice was between a 5 year old and a handicapped person. Or any other number of other choices. This, to me, and it will be different for you, or V, or G, or JAC, is a very personal decision, and something that in the fury of a split second decision is just something you have to reconcile with yourself. No amount of discussion will change that.

      • Anita,

        I apologize for the "trap question." It certainly is that. However, I think it points to a very real dichotomy in the viewpoint of the staunchly pro-life crowd. That is, that if an embryo is a baby, then why doesn't it feel like that? And, if push-comes-to-shove, would you back up that belief with comparable actions? V.H. has admitted that she also would not (and I have profound respect for the honesty in both of your answers). I admit this is a "gotcha" question, and make no bones about it. But I find the results... interesting.

        With regards to your anecdote, I am sorry for what your sister went through. And I appreciate your faith in a master plan, but I hold no such belief. It must be a great comfort to believe as you do, but I cannot. And, if there is a master plan, then surely IVF is part of that plan (as are antibiotics and vaccines).

        Now, with regards to your answer, yes, again, of course it's a trap. But I appreciate your answer and find it highly interesting. You have valued a 5 year old at 100x an embryo. So the question then becomes what if it were 1,000x? 1,000,000x? How many embryos is a 5 year old worth? If the ratio is vanishingly small, then does it not suggest that an embryo, while technically alive, is not a human being in a moral sense according to your view? To really drive the point home, if the option weren't a 5 year old child, but your beloved family pet verse a single embryo, would you save the egg?

        • No I wouldnt save the embryos. Just as I wouldn’t save the ones (possibly dozens or millions, Idk) that are naturally flushed from my body naturally every month. Adding, thank God I’m past that part of my life.

      • Seems to me that a 5 year old is higher in the pecking order than an embryo.

        VH….you have proven, via the above statement, that there is a logical decision to make and you made a logical decision. When would you like to take command? Your statement is exactly what I look for in deciding junior officer positions. Can you make a quick decision that is logical and practical. You did.

        Now, having said that……even the most hardened commander that has to make such decisions…….is not void of emotion but the emotion is kept in check……the real emotion comes afterwards….when you are alone…and you question your decisions.

  5. Canine Weapon says:

    • This airhead wasn’t aware of why we had troops in Niger. SHE’s the one who headed up legislation to have our guys go after Boka Horum (sp) in the first place, to #SaveOurGirls. Dumbass!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      The article had potential. Then it was lost with the usual rantings of the anti American Govt type. “American terrorists”. “Western imperialists”. blah, blah, blah.

      It would be nice to see some truly objective reporting from the country, however.

      • To be truthful, Obama funded and assisted in the attempted overthrow. Our government has skin in the destruction, ignoring that is silly. Whatever it should be called, wrong would work for me.

  6. President Obama labeled conservatives bitter gun clingers, who hide behind religion to conceal their hatred and racism. Hillary Clinton bashed them as a “basket of deplorables.” The mainstream media agreed with both, and echoed those sentiments far and wide in nightly news segments. Conservatives, in turn, defended ourselves in the voting booth and elected their worst nightmare, leaving them clamoring to figure out where they went wrong. One person found out, and he used to run National Public Radio

    What happens when Liberal’s leave their safe spaces 🙂

    • President Obama labeled conservatives bitter gun clingers, who hide behind religion to conceal their hatred and racism.

      No he didn't.

      “You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them,” Obama said. “And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

      He is saying that people are hurt and scared and they grab onto things that make them feel safe: guns or religion or xenophobia or anti-immigraton or anti-trade or whatever as a justification for their fear and frustration.

      He did not say conservatives, writ large, are bitter - only that some people are bitter as a result of being dealt a shitty hand for 25 years now.

      He didn't say they “hide behind religion to conceal their hatred and racism.. He said they gravitate toward (poorly phrased as "cling"... woops!) guns and religion, etc.

      Get past the soundbite. He is saying these people have been screwed and it's made them bitter. And in a search for meaning and a sense of security, they have grabbed onto guns or religion or anti-trade sentiments, etcs. This is patently true. What's more, it has always been true.

      Upticks in religion and gun ownership and xenophobia and anti-trade sentiments, etc are absolutely locked into a general feeling of security. The churches flooded after 9/11. Every time there's a mass-shooting, gun sales go through the roof. The economy is in the shitter and now all these anti-trade sentiments are boiling to the top. Where were these anti-trade folks before the financial collapse?

      It certainly wasn't an artful thing to say. But it was absolutely true.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Obama: Working Class Still Clinging to Guns and Religion

        The Economy: President Obama is mad that Donald Trump is trying to exploit the “economic stresses” suffered by the working class. Say, isn’t that precisely what Obama himself promised to get rid of seven years ago?

        In an interview this week with NPR, Obama talked about the difficult times that blue-collar workers have been going through. He mentioned the financial crisis (which ended 6-1/2 years ago) along with technology, globalization and “the fact that wages and incomes have been flatlining for some time.”

        Then he chastised Trump for “taking advantage” of the “anger, frustration (and) fear” that is out there.

        It was a direct echo of something Obama said when running for president back in 2008, in his infamous “bitter clingers” comment at a San Francisco fundraiser:

        “You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years, and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate, and they have not.

        “And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or antitrade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

        The only difference is that, back then, Obama claimed to have all the answers. Now, after seven years in the White House, he acts if these problems are all due to forces beyond anyone’s control.

        When NPR’s Steve Inskeep asked why so many blame him, Obama answered: (1) They are racists, (2) They don’t think I was born in America, (3) They think I’m a Muslim, or disloyal to the country, and (4) There are always be people who don’t like a president’s policies.

        We’re not making this up. Look at the transcript on NPR’s website. Even Inskeep seemed flabbergasted by Obama’s display of egomaniacal indifference to people’s suffering after trying several times to get him to answer his question.

        Obama can’t answer it honestly because to do so would be to admit that his own policies have been a monumental failure.

        After promises of “green shoots” and “turning the corner” and a “summer of jobs,” after the massive “stimulus,” Dodd-Frank, a government takeover of health care and industry-killing environmental rules, Obama hasn’t relieved working-class anxiety. He’s added to it by producing the worst economic recovery in modern history. And now he has the gall to attack Trump for promising to fix what he didn’t?

        This is the man who ran on “change you can believe in.”

      • they cling to guns or religion YES, HE SAID THAT!

        antipathy to people who aren’t like them LET’S SEE, RACIST, ISLAMOPHOBE, HOMOPHOBE, MISOGONYST.ETC. YES, HE DID SAY THAT.

        He totally said exactly what was claimed. That was in 08 and that sentiment still exists strongly in the Liberal camp.

      • Where were these anti-trade folks before the financial collapse?

        I was sitting back living phat as a result of millions of frequent flyers. Next thing I know, along about 06/07 I lost a big chunk of a college fund for my daughter and 1/2 the value of my lake property. At the same time we’re being fed a steady course of mega mergers and being conditioned that globalism is the wave of the future. We bitter clingers were looking around seeing all the mom and pops closing up shop and thinking what the hell is going on? Tea party comes along trying to fight back, but gets infiltrated by RINOs while we simultaneously get preached at as being racist and you didn’t build thats. So considering the way things played out, Obama certainly showed his hand with the bitter clingers comment. And it aint the way you see it.

      • I still say you would make a great speech writer.

