Skip to content

Author: Briggs

June 20, 2018 | 8 Comments

Why I Do Not Like The Korea Deal –Guest Post by Ianto Watt

I can smell this one a mile away. Which isn’t hard, considering how bad it stinks. To High Heaven, in fact. It’s the remake of Nixon’s ‘Great Opening‘ to China. With Donald in the lead role. The plot is exactly the same and stars all the usual idiots. Produced by Vladimir Pictures. And directed by President Xi, in his first Western.

Are you old enough to remember when China was the laughingstock of the world? It wasn’t that long ago. Less than one lifetime, in fact. Yes, they had a twenty-million man army. But about 200 rifles. No problem, Komrade, what we lack in weaponry we will make up for with the human-wave tactic. Pick up the gun of your enemy after you have over-run his position. His position in Korea, specifically. Once the Chinese saw that we would not nuke them, they knew they would win. And now they are about to. At zero cost. In fact, we are going to pay them to do it. Where is MacArthur when we need him?

We have seen China grow, economically and militarily, from a fourth-world position (if that is possible to imagine) to the pre-eminent power in the Eastern world. The only military power (outside Russia herself) that can possibly challenge American Imperial power. And prevail. All in less than one lifetime. But no one seems to understand how this happened. Or what’s coming next.

The answer is so simple. We gave away the candy store in 1972. So why be surprised when the Orientals moved from shoplifting to outright looting? Quit watching the nightly ‘news’ and start reading something older than last week. Look at the facts. We are the ones who have built the Chinese Juggernaut. And now it is at our throat. Why are we surprised that the inscrutable Orientals are gleefully mashing the pedal to the floor?

Here’s what’s real: the Empire is fading, and China is raiding. Raiding all of the Imperial marketplaces. All the colonial outposts are under siege. Their markets are under attack, economically. The Chinese military is growing exponentially, in all the new ways that matter. Those twenty million PLA grunts now have computers. Computers that can over-run our internet positions at will. Who needs aircraft carriers when a new artificial islands will do better? And it’s not going to get any better. Not unless we emphatically decide we don’t like a Navy that is at it’s smallest size since 1906. And an Air Force that can’t afford the cost of training (or retaining) it’s pilots. Or an Army that has been ground into dust with insane Asian wars that someone famously warned us against.

Here’s what is coming, unless Donald has way more brains than I think he has. Or if God is more merciful than we deserve. After having given the candy store inventory away by welcoming China into the front ranks of economic-civilization in 1972 (thank you, Quisling Nixon, I despise you for all the reasons you are lionized), we are now going to abandon the building as well. Kiss Asia goodbye, Komrades, as we commit economic hari-kiri. Again.

Let’s look at this idiotic Korean escapade that Donald has embarked upon.Let me ask a few stupid questions first, just to set the tone. To begin with, where did China get The Bomb? WalMart? Did they just build it themselves? With bamboo centrifuges? Here’s another silly question: who, besides the Chinese, tested their own nuke (which they refuse to acknowledge they have, to this day) at the Lop Nor testing range? In China. Was it Iceland? Ireland? Patagonia? Brooklyn?

It was the same guys that stole our nuke secrets and gave them to Russia. Guess who else they gave them to? The homeland. How can you tell the difference between Orient North and Orient South, when the largest single ‘ethnic’ group in Israel is Russian emigres? What’s the difference, Komrade? The same group that also stole PROMIS and gave it to the Chinese.

Just as Moscow got their bomb from this same place, so did Peking and Islamabad too. Who, by the way, also tested their first nuke at Lop Nor. And I’m betting these are all the routes that brought the atomic age to Pyongyang.

Who with just a few nano-seconds of serious thought can imagine Stone-Age North Korea progressing, all alone, from paleolithic simplicity to nuclear proficiency in such an astoundingly short time? Not just splitting the atom, but then miniaturizing it, then packaging it, then MIRV-ing it, and then lifting it, with mobile launchers to boot. All in seven years time?