  7. The $300 million dollar no-bid contract to rebuild sections of Puerto Rico's power grid was assigned to a company with two employees whose largest previous contract was for $1.3mm in Arizona. Terms include $330 / hr for a site supervisor and $227.88 for a "journeyman lineman." For subcontractors, this rises to $462 and $319.04, respectively. This also adds a "nightly accommodation" fee of $332 per worker per day and "almost $80 per day for food."

    By the way, the company is only two years old.

    Can we all agree there is some serious corruption at work here?

    Yes? Good.

    Now, does anyone's conspiracy theory sense tingle when I tell you that company is based out of Whitefish, Montana, pop ~7,700, the hometown of Ryan Zinke, the Interior Secretary? Does it add anything if I tell you that its chief executive and Zinke acknowledge knowing each other?

    • Just A Citizen says:


      NO! We will not agree at this point. I commented on other sites about this, this morning. Another attempt to smear people via innuendo and rumor mongering.

      Zinke admitted he knows the owner because, wait for it, virtually everyone in Whitefish knows everyone else. Which is true and you would know that if you had ever been there. In fact, anyone who is anyone in Montana knows who the other players are. The entire State has only about 1 million people, including the Indian Reservations and Military Bases.

      Also, Dept. of Interior and Zinke had NOTHING to do with the contract. And further, where is the proof there was NO BID. Recognizing that phrase is a favorite “political rhetorical trick” because there really are no such thing as “no bid contracts”. Govt. contracts are awarded by various means, all of which require either simple bids based on price or a written proposal, responding to “request for quotes”, which includes how a company will meet the RFQ’s stated metrics and the price for each.

      You forgot one of the “talking points”. Apparently the owner was also a donor to Trump’s campaign. Surprise, surprise, someone from Montana donated to Trump to beat Clinton.

      By the way, the guy in Puerto Rico responsible for the contract said that the company was doing a good job and meeting the contract requirements.

      So until further actual information is available I will file your report with InfoWars.

      • Should have given the contract to the Trump Foundation. I here they did good work after the earthquake.

      • It is remarkable to me how credulous you have become.

        • Just A Citizen says:


          I’m credulous? Your the one who posted the question, and garbage story.

          Or are you going to claim you were just posting sarcasm over a garbage story?

          By the way, a little research reveals that this company is 50 or 51% owned by a Brazilian company. The deal was done with Whitefish because another company being considered asked for 20 million down payment before they would show up. Whitefish did not ask for a down payment.

          There may be corruption involved given who was issuing the contract. But the innendo about Zinke is nothing but trash reporting.


      PREPA’s executive director, Ricardo Ramos, told reporters last week during a press conference the cash-strapped island chose Whitefish because it didn’t require a big deposit upfront. The other unnamed contender wanted a $25 million down payment for the work, Ramos said.

  8. It is clear what HRC got out of the Uranium One deal but what did BHO get? What incentive did he have for agreeing to this deal? I can understand his motives for many of the other scandals such as the IRS, F&F, etc. Most of these were political in nature. I do not see how he gained politically or financially from U1. The only thing I see is that he wanted closer ties to Russia and this was a way to buy their friendship. Or was the real purpose of this deal to funnel yellow cake to some other entity thus allowing Russia to provide yellow cake to Iran and NK?

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Very good questions. This is going to get real interesting fast. But I caution people not to get your conclusions from Hannity or other talking heads. Look at the actual evidence revealed and don’t assume to much about potential knowledge or connections. This whole Russia Thang is starting to look like a Tar Baby.

      • Actually JAC I have become very cynical over the last few years. I doubt very much that HRC, or any of the Obama gang will be prosecuted especially if the sycophantic press supports them. Remember back to Nixon. Nixon had a lot of Republican support up to a point and then the vast majority of the country realized that he had to go. His crimes pale in comparison to the crimes of Hillary, Holder, Comey, Lynch, the IRS and others.

        Obama as far as I can see was not motivated by greed like HRC but by political power the the furtherance of the socialist and hate America agendas.

        Oh well it is all great tragic political theater.

  9. Follow

    Donald J. Trump

    Workers of firm involved with the discredited and Fake Dossier take the 5th. Who paid for it, Russia, the FBI or the Dems (or all)?
    7:56 AM – Oct 19, 2017

    It appears Trump was correct…again.

  10. In an interview Tuesday with Newsmax, Bill O’Reilly claimed to have heard a recording of an “anti-Trump” attorney bribing a woman to accuse the presidential nominee of sexual harassment during his 2016 campaign.
    According to O’Reilly, the female lawyer on the tape offers a woman $200,000 to make claims of sexual harassment before the election.
    “It exists,” O’Reilly stated.  “We have urged the person who has the tape to hand it over to the U.S. attorney, because my investigative team believes there are three separate crimes on the audio tape.”
    The former host of The O’Reilly Factor said he does not have the tape, but that his attorneys have heard it and it’s “related to [his] situation.”

    If true, I wonder who PAID this attorney to screw Trump? Possibly the same people who paid for the debunked dossier? I wouldn’t bet against it.

  11. RIP Fats Domino. Passed away at age 89

    a riddle, the answer to which involves a pun or play on words, as What is black and white and read all over? A newspaper.
    anything that puzzles.

    Dems/Repubs: We must disallow the tax breaks that these beig corporations get. Cut out the loopholes.

    Where is the conundrum, you ask? Do NOT touch the state tax deductions. That would not be fair. They must stay tax deductible!

    What a farce.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      But a “conundrum” usually refers to a puzzle which seems complicated and essentially unsolvable. The TAX conundrum of both parties is easily resolved, by those who have resolve. 🙂

      • True….true. But therein lies the conundrum, does it not? “those who have resolve”? Is there such an animal?

        • Just A Citizen says:


          Yes. A riddle within a puzzle.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          P.S. I forgot your question. Yes, there is such an animal. Millions of them in fact. The question is how do you get these people elected? I suspect that if you and I and 50 more like us were in the Senate things would look very different than they it does today, relative to things getting done the “right” way.

  13. Canine Weapon says:

    “I can’t believe I ate that whole pineapple!” Tom said, Dolefully.

    “That’s the last time I’ll ever pet a lion,” Tom said, offhandedly.

    “I’ll never sleep on the railroad tracks again!” Tom said, beside himself.

    “That’s the third electric shock I’ve gotten this week!” Tom said, revolted.

    “I’m never anywhere on time,” Tom related.

    “I won’t let a flat tire get me down,” Tom said, without despair.

    “That car you sold me has defective steering!” Tom said, straightforwardly.

    “I’ve been on a diet,” Tom expounded.

    “I’ll have to send that telegram again,” Tom said, remorsefully.

    “I keep banging my head on things,” Tom said, bashfully.

    “Look at that jailbird climb down that wall,” Tom observed with condescension.

    “I remember the Midwest being flatter than this,” Tom explained.

    “That’s the third time my teacher changed my grade,” Tom remarked.

    “I’ll have to dig another ditch around that castle,” Tom sighed, remotely.

    “I’ve lived through a lot of windstorms,” Tom regaled.

    “I haven’t caught a fish all day!” Tom said, without debate.

    “That mink coat is on wrong side out,” Tom inferred.

    “I dropped the toothpaste,” Tom said, crestfallen.

    “Let’s play a C, E, and G,” said Tom’s band, in accord.

    “We don’t have a homerun hitter,” Tom said ruthlessly.

    (and my favorite)
    “You call this a musical?” ask Les miserably.


    When will a slander lawsuit finally hit the courts? All this faux racism crap is/has gone way too far.

    • It's not slander or libel (legally) if it's against a public figure (or entity) and you have a reasonable belief in the truth of the story at the time of publication.

      It's a very high bar.

      Bring your suits if you want, but they're just going to get thrown out immediately.

      This, by the way, is the same reason why conservatives are allow to spout endless nonsense about Planned Parenthood with impunity.

    • I happen to believe she's full of it.

      That said, this is kind of the point of "#MeToo".. that women have to stay silent or, baring that, make light of harassment. It is entirely plausible that she could have felt pressured/compelled to make light of an incident which she felt was sincerely troubling and only later felt comfortable speaking more openly / honestly about.

      That is, there's a lie here.. but you're assuming it's in making it harrowing whereas it was actually lighthearted. But it may be that the lie was in making it lighthearted when it was actually harrowing.

      Or she could be so full of shit we'll never know the truth. It's entirely possible that she doesn't even know the truth.


      That said, I think this MeToo crap is stupid. People are assholes. I have MeToo stories about being hit on by a gay guy too aggressively when he wouldn't take no (some gay guys seem to take a special pride in being able to "turn" a straight guy). But you know what? That's life. When he tried to get touchy, I put my foot down, and that was the end of it. I'm devastatingly handsome, of course, so I'm used to fending off a bit of unwanted attraction. C'est la vie.

      On the flip side, I'd be willing to bet that there is a girl or two out there who would tell a MeToo story about me when I was younger and too drunk / too oblivious to get the hint right away, or came on too strong. Does that make me a Harvey Weinstein caliber sexual predator? Does that make her a "victim of harassment"?

      It's just noise.. so much noise.. so much faux outrage covering up and minimizing the "real" issues of sexual harassment. The story Warren tells (the harrowing version) would be a legitimate example of what we should be fighting.. not the "micro harassement" bullshit that's so pervasive in this look-at-me give-me-attention "MeToo" idiocy.

      • Good points Mathius. I feel bad for young people these days, when simply wanting to date someone can be deemed harassment. The point in posting this little gem was the part about the guy that was so harrowing had polio. The only thing harrowing about that would be from worrying about him falling. Strange woman that Warren.

        • I feel bad for young people these days, when simply wanting to date someone can be deemed harassment

          I really feel bad for this generation in that their whole lives will be permanently recorded. There was no internet when I was young(er) and stupid(er). My teenage stupidity is lost to history. There are few photographs and no videos, and no online social media posts. I didn't have to maintain an "online presence," or any of that other bullshit. No online journals or blogs, no indelible records of my stupid thoughts. No sappy confessions of crushes or teenage angst. It all got swept away by time.

          We didn't evolve for the pressure of the digital age. Especially in a time of so much manufactured outrage. And it's got to be brutal for kids growing up in it. I don't envy them.

          • “I fear the day when the technology overlaps with our humanity. The world will only have a generation of idiots.” Albert Einstein

            And here we are.

      • Does that make me a Harvey Weinstein caliber sexual predator?

        By today’s standards, when you open a door for a lady and say good mornin’ maam… would be harrassment. I have been told twice in the last two years, when I held a door for a lady…..” I can do it myself “…….I quit.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Not me…………. ladies first. So if they want to wait and hold the door they must not be a lady.

          Love that logic thing.

        • I was threatened with physical violence once for holding a door for a girl. She got right in my fact, stuck her thumbnail right near my eye and told me she'd gouge my eye out if I ever did something like that again. Apparently, it was patronizing.

          My only regret is that I didn't slug her in the gut and let the door slam on her.. but I was too stunned to even react. I'd just held the door.. I'd do it for anyone entering behind me.. ::shrug::

          • I am polite to all people. I have no problem with holding the door open for someone close behind. I’ve never had an issue, always a kind “Thank You”. I can see you having these problems, it is inherent to where you live. I live in a society that is armed and polite, you live in a society that isn’t. I think you would like living in my neck of the woods, we actually have schools that teach and are very successful. We have a very low crime rate, violent crime being nearly non-existent. People are kind to one another and help those who need it most. It is not uncommon for the State Conservation Officer to ask for venison for a needy family, we provide. I actually live in the poorest county in PA. It’s also the only county in the state without a red light 🙂 Being poor doesn’t mean being criminal, me thinks that is cultural. Think about that.

      • When he tried to get touchy, I put my foot down, and that was the end of it.

        I hope you put your foot down about three feet inside his ass.

        • It is NEVER ok to be approached by the same sex……never.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            I have always been approached by the same sex. Always women. God this is good Irish Whiskey.

            V.H. Trying a new brand. “Quiet Man”. Single Malt Irish Whiskey. It has a bit of a Scotch Whiskey flavor to it, very smooth.

            • Oh yay! I have a Quiet Man story. When I worked at a screen print shop, we printed shirts for Quiet Man. That was my favorite repeat order, hundreds in an order, but they called for “discharge ink” which was invisible when applied. As it went through the dryer, the green color of the shirt would disappear and leave a natural linen color as a result. So instead of applying ink, you’re actually taking color away from the shirt…so you dont even feel ink on the shirt at all. Very cool print. Cheers!

            • Haven’t tried it, only thing new I’ve tried lately was called a fireball tasted just like redhots. 😃

          • Why not? How does he know I'm not interested if he doesn't "approach"?

            His mistake was not accepting the polite rejection. Honestly, it was flattering (it always feels good to be hit on - and he wasn't the first or last gay guy to try).. but then it got creepy and pushy and he needed a (verbally) forceful rejection. He put me in an uncomfortable situation, but that makes him a pushy jerk with boundary issues.. it doesn't make me some kind of #MeToo martyr victim.

            There was no call for putting my foot up his ass unless a physical response was necessary to protect myself. I can't justify hurting someone just because they annoy me or make me uncomfortable.

            • Why not? How does he know I’m not interested if he doesn’t “approach”? His mistake was not accepting the polite rejection. Agreed and this is where I was headed. YOu get one rejection….not two…not three…..ONE. No more, no less.

              Honestly, it was flattering (it always feels good to be hit on – and he wasn’t the first or last gay guy to try)…. This is where you and I part ways…I do not feel it flattering at all…not one little bit…but have to admit, that I carry a military bearing and that probably immediately discourages most approaches…..however, the one and only time that I have been approached, the comment ” get out of my face or die” seemed to solve the problem.

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    Hey Mathius

    Here is another Whitefish, Montana resident. Well he was at one time. This kind of character is among those “rich folks” who call Whitefish home. Which really means their “summer place”.

    So maybe you can see why everyone knows everyone who is connected. The town also has a huge contingent of pretty well healed Canadians who spend summers there.

    Spent a Fourth of July watching fire works from Blixseth’s deck, while he was trying to avoid divorce court asset valuations.

    • Can you give me the one minute run-down on (A) what Clinton is supposed to have done and (B) what the hell the sale is that was so wrong?

      My understanding is that, while the State Department weighed in on the deal, it did not have a veto power. State was only one of several and the . Further, there is no evidence Clinton was directly involved. Further, the panel only makes a recommendation to the President. I am also given to understand that even though it is a Russian company that owns it now, it doesn't have a licence to sell outside of the US - so it seems somewhat moot.