We will, I fear, make the Faustian bargain. Give up your nukes, Kim, in return for the riches of the market place. And since modern economics is a zero-sum game (whether you realize it or not), there is only one conclusion to draw: we are going to fund our own increased poverty. We are going to pay someone to go away from our house, by giving them our house. Just like Nixon the Fool did. He gave away our superiority in return for promises that came back to bite us. Want to know the new spelling for how to abandon Taiwan? J A P A N. Now we are looking at an Chinese-Asian behemoth that shows no signs of mellowing, contrary to what all those Harvard-educated twerps told us would happen. They are the real enemy within.

Watch as the South Koreans fawn over their cousins in the North who are supposedly becoming benign. Watch as that 600,000 man ROK Tiger Army melts into the sunset. It’s Homecoming! Watch as the North is built (by us) into another Asian Tiger economy that makes them impregnable to our economic attempts to keep them in line. Watch as Japan becomes even more isolated, as it begins to wonder if the German model is their only option. You know, cuddle up to Moscow and Peking in order to avoid the need to re-militarize in the face of the obvious reality that the Empire won’t pull their chestnuts out again.

I can hear it now. The new Asian theme song, sung by the Peking version of Tokyo Rose and the Choir. ‘Remember, my Samurai friends, it was the Americans that nuked you. Not China’. This new propaganda blizzard will be so easy to confect. And so Asian in flavor. And we’ll eat it. All of it. With chopsticks, no less.

June 19, 2018 | 12 Comments

Pity The Poor ‘Born That Way’ Pedophile!

There stands Mirjam Heine center stage. She smiles as the TED Talk audience greats her. But this is the wrong emotion. For she is here to tell us something horrible, something heartrending—something that should not be. (The video linked above was deleted was removed by the poster after it attracted too much negative attention. Two bootlegs have since appeared, as of this writing: one, two.)

She forces the smile into exile and begins to emote. Without a word her now sad eyes tell us she is feeling great pain. We want to share this pain.

She begins to speak. Each word seeps out softly. Her calculated poignancy is of a doctor telling a wife her husband is about to die.

“Let me you about Jonas…Jonas has a secret he can’t share with anyone. Not even with his best friend…He is just too afraid of anger, rejection, and repulsion.”

Heine does not cry, but she searches the eyes of the audience for the waterworks she so desperately wants to cause.

What is Jonas’s terrible secret?

He wants to diddle your kids.

Love Is Love

Heine reads her lines as if she is Juliet looking at Romeo’s corpse. She is heartbroken, and she wants you heartbroken too, over the awful truth that Jonas knows “that there will never be a loving and fulfilling partnership that he can enter. Because Jonas is a pedophile. He’s only attracted to female children between the ages of six and twelve years.”

The implication that Jonas ought to have a loving partnership that he can enter is unspoken. Love is love. Can we, as a society, bar this poor man, this good man, this pitiable soul from experiencing love?

Of course, Jonas’s love would have him dragging little girls behind the woodshed and providing them with loving experiences they weren’t biologically meant to have. But love is love, and isn’t love all you need?

Born That Way

Heine says—are you listening? pay attention here—that pedophilia is a “sexual orientation.” It is, she says, an unchangeable sexual orientation.

Heine claims “one to two percent” of men, or about 60 million men worldwide, are pedophiles. That’s a lot of folks who can never find love. There are so many child lovers that, she says, every audience members must know one. “Anybody can be born a pedophile.” Born.

Don’t confuse pedophilia with child molestation. “What percentage of child molesters are pedophiles?…Only twenty to thirty of all child molesters are pedophiles.” But that’s the wrong statistic. What we want is the percentage of pedophiles that molest children. Heine never tells us.

Here Come The Judge

The laws exploding across the West baring “discrimination” against “sexual orientation” apply. How can you discriminate against a pedophile when he applies for a job at the child care center? Pedophilia is an “orientation.” Science says so. Discrimination against “orientation” is illegal.

Hey, don’t worry. This pedophile says he’s never touched a child. He just has desires. He has no choice. Neither do you. You must hire him. You must also click here to read the rest.

June 18, 2018 | 7 Comments

Bible Sessions

A Close Reading

In a shocking twist, you’ll have to click here to read the beginning! I’m in the minority as far as Biblical expertise goes, though. I don’t come close to approaching the level of genius found at our top newspapers. Take the Washington Post’s Alexandr Petri. She heard Sessions quoted from the Bible and decided to instruct her readers about this curious book.