      I get that the guy selling the Uranium company (and thus, needing approval) was at one point a Clinton Foundation donor, but just like the Montana contractor being a Trump donor, I don't see this as proof of anything.

      • I can give you 240 million reasons…..but it will take more than one minute.

        • The Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain. Several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

          (1) Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

          (2) As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

          (3) And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

          (4) At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show. The New York Times’s examination of the Uranium One deal is based on dozens of interviews, as well as a review of public records and securities filings in Canada, Russia and the United States. Some of the connections between Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation were unearthed by Peter Schweizer, a former fellow at the right-leaning Hoover Institution and author of the forthcoming book “Clinton Cash.” Mr. Schweizer provided a preview of material in the book to The Times, which scrutinized his information and built upon it with its own reporting.

          (5) The Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.

          (6) When the Uranium One deal was approved, the geopolitical backdrop was far different from today’s. The Obama administration was seeking to “reset” strained relations with Russia. The deal was strategically important to Mr. Putin, who shortly after the Americans gave their blessing sat down for a staged interview with Rosatom’s chief executive, Sergei Kiriyenko. “Few could have imagined in the past that we would own 20 percent of U.S. reserves,” Mr. Kiriyenko told Mr. Putin.

          (7) Now, after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and aggression in Ukraine, the Moscow-Washington relationship is devolving toward Cold War levels, a point several experts made in evaluating a deal so beneficial to Mr. Putin, a man known to use energy resources to project power around the world. “Should we be concerned? Absolutely,” said Michael McFaul, who served under Mrs. Clinton as the American ambassador to Russia but said he had been unaware of the Uranium One deal until asked about it. “Do we want Putin to have a monopoly on this? Of course we don’t. We don’t want to be dependent on Putin for anything in this climate.”

          (8) The path to a Russian acquisition of American uranium deposits began in 2005 in Kazakhstan, where the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra orchestrated his first big uranium deal, with Mr. Clinton at his side. The two men had flown aboard Mr. Giustra’s private jet to Almaty, Kazakhstan, where they dined with the authoritarian president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev. Mr. Clinton handed the Kazakh president a propaganda coup when he expressed support for Mr. Nazarbayev’s bid to head an international elections monitoring group, undercutting American foreign policy and criticism of Kazakhstan’s poor human rights record by, among others, his wife, then a senator. Within days of the visit, Mr. Giustra’s fledgling company, UrAsia Energy Ltd., signed a preliminary deal giving it stakes in three uranium mines controlled by the state-run uranium agency Kazatomprom.

          (9) Soon, Uranium One began to snap up companies with assets in the United States. In April 2007, it announced the purchase of a uranium mill in Utah and more than 38,000 acres of uranium exploration properties in four Western states, followed quickly by the acquisition of the Energy Metals Corporation and its uranium holdings in Wyoming, Texas and Utah. That deal made clear that Uranium One was intent on becoming “a powerhouse in the United States uranium sector with the potential to become the domestic supplier of choice for U.S. utilities,” the company declared.

          (10) Still, the company’s story was hardly front-page news in the United States — until early 2008, in the midst of Mrs. Clinton’s failed presidential campaign, when The Times published an article revealing the 2005 trip’s link to Mr. Giustra’s Kazakhstan mining deal. It also reported that several months later, Mr. Giustra had donated $31.3 million to Mr. Clinton’s foundation.

          (11) By June 2009, Uranium One’s stock was in free-fall, down 40 percent. Mr. Dzhakishev, the head of Kazatomprom, had just been arrested on charges that he illegally sold uranium deposits to foreign companies, including at least some of those won by Mr. Giustra’s UrAsia and now owned by Uranium One.

          (12) Uranium One officials were worried they could lose their joint mining ventures. American diplomatic cables made public by WikiLeaks also reflect concerns that Mr. Dzhakishev’s arrest was part of a Russian power play for control of Kazakh uranium assets. At the time, Russia was already eying a stake in Uranium One, Rosatom company documents show. Rosatom officials say they were seeking to acquire mines around the world because Russia lacks sufficient domestic reserves to meet its own industry needs. It was against this backdrop that the Vancouver-based Uranium One pressed the American Embassy in Kazakhstan, as well as Canadian diplomats, to take up its cause with Kazakh officials, according to the American cables.

          (13) What is clear is that the embassy acted, with the cables showing that the energy officer met with Kazakh officials to discuss the issue on June 10 and 11. Three days later, a wholly owned subsidiary of Rosatom completed a deal for 17 percent of Uranium One. And within a year, the Russian government substantially upped the ante, with a generous offer to shareholders that would give it a 51 percent controlling stake. But first, Uranium One had to get the American government to sign off on the deal.

          (14) The national security issue at stake in the Uranium One deal was not primarily about nuclear weapons proliferation; the United States and Russia had for years cooperated on that front, with Russia sending enriched fuel from decommissioned warheads to be used in American nuclear power plants in return for raw uranium. Instead, it concerned American dependence on foreign uranium sources. While the United States gets one-fifth of its electrical power from nuclear plants, it produces only around 20 percent of the uranium it needs, and most plants have only 18 to 36 months of reserves, according to Marin Katusa, author of “The Colder War: How the Global Energy Trade Slipped From America’s Grasp.”

          (15) “In order to export uranium from the United States, Uranium One Inc. or ARMZ would need to apply for and obtain a specific NRC license authorizing the export of uranium for use as reactor fuel,” the letter said. Still, the ultimate authority to approve or reject the Russian acquisition rested with the cabinet officials on the foreign investment committee, including Mrs. Clinton — whose husband was collecting millions in donations from people associated with Uranium One.

          (16). A review of tax records in Canada, where Mr. Telfer has a family charity called the Fernwood Foundation, shows that he donated millions of dollars more, during and after the critical time when the foreign investment committee was reviewing his deal with the Russians. With the Russians offering a special dividend, shareholders like Mr. Telfer stood to profit. His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012.

          (17) Amid this influx of Uranium One-connected money, Mr. Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow in June 2010, the same month Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium One.

          (18) A person with knowledge of the Clinton Foundation’s fund-raising operation, who requested anonymity to speak candidly about it, said that for many people, the hope is that money will in fact buy influence: “Why do you think they are doing it — because they love them?” But whether it actually does is another question. And in this case, there were broader geopolitical pressures that likely came into play as the United States considered whether to approve the Rosatom-Uranium One deal.

          (19) Two months later, the deal giving ARMZ a controlling stake in Uranium One was submitted to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States for review. Because of the secrecy surrounding the process, it is hard to know whether the participants weighed the desire to improve bilateral relations against the potential risks of allowing the Russian government control over the biggest uranium producer in the United States.

          (20) despite assurances by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that uranium could not leave the country without Uranium One or ARMZ obtaining an export license — which they do not have — yellowcake from his property was routinely packed into drums and trucked off to a processing plant in Canada.

          (21) Uranium One was delisted from the Toronto Stock Exchange and taken private. As of 2013, Rosatom’s subsidiary, ARMZ, owned 100 percent of it.


          Since then, in excess of $240 million from Russian Banks has found its way to the coffers of the Clinton Foundation under the disguise of…health related activities. Anything that Trump could do right now would not even rise to the corruption of this Uranium Deal….which I reported on here about three years ago and most everyone poo-pooed it.

          • That explains things, but it is missing some stuff. “Clinton Cash” is a movie as well, which I have posted here awhile back. More importantly, the FBI informant in the investigation (for 4 years) is no longer required to remain silent, the DoJ has lifted his non-disclosure agreement. This will now get quite interesting, if this guy stays alive long enough to get his story out. This informant was even threatened by Loretta Lynch to stay quiet, or else.

            The main stuff the FBI informant has involves bribery. If true and as wide spread as I have heard, there will be 9 heads of US Departments within the Feds that may be going to jail, and that may be just the beginning.

      • Just A Citizen says:


        The Whitefish contractor was not the Trump donor. That was an investor who put up money to help start Whitefish Electric. The other owner being the Brazilian company.

      • Mathius, the issue is the bribery that took place to make this deal happen. This will come out soon, as the FBI informant is now cleared of his non-disclosure agreement. I fully expect an attack on this man’s credibility, and a hard attack, and it will come from the Left and only the Left.

        This is going to be a fun subject to watch unfold. What crimes? We shall soon see 🙂

  16. A pizza parlor in Boston was forced to shutter its doors after an attempt to buck capitalism proved an utter failure for business.
    Dudley Dough began in 2015 as the brainchild of Haley House, a nonprofit organization. The idea was to offer the Roxbury neighborhood great pizza by a happy staff who is paid much higher than minimum wage and who are rewarded for being an integral part of local community outreach. In their minds, it would be a progressive pizza parlor paradise and put to shame the greedy capitalists who like their pizzas topped only with profit.
    However, two years later Haley Houses executive director Bing Broderick has announced that Duddley Dough is done because it’s “not breaking even financially,” according to The Boston Globe, and has been putting undue stress on the nonprofit.
    It wasn’t that the restaurant didn’t draw customers; it was very popular. It’s just that economic justice is a terrible business model. But don’t tell the employees that; they refuse to believe that the venture was a failure. Sure, it lasted a whole two years, and perhaps the wages were more than fair, but now, everyone is out of a job. It’s hard to call that a success.

    • That's it! You've convinced me.

      I'm lowering all my employees' wages!

      While I'm at it, should I also take away their benefits? I mean, who needs health care, anyway?

  17. Federal Court has confirmed that the funding of health insurance companies was illegal…..and you have to hand it to the Dems……they are saying that the 30% increases next year is the fault of the Republicans. It is the Republicans fault because they are forcing the Dems to abide by law. Oh…..for shame.

  18. Just because…why not, it’s beautiful. This is not my photo, but I take my dogs here to run a couple times a week. My son also arranged a kids/grandkids photo as a birthday gift for me last year from this same park.

  19. The media, with the full blessing of the Democratic Party, ran back-to-back, 24-hour news coverage of the alleged Trump/Russia election collusion and condemned the president and his family every step of the way. And when news broke back in July that Donald Trump Jr. might have been caught red-handed in a meeting with a Russian lawyer seeking dirt on Hillary Clinton, they had their ace in the hole.
    “Treason!” they cried in unison. “Don Jr. deserves jail!” Then-DNC chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz seethed:
    “Clearly, what we learned today is that the president’s son, his namesake, a senior advisor and someone who was in the top tier of the Trump campaign colluded, which is the classic dictionary definition of what that means. There is no question what Donald Trump Jr. agreed to do — with relish, I might add — is meet with a lawyer who he believed was affiliated with the Russian government to assist his father’s campaign and collect dirt on Hillary Clinton. If that is not the definition of collusion, I don’t know what is.”
    Clinton’s running-mate and Virginia Democrat Tim Kaine was equally enraged: “We are now beyond obstruction of justice in terms of what’s being investigated. This is moving into perjury, false statements and even potentially treason.”
    It looked bad for Donny J, for sure. But now we know that Clinton and the DNC paid for Russian dirt on Donald Trump during the campaign, as Grabien News noted, “The DNC not only accepted this second-hand, uncorroborated information, but actually sought it out, financed it, and disseminated it through Washington.” That not only flies in the face of Clinton who smuggly condemned Trump time and time again for handing the American voting process over to Vladimir Putin and here she was actually doing it — and, come to find out, breaking campaign finance laws to boot!

  20. Interesting now rthat Amazon is out……… soon before the government calls foul and anti-trust issues.

  21. Interesting….the DNC and Hillary Clinton saying,” they knew nothing about a trash campaign against Trump…..nothing at all. (Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain).

  22. When one is attending a concert given at a church in Germany and one overhears a conversation between some 70 plus fellow American oldsters in your tour group and a German family wherein the Oldsters trash both the United States of America and it’s “senile president”, one should……

    A. Say nothing

    B. Rise to the occasion and punch them in the mouth

    C. Glare menacingly at that point and every time you see them on the tour

    • Glaring is a good start 🙂

    • C even though the invisible guy on your shoulder says B.

    • Just A Citizen says:


      Your forgot another option, one I used myself one time. Speak Up and embarrass them with some comment or fact. Like, “you know it is pretty un American to air our dirty laundry while overseas, unless of course your all Socialists.” Followed by “And if that is the case I suggest ya’ll take up residence here and don’t bother getting back on the tour bus.”

    • I abstain…

    • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      D. Recognize that everyone is entitled to their opinion and the freedom to speak their mind as they wish?

      • Not an option. When you are overseas, talking to folks who have no clue about the American Political system, best to keep your “opinions” to yourself. To badmouth the country in the land of former Nazi’s is particularly obnoxious. Amazing to see just how conservative Eastern Europe is. I guess after a century of barbarism, Nazi then Communist, you get a taste of what the authoritarian left can deliver.

        • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

          Who appointed you arbiter of what Americans should and should not say with regards to where they are?

          If you asked that person, I imagine he would claim that it’s his duty to give an honest account of what’s going on to the best of his understanding.

          Don’t like it? Feel free to argue the merits. Otherwise, find something better to do with your time and energy. Since this is Germany, I might suggest visiting a beer hall.

  23. Went to a former Nazi concentration camp in Europe. The Eighth Air Force did not nearly kill enough.

    • Serious questions for you:

      (A) why didn’t the US liberate the camps sooner or, baring that, bomb out the railways to the camps?

      (B) why hasn’t the US done so in N. Korea where there are camps which are just as bad? Do you consider that America has a moral obligation to do so?

      (C) Obviously, America never had death camps of the kind seen in Europe, but it did have Manzanar and others where more than 110,000 innocent men, women, and children were imprisoned in the desert and had their livelihoods stolen because of their ethnic backgrounds. How do you think about America relative to countries such as Germany in light of this fact?

      (D) How does a people – any given people – come to behave in this manner? That is, how did the Germans reach the conclusion that it was “ok” to exterminate the Jews (for the Germans who knowingly participated). How did the N. Koreans reach the conclusion that it was ok to have their camp and imprison innocents there? How did Americans reach the conclusion that Japanese “internment” was justified and morally allowable? What are the signs and warnings that we should heed, what are the lessons we should take away?