Her first lesson was that the Bible is not—I repeat not—the “law of the land.” The legal expert I spoke with—“Tiny” Ed Dobrowski, who once got a parking ticket tossed out—said that this is true. Which is why you never hear passages like the one in Leviticus quoted so often.

Petri didn’t stop with this stunner. “You can find a lot of things in the Bible,” she said.

She found that “Job: As we see in the Bible, God is in favor of making innocent people suffer for no reason whatsoever.” I think she mistook our Father which art in Heaven for her editor, who assigned her this “Job.” That’s a natural mistake for a reporter on a deadline to make.

But then she also said that “As King Solomon so wisely and clearly admonishes us, babies should be taken from their mothers and cut in half.”

No, sweetie, that’s the Planned Parenthood brochure you’re reading. Not the Bible.

The Other Roman Option

Petri finally came to the Bible and the immigration question. “As the Bible so humanely shows, if you take a baby from its mother and float it downriver in a basket, it will work out fine.” People wanting to cross the border illegally are advised not to try this, however. Wikipedia tells us “Despite its name and length, the Rio Grande is not navigable…nor do smaller passenger boats or cargo barges use it as a route.”

She said that the Bible insists that “If someone objects to the laws of a land,” such as (we imagine) a person trying to cross the border illegally, “authorities are within their rights to punish him, for instance by throwing him into a den of lions.”

Dude, that’s pretty harsh. The worst penalties we now hand out are a having to take a time out and free trip back across the border. Feeding parents, and the kids they risked bringing with them on their illegal adventure, to some unemployed circus animals will likely have the deterrence effect Petri is after, but it will also anger PETA. And nobody wants that.

All the Way to the Right

I don’t know when the Post turned into such a right-wing paper. First it’s lions, next it’s ovens. “As the Bible suggests, there are many fitting punishments for those who disobey authority; for instance, to throw them into a fiery furnace.”

Ouch. That will cause some double takes.

We can be grateful Petri is not an immigration judge (or judge of any kind!) and is instead an expert Bible reporter.

June 17, 2018 | No comments

Summary Against Modern Thought: Human Happiness Does Not Come In Health

Previous post.

Strange (again again) are the things men seek out.

That Human Felicity Does Not Consist In Goods of the Body

1 Moreover, that man’s highest good does not lie in goods of the body, such as health, beauty, and strength, is clearly evident from similar considerations. For these things are possessed in common by both good and bad men; they are also unstable; moreover, they are not subject to the will.

2 Again, the soul is better than the body, which is not alive, and which does not possess the aforementioned goods except by means of the soul. So, a good of the soul, like understanding and that sort of thing, is better than a good of the body. Therefore, the good of the body is not man’s highest good.

3 Besides, these goods are common to men and other animals. But felicity is the proper good of man. Therefore, man’s felicity does not lie in the aforesaid goods.

4 Moreover, many animals are better endowed than men, as far as the goods of the body go; for some are faster than man, some are stronger, and so on. If, then, man’s highest good lay in these things, man would not be the most excellent of animals; which is obviously false. Therefore, human felicity does not consist in goods of the body.

That Human Felicity Does Not Lie in the Senses

1 In the same way, it is also apparent that man’s highest good does not lie in the goods of his sensitive part. For these goods, too, are common to men and other animals.

2 Again, intellect is better than sense. So, the good of the intellect is better than the good of the senses. Therefore, man’s highest good does not lie in sense.

Notes And you have proved that, dear reader, by reading these lines.

3 Besides, the greatest pleasures in the sense order have to do with food and sexual activities; and so, the highest good ought to lie in these areas, if it were in sense. But it is not found in these things. Therefore, man’s highest good does not lie in the senses.

Notes This relies on the hard lesson we learned a few weeks back.

4 Moreover, the senses are treasured because of their usefulness, and also because of their knowledge. Now, the entire utility of the senses has reference to the goods of the body. But sense cognition is subordinated to intellectual cognition; thus, animals devoid of understanding take no pleasure in sensing, except in regard to some benefit pertaining to the body, according as they obtain food or sexual satisfaction through sense knowledge. Therefore, man’s highest good, his felicity, does not lie in his sensitive part.