      • Regarding the bombing. The assumption would have been that it was to no end. All resources were aimed at knocking Ger4many out of the War ASAP. Then there is the distance factor. Your extermination camps were at the farthest reach of the 8th AF. Only after mid-1944 did the Air Force have the P-51 which could take the bombers all the way in and out again. There were a very few shuttle missions to Russia where they landed and refueled (my Dad’s unit did one). The Russians were not terribly cooperative and in one instances the Germans mounted a mission against the fighters and bombers that landed and destroyed almost all on the ground. From early 1944, the priority US bombing campaign was against railroad junctions. Also try to remember the US 8th Air Force lost 27,000 dead in WW2. More than the entire USMC in the Pacific! That was just the 8th from England. RAF bomber command lost nearly half of its people. 60,000 dead!

        Korea, we are technically not in a shooting war with them. Again, to what purpose? Remember that the Japanese promised to execute all allied POW’s if Japan surrendered. It was only because of the precipitous way that Japan surrendered that it DID NOT happen. We have the moral obligation to do a whole lot but exactly who? You? Me? the guy down the block’s kid? Bomb the camps? Kill who? They don’t need rail heads in NK.

        We did not kill anybody! What you saw was a combination of hysteria and I really think greed. The opportunity to essentially either confiscate of steal at a dime on the dollar, all the land from the Nisei was just too great for the Californians. The great civilian Governor of CA wanted it, Earl Warren and FDR vetted it. Note, NO Nisei, East of the Mississippi were interned. I knew a few who lived in the City and just had to register. Former members of the Bund were imprisoned and several thousand Italian Americans who had links to Mussolini’s Italy.

        There is a national flaw in the German character. That my friend is a great question. How could the most progressive people in Europe do what they did from 1914-1945. Yes, it was ONE war with a time out. My 1964 High School History teacher was prescient about that. North Korea is following the typical Communist playbook. The country is still in stage one. So, no different from Leninist, Stalinist Russia or Mao’s China and the ongoing extermination that started in ’49 and lasted through the cultural revolution. Or Pol-Pot’s regime in Cambodia. The round-up and extermination of enemies of the people real or perceived and of course the opportunity to settle scores.

        Try and stay away from the “false equivalency” of Japanese internment. Again it was limited and did not kill anyone or even mistreat them within the camps. Nor were they required to perform forced labor for the war effort. The boys were ALLOWED, not forced to enlist. Nobody went for slave labor. It is interesting though to see American schizophrenia at work where German and Italian POW’s received such excellent treatment including passes and paroles in US POW camps. Now if you want an equivalent, I give you the Czech EXPULSION of ALL Sudetenland Germans , all 2,500,000 of them post WW 2 or perhaps the expulsion of ethnic Italians from the Dalmatian coast of Yugoslavia. As far as the Yugo’s were concerned or the Czechs, it was the casus belli of the war and they were not willing to wait to see if it would happen again in another 20 years. Of course, the confiscation of the rather valuable land and property probably had NOTHING to do with it.

        Hope this helps.

  24. Why can I not ever “just relax”?

  25. Came home to a ten inch diameter tree branch sitting on my roof and car. Damn thing traveled 20 feet and did a 270 degree turn on the way down!

  26. Due to a screw up by KLM, we had to transfer stuff from the last minute from a carry on to my back-pack. Wife lost the camera. Cannot prove we were away anymore.

  27. Nice trip anyway.

  28. Anita, just looked at the MSU schedule. You got NW, PSU, and OSU. Penn State has OSU and MSU next. So we shall see very shortly who takes on Wisc. for the Big10. Good luck Saturday.

    • Same to you. You have big momentum going to OSU and you looked scary as heck vs Mich. We should be ok this weekend. It will all come down to PSU/MSU at Spartan Sradium. I’m sorta scared to tell the truth. 🙂

  29. The hypocrisy is beyond acceptable.

  30. Sir Mathius………..would you please dispatch the Hammer to sail up the Trinity River to Dallas ( the East fork ) and take out Mark Cuban. One egoistic billionaire in the White House is enough…we do not need two. He stands no chance of even winning Texas, none, but it is time for target practice anyway. He has shot himself in the foot by supporting Hillary but we are tired of his commercials and his blow hard attitude that is Texas Sized compared to Trump.

    Thanking you in advance, I remain……..

    PS…..I would send in some raptors but their diet is very sensitive.

    • While you at it add Tom Steyer to the list.

    • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

      I would help you, but I was recently paid to take a small crew up an overgrown, booby-trapped Potomac River to find a deranged John Kelly. Apparently, the military sent a PT boat, but they were never heard from again, so they offered me a chest full of doubloons and, well.. off I went. The soldiers were somewhat dispirited when they saw the mutilated corpses of Anthony Scaramucci and Sean Spicer, but we’re pressing on. Just beyond the treeline, we’ve had multiple sightings of shaddowy figures in three-piece suits wearing American flag lapel pins. The soldiers tell me that these are probably something called “senators” and that there are two warring tribes in the area. They fled after a warning shot from the 9 pounders, but I fear that they will be back, and in greater numbers.

      (Previous (failed) attempt:

      • You dropped from the 24 pounder to the 9 because of the shallow draft and the need for speed….good choice.

      • Rapto-intel reports of a Bruja and minions lurking somewhere up there…AKA: Witch of the Potomac, that bears a striking resemblance to Nanci Pelosi or Elizabeth Warren. Beware, for it is known that they can fire “bolts of lightning” from their arse….that would be devastating from a 80 year old arse. Dreadful.

        • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:


          We’ve been boarded! I can’t get a good look at the villain, just a fleeting glimpse of a pantsuit… there’s something eerily familiar about it.

          Two raptors are down, apparently having been beaten to death with a book.. there’s too much gore on the cover to make it out clearly, just “[illegible] Happened [illegible].” The poor beasts clearly suffered tremendously in their final moments.

          The men seem to know more about this creature than I do, but they are too terrified to speak plainly. One of them is rocking inconsolably in a corner muttering about a “burn” being our only hope. Perhaps he is telling me that I can kill it with fire? But fire is dangerous aboard a wooden ship… I will continue for now with muskets.

          Wish me good fortune.

          • The swivel gun, man…the one on the stern….quick, before it is too late.

            • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

              A’rrgh! Swivel’s gone.. just… gone. The radiation detectors are picking up uranium, but the reactor core and armory are still secure, so I don’t know where it’s coming from. The natives on the shore are becoming bolder.. and I’ve called in an airstrike on my own position. The Hammer can take it, but I don’t think much else will be left standing afterward.

              Another 5 raptors are down, but, fortunately, I departed with a full complement. It seems one managed to take a bite out of the trespasser, but had some kind of fatal food poisoning. There was a bit of foam-covered pastel cloth stuck in its teeth.

              One of the soldiers threw himself overboard – perhaps he was the smart one? The one I mentioned previously is just screaming “burney” over and over again – and it seams to be keeping the creature at bay. It must really fear fire.

              The beast did manage to get into my server room. I’m afraid it’s a total loss. It seems to have gone into a blind feral rage at the sight of my personal email server. I believe it is trying to cut off my ability to call in reinforcements, but I have no explanation for the level of devastation.

              I have managed to connect the maddened solider into a makeshift PA system. The creature has ceased its attack and is wandering the ship destroying my speakers. This is a stopgap measure at best, but perhaps I can lure it into a trap. I have cut power to all speakers except one on the foredeck… the airstrike I called in should be here any moment. If the beast is still topside when it hits, that should take care of matters.

              The chanting of “burney” seems to be having an odd affect on the natives as well. Some have fled in terror while a few others seem drawn to the sound, emboldened. Those that have ventured beyond the shoreline have been met with the heavy guns, and so far none have reached The Hammer intact.

              I have never encountered anything like this. One wonders if Mathius is behind it all….

              I have ordered full steam ahead, hoping to escape this accursed place while I still can.

              • With the remaining speaker……..sing “Kumbaya”,,,,THAT with the “burney” factor should slow the natives some to make your get a way….and they got your laser guided swivel gun…..damn.

              • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

                The trap worked! The creature was topside for a direct airstrike. The deck was completely scoured. Grainy surveillance footage shows the creature was launched from the deck rather than destroyed. Why won’t it just die! Well, it’s not my problem now… now I just have to retrieve the insane General and get the hell out of here.

                Unfortunately, I have another problem. While my speakers were blasting out “burney burney,” one of the natives – a white woman wearing an Indian-chief headdress – managed to get through the cannons and damaged my rudder. She hissed at me, and shouted up that I have to “share The Hammer with the less fortunate who do not have ships of their own.”

                Obviously, I was having none of that, and broke out the rail gun. But she was gone, beneath the waves. I asked the mad soldier about it since he seems to have tactical knowledge I lack. He could barely form the words, but said something that sounded like “warnin’.” Perhaps I misheard, or perhaps, he was just trying to warn me? But what was it he was warning me of?

                It is eerie silent now, but I cannot proceed until repairs are made. We’re starting to run low an ammunition and scanners have detected 435 additional bogeys converging on my position. We’ve taken on some water, which will slow us down, but the bilge pumps are doing their jobs.

                I have taken up your suggestion of blasting Kumbaya and, while it is making my ears bleed, it does seem to be working for now. Unfortunately, the creature destroyed too many of my speakers and I am unable to project sufficiently. I tasked a raptor with playing the guitar, but it lacks the manual dexterity. He’s trying his best, though.

                Other raptors are attempting repairs on the rudder, but we’ve lost another six so far. There’s something in the water. In truth, this water is more akin to a swamp, and it is full of all manner of foul beasts.

                I should have asked for more gold.


                One more thing.. I saw a small group of natives dressed like pirates. But there was something off about them. It seemed to me that they wanted to appear to be pirates, but were actually just like the others… They signaled to me, but I have not waved them aboard. I don’t trust them. If you have intel, I’d sure appreciate it..

              • Beware…it is believed that the small group you see is actually a rebel part of the Senator tribe called “Teapartyites”….while not a major threat, they do appear to be growing. However, since you are somewhat mired in the swamp and you have received your “warrening”, it is further beleived that you can save the raptors on the rudder further demise by allowing the Teapartyites to step into the water believing that you will allow them to board. The Teapartyites expel some sort of ultra conservative radiation that relieves the “warrening” somewhat, allowing you to repair the rudder without losing anymore raprtors.

                In addition, I am sending a small force of para raptors to your location and have dispatched a small detachement of rapto-sharks to escort your vessel up the Potomac….however, please be aware that even my rapto-sharks can only handle the brackish, often, soured Potomac for brief periods. Too much exposure to the contaminated waters of the Potomac makes them lose their collective minds.

                I am currently working on a new breed of Rapto-borg…but they are not quite ready…..there is still some programming of Hugh that is stuck in there but do not despair…they may be ready shortly.

      • Mathius, is is true that you made your coffee this morning with Red Bull instead of water…and that you were half way to your office before you realized you forgot your car?

        • You joke, but I actually did something akin to this.

          The other day, I drove to the post office, then walked back to my office. At the end of the day, I went to the parking lot and found my car to be missing. It took me a full 10 minutes to realize what I had done. Fortunately, I hadn’t been towed.

  31. I don’t know if I can sleep tonight but I will try. Black Lives Matter, this morning, claims that Texas is probably the most racist State in the WORLD……..why, you ask.

    Well, it seems that they rented the Dallas Civic Center that seats 18,000 or so and spent millions of dollars advertising their arrival to discuss the various issues pertaining to blacks,……..and……………………………………………164 showed up and most of that was staff and support. They claim that since no one showed up, there is a secret movement in Texas that intimindates and actually strong arms people. They said that it is obvious because no one showed up.

  32. Just A Citizen says:

    File among FREAKY THINGS:

    We have some scientific brains here, what explanation do you have.

    • The Col. has developed some advanced Raptors.

      • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

        The Colonel and I were test firing our Rapid-Raptor delivery system – capable of landing a velociraptor within 10 feet of anywhere on the globe within 20 minutes.

        Now if we can just figure out how to make the raptor arrive without having been turned into a sticky mush in the process…

        • Yeah…the drag chutes did not work…….

        • Just A Citizen says:


          If you can get them to me in once piece then I can keep them from turning to mush.

          • The Dread Pirate Mathius says:

            I like the cut of your jib. I will assume that is a picture of you in front.

            But I think the main problem is one of acceleration. The rocket pulls a sustained 100+ G’s.

            • Just A Citizen says:


              No worries mate. I have “soft hands”. Anita the short stop knows what that means, cause it ain’t what your thinkin.

              • Yesirree, I know all about soft hands. The pic of the glove above gave me an attitude by way of flashback. My glove, and you know darn well they become treasures over the years, vanished out at the lake several years back. Damned if I didn’t find it til the next summer while clearing some overgrowth one day. It was doomed beyond saving. I sure didn’t leave it out in the back 40. Kids! Ugh!

  33. Mathius….is it true that you made your coffee this morning with Red Bull instead of water and that you were halfway to your office before you realized you forgot your car?

  34. If these fancy politicians treat the people this poorly when you are armed to the teeth…just imagine what they would be like once they have taken your guns…..

  35. For G Man……for just 43 cents, you can help a lonely 5.56 round find a home in its very own terrorist…Don’t be selfish, rounds have needs too, you know.

  36. Ever wondered that if guns kill people……how does anyone get out of a gun show alive? …………..jus’ sayin’….

    For you T Ray……every single day, hundreds of lonely rifles gather dust at your local gun store…ACT NOW….adopt a rescue gun!

  37. JAC was hunting one day when a liberal accosted him and said that “you don’t need 30 bullets to kill one deer!”….JAC responded, ” Of course, you are correct. I just need one bullet to kill the deer and 29 to keep liberals from stealing the venison I worked for..”

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Smiling from ear to ear……………. So true my Texican friend.

      Of course there was the time I killed a 4 pt mule deer buck with NO bullets. Just a knife and a Reata.

  38. Then , there is a story of Sir Mathius floating around New York…..someone said he shot his first turkey today…it scared the crap out of everyone in the frozen food section, but it was awesome……

    Just rumor, tho…

  39. Anita…is it true that you carry a gun in your purse because a rifle won’t fit?

    • Negative, Colonel. I don’t carry a purse. I tried hard to fit in with the females with purses in high school, but I left that purse behind one too many times and said forget all this purse business. I’m not telling you where I stash my gun.

  40. VH thinks to herself…..Why is it acceptable for you to be an idiot and no for me to point it out?

  41. Canine Weapon casts a side glance at US Weapon and, uses best barking English………I have decided to cut back on sarcastic..I solemnly swear to only be sarcastic on days that start with a T….Tuesday, Thursday, Today, and Tomorrow…”

    Now, feed me.

  42. Stephen proudly says….I am not OLD….I just need some WD 40.

  43. Now, think about this… children, we saw Tarzan almost naked, Cinderella always arrived home after midnight, Pinocchio told lies, Aladdin was a thief, Batman drove over 200 mph, Snow White lived in a house with seven men, Popeye smoked a pipe and had tatoos, and PAC MAN ran aorund to digital tunes eating pills that enhanced his performance……..and we wonder why everyone is confused.

    • Can’t forget about Shaggy and Scooby. Just think about it. Were those Scooby snacks for the munchies? I mean…the 70s, the Mystery Machine, Shaggy is a dead give away for a partier, Shaggy shared the Scooby snacks with Scooby…who spoke dog English, Daphne is a possibility, it was Fred’s Mystery machine, and Velma was probably clueless to all of it.

  44. Just A Citizen says:

    The Colonel mentioned the fact today that the top 20% of income earners pay 85% of the taxes. Here is an article that goes with this story of the day.

    Now here is the trick, one I tried to point out with Mathius the other day. The speaker calls the middle quintile the middle class. Problem here. Very few people actually use the middle quintile as the “middle class”. NOBODY has ever defined the middle class. When people are asked it they are middle class you get folks in the second lowest to highest quintile responding that they are the middle class. Because there is NO ACCEPTED DEFINITION.

    In fact, the top 20% includes people making about a 100 k per year all the way to gazillionaires.

  45. The Houston Texan’s owner made a statement about the failing leadership in the NFL, stating that the inmates are running the prison, then correcting the “very old” saying, the inmates are running the asylum. This is an old saying, referring to poor leadership, or maybe even Union leadership, but none the less, it is NOT a racist comment and it never has been. Well, Some Houston Texan snowflake players took offense, which should come as a surprise, because if the Left can find a reason to be offended, even when none is there, they will. So now there are claims of boycott, which won’t happen, at least not in the normal sense.

    But, as a longtime NFL fan, my patience with these whiney millionaires is about over. Granted, these whiney millionaires are but a small minority of players, but one or two players can cost a team a football game, should they not perform at their best. This upcoming game between the Texans and Seahawks will be one that I will watch for this very thing, as I expect, now, that the Texans will get beat badly in a game that should be fairly close.

    There is a great deal of money at stake each week concerning the outcome of NFL games and the production of individual players. Now, those who gamble this way have to watch out for snowflake melting and crybaby antics.

    But let’s not blame the players, let’s blame the owners for not controlling their employees when a benchwarmer quarterback who’s skills were in major decline, wanted to pout. Ratings are way down, the word is Thursday Night football will get scaled back, and stadiums are noticeably loaded with empty seats. This is what happens to a business when the inmates run the asylum.

    • And Hopkins wasn’t the only Houston player to be perturbed by McNair’s reported metaphor. Citing ESPN NFL Nation reporter Sarah Barshop, Schefter also noted that “Texans players wanted to walkout [sic] today in response to Bob McNair’s comments” and “had to be persuaded to stay.”

      This is an excellent exercise in proving a theory I have had for a long time. The theory is simple, the team who’s players mind’s are on the game, with few distractions, win big, versus a team that isn’t. Emotions play a roll as well, an negative emotions are a game killer. This qualifies as a game killer for the Texans, under the theory, hence, Seahawks in a blow-out!

  46. Out: Basket of deplorables.
    In: Dumpster of indictables.

  47. Having been incommunicado for two weeks, anything new on the Las Vegas Shooter?

    • Haven’t heard much. The motive is still unknown. The shooters brother was arrested for child porn. The shooters brain is at Stanford for analysis.

  48. It looks like Mueller is preempting the demands for his resignation by filing charges against person(s) known or unknown. I suspect all the talk this week forced his hand. Why all the cloak and dagger stuff by sealing the indictments until Monday.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      The consensus is that manfort will be the one charged. Not with any real crime, but some regulatory issue that if one digs deep enough anyone can be GOTTEN by the Feds.

      Mueller still needs to go but he and his team have NO honor and regardless of evidence will continue to go only after Trump. Not anything near the Clinton’s. The purpose of the AG to attend the committees deciding on international sales of “critical” assets to the country, is precisely to bring to the table of any investigations, criminal activity etc of the party’s involved. Yet the FBI (Mueller and Comey and Holder) stayed silent on the known criminal activity by the party’s involed with Uranium One. HRC stayed silent on all the MONEY $145M that flowed to the Bill’s foundation plus the money that went directly into his pockets. The vote was 9-0 approving the sale with Obama’s ultimate signoff.

      • While I feel this will be unrelated to the Trump campaign, the fact that CNN got this tip is strange. Either someone is trying to help CNN or trying to put more nails in their coffin. CNN has all weekend to claim the Trump is done (not sure if they are or not). much like MSNBC’s Trump tax return fiasco, I’m thinking that this is not what the Liberal media world thinks. Time will tell.

  49. Dale A. Albrecht says:

    Heard an interesting bit today. Refugees refusing to work in Germany. Claiming they are quests of Merkel…..they were offered “volunteer” jobs with nominal pay. This begged for some research:

    Ireland is the only country in the EU that bans asylum seekers and refugees the ability to work, However, all throughout the EU it is banned for asylum seelers to work until their status is approved or disapproved. The State Depts try to resolve the cases within six months but also can take years. After one year they can apply for a work permit if their case is still not adjudicated. Another however….if the refugee or asylum seeker has a critical skill and one that has a shortage of people available to work that type of job in the EU, which few refugees have those skills, example a chemical engineer etc. They can get work immediately.

    With the high rate of unemployment in the EU of people within the 18-30 year ages, with the average is 20% plus, with some countries 50% plus why in gods name is the EU injecting more people that will remain for the most part unemployed and therefore NOT injecting taxes into the system to cover the aging population.

    When I lived overseas Europe strenuously protected their industries enabling and aiding their employment possibilities. As an example a SONY stereo was was much more costly. Yet a product made in Europe was less expensive and made good products. Since the EU got started though the rules and regulations have driven companies out and further exacerbated by their energy policies creating the highest energy costs in the world. Companies are subsidized so the will not leave and the taxes are passed to the people who are stuck. When the EU forces a country to shut businesses down and stop production or rename products that have been in existence for 2000 years, only because these new countries had products that would compete with business in Germany or France etc. They claimed with open borders those newly unemployed could work anywhere. Sure,,,,but there were no jobs, they were already taken. When we could get 9 highly skilled network engineers and analytical people all college graduates for the price of what was my salary here in the US. That was great because it boulstered employment there and they worked the Europe, Middle East and Africa clients. However, even they all got layed off because at&t outsourced their jobs to a firm in India. most of the eople in the EU could not find work, so they switched careers and went into jobs like plumbing and electrical wiring actually in far off areas in like northern Norway and Sweden where the tradesmen left to go to the big cities. The Countries were actually paying these people to relocate to the arctic circle……now even they will be undercut by the millions of migrants innundating these countries and working at cut rate illegal wages.

    Also it is virtually impossible to get rid of a bad employee. They literally have to commit murder to be let go. So companies are very reluctant to hire anyone. Plus the 35 hour workweek. The peoples till get paid the full wage and the policy was to help the unemplyment problem which it did not.

  50. Ohio State is back in the playoff picture 🙂 🙂 🙂

    J.T. Barrett 13-13 170 yards 3 TDs

  51. Sad Ending both MSU & OSU go done.

%d bloggers like this: