tMoA

~ The only Home on the Web You'll ever need ~


    The Wall Street Journal

    Share
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Wed Sep 21, 2016 12:51 am

    A frustrating evening has motivated me to attempt a different approach to life, the universe, and everything!! I plan to discuss various articles found in The Wall Street Journal!! No more "save the world" talk!! This should be refreshing!! Perhaps I'll add this thread to The United States of the Solar System: A.D. 2133 (Book Three) thread!!
    orthodoxymoron wrote: I now authorize whatever means necessary and appropriate, to deal with those who wish me harm (in any way, shape, or form -- in-body or out-of-body -- in planning, ordering, or carry-out stages). I have been extremely tactful and discrete. My internet-activities have been a rather quiet back-channel for those in the know. It was never intended for those I come in contact-with in my local-community -- yet someone alerted them to my "madness". It's SO Obvious. I haven't been fooled -- and I'm not fooled -- even though I am a "completely ignorant fool". It stinks when people stick their noses in other people's business. I'm going silent -- not because I've been threatened and harassed -- but because no one has properly discussed my concerns with me over the past seven years of internet posting (and I'm not necessarily referring to forum-members).

    I have come to the conclusion that I am finished -- and that I will be very harshly punished for attempting to make things better for everyone -- everywhere. The creation of Male and Female Human Physicality was probably heresy and rebellion in this universe. Freedom (even Responsible Freedom) is probably heresy and rebellion in this universe. I have never felt more helpless and desperate than I feel presently. Ethics seem to be of no consequence in this universe. Absolute Obedience seems to be EVERYTHING in this universe. I hope everyone is happy with what's coming -- and I hope someone remembers me -- because I don't think I'll be part of what's coming -- whether I wish to be, or not. I think my fate is sealed -- and that it's not a good one. But none of you seem to give a damn about any of this.

    I have observed (even in myself) that the Creation v Evolution debate is often Closed-Minded Pseudo-Intellectual Trench-Warfare -- rather than being Eclectic, Open-Minded, and Multi-Disciplinary. What if Darwin's Theory mostly applies to that which preceded the Human Being? What if most everything evolved over billions of years -- and that a product of this ancient evolutionary process (some form of humanoid) created the Human Being -- and that this creation (or genetic engineering) might've been an Illegal Innovation? Think about it.

    Imagine a Pre-Human Reptilian-Theocracy led by a Reptilian-Queen who expected Absolute-Obedience. This Hypothetical-Queen might've been the Benchmark of Everything. The 'Law of God' might've been every word that proceedeth out of the 'Mouth of God'. There might've been no Written 'Word of God'. There might've been no Constitution and Bill of Rights. There might've been no Governmental Body of any sort. Everything might've revolved around this Hypothetical Reptilian-Queen. Perhaps this state of affairs existed for millions, or even billions, of years. But what if an ambitious and clever underling decided to create the Human-Race and Responsible-Freedom -- clearly in defiance of the Reigning Queen? That would mean war, wouldn't it? War in Heaven, perhaps? What if the Humans eventually lost the war? What if the Humans have been punished, tortured, enslaved, taxed, lied-to, etc, etc, etc -- for tens of thousands of years -- by the Hypothetical Reptilian Empire -- to send a clear message to the entire universe -- to never, ever attempt anything similar to the Human-Rebellion? Is Humanity on the Verge of Extermination? Will Humanity revert to a Reptilian Theocracy? Status Quo Ante Bellum? Think about it.

    Some of you need to think very, very deeply about an Ancient One-Race, One-Religion, One-Government, One-God Theocratic Universe -- AND the Advent of Someone With a 'Better Idea' -- who Created a New-Race, New-Religion, New-Government, Poly-Theistic Solar System -- and the Reaction of the Galactic Powers That Be. I'm very, very, very , very serious about this. The problems connected with all of this are UNIMAGINABLE -- from the Innovation and the Status-Quo points of view. I will elaborate later --  but I am so upset, I can hardly type. Once again, are we about to experience 'Status Quo Ante Bellum'? Think about it.

    You just keep ignoring me, and writing me off -- AT YOUR OWN PERIL. Some of you are guilty of GROSS NEGLIGENCE. YOU KNOW BETTER -- YET YOU DO NOTHING AND SAY NOTHING.



    The Sovereign Reptilian Queen of the Air aka Lilith
    in a Tibetan Underground Base with Her New Creation.
    Just Wait Until Enlil Finds Out About This!!!
    Mercuriel wrote:
    Lets go even further...

    INRI = Inanna - Nimrod - Marduk Ra or just Ra at that time - And Isis...

    Moses with Horns

    > Horns signifying both Genetic Lineage to the Anuks and "Right to Rule" as the gODS had 'em in abundance due to Them being Master Geneticists...

    For instance - Enlil was known as the Bull and Marduk was known as the Ram...

    Da Vinci was trying to tell Us something here and most have missed It.





    Interesting eh ?

    And nope - You're not finished just yet anyways. Almost - But not yet...
    Is the United States of the Solar System a Representative-Republic or a Representative-Theocracy? Is the 'Separation of Church and State' intended to keep a Good God or a Bad God out of government and governance? Think about it. Is the 'God of This World' a Good God or a Bad God? As blasphemous and irreligious as this sounds, what if Washington D.C. were superimposed onto Vatican City -- with 10,000 PhD Representatives -- a Ceremonial and Ambassadorial PhD King and PhD Queen of the United States of the Solar System -- and a Very Human, Very Visible, and Very Imperfect Ceremonial, Ambassadorial (and Authority of Last Resort) PhD 'God' (making sure that things didn't spiral out of control -- but not micromanaging or manipulating)???!!! What if half of the PhD Representatives resided in Italy -- and participated in daily legislative sessions within Vatican City? What if the other half of the PhD Representatives were spread throughout the Solar System -- communicating and voting via the InterPlaNet???!!! If Fox News broadcast this proposal -- can you imagine being one of the people answering the angry and livid calls from the General Public???!!! Can you imagine the Official Statements from the Political and Religious Leaders of the World???!!! Can you imagine the responses from Sirius and Orion???!!! Would we suffer a Drac-Attack???!!! Would a Solar System 'God' be the Real Deal -- or just a Propped-Up Puppet Who Agreed to Sell-Out the Human Race??? Would a Solar System God be the God of the Universe -- or just a Local God?? Would there be a Human God and a Reptilian God? Does Michael-Horus-Jesus have Dual-Citizenship??

    This 'God Issue' could be EXTREMELY complex and problematic -- in the context of a hypothetical Reptilian v Human Galactic Civil War. Sherri Shriner says that Aliens Are Not Our Friends. But what if Aliens Are Our Relatives???!!! Just think of that Hundred Mile-Long Alien-Spacecraft as being a Bad@$$teroid Mother-In-Law Ship!!!! There's a reason why some of us lead -- and why some of us are merely internet warriors!!! What continues to REALLY worry me -- is whether the Human Race is capable of properly debating and discussing this sort of thing???!!! Is there a critical mass of people who are REALLY doing their homework regarding Politics and Theology in a New Solar System and Brave New Universe???!!! I know there are certain individuals who read my tripe -- completely understand it -- and are capable of intelligently discussing everything in this thread -- yet choose to remain silent or mostly silent. This makes me EXTREMELY apprehensive. I am keeping this tempest in a teapot safely within the confines of this website -- but a proper conversation is NOT occurring. I had hoped that this could be a Mostly Private Back-Channel -- with some meaningful discussions -- even with Alphabet Agency Interns -- but this isn't happening. It seems as if everyone is watching gleefully as I continue to post Provocative Non-PC Speculations and Proposals -- which can and will be (and probably already have been) used against me. I will be MOST interested to learn who said what about me. What did YOU say -- and when did you say it??? I came in peace. Shall I leave you to your own devices -- or will ET simply leave us in pieces???

    I continue to conceptualize the possibility of the historical and contemporary existence of an Orion-Sirius-Egyptian-Roman Empire, administered in this solar system by a hypothetical Reincarnating Osiris-Isis-Horus-Set Royal Family -- wherein the Roman Empire and the Roman Catholic Church would be a highly important and relevant piece of this puzzle. I can't prove this -- and I don't even have a lot of evidence -- but it is part of my ongoing science-fiction series, which I am sharing with the very few of you who bother to read my tripe. I continue to think that Theology is a HUGE part of Politics -- regardless of any problems with texts, history, personalities, ethics, whoever, and whatever. It's still important. My Goal is a New Reformation of the City-States, which retains the best and discards the worst. Once again, I do not wish to start from scratch, or to reinvent the wheel. God and the way God runs the Universe, is a HUGE part of properly understanding Solar System Governance -- especially regarding whether the United States of the Solar System has more than a snowball's chance in hell of being established, and of surviving for more than a generation. I've been told that 'in 20 years, you'll be working for us' and that, in essence, my bad-side would manifest itself. I don't wish to elaborate. The Mind, Character, Personality, Nature, and Government of God are HUGE ISSUES. We should take off our shoes -- because the ground upon which we are standing is HOLY GROUND. Please listen to this previously posted link, for a very balanced theological conversation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBjkZ5WzBfc Note especially the material in the second hour.

    I keep trying to imagine a peaceful and happy solar system, with highly ethical and competent leadership, and without a lot of negative drama. Solar System Governance should be somewhat boring and uneventful. I envision continuing doing what I'm doing right now, but in a much more sophisticated and refined manner. I'm really not joking when I speak of a 600 square-foot office-apartment, a Cray, and a Fisk! I am joking when I speak of a Personal Sport-Model Bad@$$teroid and Six Goddesses! One more time, the 'God' portion of the hypothetical New Solar System is VERY important. Perhaps Male and Female Human Physicality -- combined with Responsible Freedom -- are a Rebellious-Invention in a Theocratic Hermaphrodite-Reptilian Universe. I don't know that this is the case, and I am VERY, VERY, VERY sorry for any disrespect or irreverence, especially if this hypothesis is completely in error. However, if this theory is even partially correct, it is VERY important to determine how we might bring that which exists in this solar system -- into harmony with the rest of the universe -- or how to conduct business in a manner which does not cause the rest of the universe to seek to exterminate ALL of us. When I say that I feel as if I am in conflict with Myself, Divinity, and Humanity -- I do not imply hostility or hatred -- but rather a fundamental idealistic struggle -- which seeks to overcome all obstacles to the achievement of a Genuinely Heavenly Universe. A New Solar System must be considered in harmony with a Brave New Universe. The way things have been run throughout the universe, for billions and trillions of years, may not change anytime soon, and perhaps for good-reason -- but where does that leave the Human Race, in this little solar system? Was our punishment and extermination decided upon Hundreds of Thousands of Years Ago? "We can change!!" might be irrelevant. "The decision is made"?

    I would encourage all of you to study the Bible, even if you don't believe a word in it, and even if you don't believe in God (with an upper or lower case 'g'). We need the mental and spiritual discipline and exercise connected with serious Bible-study. I have made some study suggestions below, and I didn't pull them out of an anatomical black-hole. Something is VERY wrong with me, on a physical, mental, and spiritual level, but I still have enough sense to point you in productive areas of research. I feel VERY attacked, and I might not get better anytime soon. However, I don't think I'll get worse anytime soon. I think I'm pretty much stuck in the muck, right where I am. I am not leadership-material in the real-world, but I am a serious force to deal with in the theoretical-world. I mean absolutely no harm, and I completely agree with the Hippocratic Oath "First, Do No Harm". Don't stop thinking about the Idealistic Integration of Theoretical-Theology, Theoretical-Governance, and Science-Fiction. Star Wars, Battlestar Galactica, Stargate SG-1, and "V" are only the beginning. Alex Collier is absolutely right when he says that Hollywood is really "clued-in" regarding all of the esoteric stuff. I simply have a HUGE problem with the regressive-influences in Hollywood. I don't even want to begin to think about how nasty the closed-door meetings get in Hollywood, New-York, Washington, DC, London, and Rome. Some of you know EXACTLY what I'm talking about. The horror.

    Siriusly, people in the 'know' have known a lot of damning things about a lot of things and people for a very long time -- but a censoring power rules above them which wishes to keep sweeping everything under the rug. I discovered this and that about this and that -- but I simply had to move on -- rather than involving myself in pointless trench-warfare with the BTB (Bastards That Be). I still wonder what sort of Galactic Arrangement this Solar System and the Human Race exist under??!! I suspect that it's NOT a nice one. Attempted reforms might be pointless. Resistance might really be futile. This is the major reason I keep harping on Solar System Governance -- like a broken CD. This is the thread that never ends. It just goes on and on, my friends. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_47KVJV8DU "End the Thread! End the Thread! End the Thread!"

    I recently joked about the Solar System being ruled from Pluto -- by a bunch of Plutocrats!! But seriously, it might be fun to think about a United States of the Solar System Plutocracy! Consider the United States of the Solar System as being completely human (or mostly human) -- and Nibiru basically being an Ellis Island of the Galaxy for Freedom-Seeking Reptilians and Greys -- in a Circular Orbit, Safely Beyond the Orbit of Pluto! I'm assuming that this Solar System is a Human Island in a Reptilian Universe (for modeling purposes). I'm having a very difficult time transitioning from my stupid and useless real world life -- to my exciting and important out of this world imaginary life. I'm not sure if I actually crave this sort of life -- or if my insecurity DRIVES me to think about this sort of thing. I suspect that current Solar System Governance is an absolute nightmare -- especially if one really had clear vision and compassion. The view from the top might REALLY suck. I keep imagining myself being on the Moon -- looking at Earth -- and weeping and weeping and weeping. I kid you not. As you well know, my conceptual modeling is quite strange and somewhat insane -- and I'm REALLY pulling my punches and restraining myself. I really am. I'm also probably completely discrediting myself, and possibly ruining whatever future I might've had. This whole thing seems like a complete loss and a complete waste of time -- yet I keep on keeping on -- but WHY? It takes all kinds -- but WHY? The show must go on -- but WHY?

    I wish to make it clear that I support the individuality of various races, nations, and religions -- but I do not support Uber-Alles Nationalism. Once again -- what is the proper definition and role of 'God' in Solar System Governance? This might very well be the trickiest and stickiest part of this whole 'Governance' subject. A lot of this probably is dependent upon how this universe really works. It might not be up to us locals. I am supportive of the human race -- yet I don't know the whole story regarding the origins, nature, history, and destiny of humanity. I continue to fly-blind -- just like most everyone else. I have no inside contacts. I don't do regression-hypnosis -- or anything supernatural and creepy. I just passively research and reflect. That's all. I belong to no secret societies or think-tanks (other than participating in this website). This thread continues to be merely a Study-Guide -- although I am quite committed to the concept of Responsible-Freedom. I have made certain proposals in rather definite ways (one in particular) -- yet I desire that these proposals be highly refined. I consider them to be 'diamonds in the rough'. My strange speculations are intended to make all of us think in ways which might result in the 'Eureka Phenomenon'. A lot of this is up to YOU. I can lead a horse to water -- but I can't make it pee. Is that how it goes?

    Siriusly -- what if Archangel Michael was (and is) NOT like Max Von Sydow -- but rather more like Dr. Who -- Alaya in 'Dr. Who' -- Anna in 'V' -- or Vala Mal Doran??? One more thing. What if Popes and Queens were elected by at least the Priests and Aristocrats -- in a televised electoral process? What if they served ten-year terms -- and then became Popes and Queens Emeritus? This question is especially relevant if Popes and Queens rule the world -- with or without the Queen of Heaven and God of This World. What if the United States of the Solar System ruled the Solar System -- as an Open Secret Government -- with the Pope of Rome and the Queen of England serving as the Ceremonial King and Queen of the United States of the Solar System (especially if they were openly-elected and non-bloodline -- with 10 year terms)? What if the Roman Catholic Church Joined the Anglican Communion???!!! OMG!!! What if the current and hidden God of This World and Queen of Heaven retired -- and advised a New and Open Solar System Administrator? How might such a hypothetical administrator be chosen or elected? What would Orion and Sirius say? I'm presently thinking of various 'prophecies' (including Biblical prophecy) as being a Scripted Punishing Sentence Against Humanity -- rather than being a Pre-Cognitive History of the Future). How would YOU set up Church and State in a New Solar System -- with a Clean-Sheet of Paper and No Historical Baggage??? Think about it.

    I can't begin to tell you how much it hurts to try to deal with all of this. I come from a conservative Christian background -- and I am trying to stay as close to the original path as possible -- but every post of mine is full of heresy and even blasphemy -- but I really have absolutely no hatred or feelings of ill-will toward anyone. I'm simply trying to consider possibilities which are not widely considered. I think DiVinci and Michelangelo are extremely interesting. I think they both knew a helluva lot -- but that they had to be very careful -- because of potentially nasty Powers That Be -- human and otherwise. Same goes for the Bible. I'll be VERY interested to see where the Quest of the Historical Jesus ultimately leads. I continue to like the Teachings Attributed to Jesus -- but the REAL story concerning Jesus might be more disorienting and upsetting than most of us can imagine. My inner thoughts are MOST upsetting. I think the religious world (all religions) are going to go NUTS as the REAL TRUTH emerges. I'm trying to be as traditional and respectful as possible -- but I see nothing but trouble for the next few decades -- and possibly for the rest of the 21st century. The chickens, greys, reptilians, and who-knows-what, are coming home to roost, and probably to do some heavy-duty @$$-kicking. Go easy on me guys. I'm quite sensitive -- and I can't stand the sight of blood. I've been recently joking about living in an old decommissioned missile-silo! Unfortunately, if the excrement really contacts the refrigeration-system, I doubt that there is any place to hide, anywhere in the solar system. Anyway, I presently feel as if I have very little to lose, so here goes another speculative what-if episode.

    To recap -- what if the Roman Catholic Church joined the Anglican Communion? What if the new Anglo-Catholic Church were headquartered in Vatican City? What if the United States of the Solar System were headquartered in Vatican City? What if the Monarchy and the Papacy united to become the King and Queen of the United States of the Solar System -- doing double duty as the King and Queen of the Anglo-Catholic Church? What if the King and Queen both had PhD's in Solar System Studies and Governance? What if they were non-bloodline positions -- with 10 year terms? What if they were elected by the 10,000 Representatives? What if the sacred and secular governance aspects were handled by the United States of the Solar System? What if the sacred and secular ceremonial aspects were distinctly Anglican? What if theological issues were debated and decided by the United States of the Solar System? What if the 10,000 Representatives of the United States of the Solar System all had PhD's in Solar System Studies and Governance? What if the hypothetical and hidden Queen of Heaven and God of This World were replaced by a visible, but largely observational, ceremonial, and ambassadorial Solar System Administrator(s) -- who might be an Authority of Last Resort? What if most sessions occurred within the relatively new and large building next to St. Peter's? What if special sessions and ceremonies occurred within St. Peter's? What if the Secret Government and the United Nations were effectively replaced by the United States of the Solar System? What if that 1875 Cavaille-Coll Pipe-Organ (by Fisk or Reiger perhaps) were installed as originally designed and intended in St. Peter's? Have I caused enough trouble for one post already???

    You City-State and Moon People (and Other Than People) must just LOVE me!!! I hear that the Jesuits hate me!!! But guys -- instead of the poison-cup -- could you just buy me a Ducati 1098R -- and give me a couple of weeks -- if you know what I mean??? Mind you, I just keep forcing this sort of thing into cyberspace to make all of us think. I'm not saying that this is the way things should be. I'm not saying 'my way, or the highway'. Can you imagine the anger, confusion, and running in the streets if my ideas were implemented? But really, I tend to think that we're somewhat screwed no matter what we do. The problems which confront us are that bad. The Horror. Enough for Now. More Later. This is getting way too scary for me. I need to stop.



    Consider Dr. Venkman ('Ghostbusters').
    Dr. Who? Dr. Bowman?

    My posting regarding how things work and how things should work in the solar system has been going on for several years now -- with very little response or conversation. Is it because I'm getting it wrong -- getting it right -- no one gets it -- or no one cares??? I feel very shut out. I feel way out of any sort of loop. Is this too simple? Is this too hard? Should I beg? Should I kneel? Should I shout? What should I do? What should I not do? Should I do anything at all? I didn't do much for decades because I sensed that what has happened over the past couple of years would indeed be the case -- and I was right. I tried to reason with people from time to time -- but to no avail. It seemed pointless then -- and it seems pointless now. Perhaps my work is done. Perhaps the task I came into this life to perform was an impossible job. My teeth are ground-down and I feel horrible 24/7. I sense that Humanity Can Do Nothing Right in the Eyes of the Galactic Powers That Be. I'm feeling no love. I sense that I have promoted love -- lifetime after lifetime -- but that love is not the way things work in this universe. I have more recently been promoting the concept of Responsibility -- with Love, Freedom, and Response-Ability orbiting this central concept. So far there seems to be very little interest in this innovation -- which shouldn't surprise me, at this late date. Even the Teachings of Jesus seem to have been largely ignored for 2,000 years -- and thousands of Horrible Images of Jesus Christ as a Human Sacrifice continue to be paraded and displayed throughout the world -- without anyone seeming to notice the problems connected with this. So why should I be surprised when my tripe is trodden under foot??? "Stupid Latter-Day Luddite Me for Liking the 'Bach B-Minor Mass'!!"
    orthodoxymoron wrote: The queston that continues to puzzle me is "why have there been so few comments on my threads throughout the years??" I think I know why the regular forum-members don't post -- but I think I know who monitors this website -- and who these monitors are associated with. There are those who should be communicating with me on this thread (but don't). I might continue this thread as long as I can, regardless of whether anyone views it (and comments on it), or not. These seem to be the best of times, and the worst of times, for a variety of reasons. Are we in the eye of a storm?? Is there no problem?? Is everything fine?? Is this a fast-talking and fast-walking contest?? Is this a "more secret-agent than thou" contest?? Is everyone right?? Is everyone wrong?? Is everyone innocent?? Is everyone guilty?? The Ancient Egyptian Deity told me "No One is Good" and "People Deserve to Die". The AED thought that even the women and children deserved to die in the Ancient Roman Colosseum!! Is this the End of Humanity? Is the Decision Made?

    The question that continues to trouble me is "what is the true soul-history of this solar-system??" The answer to this question might go a long-way toward understanding terms such as "Original-Sin", "Fallen and Sinful Human-Nature", "Prison-Planet", "Planet in Rebellion", "Lamb Slain from the Foundation of the World", "Lamb's Book of Life", "Nephilim", "Giants", "Angels", "Demons", "Gods", "Sons of God", "Daughters of Men", "Fallen-Angels", "Mystery of Iniquity", "Sin", "Righteousness", "Perfection", "Perfect Law of the Lord", "Trinity", "Nature of Christ", "Soteriology", "Christology", "Eschatology", "King of Babylon", "Whore of Babylon", "Orion Group", "Roman Empire", etc. We don't seem to have enough information to answer the most important questions regarding life, the universe, and everything. What if this whole solar-system is based upon deception?? Will the truth set us free and/or precipitate the end of the world (as we know it)?? Should we be "true-believers"?? Should we be "atheists"?? Should we be "agnostics"?? Should we simply "follow the leader" and "just follow orders"?? Is resistance futile?? I continue to offer to correct any errors I've made on the internet, throughout the years. I've repeatedly requested detailed critiques of my internet-posting, with no responses. There's been some meaningful conversation, but most of it seemed to involve a fake "niceness" which mostly seemed to end in "nastiness". Should I NOT Talk About God and the Bible?? Should I keep my word, and end this thread?? Should I start a Wall Street Journal thread?? Actually, that might be a fine-idea!! No more Mr. Nice-Guy!! No more Church of Orthodoxymoron of Latter-day Luddites!! Just The Wall Street Journal!! "The Bottom-Line is the Bottom-Line!!"


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Fri Sep 23, 2016 9:07 pm; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    mudra

    Posts : 18366
    Join date : 2010-04-09
    Age : 62
    Location : belgium

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  mudra on Thu Sep 22, 2016 1:53 am

    It's a holographic Universe Oxy .
    You are free to explore it from any point you choose.
    It all goes nowhere really.
    I am very curious to hear your comments on the Wall Street journal articles.
    It should be fun Big Grin 3

    Love from me
    mudra
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:47 pm

    mudra wrote: It's a holographic Universe Oxy. You are free to explore it from any point you choose. It all goes nowhere really. I am very curious to hear your comments on the Wall Street journal articles. It should be fun.   Big Grin 3

    Love from me
    mudra
    Thank-you, mudra. I'm going to try to shut-out what I've previously posted, and just focus on the title of this thread. I'm still not sure how to proceed, but I might attempt to provide a "Daily Interpretive-Summary" of the Current Front-Page. I will resist the temptation to simply post articles and videos. I will try to just post my own words (perhaps combined with appropriate images). What if there were The Wall Street Journal Church??!! What Would Trinity Church Say?? Here is one last minimal-list:

    1. The Wall Street Journal (print and online).

    2. The SDA Bible Commentary -- Volume Four (Isaiah to Malachi).

    3. Sacred Classical Music.

    There's more to this than you might think. This does NOT involve joining or leaving ANY church or organization. Imagine a Minimalist Crystal Cathedral Concept Church based upon this little list!! What Would Dr. Robert H. Schuller Say?? "The Sacred Must Become Secular, and the Secular Must Become Sacred!!" and "Tough Times Never Last, But Tough People Do!!" BTW -- One of my favorite movies is the 1963 It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World!! I think it describes the History of the World extremely well!! It might also describe the End of the World quite accurately!! What Would Jupiter Jones Say?? What Would Mr. Edgars Say?? Does Satan Have an Office at Goldman Sachs?? What if the History of the World is Bull v Ram aka Pinkie v Brain?? Imagine Ram and Bull discussing Sirius-Issues at Starbucks!! Best-Friends and Worst-Enemies?? Think Long and Hard About What I Just Said!! One last thing. I recently encountered a woman who said something rather cryptic regarding "sixteen-years", but I don't want to talk about it, other than that I noticed.














    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri Sep 23, 2016 10:50 am

    orthodoxymoron wrote:I suspect that to really understand history, one must be an insider. But that opens up a whole new can of worms. I've attempted to deal with this stuff for several years now, and I feel as if this was a mistake. I've started The Wall Street Journal thread, to try to forget about the important things (like saving the world). Let me just say that if all the world has been a stage for thousands of years, with One Script-Writer and Director, the implications and ramifications of this are MOST Upsetting. The Visible PTB might all simply be Actors and/or Pawns in a Theater of the Universe. But what if the Reprehensible has been Absolutely-Necessary?? What if Watergate was necessary?? What if 9/11 was necessary?? What if the only way to run a hypothetical Prison-Planet in Rebellion, is by controlling Everyone and Everything in secretive and nefarious ways?? What if my pipe-dream of open and honest governance, with everyone loving each-other, is pure unmitigated-poppycock?? I've gotten to the point where I have to stop. As a youth, I intuitively knew a lot about the way things really worked, but I didn't get involved, and now I know why.
    This thread will literally be a "Journal". The Wall Street "Journal". Get it?? If only Ron Klug could see me now!! Harper and Row should've worked with me, to publish my Interpretive Paraphrase of the Life and Teachings of Jesus!! This was a very long time ago!! Ron wrote at least one book about "Journaling". I talked to Mr. Klug at a writer's conference, and submitted part of my manuscript to him. Frank Peretti was the keynote speaker at that conference!! He was funny and profound!! I think I'll start by commenting on What's News on the front page of The Wall Street Journal. This is the narrow column on the left side of the page, which runs from top to bottom. It is divided into two sections. 1. Business and Finance. 2. World Wide. I might do a detailed analysis, or I might simply do some sort of an extemporaneous expression, reminiscent of the Eureka Phenomenon!! Well here we go!!

    Yahoo said state sponsored hackers penetrated its network in late 2014 and stole personal data on over 500 million users. This is what they tell us, but how much personal data gets passed around throughout the world, each and every day?? This sort of thing becomes front page news when it is not possible to sweep it under the rug. It is my impression that all of our lives are open-books to those in the know -- and those with the dough. I think we all live in a Fish-Bowl (or is it a Yellow Submarine??)!! It's just going to get worse and worse. I keep suspecting that all of our Past-Life Data will eventually be posted on the internet for all to see. Every Secret Thing will probably be revealed.

    Wall Street bank's fees from equity deals have fallen to their lowest level in more than 20 years, as firms opt for cheap private funding. This is one example of why Free-Enterprise is probably a good-thing. Competition Improves the Breed. It's painful and angering for some, but it forces everyone to dig-deeper and try-harder. I've been advocating Micro-Competition and Macro-Cooperation. This is sort of how a corporation works. Everyone competes with Everyone, yet there is an Umbrella of Cooperation to ultimately do that which is in the best-interest of the Company. One might argue with a coworker without serious-consequences, but insubordination to the CEO might result in traveling and meeting new people.

    Big ad buyers and marketers are upset with Facebook after learning the firm vastly overestimated average viewing time for video ads. Why is this an estimate?? Why can't the actual viewing times be accessed?? Some low-budget research by the ad-buyers and marketers should've revealed the real-deal. No one should've been blindsided by this one!! Don't salespersons tend to exaggerate and sugar-coat?? Haven't these people ever bought used-cars?? Would YOU buy a used-car from Richard Nixon??

    Bonds rallied for a second day as renewed central bank commitments to easy policies curtailed investors' fear of a "taper tantrum". The experts provide reasons why things go up and down, but are the provided-reasons the real-reasons?? Greed and Fear are two basic factors relative to why things go up and down. The underlying undercurrents might be incredibly-complex. The Cliff Notes version might be simplistic and deceptive. There are undoubtedly black-box computer-programs which analyze all relevant-factors 24/7. I keep suspecting that humanity will become obsolete in SO many ways. But until then, just remember that the Trend is Your Friend.

    U.S. Stocks extended gains, with the Dow rising 98.76 points to 18392.46. The dollar fell further. The doom and gloom forecasters have been predicting a market-crash for several-years now. The National-Debt is unimaginably and astronomically high. SO many people receive some sort of public-assistance!! Low-wage foreign-workers keep taking U.S. jobs!! This would seem to militate against current stock prices. What is REALLY going on here?? The published reasons for why things go up and down might be very-different than the real-reasons. Some say the markets are rigged. Imagine a Central War-Room, where the markets can be made to go in whichever direction the Big-Shots wish!! I once heard someone say that the markets move in a manner which screws the most people!! Consider deception and surprise when analyzing why the markets do what they do. How extensive is Insider-Trading?? How leveraged are stock-bets worldwide?? What happens if the music slows?? What happens if the music stops?? Will the USD crash?? Will the Dinar skyrocket?? What if the USD gets backed-up by silver, gold, or something of significant-value (with no crash)?? What Would John F. Kennedy Say?? What Would Ron Paul Say??

    This first analytic-post is pretty lame, but I will attempt to cover the entire left-column of the first-page each-day (with an increasing level of sophistication). I haven't decided which type of writer to model, but I might simply be "myself' (whatever that means). Anyway, now I'm going to post an article from the Opinion page, by Kenneth L. Woodward. I once had the privilege of asking Mr. Woodard a question about money in a public-meeting at Pacific Union College, in Angwin, California. It was the last question, and Kenneth Woodward commented that no one seemed to want to talk after my question regarding Money and Religion!! It had something to do with "Rich Christians"!! Oxymoron or Wave of the Future??!! BTW -- Chelsea is my favorite Clinton!! I've always wanted to talk to her!! Here's that article (about Hillary). http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-democrats-methodist-moment-1474586097


    The Democrats’ Methodist Moment
    Young Hillary Rodham saw the church’s social concerns
    shift from alcohol and gambling to sexism and racism.

    By Kenneth L. Woodward
    Sept. 22, 2016 7:14 p.m. ET

    After Bill Clinton, a Bible-toting Southern Baptist, was elected, I repeatedly tried as religion editor of Newsweek to interview him about his religious beliefs and practices. Ten days before the 1994 midterm elections, the White House offered me Hillary, the sturdy Methodist, instead.

    The first lady spoke candidly about her Methodist upbringing, her core Christian beliefs and prayer habits, and how she frequently consulted the latest Methodist Book of Resolutions, the church’s official handbook on social and political issues, which she kept upstairs in the family quarters. Piety plus politics was her message.

    I asked her if she ever thought of becoming an ordained Methodist minister once her White House years were over. “I think about it all the time,” she instantly replied. But after exchanging glances with her press secretary, Lisa Caputo, she asked me not to print what she had said because she felt it made her sound much too pious. I didn’t.

    I feel free to mention this now because Hillary Rodham Clinton obviously has opted for a career in public service. But for a serious Methodist, public service is a form of ministry. All the more so because, as Mrs. Clinton’s former youth minister told Newsweek with sly self-awareness: “we Methodists know what’s good for you.”

    Although religion is not an issue in this year’s presidential election, Hillary Clinton is by far the more religious candidate. What’s more, hers is the more religious political party—even though atheists, agnostics and other religiously nonaffiliated Americans (the “Nones”) now represent the largest bloc, replacing African-Americans, within the Democratic Party. To understand this seeming paradox, we first have to recognize that since its transformation in 1972 under another Methodist politician, George McGovern, the Democratic Party has advanced a righteous politics that mirrors the political righteousness of the United Methodist Church.

    Methodists have been zealous monitors of American morals since the middle of the 19th century when, as historian Nathan O. Hatch has written, Methodists operated “the most extensive national institution other than the federal government.”

    Their longtime concern with politics is symbolized by the Methodist Building, still the only nongovernmental edifice on Capitol Hill. It was built during Prohibition to house the denomination’s powerful Board of Temperance, Prohibition and Public Morals. The building also provided office space for Washington lobbyists representing the other mainline Protestant denominations. Together, they formed a moral Maginot line against the growing political influence of American Catholics as a threat to their vision of a Protestant America.

    By the time Hillary Rodham joined a Methodist youth group in the early 1960s, the church’s social concerns had shifted from alcohol, gambling and shopping on the Sabbath to racism, sexism and the war in Vietnam. Thanks in large part to South Dakota’s George McGovern, so would the concerns of the Democratic Party.

    The events of 1972 inaugurate what I call the Methodist Moment in Democratic Party politics. That was the year McGovern won the party’s presidential nomination—and, coincidentally, the year former Republican Hillary Rodham became a Democratic Party activist. McGovern was the son of a Methodist minister, grew up in a Methodist manse, graduated from a Methodist college, studied for the Methodist ministry before taking a doctorate in history, and taught at his Methodist alma mater before accepting the challenge of rebuilding South Dakota’s moribund party. His stump style was prairie preacher; his reformer’s rhetoric Methodist to the core.

    In 1972 the United Methodist Church, as it was by then called, held its quadrennial General Convention—the church’s highest legislative body—as it does every presidential election year a few months prior to the national political conventions. A review of the positions taken by the church reveals remarkable congruence with the Democrats’ subsequent party platform. Both opposed the war in Vietnam and called for immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops. Both framed the nation’s economic ills as “systemic” and proposed wholesale transformation of political, economic and social institutions.

    What is truly astonishing is the way that the Democrats’ planks on emerging culture-war issues echoed the (often more radical) stands adopted by the Methodists. Among the rights of children, for example, the Methodists included the right “to a full sex education, appropriate to their stage of development.” Affirming the rights of women, the Methodists supported full equality with men and demanded and end to “sex-role stereotypes.”

    To counter overpopulation, the convention recommended the distribution of “reliable contraceptive information and devices.” Less than a year before Roe v. Wade, the convention urged “removal of abortion from the criminal code” but stopped short of approving abortion on demand. Finally, the Methodists embraced affirmative inclusion by reserving 30% of seats on all church boards and agencies for nonwhites, even though barely 6% of church members were African-American.

    The events of 1972 also hastened the steady decline in membership and influence among the liberal mainline churches. Before the 1970s were out, the politically and socially conservative Southern Baptists superseded the United Methodists as the nation’s largest Protestant denomination. As one generation gave way to the next, more and more young Methodists, Presbyterians and the like grew up to become religiously something else or—especially among millennials—nothing at all.

    In sum, many of today’s Nones have retained the Methodists’ ethos of righteous politics while jettisoning the beliefs, behavior and belonging that made righteous Methodists Methodists in the first place. Many Jews and Roman Catholics can and do find in progressive Democratic politics aspects of their own social-justice traditions.

    But the emergence of the Nones shows us that anyone can think and act like righteous Methodists just by being a liberal Democrat.

    Mr. Woodward is the author of “Getting Religion: Faith, Culture and Politics from the Age of Eisenhower to the Era of Obama,” just published by Convergent Books.






     
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:56 pm


    I will become more factual and sophisticated, with time, regarding The Wall Street Journal. I'm just trying to make an editorial-transition from Religious and Political Science-Fiction -- to Boring and Stuffy News-Commentary. I've compared myself with the news-reporter Chad Decker (from the 2009-10 "V" series)!! Perhaps The Wall Street Journal thread will strengthen that assertion!! BTW -- consider reading The Camera Never Blinks by Dan Rather. It's a great book!! Anyway, today's commentary is quite a harangue!! I'll try to tone it down as I proceed!! I'm trying to remake myself into a Kinder and Gentler "Completely Ignorant Fool"!! Perhaps, in my next-life, I'll be the host of "The Regressive Perspective"!! Sorry. I couldn't resist.

    No CEO at the nation's largest 100 companies had donated to Trump's campaign through August, while 11 backed Clinton. This is surprising to me. I keep imagining the Big-Shot CEO's donating to BOTH candidates, to cover their bases. Do the CEO's know something about the near-future of America that the rest of us don't?? Does this reveal their perceptions of the perceived-power (or lack thereof) of the President of the United States of America?? I remember when Dr. Robert H. Schuller wanted to build a Family Life Center on the Crystal Cathedral Campus -- and NONE of His Major-Contributors supported this project (at least initially). I remember the day he told the congregation this sad fact. I was there. Are the CEO's sending their money to the Pope, the Queen, and Putin?? Sorry. I couldn't resist.

    Cruz, in a reversal, said he plans to vote for Trump, citing a pledge to back whoever won the GOP nomination. Does it really matter who votes for who, if all the politicians work for the Same Guy and/or Gal?? Are modern-politics a necessary-evil?? Should everyone just play-along with this seemingly superficial and corrupt game of money and power?? Sometimes I wish I would've signed on the dotted-line and joined the club. Perhaps I should've stayed at the Crystal Cathedral, joined the Masons, started a business in Garden Grove, gone to all the parties, used a couple of Hollywood connections I had, become morally-ambiguous, and become a Filthy-Rich Mover and Shaker in Southern California!! I'm sort of bitter, and sort of serious!! I might've gotten a free-ride on a UFO to the Dark-Side of the Moon, to meet with the Queen of Heaven and the God of This World!! Sorry. I couldn't resist.

    Trump received numerous loans from his father early in his real estate career, documents show. So what?? Why is this news?? It might be newsworthy if Trump received numerous loans from the Mafia throughout the years!! What if he did?? He was supposedly close to some pretty-shady characters throughout the years!! Politics seems to be synonymous with Big-Money and Smoke-Filled Rooms!! Sherry Shriner claims that neither Trump or Hillary are the same people they were years ago, and that they've been replaced and/or taken-over. She's much more descriptive than I'm willing to be, and I have no idea how compromised politicians are, but this stuff scares the hell out of me. Supposedly the Jesuits have a lot to do with all of this, but I don't know for certain. The Ancient Egyptian Deity said he was very close to Obama, and that he really liked Bill Clinton!! He said Ron Paul was bad for America!! Now you know too much!! Sorry. I couldn't resist.

    Two of Clinton's attorneys were granted immunity as part of a now-closed FBI email probe, lawmakers said. Is the law an ass??!! We have the best legal and political system money can buy!! Why do we have "lawmakers"?? Should we have the "Perfect Law of the Lord" which never changes (because it's perfect)?? What if there is a Perfect-Law which predates the creation of the human-being?? What if there is a Better-Bible hidden in the Vatican-Archives?? I'm still wondering about those 37 books I supposedly wrote in antiquity, which are supposedly hidden in the Vatican-Archives??!! No black SUV's have pulled into my driveway at 3AM, delivering me a personal-copy of what I supposedly wrote (and I'm NOT holding my breath)!! If that strange message I found in my word-processor is even partially-true, I'm suspecting some sort of an Old-Testament Commentary, written during the Intertestamental-Period (possibly in Egypt or Tibet)!! Sherry Shriner recently suggested that there were several additional-chapters to the Book of Daniel (hidden in the Vatican Archives)!! What Would Desmond Ford and Raymond Cottrell Say?? Sorry. I couldn't resist.

    Obama rejected a bill that would let Americans sue foreign governments over terror attacks. Congress is likely to override the veto. This makes my hair stand on-end!! This sounds like a bunch of gangsters protecting each-other from the good-guys!! Are Politics and Religion sort of like the Crips and the Bloods??!! Do the Corrupt Rule the Stupid?? Americans should be able to sue whoever did them wrong, wherever the hell they are!! Americans should receive free legal-assistance from the U.S. Government when they sue foreign governments over terror attacks!! Do Americans work for the Government?? Does the Government work for Americans?? What do YOU think?? Sorry. I couldn't resist.

    The U.N. Security Council adopted a resolution calling on countries to refrain from nuclear testing. What if all Nuclear-Programs are controlled by the Secret-Government and/or the Secret Space Program?? Remember the UFO's shutting-down Missile-Silos??!! I continue to speculate concerning an Ancient and Ongoing One Solar-System Government (which controls Everyone and Everything -- including ALL Weapons of Mass-Destruction)!! There might be several-factions of one general-government!! I've suggested the possibility of Anna and the "V's" running the solar-system since the Garden of Eden (at least for the past six-thousand years)!! Sorry. I couldn't resist.


    The Gathering Nuclear Storm
    Lulled to believe nuclear catastrophe died with the Cold War,
    America is blind to rising dragons.

    By Mark Helprin
    Sept. 23, 2016 6:11 p.m. ET

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-gathering-nuclear-storm-1474668674

    Even should nuclear brinkmanship not result in Armageddon, it can lead to abject defeat and a complete reordering of the international system. The extraordinarily complicated and consequential management of American nuclear policy rests upon the shoulders of those we elevate to the highest offices. Unfortunately, President Obama’s transparent hostility to America’s foundational principles and defensive powers is coupled with a dim and faddish understanding of nuclear realities. His successor will be no less ill-equipped.

    Hillary Clinton’s robotic compulsion to power renders her immune to either respect for truth or clearheaded consideration of urgent problems. Theodore Roosevelt’s secretary of state once said that he was “pure act” (meaning action). Hillary Clinton is “pure lie” (meaning lie), with whatever intellectual power she possesses hopelessly enslaved to reflexive deviousness.

    Donald Trump, surprised that nuclear weapons are inappropriate to counterinsurgency, has a long history of irrepressible urges and tropisms. Rather like the crazy boy-emperors after the fall of the Roman Republic, he may have problems with impulse control—and an uncontrolled, ill-formed, perpetually fragmented mind.

    None of these perhaps three worst people in the Western Hemisphere, and few of their deplorable underlings, are alive to the gravest danger. Which is neither Islamic State, terrorism, the imprisoned economy, nor even the erosion of our national character, though all are of crucial importance.

    The gravest danger we face is fast-approaching nuclear instability. Many believe it is possible safely to arrive at nuclear zero. It is not. Enough warheads to bring any country to its knees can fit in a space volumetrically equivalent to a Manhattan studio apartment. Try to find that in the vastness of Russia, China, or Iran. Even ICBMs and their transporter-erector-launchers can easily be concealed in warehouses, tunnels and caves. Nuclear weapons age out, but, thanks to supercomputing, reliable replacements can be manufactured with only minor physical testing. Unaccounted fissile material sloshing around the world can, with admitted difficulty, be fashioned into weapons. And when rogue states such as North Korea and Iran build their bombs, our response has been either impotence or a ticket to ride.

    Nor do nuclear reductions lead to increased safety. Quite apart from encouraging proliferation by enabling every medium power in the world to aim for nuclear parity with the critically reduced U.S. arsenal, reductions create instability. The fewer targets, the more possible a (counter-force) first strike to eliminate an enemy’s retaliatory capacity. Nuclear stability depends, inter alia, upon deep reserves that make a successful first strike impossible to assure. The fewer warheads and the higher the ratio of warheads to delivery vehicles, the more dangerous and unstable.

    Consider two nations, each with 10 warheads on each of 10 missiles. One’s first strike with five warheads tasked per the other’s missiles would leave the aggressor with an arsenal sufficient for a (counter-value) strike against the now disarmed opponent’s cities. Our deterrent is not now as concentrated as in the illustration, but by placing up to two-thirds of our strategic warheads in just 14 submarines; consolidating bomber bases; and entertaining former Defense Secretary William Perry’s recommendation to do away with the 450 missiles in the land-based leg of the Nuclear Triad, we are moving that way.

    Supposedly salutary reductions are based upon an incorrect understanding of nuclear sufficiency: i.e., if X number of weapons is sufficient to inflict unacceptable costs upon an enemy, no more than X are needed. But we don’t define sufficiency, the adversary does, and the definition varies according to culture; history; the temperament, sanity, or miscalculation of leadership; domestic politics; forms of government, and other factors, some unknown. For this reason, the much maligned concept of overkill is a major contributor to stability, in that, if we have it, an enemy is less likely to calculate that we lack sufficiency. Further, if our forces are calibrated to sufficiency, then presumably the most minor degradation will render them insufficient.

    Nor is it safe to mirror-image willingness to go nuclear. Every nuclear state has its own threshold, and one cannot assume that concessions in strategic forces will obviate nuclear use in response to conventional warfare, which was Soviet doctrine for decades and is a Russian predilection now. Ballistic missile defense is opposed and starved on the assumption that it would shield one’s territory after striking first, and would therefore tempt an enemy to strike before the shield was deployed. As its opponents assert, hermetic shielding is impossible, and if only 10 of 1,500 warheads were to hit American cities, the cost would be unacceptable. But no competent nuclear strategist ever believed that, other than protecting cities from accidental launch or rogue states, ballistic missile defense is anything but a means of protecting our retaliatory capacity, making a counter-force first strike of no use, and thus increasing stability.

    In a nuclear world, unsentimental and often counterintuitive analysis is necessary. As the genie will not be forced back into the lamp, the heart of the matter is balance and deterrence. But this successful dynamic of 70 years is about to be destroyed. Those whom the French call our “responsibles” have addressed the nuclear calculus—in terms of sufficiency, control regimes, and foreign policy—only toward Russia, as if China, a nuclear power for decades, did not exist. While it is true that to begin with its nuclear arsenal was de minimis, in the past 15 years China has increased its land-based ICBMs by more than 300%, its sea-based by more than 400%. Depending upon the configuration of its missiles, China can rain up to several hundred warheads upon the U.S.

    As we shrink our nuclear forces and fail to introduce new types, China is doing the opposite, increasing them numerically and forging ahead of us in various technologies (quantum communications, super computers, maneuverable hypersonic re-entry vehicles), some of which we have forsworn, such as road-mobile missiles, which in survivability and range put to shame our Minuteman IIIs.

    Because China’s nuclear weapons infrastructure is in part housed in 3,000 miles of tunnels opaque to American intelligence, we cannot know the exact velocity and extent of its buildup. Why does the Obama administration, worshipful of nuclear agreements, completely ignore the nuclear dimension of the world’s fastest rising major power, with which the United States and allies engage in military jockeying almost every day on multiple fronts? Lulled to believe that nuclear catastrophe died with the Cold War, America is blind to rising dragons.

    And then we have Russia, which ignores limitations the Obama administration strives to exceed. According to its own careless or defiant admissions, Russia cheats in virtually every area of nuclear weapons: deploying missiles that by treaty supposedly no longer exist; illegally converting anti-aircraft and ballistic missile defense systems to dual-capable nuclear strike; developing new types of nuclear cruise missiles for ships and aircraft; keeping more missiles on alert than allowed; and retaining battlefield tactical nukes.

    Further, in the almost complete absence of its own “soft power,” Russia frequently hints at nuclear first use. All this comports with historical Soviet/Russian doctrine and conduct; is an important element of Putinesque tactics for reclaiming the Near Abroad; and dovetails perfectly with Mr. Obama’s advocacy of no first use, unreciprocated U.S. reductions and abandonment of nuclear modernization. Which in turn pair nicely with Donald Trump’s declaration that he would defend NATO countries only if they made good on decades of burden-sharing delinquency.

    Russia deploys about 150 more nuclear warheads than the U.S. Intensively modernizing, it finds ways to augment its totals via undisguised cheating. Bound by no numerical or qualitative limits, China speeds its strategic development. To cripple U.S. retaliatory capability, an enemy would have to destroy only four or five submarines at sea, two sub bases, half a dozen bomber bases, and 450 missile silos.

    Russia has 49 attack submarines, China 65, with which to track and kill American nuclear missile subs under way. Were either to build or cheat to 5,000 warheads (the U.S. once had more than 30,000) and two-thirds reached their targets, four warheads could strike each aim point, with 2,000 left to hold hostage American cities and industry. China and Russia are far less dense and developed than the U.S., and it would take more strikes for us to hold them at risk than vice versa, a further indictment of reliance upon sufficiency calculations and symmetrical reductions.

    Russia dreams publicly of its former hold on Eastern Europe and cannot but see opportunity in a disintegrating European Union and faltering NATO. China annexes the South China Sea and looks to South Korea, Japan and Australasia as future subordinates. Given the degradation of U.S. and allied conventional forces previously able to hold such ambitions in check, critical confrontations are bound to occur. When they do occur, and if without American reaction, China or Russia have continued to augment their strategic forces to the point of vast superiority where one or both consider a first strike feasible, we may see nuclear brinkmanship (or worse) in which the United States—startled from sleep and suddenly disabused of the myth of sufficiency—might have to capitulate, allowing totalitarian dictatorships to dominate the world.

    Current trajectories point in exactly this direction, but in regard to such things Donald Trump hasn’t the foggiest, and, frankly, Hillary Clinton, like the president, doesn’t give a damn.

    The way to avoid such a tragedy is to bring China into a nuclear control regime or answer its refusal with our own proportional increases and modernization. And to make sure that both our nuclear and conventional forces are strong, up-to-date, and survivable enough to deter the militant ambitions of the two great powers rising with daring vengeance from what they regard as the shame of their oppression.

    Mr. Helprin, a senior fellow of the Claremont Institute, is the author of “Winter’s Tale,” “A Soldier of the Great War” and the forthcoming novel “Paris in the Present Tense.”




    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Sep 26, 2016 1:40 pm

    Somewhat unrelated to The Wall Street Journal, I've previously referred to Michael-Horus-Jesus, but I'm presently not so sure these three names should be joined at the hip. I'm presently thinking of Michael in terms of the 'Lamb Slain from the Foundation of the World', and possibly connected with the name 'Osiris', but I'm very uncertain about this. The name-change game, and the name shell-game, continue to trouble and confuse me. I haven't made a scholarly study of this stuff. I continue to deal with such matters in a pseudointellectual manner. I'm not in a hurry to get to the truth and the whole-story. I mostly lead some of us to the edge of truth, without making a big-deal about it. You must do your own homework. I cannot and will-not do it for you. My tradition sometimes makes the connection between Michael and Jesus, but I have a big question-mark concerning the Historical-Jesus of the Gospels. I'm not against the Teachings Attributed to Jesus. I'm simply concerned about Historical Reliability and Verifiability.

    I continue to exercise science-fictional possibility-thinking relative to Sacred-Scripture. How do we REALLY know?? I still don't have an Absolute-Access Pass to the Vatican Library and Archives (and I'm NOT holding my breath)!! I think Vatican-Insiders REALLY Know (but they usually don't let the rest of us know)!! I continue to wonder about King David, King Solomon, and the Queen of Sheba (figuratively and literally) relative to the Father, Son, and Holy-Spirit (figuratively and literally). Some scholars say that most of the Biblical-Characters never existed (at least as described in the Bible). But again, how are we supposed to REALLY Know?? What is the relationship (figuratively and literally) between the "Lamb Slain from the Foundation of the World" and the "Historical-Jesus"?? Should I think in terms of Gabriel-Horus-Jesus?? Acts through Revelation seems to reveal very little about the Historical-Jesus. It seems to reveal the Mystical-Christ. I stumbled-upon dividing the Bible into Seven-Sections aka Seven-Churches (mirroring the Seven-Volumes of the SDA Bible Commentary):

    1. Genesis to Deuteronomy.

    2. Joshua to 2 Kings.

    3. 1 Chronicles to Song of Solomon.

    4. Isaiah to Malachi.

    5. Matthew to John.

    6. Acts to Ephesians.

    7. Philippians to Revelation.

    Each of these volumes are Whole-Bible in their approach (but from the perspective of a certain section of the Bible). I think Biblical-Research is a HUGE Can of Worms. It's NOT for Everyone!! There is some logic to the Catholic concept of "Just attend Mass, and do what Holy Mother Church tells you to do" regardless of what the Bible says (or supposedly says). I've suggested the concept of relying-upon Sacred Classical Music for Ecumenical and Inspirational Purposes (with the People struggling with the madness in their owns ways and timetables). The Info-War is making Simple-Faith exponentially more difficult for the Rank and File. Spiritual-Quicksand is Everywhere. The Genie is seemingly escaping from the bottle (and the Genie seems to be a Meanie)!!

    Anyway, back to The Wall Street Journal. My plan is to briefly comment on the Front-Page, and then include an editorial from the Opinion section. I'll try to NOT Include much else. This post is an exception to that rule.

    S&P 500 companies are set to report a sixth-straight quarter of falling profits, raising questions about how far stocks can rise without earnings growth. Is the music slowing?? What if the music stops?? Are we at the Pinnacle of Irrational-Exuberance?? Are the markets exhibiting the Epitome of Stupidity?? What Would Alan Greenspan Say?? He said that Brexit was just the "Tip of the Iceberg". What if Brexit was a Prelude to Disclosure?? The Truth might set us Free -- but what if the Truth crashes the markets?? I continue to suspect that most significant Events are somehow planned and staged, to achieve nefarious-ends via devious-means. What Would the Beast Supercomputer Say??

    OPEC is increasingly counting on refineries in China, known as "teapots", to boost exports. What if China and Russia will reshape the world, as the Sorcerer's New Apprentices?? What if their atheistic-leanings will spread throughout the world, as they hypothetically dominate the planet economically and militarily?? What about that nearly Twenty Trillion Dollar U.S. National Debt?? When will the economic-chickens REALLY come home to roost??

    Banks are struggling to upgrade their back-office technology to meet new reporting regulations. What will happen to people's money if the excrement REALLY contacts the refrigeration-system?? How safe are financial-records at financial-institutions?? How interconnected is Local-Banking with International-Banking?? What about Intergalactic-Banking?? Ever heard of the Chase Aldebaran Bank??

    The Fed proposed rules that could drive banks out of commodities trading by making it too expensive. Does the private Federal Reserve Bank really run the United States of America?? Is the Fed the faithful-servant of America or England?? What about Russia and Rome?? What if Russia and Rome excommunicated the God of This World?? What Would the Queen of Heaven Say?? These are Sirius-Questions.

    Goldman plans to lay off over a quarter of its investment bankers in Asia as deal activity slows. Does Satan have an office at Goldman Sachs?? What does the Devil know that we don't know?? Is this another example of the music slowing?? What is the relationship between the Federal Reserve and Goldman Sachs?? What Would the Rothschild's Say?? How is the Organizational-Structure of Planet-Earth changing presently?? Do those with the Gold RULE??!! Does God have the most money and guns in the universe?? Are we dealing with a Local-God and/or a Universal-God??

    My ears are ringing louder and louder. My nerves are becoming more and more shot. I am feeling more and more miserable. Is this retribution for my revelations and speculations?? Is my Wall Street Journal approach extricating me from the Rabbit-Hole, or am I being pulled into a much more dangerous Black Rabbit Hole?? Is it too-late to avoid hell by just shutting-up?? "You'll never work in this world again!!"?? What if the Way Things Are and the Powers That Be are now Locked-In for All-Eternity?? What if the God of This World is now a Beast-Supercomputer in an Underground-Base?? What if the Real-Deal has left the building for all-eternity?? Daniel and Revelation: Red-Herring or History of the Future??


    The NCAA Isn’t a Moral Arbiter—Nor Should It Be
    Let my school—Notre Dame—speak for itself
    on restrooms and other contentious social issues.

    By John I. Jenkins
    Sept. 25, 2016 6:10 p.m. ET

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ncaa-isnt-a-moral-arbiternor-should-it-be-1474841413

    The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) has gotten ahead of its member universities and its own constitutional principles. On Sept. 12, the association pulled all 2016-17 national-championship events out of North Carolina to protest a state law there overriding local antidiscrimination ordinances that, among other things, allowed transgender people to use the public restroom of their choice.

    House Bill 2 (H.B. 2) requires that “multiple occupancy bathroom or changing facilities” in public schools or maintained by public agencies be used according to a person’s biological sex, not gender identity. The Atlantic Coast Conference—to which my school, the University of Notre Dame, belongs—followed the NCAA’s lead and pulled all its 2016-17 championship events at “neutral” off-campus sites out of North Carolina. That includes, for example, the Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte.

    Heightened respect for the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender citizens is a signal moral achievement of our time, and harboring reservations about any retrenchment is natural. Yet some citizens may wonder about the implications of substituting gender identity for biological sex in public restrooms. While attending to the rights and sensibilities of transgender persons, it’s important to also take into account the feelings of those who might be uncomfortable undressing in front of a member of the opposite biological sex.

    Our society has become inured to public disputes over neuralgic moral and social questions. These debates will continue as the legal and political process takes its course. In May, the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division filed suit against the state of North Carolina, arguing that H.B. 2 is “in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013.” The federal government argues that discrimination based on “sex,” which is illegal, includes “gender identity.”

    North Carolina filed a counter suit, accusing the federal government of “baseless and blatant overreach.” The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond, Va., deferred to the Justice Department’s position in an April decision subsequently stayed by the Supreme Court.

    In the interim, it is not the role of the NCAA to employ the economic power it derives from member universities to attempt to influence the outcome of the legal process or change legislation. When it comes to complex, contentious social issues, universities have a critical role to play in fostering reflection, discussion and informed debate. No matter how popular or profitable certain college sports become, athletic associations should not usurp that role. I was particularly disheartened that the NCAA took action without consulting its member universities.

    The role of such associations is to foster athletic competition that is fair and serves the well-being of student-athletes. There is plenty of work for them to do in that sphere without assuming the role of spokesperson for their members on contentious political and social issues.

    In “The Idea of a University,” the 19th-century Catholic cardinal and theologian John Henry Newman wrote eloquently of colleges’ responsibility to raise the intellectual tone of public conversation. Universities, he believed, were for purifying the national debate by being places of reflection and deliberative, informed discussion. He wrote of “supplying the true principles to popular enthusiasm and fixed aims to popular aspiration,” and “giving enlargement and sobriety to the ideas of the age.”

    At a time when tweets, slogans and sound bites seem to define the substance of our political discourse; when respect for truth seems a casualty of the campaign; and when ideological polarization often hamstrings responsible governing, the nation needs universities to raise the intellectual tone of Americans’ discussions more than ever. We must strive to do a better job of providing this service. We will certainly fail if we delegate the work to athletic associations.

    Father Jenkins is the president of the University of Notre Dame.

    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:16 pm





    America’s Next Crisis Manager
    Leading a nation through disaster calls for honesty, calmness and resolve.
    Trump and Clinton have flaws, but also strengths.

    By Tevi Troy
    Sept. 25, 2016 6:27 p.m. ET

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-next-crisis-manager-1474842419

    As Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump clash on the debate stage Monday night, viewers should consider how each might handle a disaster as president. One of the topics slated for debate is “securing America,” and indeed, terrorism recently struck New York, New Jersey and Minneapolis. Hurricanes and pandemics also loom as unpredictable threats in the presidential purview.

    The campaign has been unusually focused on exactly the characteristics that are essential in a time of crisis: honesty, calmness, resolve. Unfortunately, the two major-party candidates are lacking in important ways. Mrs. Clinton’s email scandal and recent obfuscations about her health undermine her credibility with the American people, which is the basis for effective leadership in a disaster. Without it, leaders cannot count on getting people to follow difficult directives during a crisis.

    In 1976, for example, President Gerald Ford embarked on an ambitious plan to vaccinate “every man, woman, and child in the United States” against a worrisome strain of swine flu. Ford made sure to be photographed receiving the vaccination himself, but most Americans did not follow suit. Only about a quarter of the population went along with the presidential directive, which was canceled a few months later when the vaccine was linked to cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome.

    Why did so many Americans buck Ford’s inoculation program? One reason may have been the loss of presidential credibility following Richard Nixon’s resignation, which propelled Ford into the office. Luckily, that swine-flu strain was not as deadly as feared. But if a more virulent pathogen requiring mass vaccination were to emerge, would Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Trump have trouble persuading most Americans to follow instructions?

    Another vital aspect of crisis leadership is obtaining the facts before speaking and choosing words carefully—both areas where Mr. Trump struggles. During a disaster words that are insufficiently measured could cause panic or confusion. During another swine-flu outbreak in 2009, Vice President Joe Biden said on the “Today” show that he “would tell members of my family, and I have, I wouldn’t go anywhere in confined places now.” It was a careless statement that threatened to drive people away from air travel and public transportation. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had to walk back the remarks.

    In the early stages of a crisis, the wisest approach might be to say nothing. Immediately after the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush was confronted with a press corps eager for details on what had occurred and what would happen next. But conflicting stories were rampant and confusion still reigned. Press Secretary Ari Fleischer held up a makeshift sign for the president, not visible to reporters, with the words “DON’T SAY ANYTHING YET.”

    Supporters of Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump might disagree with this assessment of their flaws. They might point out the candidates’ strengths as well. Mr. Trump’s trip to flood-ravaged Louisiana in August showed that he understands the importance of making common cause with those affected by a natural disaster. It was reminiscent of his conduct during Hurricane Sandy four years ago, when he opened the atrium of Trump Tower, serving coffee and food to storm-weary New Yorkers.

    Mr. Trump also has shown optimism in responding to disasters. After 9/11, he said “we have to rebuild in some form that will be just as majestic as the World Trade Center.” In 2010, when the Deepwater Horizon oil rig was still spewing into the Gulf of Mexico, Mr. Trump called the White House to offer assistance, according to David Axelrod’s book, “Believer.” He writes that Mr. Trump said: “That admiral you have down there running this leak operation seems like a nice guy, but he doesn’t know what he’s doing. I know how to run big projects. Put me in charge of this thing, and I’ll get that leak shut down and the damage repaired.”

    What about Mrs. Clinton? As one of New York’s senators during 9/11, she took a tough stance after the attack, sounding somewhat like George W. Bush. “Every nation has to be either with us or against us,” she told Dan Rather. “Those who harbor terrorists, or who finance them, are going to pay a price.” She also helped secure $11 billion in federal disaster funds for New York.

    In a 2008 campaign ad, she coined what has become the shorthand cliché for disaster management: “It’s 3 a.m., and your children are safe and asleep,” the narrator said. “But there’s a phone in the White House and it’s ringing. . . . Your vote will decide who answers that call.” The ad went on to say that Mrs. Clinton was tested, that she already knew the world’s leaders. It’s also true that she has extensive knowledge of the federal government from her time as first lady, senator and secretary of state. This experience might help her navigate the bureaucracy in times of trouble.

    The perfect disaster manager would have George Washington’s trustworthiness, Franklin Roosevelt’s or Ronald Reagan’s communication skills and Abraham Lincoln’s steely resolve. Americans are unlikely to get those things after this election, but their importance should not be forgotten. After all, hurricanes and pathogens don’t care which party occupies the White House.

    Mr. Troy, a former deputy secretary of Health and Human Services, is the author of “Shall We Wake the President? Two Centuries of Disaster Management from the Oval Office,” out this month from Lyons Press.


    I include a lot of bad and crazy stuff, just to get us used to dealing with that sort of thing, each and every day. I continue to attempt responsible-neutrality, as I continue to slide downhill. I now have massive car-trouble, and I'm quite depressed. The world can be going to hell, and I can handle that -- but car-trouble pushes me over the edge, and I get really upset and despondent. The Bush's, Obama, the Clinton's, and Trump might all be bad and corrupt, but at the Top of the Pyramid everyone and everything are undoubtedly bad and corrupt. I feel bad and corrupt just speculating about how things might really work. Bad and corrupt people might require bad and corrupt leaders. We might be stuck with that modus operandi for a very long time. We might have what we deserve. Who knows??
    Carol wrote:
    The FBI Investigation of EmailGate Was a Sham

    NSA Analyst: We now have incontrovertible proof the Bureau never had any intention of prosecuting Hillary Clinton. From the moment the EmailGate scandal went public more than a year ago, it was obvious that the Federal Bureau of Investigation never had much enthusiasm for prosecuting Hillary Clinton or her friends. Under President Obama, the FBI grew so politicized that it became impossible for the Bureau to do its job – at least where high-ranking Democrats are concerned.

    As I observed in early July, when Director James Comey announced that the FBI would not be seeking prosecution of anyone on Team Clinton over EmailGate, the Bureau had turned its back on its own traditions of floating above partisan politics in the pursuit of justice. “Malfeasance by the FBI, its bending to political winds, is a matter that should concern all Americans, regardless of their politics,” I stated, noting that it’s never a healthy turn of events in a democracy when your secret police force gets tarnished by politics.

    Just how much Comey and his Bureau punted on EmailGate has become painfully obvious since then. Redacted FBI documents from that investigation, dumped on the Friday afternoon before the long Labor Day weekend, revealed that Hillary Clinton either willfully lied to the Bureau, repeatedly, about her email habits as secretary of state, or she is far too dumb to be our commander-in-chief.

    Worse, the FBI completely ignored the appearance of highly classified signals intelligence in Hillary’s email, including information lifted verbatim from above-Top Secret NSA reports back in 2011. This crime, representing the worst compromise of classified information in EmailGate – that the public knows of, at least – was somehow deemed so uninteresting that nobody at the FBI bothered to ask anybody on Team Clinton about it.

    This stunning omission appears highly curious to anybody versed in counterintelligence matters, not least since during Obama’s presidency, the FBI has prosecuted Americans for compromising information far less classified than what Clinton and her staff exposed on Hillary “unclassified” email server of bathroom infamy.

    This week, however, we learned that there is actually no mystery at all here. The FBI was never able to get enough traction in its investigation of EmailGate to prosecute anybody since the Bureau had already granted immunity to key players in that scandal.

    Granting immunity is a standard practice in investigations, and is sometimes unavoidable. Giving a pass to Bryan Pagliano, Hillary’s IT guru who set up her email and server, made some sense since he understands what happened here, technically speaking, and otherwise is a small fish. The wisdom of giving him a pass now seems debatable, though, since Pagliano has twice refused to testify before Congress about his part in EmailGate, blowing off subpoenas. Just this week the House Oversight Committee recommended that Pagliano be cited for contempt of Congress for his repeated no-shows. That vote was on strictly partisan lines, with not a single Democrat on the committee finding Pagliano’s ignoring of Congressional subpoenas to be worthy of censure.

    Now it turns out the FBI granted immunity to much bigger fish in the Clinton political tank. Three more people got a pass from the Bureau in exchange for their cooperation: Hillary lawyer Heather Samuelson, State Department IT boss John Bental, and – by far the most consequential – Cheryl Mills, who has been a Clinton flunky-cum-factotum for decades.

    Mills served as the State Department’s Chief of Staff and Counselor throughout Hillary’s tenure as our nation’s top diplomat. Granting her immunity in EmailGate, given her deep involvement in that scandal – including the destruction of tens of thousands of emails so they could not be handed over to the FBI – now seems curious, to say the least, particularly because Mills sat in on Hillary’s chat with the Bureau regarding EmailGate.

    This was in fact so highly irregular that Jason Chaffetz, chair of the House Oversight Committee, pronounced himself “absolutely stunned” by the FBI’s granting of immunity to Cheryl Mills – which he learned of only on Friday. “No wonder they couldn’t prosecute a case,” Rep. Chaffetz observed of Comey’s Bureau: “They were handing out immunity deals like candy.”

    Not to mention that Mills has a longstanding and well-deserved reputation in Washington for helping the Clintons dodge investigation after investigation. When Bill and Hillary need a fixer to help them bury the bodies – as they say inside the Beltway – trusty Cheryl Mills has been on call for the last quarter-century.

    She played a key role in the Whitewater scandal of the 1990s – and so did James Comey. Fully two decades ago, when Comey was a Senate investigator, he tried to get Mills, then deputy counsel to Bill Clinton’s White House, to hand over relevant documents. Mills went full dog-ate-my-homework, claiming that a burglar had taken the files, leading Comey to unavoidably conclude that she was obstructing his investigation. Mills’ cover-up, the Senate investigators assessed, encompassed “destruction of documents” and “highly improper” behavior.

    Such misconduct is a career-ender for normal people in Washington, but not for Cheryl Mills, who over the last several decades has followed the Clintons everywhere they go. Mills has proven her loyalty to Clinton, Inc. time and again, and that loyalty has been rewarded with a pass on prosecution in EmailGate.

    To say nothing of the fact that as chief of staff at Foggy Bottom, Mills was in no way functioning as Hillary’s personal lawyer, as Clinton advocates have contended. Even her other title, State Department Counselor, has nothing to do with legal matters, despite the name. That role is traditionally assigned to an esteemed foreign policy guru who is supposed to offer sage counsel to the secretary of state. Mills’ predecessor as Counselor was Eliot Cohen, one of the country’s preeminent scholars of international relations. Leave it to the Clintons to turn that job over to one of their trusted cabal, translating Counselor in mafia fashion as consigliere.

    “The whole thing stinks,” explained a retired FBI senior official who professed dismay about the state of his former employer. “This was impossible in my time, unthinkable,” he rued, expressing shock that the Bureau allowed Mills to remain involved in the investigation, including acting as Hillary’s personal lawyer, despite her own immunity.

    How exactly Cheryl Mills got immunity, and what its terms were, is the long-awaited “smoking gun” in EmailGate, the clear indication that, despite countless man-hours expended on the year-long investigation, James Comey and his FBI never had any intention of prosecuting Hillary Clinton – or anyone – for her mishandling of classified information as secretary of state.

    Why Comey decided to give Mills a get-out-of-jail-free card is something that needs proper investigation. This is raw, naked politics in all its ugly and cynical glory. Corruption is the tamest word to describe this sort of dirty backroom deal which makes average Americans despise politics and politicians altogether.

    How high in this administration EmailGate went is the key question, and it’s been reopened by the latest tranche of redacted documents that the FBI released – on Friday afternoon, as usual. There are lots of tantalizing tidbits here, including the fact that early in Hillary’s term at Foggy Bottom, State Department officials were raising awkward legal questions about her highly irregular email and server arrangements.

    Most intriguing, however, is the revelation that Hillary was communicating with President Obama via personal email, and he was using an alias. The alias he used with Hillary, and apparently others, was withheld by the FBI, and let it be said the fact that the president wanted to disguise his identity in unclassified email is not all that odd.

    What is odd, however, is the fact that Obama previously told the media that he only learned of Hillary’s irregular email and server arrangements from “news reports.” How the president failed to notice that he was emailing his top diplomat at her personal, clintonmail.com address, not a state.gov account, particularly when they were discussing official business, is something Congress may want to find out – since certainly the FBI won’t.

    Indeed, when she was being interviewed by the Bureau, Hillary’s ever-faithful sidekick Huma Abedin, was asked about President Obama’s emailing to Hillary using an alias. “How is this not classified?” inquired the mystified Abedin.

    How indeed?

    The fact that the FBI redacted the contents of that email indicates that is was classified, although it was sent to Hillary’s personal email and transited her personal server.

    This, like so many aspects of EmailGate, seems destined to remain a mystery, at least for now. The State Department won’t release the full collection of Clinton’s emails until after our November 8 election. Just this week a Federal judge blasted Foggy Bottom for its slow-rolling: “The State Department needs to start cooperating to the fullest extent possible. They are not perceived to be doing that.” Nevertheless, the public won’t get to see all of Hillary’s emails until after Americans decide who the next president will be.

    For Hillary Clinton, winning that election may be a legal necessity to protect her from prosecution. Congress, animated by these latest revelations of illegality and corruption, will now pursue her with vigor, while an FBI in the hands of Donald Trump seems likely to show an interest in EmailGate which the Bureau never possessed under President Obama.

    Regardless, this story has emerged yet again to tar Hillary Clinton’s reputation at the worst possible time, when her campaign is lagging in the polls. We can be sure that her Republican opponent will mention EmailGate in Monday’s inaugural presidential debate. The Democratic nominee should have coherent answers about her email and server at the ready if she wants to avoid a debacle before the cameras.

    John Schindler is a security expert and former National Security Agency analyst and counterintelligence officer. A specialist in espionage and terrorism, he’s also been a Navy officer and a War College professor. He’s published four books and is on Twitter at @20committee. http://observer.com/2016/09/the-fbi-investigation-of-emailgate-was-a-sham/
    Carol wrote:Bob, I think you may be missing the big picture. Hillary is a war hawk along with her supporters. They make money off of war profiteering. She also is a manipulator behind the scene of illegally making big money supporting this war profiteering effort. When you look at the financial history one thing to take note of is just how bad it is with banks imploding from their manipulation of fiat money. The bond market is crashing along with Derivatives. Banks are now going toward negative interest rates. The last implosion was the 2007 bank bail-ins where millions from the US tax payers money went to bail out Europe's banks and the euro last time.

    You may also notice that the US is on the brink of war if you've been reading the Russian news. History tends to repeat itself. In the past the cabal creates war to monetarily rebuild their wealth. It's what they do.

    In addition, the US is about to take a huge financial dive. Within weeks. The housing market is also about to take a dive.

    Deutsche Bank Slumps to Fresh Record Low on Capital Concerns and guess what? I read where the US has been sending millions to them in hopes of STALLING THIS. Why? Because of this headline on Zero hedge: Global Stocks Tumble, US Futures Slide On Deutsche Bank Fears, Central Bank And Commodity Concerns and this Deutsche Bank Stock Plunges To All Time Low After Merkel Rules Out State Bailout; Default Risk Surges. Then there is this headline: Bond Risk Crashes To 2-Year Lows As VIX Shorts Fold.

    With Clinton the government is planning to confiscate the majority of our assets.

    Confiscation of Property: Clinton proposed a new top Estate Tax of 65% on people with net worth over $500 million. Her website goes to great length to obscure the actual policy details, including the fact that taxes would increase on lower value estates as well. See the total lack of transparency here, where the text simply refers to going back to 2009 rates. It is clear that the intent of the page is to mislead, not inform.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-25/dilbert-creator-scott-adams-explains-why-he-switched-his-endorsement-trump

    Then there is also the collapse of Hedge Funds: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-25/why-hedge-funds-remain-worst-performing-asset-class-2016

    The world's economy is on the brink of implosion. Meanwhile, it is also positioning itself to become asset backed according to Basil III accord. Basel III is a set of international banking regulations developed by the Bank for International Settlements in order to promote stability in the international financial system. The purpose of Basel III is to reduce the ability of banks to damage the economy by taking on excess risk. (Problems with the original accord became evident during the subprime crisis in 2007. 2007 is primed to rinse and repeat within the next few weeks unless some major changes are made.

    Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/10/understanding-basel-3-regulations.asp#ixzz4LNL3aMpJ

    Then examine one of Clinton's primary financial supporters, Soros who funded BLM (Black Lives Matter) and paid for agitators to create the violent fiasco in NC. 75% of the people (agitators) arrested were bussed in from out-of-state. Why? Most likely to incite violence in hopes of creating a race war and martial law to keep Obama in office and take attention off of how ill Clinton really is.

    Please keep in mind that with Clinton it is business as usual. With Trump it is someone who is realistic about what's in the articles below and wants to deal with this. Trump wants to fix things not create more wealth for himself like Clinton has been doing her entire political career.

    The US is instigating the following: US Slams Russian "Barbarism" In Syria; Moscow Responds Peace "Almost Impossible Now" The US wants to create a war to take attention off of just how bad the economy is and the elections. Anything is fair game to them to divert attention from their illegal activities. Basically the US and Clinton (because I heard her with my own ears talk about taking a stand with Russia) are war posturing. War is not good for humanity or the planet - BUT it is GOOD FOR THE GLOBALISTS THE WAR PROFITEERS. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-26/us-slams-russian-barbarism-syria-moscow-responds-peace-almost-impossible-now

    26 Incredible Facts About The Economy That Every American Should Know Before The Trump-Clinton Debate Are you ready for the most anticipated presidential debate in decades?  It is being projected that Monday’s debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton could potentially break the all-time record of 80 million viewers that watched Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter debate back in 1980.  Many Americans probably hope to see some personal fireworks between the two nominees, but the two candidates have both expressed a desire to focus on substantive issues.  There will likely be quite a few questions about the economy, and without a doubt this is an area where Trump and Clinton have some very sharp differences.  The mainstream media would have us believe that the U.S. economy is in pretty good shape, and if that was true that would seem to favor Clinton.  But is it actually true?  The following are 26 incredible facts about the economy that every American should know for the Trump-Clinton debate…

    #1 When Barack Obama entered the White House, the U.S. government was 10.6 trillion dollars in debt.  Today, the U.S. government is 19.5 trillion dollars in debt, and Obama still has several months to go until the end of his second term.  That means that an average of more than 1.1 trillion dollars will be added to the national debt during his presidency.  We are stealing a tremendous amount of consumption from the future to make the economy look much, much better than it otherwise would be, and we are systematically destroying the future in the process.

    #2 As Obama prepares to leave office, the rate at which we are adding to the national debt is actually increasing.  During the fiscal year that is just ending, the U.S. government has added another 1.36 trillion dollars to the national debt.

    #3 It isn’t just the federal government that is on a massive debt binge.  Total U.S. corporate debt has nearly doubled since the end of 2007.

    #4 Default rates on U.S. corporate debt are the highest that they have been since the last financial crisis.

    #5 Corporate profits have fallen for five quarters in a row, and it is being projected that it will be six in a row once the final numbers for the third quarter come in.

    #6 During the month of August, commercial bankruptcy filings were up 29 percent compared to the same period a year ago.

    #7 The rate of new business formation in the United States dropped dramatically during the last recession and has hovered at that new lower level ever since.

    #8 The Wall Street Journal says that this is the weakest “economic recovery” since 1949.

    #9 Barack Obama is on track to be the only president in all of U.S. history to never have a single year when the U.S. economy grew by at least 3 percent.

    #10 In August, the Cass Freight Index dipped to the lowest level that we have seen for that month since 2010.  What this means is that the total amount of stuff being shipped around the country by air, by rail and by truck is really dropping, and this is a clear sign that real economic activity is slowing down in a major way.

    #11 Capital expenditure growth has turned negative, and history has shown that this is almost always followed by a new recession.

    #12 The percentage of Americans with a full-time job has been sitting at about 48 percent since 2010.  You have to go back to 1983 to find a time when full-time employment in this country was so low.

    #13 The labor force participation rate peaked back in 1997 and has been steadily falling ever since.

    #14 The “inactivity rate” for men in their prime working years is actually higher today than it was during the last recession.

    #15 The United States has lost more than five million manufacturing jobs since the year 2000 even though our population has become much larger over that time frame.

    #16 If you can believe it, the total number of government employees now outnumbers the total number of manufacturing employees in the United States by almost 10 million.

    #17 One study found that median incomes have fallen in more than 80 percent of the major metropolitan areas in this country since the year 2000.

    #18 According to the Social Security Administration, 51 percent of all American workers make less than $30,000 a year.

    #19 The rate of homeownership in the U.S. has fallen every single year while Barack Obama has been in the White House.

    #20 Approximately one out of every five young adults are currently living with their parents.

    #21 The auto loan debt bubble recently surpassed the one trillion dollar mark for the first time ever.

    #22 Auto loan delinquencies are at the highest level that we have seen since the last recession.

    #23 In 1971, 61 percent of all Americans were considered to be “middle class”, but now middle class Americans have actually become a minority in this nation.

    #24 One recent survey discovered that 62 percent of all Americans have less than $1,000 in savings.


    #25 According to the Federal Reserve, 47 percent of all Americans could not even pay an unexpected $400 emergency room bill without borrowing the money from somewhere or selling something.

    #26 The number of New Yorkers sleeping in homeless shelters just set a brand new record high, and the number of families permanently living in homeless shelters is up a whopping 60 percent over the past five years.

    Despite all of the facts that you just read, the truth is that there is one particular group of people that have been doing quite well during the Obama years.  I really like how Charles Hugh Smith made this point in one of his recent articles…

    The top 5% of households that dominate government, Corporate America, finance, the Deep State and the media have been doing extraordinarily well during the past eight years of stock market bubble (oops, I mean boom) and “recovery,” and so they report that the economy is doing splendidly because they’ve done splendidly.

    By recklessly creating money out of thin air and pumping it into the financial markets, the Federal Reserve has greatly enriched the elite, but they have also dramatically increased the gap between the very wealthy and the rest of us.  Since he has been in the White House during this time, Barack Obama has gotten the credit for this temporary stock market bubble, and most of the elite love Obama anyway.

    But in the process the stage has been set for the greatest economic and financial implosion in U.S. history, and the pain that is coming is going to affect every man, woman and child in this country.

    During the debate, Trump and Clinton will talk a lot about tinkering with tax rates and regulations, but those measures are essentially going to be meaningless when compared to the massive economic tsunami that is coming. The next president is going to inherit the biggest economic problems that this nation has ever faced, and it is going to take a miracle of Biblical proportions to turn the U.S. economy in the right direction.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-26/26-incredible-facts-about-economy-every-american-should-know-trump-clinton-debate

    Given that Obama and Clinton are significant players in creating many of these financial problems there is no way they can fix them. It will only get worse. At least Trump, who himself once was 1 billion in debt, learned how to tighten his belt and worked his ass off to rebuild a multi-billion dollar empire. Trump is a builder and creates thousands of jobs. He is better equipped on how to reduce debt and make money then any other candidate - and that is the bottom line, isn't it. Stay out of war, build partnerships, get people back to work, rebuild the nations infrastructure at all levels. He is a vision on how this can and will happen under his leadership. And his millions of followers share that vision. They too feel he is the only voice who is speaking for them as obviously the other politicians along with Obama failed them.







    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Oct 30, 2016 3:47 pm






    I just watched The Matrix for the first-time (a couple of days ago), and I think I might've subsequently encountered at least one aspect of the Matrix Oracle!! She said "I'll help you!" I said "I need all the help I can get!" She said "That's for sure!" Honest. I've repeatedly touched upon this, but I seem to be fascinated by a certain personality-type, especially in black-women!! Consider the Oracle in The Matrix, Kate in East of Eden, Rachel Constantine in Contact, Dr. Josephine Mataros in Earth: Final Conflict, Starbuck's mother in Battlestar Galactica, Sherry Shriner, Gabriel in Constantine, et al. Once, at the Crystal Cathedral, I noticed a very smart and distinguished black-woman after a service, and I overheard one choir-member say to another "Is that her? Yes!! That's her!!" One of these choir-members had previously told me I was "in too deep"!! Years later, a man who I never talked to about theology, said "You're in too deep with theology"!! Another man once emphasized my theological-connection, even though I had never talked to him about theology!! Notice that the Oracle tells Neo that he seems to be waiting for another life!! Think about what I've said about being a completely ignorant fool in this life, but hoping to be some sort of consultant in a cool-location in my next life!! This is probably insignificant, but it's sort of creepy to me!!

    Think long and hard about all of my posts on page 7 of The United States of the Solar System (Book 3) thread, and PLEASE Talk to Me About It!! BTW -- a Catholic organist once told me that a priest had privately asked her, "What if God is a Black Woman??" What Would the Black Madonna Say?? Once again, I need to stop. I've had nothing but trouble with my computers over the last few days. Was it something I said?? What if a Nefarious Matrix is a necessary evil?? What if a Nefarious Mediatrix is a necessary evil?? What if the God of This World MUST be a bad@ss?? Should we simply have the God of This Universe instead of a God of This World?? How might this question relate to Our Father, Who Art in Heaven?? Think long and hard about the Substitutionary-Atonement, and Christ as Priest and Mediator in the Heavenly-Sanctuary. I could say a lot more, but I'd rather not. Not now. Some of us should probably read (straight-through, over and over) volumes 1-7 of The SDA Bible Commentary (Genesis to Revelation) while listening to the complete-works of J.S. Bach. This really isn't a marketable job-skill, but it might be more important than any of us can imagine.

    In high-school, I discussed "Homeostasis" with a Medical Doctor (in one of the waiting-rooms) at the Glendale Adventist Medical Center. In my twenties, in the Loma Linda University Medical Center, I told a Medical Doctor that "God has a nasty job, but somebody has to do it!!" I thought he was going to call "Security"!! I'm simply attempting to understand the so-called "Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan in the Conflict of the Ages" in an Alternative-Research and Science-Fictional Context. But this has just about completely-destroyed me. Faith can equal Delusion. Facing-Reality can equal Losing One's Faith. Perhaps Positive-Thinking in the Context of Possibility-Thinking is a Middle-Way or Happy-Medium. What Would Dr. Robert H. Schuller Say?? What Would Seymour Cray Say?? What Would Mr. Edgars Say?? What Would Sherry Shriner Say?? What Would Brother Rich Say?? What Would Edgar Mitchell Say?? What Would Mitchell Say?? What Would Sister Angie Say?? What Would the Humble Janitor Say?? What Would Anchor Say?? What Would Anubis Do?? What Would Cicero, Cleopatra, Mark Antony, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, King David, King Solomon, the Queen of Sheba, Bull, Ram, Enlil, Enki, Christ, Antichrist, Ra, Anti-Ra, the Tokra, the Lamb Slain from the Foundation of the World, HAL 9000, Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer, the God of This World, the Queen of Heaven, Josephus, Lord Ba'al, Kitesh, Vala Mal Doran, John Sheridan, Anna Sheridan, Delenn, Anna and the V's, Ellen Goa'uld White, the Piso Family, and the Apostle Paul Say?? I obviously need to stop. In ten-years, I'll probably be babbling to myself in a secret-government nut-house (instead of babbling to myself in my car). I'm going to try to just post those WSJ editorials. I now return this thread to its originally-stated purpose. I just received an official-warning, telling me this website is unsafe!! I've known THAT for YEARS!! Namaste, Godspeed, Mea Culpa, and Geronimo.



















    http://www.wsj.com/articles/clicking-our-way-to-the-grave-1476916500
    Clicking Our Way to the Grave
    By Steven Levy
    Oct. 19, 2016 6:35 p.m. ET

    A hallmark of our hyper-connected age is that while our ability to concentrate is at a scary low, the machinery constructed to seize our attention has gone nuclear. Every day we willingly tumble into rabbit holes of triviality, clicking on celebrity prom pictures, watching best-forgotten YouTube videos and feeling bad because our friends’ Facebook profiles portray lives more glamorous than ours.

    In “The Attention Merchants,” Tim Wu casts this phenomenon not as merely an accumulation of distractions but as an intentional and meretricious diversion. He identifies us as victims of a slow-motion crime, a more-than-century-long hijacking of our inner lives by commercial interests that began in 1833. That was when a 23-year-old printer named Benjamin Day invented the modern newspaper by using low prices and salacious content to build circulation—then packaging his audience to advertisers. That business model has adapted to every technological advance since the printing press: radio, television and, most devastatingly, the internet. In the process, commercial promotion has penetrated into every corner of society; Mr. Wu begins with an account of a California school district that raised money by opening its doors to advertising targeted at the captive audience within.

    Mr. Wu, who is known for coining the term “net neutrality” and is the author of “The Master Switch,” a book about technology monopolies, has a definite point of view on this matter: He hates it. But instead of bludgeoning us with data and diatribes, he deploys a series of capsule histories. We meet Jules Chéret, who in the 1860s plastered the once pristine edifices of Paris with eye-catching posters; Lord Kitchener, who helped win World War I by packaging patriotic messages to recruit British youth; Claude Hopkins, whose pitches for patent medicines in the 1890s led to a methodology of “scientific advertising” designed to create needs where none existed; and Walter Templin, the toothpaste executive who used a Pepsodent-sponsored radio series (“Amos ’n’ Andy”) to drive advertising deep into American living rooms.

    Though many of Mr. Wu’s characters in the first half of the book are fascinating, to our jaded ears their activities are not particularly shocking. It’s nice to know that snake-oil salesmen actually sold snake oil but not terribly surprising. As lifelong media observers, we already know that advertising shaped network television, and we may have even read one of the many previous accounts (notably by David Halberstam) of the rivalry between NBC’s technophile David Sarnoff and CBS’s patrician marketer Bill Paley. Most of us have already figured out that People Magazine, Oprah and reality TV have raised the stakes in what Mr. Wu calls the Celebrity-Industrial Complex. One reads those pages waiting for the good stuff to show up—the internet, where attention merchants really captured our brains.

    Sure enough, Mr. Wu unveils an online rogue’s gallery that includes Steve Case, Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg and Jonah Peretti, co-founder of the Huffington Post and his Frankenstein monster of clickbait, BuzzFeed. Mr. Wu is best when analyzing how the internet has taken the attention wars to a new level of sophistication, with machine-learning algorithms, tracking cookies and listicles, culminating in his citation of a scientist who laments: “The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads.” Mr. Wu is particularly harsh on the Huffington Post, which, he concludes, was never meant to be a business, “just a giant vacuum sucking up human attention.”

    In short, Mr. Wu thinks we blew it—he believes there was an opportunity lost early on when the internet went commercial instead of becoming a PBS-style public service. It’s tough to see how the Net would have come to occupy its current essential role in our lives if that had happened. But maybe that’s his point.

    Still, Mr. Wu isn’t totally pessimistic. He believes that the war on our consciousness is somewhat cyclical; when attention merchants get emboldened by their success, they overreach, and outraged consumers and regulators push back. The 1950s game-show scandals—created by producers who understood that rigging contests produced maximum drama—led to reforms. The social movements of the 1960s, as Mr. Wu sees it, were a reaction against commercialism. Thus Timothy Leary, the Harvard proponent of LSD, becomes one of the characters in Mr. Wu’s saga, urging people to “turn on, tune in, drop out.”

    More recently, viewers are choosing to watch television on Netflix and other services that eschew advertisements. Yet those reversals seem only temporary, because, to Mr. Wu’s dismay, advertising remains the default business model. Internet moguls are perpetuators of Benjamin Day’s original sin—a business whose product is not the content but the audience. Google and Facebook would presumably argue that they are delivering genuine value to their users, but Mr. Wu will hear none of that.

    Only as his tale concludes does Mr. Wu suggest strategies to thwart this trespass on our senses. His solutions, however, are vague and implausible. Can you really imagine a voluntary “human reclamation project” beating back the furies of Madison Avenue, Silicon Valley and Wall Street? As Mr. Wu himself notes, commercial interests are all too adept at co-opting such revolutions. “The game is never lost, only awaiting the next spin of the wheel,” he writes. “As a mode of production, capitalism is a perfect chameleon; it has no disabling convictions but profit and so can cater to any desire, even those inimical to it.” Even Leary’s famous slogan wound up in a commercial for Squirt, a carbonated grapefruit beverage.

    Mr. Wu himself unconsciously provides a hint of how tempting it is to take advantage of a captive audience. Every so often—nine times, by my count—he refers us to his previous tome, “The Master Switch,” for further reading. He does not stuff those references in the back with the other sources but plants them as footnotes under the main text. It’s like a running product-promotion zipper at the bottom of the page.
    He had our attention—so why not?

    Mr. Levy is editor in chief of Backchannel and author of “In the Plex: How Google Works, Thinks, and Shapes Our Lives.”


    Carol wrote:
    NOTICE...

    COULDN'T ACCESS THE FORUM TODAY?

    THIS MAY HAPPEN AGAIN TO THE LOCATION WHERE OUR SERVER IS LOCATED.

    RELAX AND TRY BACK LATER. IT SEEMS TO LAST FOR A FEW HOURS,

    THEN IS BACK UP AGAIN.


    Massive DDoS Attack Incoming! Internet going down!
    Massive DDOS Attack is underway. It's targeting all Level3 Communications
    which host all the popular websites and services.


    http://downdetector.com/status/level3/map/
    mudra wrote:
    Vote all you want. The secret government won’t change.

    The people we elect aren’t the ones calling the shots, says Tufts University’s Michael Glennon

    The voters who put Barack Obama in office expected some big changes. From the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping to Guantanamo Bay to the Patriot Act, candidate Obama was a defender of civil liberties and privacy, promising a dramatically different approach from his predecessor.

    But six years into his administration, the Obama version of national security looks almost indistinguishable from the one he inherited. Guantanamo Bay remains open. The NSA has, if anything, become more aggressive in monitoring Americans. Drone strikes have escalated. Most recently it was reported that the same president who won a Nobel Prize in part for promoting nuclear disarmament is spending up to $1 trillion modernizing and revitalizing America’s nuclear weapons.

    Why did the face in the Oval Office change but the policies remain the same? Critics tend to focus on Obama himself, a leader who perhaps has shifted with politics to take a harder line. But Tufts University political scientist Michael J. Glennon has a more pessimistic answer: Obama couldn’t have changed policies much even if he tried.

    Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way. In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.

    Glennon cites the example of Obama and his team being shocked and angry to discover upon taking office that the military gave them only two options for the war in Afghanistan: The United States could add more troops, or the United States could add a lot more troops. Hemmed in, Obama added 30,000 more troops.

    Glennon’s critique sounds like an outsider’s take, even a radical one. In fact, he is the quintessential insider: He was legal counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a consultant to various congressional committees, as well as to the State Department. “National Security and Double Government” comes favorably blurbed by former members of the Defense Department, State Department, White House, and even the CIA. And he’s not a conspiracy theorist: Rather, he sees the problem as one of “smart, hard-working, public-spirited people acting in good faith who are responding to systemic incentives”—without any meaningful oversight to rein them in.

    How exactly has double government taken hold? And what can be done about it? Glennon spoke with Ideas from his office at Tufts’ Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. This interview has been condensed and edited.

    read on: Arrow https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/10/18/vote-all-you-want-the-secret-government-won-change/jVSkXrENQlu8vNcBfMn9sL/story.html

    Love Always
    mudra

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sherrytalkradio/2016/10/25/10-24-16-monday-night-with-sherry-shriner

    I listen to each and every Sherry Shriner show, but I've never contributed, I'm not an Orgone-Warrior, I don't do Bible-Codes, and I never know when the truth ends and the bullshit begins on her shows. I think she is a Significant Individual of Interest, but I don't want to talk about it. The sad and scary thing about This Present Madness is that the more I learn, the more I wonder if a lot of the way things really work is somehow necessary, in some twisted and abstract sense?! I poke and prod at the way I think things might really work, but I never make a big deal out of it. Am I the bad-guy if I try to learn and reveal the truth? Am I the bad-guy if I look the other way? I suspect that the PTB will make sure I'm the bad-guy, no matter what I think, say, and do (or don't think, say, and do). As I've said so many times, I don't think this is a game I can win (in this particular incarnation). BTW -- I think I might've talked to Augur, from Earth: Final Conflict, but I didn't realize it until after he was gone!! He looked and acted like Augur, and he wore funny glasses!! I'll kick myself for the rest of my life!!


    I was going to do some personal commentary within this thread, but I've sort of moved on. I think I've gotten myself in enough trouble already. My plan is to just post some editorials and book reviews. That will keep me somewhat visible on this site, without digging my grave even deeper than it already is. I honestly have some serious medical issues, but I don't wish to talk about them. This is going to keep me distracted for a while, which might be just as well. My Renegade Days are probably over. I'm not waving the white-flag, but I'm going somewhat incognito. I know I can't keep up, and I suspect that I'll be highly miserable for the rest of my life. The medical stuff probably contributes to this, but it probably isn't primarily responsible for it. I honestly don't think there's anything I can do about it, but once again, I don't want to talk about it. Just enjoy reading what I post. The featured authors are MUCH better writers than I'll ever be, so why should I bother writing what no one reads?? Actually, I might not post at all. Just subscribe to The Wall Street Journal, and read Section A, each and every day. Namaste.

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/smuggling-truth-past-the-censors-1477523888


    Smuggling Truth Past the Censors

    Yan Lianke’s burlesque of a nation driven insane by money is
    equally a satire of some of the excesses of the Chinese Revolution.

    By
    Sam Sacks

    There are many things you can’t write about in China. Anything that challenges the official accounts of  Mao Zedong and other prominent Communist Party officials is forbidden. So, too, are works that touch on the Great Famine, the Cultural Revolution or the Tiananmen Square massacre. It’s equally forbidden to criticize the government’s human-rights record, its occupation of Tibet and its crackdowns on minorities. Books will even be pulled off the shelf because they’re judged to be deleterious to public morals. And since the Central Propaganda Department keeps its rules secret, there are surely countless other subjects and incitements considered off limits.

    So how exactly is satire thriving in the country? What’s left to satirize? The answer is capitalism. Since China privatized its markets, and its economy began growing at breakneck speed, novelists have been free to excoriate the greed and corruption that the change has wrought. The best known of these satirists is the 2012 Nobel Laureate Mo Yan, who blends a gonzo magic realism with crude comedy to take on serious contemporary issues like industrial farming (“Pow!”) and the One Child Policy (“Frog”). But he is only the tip of the iceberg.  Zhu Wen (“I Love Dollars”) and  Yu Hua (“Brothers”) have also written lewd, chaotic and farcical send-ups of the culture of runaway materialism and the injustices of the wealth gap.

    No contemporary satirist has had more experience with China’s censors than  Yan Lianke. His first novel, “The Sun Goes Down,” was banned in 1994 due to its depiction of the People’s Liberation Army, and Mr. Yan was forced to write self-criticisms for six months. His 2005 work “Serve the People!,” about a bored army housewife during the Cultural Revolution who gets aroused by tearing up copies of Mao’s Little Red Book, was denounced by the Central Propaganda Department: “This novella slanders Mao Zedong, the army, and is overflowing with sex.” The certainty of censorship meant that his 2011 novel about the Great Leap Forward, “The Four Books,” couldn’t even find a publisher in mainland China, appearing only in Hong Kong and abroad. But when his works are published at home, they are wildly successful.

    His latest, “The Explosion Chronicles,” was a best seller in China in 2013. Adopting the style of an ancient historical record (here in a lively translation by  Carlos Rojas), it tells of the rise of Explosion from a tiny mountain village to a city rivaling Beijing. Leading the ascent is Explosion’s mayor  Kong Mingliang and his wife  Zhu Ying, children of rival clans who detest each other but understand the expediency of intermarriage. Kong made his fortune stealing from the cargo trains that pass through the village. Zhu is a wealthy brothel owner. With this background in crime and a governing approach centered on bribery and intimidation, they elevate Explosion to the status of town, then county seat, then world-bestriding metropolis.

    This darkly absurd history trucks freely with the fantastic—the city’s airport is built in less than a week—but many of the more brazen events are taken straight from the news. Echoing widely reported military scandals, Kong buys his incompetent brother a high-ranking position in the army. Another chapter concerns a space-saving edict requiring that the dead be cremated rather than buried. It triggers a rash of suicides among the elderly who want to be traditionally buried before the law comes into force.

    Mr. Yan’s burlesque of a nation driven insane by money is equally a satire of some of the excesses of the Chinese Revolution. Aspects of Explosion’s unchecked expansion tacitly reflect the transformations of the Great Leap Forward, from the mass confiscation of land—here it’s taken for roads and fancy houses rather than collectives—to the cult of personality that arises around Kong. Late in the book, he addresses a field of animals, demanding that they go somewhere else so that he can erect another building. Chinese readers will recognize in the ridiculous scene a parallel to Mao’s 1958 campaign against grain-eating sparrows and insects, which wrecked the country’s ecological balance. “I am Mayor Kong. Did you hear me when I said I wanted to immediately construct a building here?” he shouts. But as before, the natural world is unimpressed.

    Compared to “The Explosion Chronicles,” Ge Fei’s “The Invisibility Cloak” (2012) is a model of reserve and understatement. Yet it too, in the stylish translation by  Canaan Morse, is a sly and damning piece of work. The narrator is Mr. Cui, a curmudgeonly everyman who puts together bespoke sound equipment for Beijing’s nouveau riche. When Mr. Cui accepts a commission to help a client “acquire the highest quality sound system in the world,” he enters the orbit of a shadowy millionaire named Ding Caichen, who emanates distinct auras of violence and desperation.

    Is Ding a mafioso or something even more dangerous? Mr. Cui doesn’t want to know, but the commission keeps entangling him in the man’s business, giving him cryptic and terrifying glimpses of the savagery beneath Beijing’s shiny veneer. Ge Fei craftily evokes taboo subjects. He pokes fun at old revolutionary opera songs like “Overthrow the American Imperialist Wolves.” When Mr. Cui demonstrates the sound system for his gangster client, he plays a record of  Erik Satie, noting that “a lot of people secretly like his music” and that he was the teacher of Debussy. For Chinese readers this will conjure the episode during the Cultural Revolution when musicians were arrested and abused for defending Debussy’s music.

    The book’s title refers to the rumor of a magical garment that allows one to walk around unseen. Mr. Cui dismisses the tale, but his own power is his ability to move inconspicuously through Beijing’s brutally competitive society, keeping “one eye closed and one eye open.” Ge Fei offers a wry example for Chinese novelists hoping to follow a more cautious path than Yan Lianke has: Don’t call attention to yourself; master the tools of allusion, metaphor and silence. In these ways the writer can smuggle vital truths past the censors.

    Mr. Sacks writes the fiction chronicle in the Weekend Journal.

    mudra wrote:
    When the Survivors of Atlantis Wake Up, p 1 - Mohenjo-daro and the Mycenae civilisation

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk-o42NNQm4


    Carbon Dating and the Stolen History - p 2 / When the Survivors of Atlantis Wake Up
    newearth


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2xUCyi727Y


    When the Survivors of Atlantis Wake Up, p 1 - Mohenjo-daro and the Mycenae civilisation

    The Really Old Books, Do We Have Any Left? - p 3 / When the Survivors of Atlantis Wake Up

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KmQPcNwDww


    The Truth about the Reformation and the Gregorian Calendar Tricks - p 4 / When the Survivors Wake Up

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=214QYY6h4Sc


    The Stolen History of All Religions - p 5 / When the Survivors of Atlantis Wake Up

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfqSyFG3fMY


    Love Always
    mudra
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I keep thinking that proper scholarly Biblical-Studies might be "practice" for dealing with the really-old and really-hidden historical-books. An Individual of Interest feels that we should exist without physicality of any sort. They speak of "fallen and sinful human-nature" which seems to imply that the Creator or Genetic-Engineer of Humanity is somehow responsible for Sin. What Would Azazel Say?? I think there must be a Better-Genesis hidden-away in some subterranean-channel, which might reveal the real-deal regarding the History of the Human-Being. I'd love to pursue this further, but my nervous-system just can't take it. Others will have to do the heavy-lifting in this area of research. I obviously want things to be better for all-concerned, but the lack of conversation regarding all of the above is really pathetic and negligent. I'm not told the real-story, yet I am held accountable for not knowing the seemingly unknowable. I can't make responsible determinations without the absolute-truth. Don't hold your breath, waiting for a definitive resolution of a seemingly ancient battle between disembodied-spirits and incarnated-physicality. I continue to believe that humanity is on the brink of extinction. Now is the time to get our facts straight. Tomorrow might be too late. I'm Sirius.


    orthodoxymoron wrote:I've  been modeling a certain personality and editorial-slant on this site, which I am certainly not in real-life. In reality, I'm just a stupid-dud, but online, I step into my Dr. Who Police Call-Box, and raise some internet-hell!! Fortunately, my cyber-experiment is pretty-much over, and the real private-research is just beginning, but I doubt that I'll talk about the results (online or in real-life). This is sort of like the guy who gets a bar-fight going, and then leaves the bar, as everything goes to hell!! What if that's sort of what happened in the Ancient Garden of Eden?? What if most of us are Ancient-Aliens who got involved in a Galactic Bar-Room Brawl??







    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:00 pm

    I recently found all of my files nefariously wiped from my new-computer. Was it something I said?? Can't we all just get along?? What if simply continuing this thread (in an infinite number of books) is as close to a mind-mainframe link as I should aspire to?? Should I remain somewhat hamstrung?? How About a Primo-Laptop (with Encrypted-Satellite Absolute-Access InterPlaNet) and a 600 Square-Foot Office-Apartment Beneath Colorado Springs (with a Red-Phone Hotline to James Dobson)?? BTW -- An Individual of Interest recently indicated that they didn't agree with Noam Chomsky. They previously seemed to be troubled by the Jesuits. What Would Seymour Cray Say?? What Would Archeologist Belloq (in Raiders of the Lost Ark ) Say?? What Would Mr. Edgars (in Babylon 5) Say?? What Would Edgar Mitchell Say?? What Would Mitchell Say?? Indiana Jones = Jupiter Jones?? Consider the following approaches to Biblical-Research:

    1. Genesis to 2 Kings and Matthew to John (NKJV).

    2. 1 Chronicles to Malachi and Acts to Revelation (NKJV).

    3. SDA Bible Commentary -- Volumes 1,2,5 (Genesis to 2 Kings and Matthew to John).

    4. SDA Bible Commentary -- Volumes 3,4,6,7 (1 Chronicles to Malachi and Acts to Revelation).

    5. Patriarchs and Prophets -- Prophets and Kings -- Desire of Ages (Ellen White).

    This reflects my background and struggles, but I certainly don't have this figured-out. I'm mostly attempting to help some of you save some time and trouble. My present bias is to focus upon #4, with the other approaches shedding light upon #4. I've actually duct-taped those SDABC books together to form two HUGE volumes!! I'm a bit different!!






    Make the Solar System Great Again

    Picture astronaut boots on the ground, all the way to Pluto.

    By
    Mark R. Whittington

    Nov. 10, 2016 7:29 p.m. ET
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/make-the-solar-system-great-again-1478824178

    Donald Trump didn’t win the election because of his space policy. Few voters probably realized that he has one. But if the Trump administration implements the candidate’s platform, NASA could undergo the kind of transformation not witnessed in a generation. Although major questions remain unanswered, Mr. Trump has an ambitious plan for the U.S. to push into the final frontier.

    Here’s what Trump advisers Robert Walker and Peter Navarro suggested last month in Space News magazine: “Human exploration of our entire solar system by the end of this century should be NASA’s focus and goal.” That implies Mr. Trump wants astronaut boots on the ground of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn—and even Pluto—during his grandchildren’s lifetimes. Current policy calls for a trip to Mars, but Mr. Trump seeks to go a couple billion miles deeper into space.

    The foundation of Mr. Trump’s efforts, his advisers explained, will be public-private partnerships. For instance, he will try to transform the International Space Station into a “quasi-public facility supported by international contributions and resupplied utilizing commercially available services.” Leveraging the private economy’s expertise and flexibility would accomplish much that NASA cannot do on its own. A Trump administration will establish a national space-policy council, led by Vice President Mike Pence, to coordinate NASA, military and commercial activities.

    However, Messrs. Walker and Navarro left out important details. Will NASA proceed with the planned journey to Mars by the 2030s? Or will the space agency return to the moon first? To what extent will commercial efforts be integrated into NASA’s missions of exploration?

    They did not mention other future initiatives: the Orion deep-space vehicle, the heavy-lift Space Launch System and the Asteroid Redirect Mission. Will President Trump cancel one or more of these and pursue commercial alternatives? How much will he increase NASA’s budget, if at all? What about international partnerships to exercise soft power and share the burden of space exploration?

    Mr. Trump should meet with space experts in Congress to discuss these issues. One of President Obama’s greatest mistakes was to ignore pleas from lawmakers and abruptly cancel President Bush’s Constellation program, which would have put astronauts back on the moon by 2020 and on Mars at an undetermined date.

    The president-elect isn’t a policy wonk, but no one doubts his ambition or love for epic projects. Mr. Trump could make the American space program into an engine of renewal that could last for decades. Maybe a Donald IV can build the Trump Tower Mars.

    Mr. Whittington is a writer in Houston.





    Can You Love God and Ayn Rand?

    A friend claims the atheist philosopher at one point saw the appeal of spirituality.

    By
    Jennifer Anju Grossman

    Nov. 10, 2016 7:10 p.m. ET
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/can-you-love-god-and-ayn-rand-1478823015

    Ayn Rand’s most adamant axiom forms the foundation of her Objectivist philosophy: “Contradictions do not exist.” But what about the contradiction between her philosophy and religion—one grounded in reason, the other in faith? Put another way: Can you love “Atlas Shrugged” and the Bible? Rand and Objectivist scholars say no, yet many of her followers disagree, and they should still be welcomed with open arms.

    During the 2012 campaign, then-vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan told Fox News that he “really enjoyed” Rand’s novels” and admired the writer’s ability to highlight the pitfalls of socialism. But the current House speaker, a practicing Roman Catholic, described Objectivism as “something that I completely disagree with. It’s an atheistic philosophy.” It’s a shame that Rand’s secularism prompts some to reject the rest of Objectivism, which she described as a philosophy based on “the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”

    As a teenager in Soviet Russia, Rand decided “that the concept of God is degrading to man.” She added, “Since they say that God is perfect and man can never be that perfect then man is low and imperfect and there is something above him, which is wrong.” In a 1934 journal entry, she referred to faith as “the worst curse of mankind” and “the exact antithesis and enemy of thought.”

    Though her atheism never wavered, Rand’s feelings toward religion weren’t simplistic. She admired the brilliance and impact of historical religious thinkers like Aquinas and respected religious freedom, even drafting a speech for Barry Goldwater that included ample references to God. And one account, if true, suggests that Rand understood the powerful appeal of spirituality during times of grief.

    Steve Mariotti—an education entrepreneur whose grandfather, Lowell B. Mason, had been Rand’s friend—spoke with Rand as she was grieving the loss of her husband, Frank O’Connor. Hoping to comfort her, Mr. Mariotti suggested that she would see Frank again in a spiritual sense. He told me in a recent interview that Rand replied, “I hope you are right. Maybe you are. . . . I will find out soon enough.” Mr. Mariotti jokingly responded to let him know, prompting a laugh that lifted her mood.

    More important, militant atheism doesn’t spring from the pages of Rand’s fiction. If she truly believed that religion was such a threat, where are the religious villains in her novels? Corrupt priests or hypocritical churchgoers are nowhere to be found. It’s possible to read “Atlas Shrugged,” “We the Living,” “The Fountainhead” and “Anthem,” cover-to-cover and have little idea what Rand thought about religion.

    Andy Puzder, the CEO of CKE restaurants and a practicing Roman Catholic, finds nothing worrisome in that fact: “I encouraged my six children to read both ‘Fountainhead’ and ‘Mere Christianity’ by C.S. Lewis,” he told me. Each child later read “Atlas Shrugged.” Mr. Puzder argued that “there’s no contradiction between raising my children in the church, and urging them to lead the kind of lives of achievement, integrity and independence that Ayn Rand celebrated in her novels.”

    Randall Wallace, the Oscar-nominated screenwriter of 1995’s “Braveheart,” and the director of 2014’s “Heaven Is for Real,” is such an admirer of Rand’s work that he wrote a screen adaptation of “Atlas Shrugged.” Mr. Wallace, a Southern Baptist, said, “My faith isn’t contradicted by her beliefs. We live in a world of labels, but God surely cares less about the labels we give ourselves than about how we live because of them.” Rand, Mr. Wallace feels, wrote fiercely and fearlessly about bold and brave characters. “I think it would contradictory to my own beliefs not to admire her.”

    To Messrs. Puzder and Wallace, Ayn Rand’s rejection of her ancestors’ Judaism in favor of secularism has little bearing on her contributions to the canon of liberty. Part of why Rand loved America was because it allowed for diversity of conscience—including religion. I believe that her atheism closed her to many religious people who would benefit from her aspirational views. Her secular view has likely been overstated and used by those who want to marginalize her larger message of individualism and freedom.

    The transformative power of Rand’s ideas is undeniable. Her fiction was for many an activator to learn more about economic and political liberty. Rep. Ryan said as much in the same interview in which he disavowed her atheism. For this reason, the vested interests Rand threatened—those dependent on a larger, more powerful regulatory state—knew they had to take that mother ship down. The best tactic to undermine her in God-fearing America would be to concentrate on her lack of belief.

    And it has worked, to an extent, making some Rand fans tuck tail and forswear admiration. Yet as Americans become more secular, the athiesm-smear tactic has become less effective. The world changes, but the genius and power of her words remain. As John Galt says in the closing lines of “Atlas Shrugged”: “The road is cleared.” It is up to us, believers and nonbelievers, to take up her message and spread the news.

    Ms. Grossman is CEO of the Atlas Society.






    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri Nov 18, 2016 3:16 pm






    Just a friendly-reminder to NOT take my posts too seriously!! This is mostly a self-flagellating and self-destructive exercise in futility!! Don't worry!! Be happy!! Just get back to work, and make lots and lots of money!! It's easier that way!! This was an ill-fated attempt to do the right thing, and make us think about possible possibilities, but I can see that this was a horrible mistake!! Perhaps I'll be All-Business in my next-life!!

    I regularly attended a Sabbath-School class at Pacific Union College (near the Napa Valley) taught by Dr. Kent Seltman (in the choir-room of Paulin Hall). He wrote several questions on a chalkboard, which guided the discussion. Most of the people in that class had doctorate degrees. This was a very long time ago. I think David Koresh MIGHT'VE attended that class, once, while I was there. Remember what I said about the Hollywood United Methodist Church being a possible setting for a series and/or movie?? Think about combining that just-mentioned class with the library-scene from Constantine, and the Army-Intelligence scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark!! Do you see what I mean?? Again, this probably wouldn't sell, but it might be a cool-setting for discussing The United States of the Solar System (Books One, Two, and Three)!! The budget could be kept quite low by not using "name" actors and actresses, and by mostly using that church for the set. The actors and actresses might be real-live Nazis, Masons, Jesuits, Alphabet-Agents, Dracs, and Greys!! What Would the Ancient Egyptian Deity Say?? Don't take this too seriously!! I mostly have bad ideas!!

    I like listening to people, such as the man in the first video below!! I'm a Completely Ignorant Fool, but I enjoy listening to smart-people talking about forbidden-topics!! It's probably a Morbid-Curiosity Mental-Illness (MCMI), but I seem to be incurably-addicted!! I suffer from MCMI, along with CRS!! I'm SO SOL!! But I'm trying to mostly study Volumes 1 to 7 (Genesis to Revelation) of the SDA Bible Commentary, while listening to the Music of J.S. Bach!! Honest!! I'm contrasting SDABC Volumes 1,2,5 with SDABC Volumes 3,4,6,7. This takes more time and brains than you can imagine!! I'm clearly not up to the challenge!! It really sucks to be a Completely Ignorant Fool with a Messiah Complex!! But I guess we all have our crosses to bear!! What Would Rachel Constantine Say?? What if she really runs this solar system?? What Would Anna and the V's Say?? I told a Mulholland Drive Cowboy Kind of Guy that I liked the best aspects of Anna and the V's, and he agreed!! He also told me that mystery was a good-thing.

    I grew-up attending a church a couple of miles from the one shown below. The doctor my mom worked-for attended the Hollywood United Methodist Church. The organist lived in the carillon-tower (if I remember correctly)!! I wonder if his living-quarters covered 600 square-feet??!! The Hollywood Presbyterian Church is a couple of miles from the one shown below!! What Would Lloyd John Ogilve Say?? What Would Kimo Smith (K.S. Bach) Play?? What Would Fred Bock Say?? My dad drove his 1959 Ghostbuster's Cadillac by the Hollywood United Methodist Church on his way to and from work at CBS Television City in "Hollywood" (where he literally kept the stars cool)!! George Vandeman taped "It Is Written" at CBS. He liked the set really cold!! What Would Marjorie Lewis Lloyd Write?? My dad's friend, David Rose, directed the orchestra for The Red Skelton Show at CBS. THE CBS EYE IS ALWAYS WATCHING!! When You Watch Television, the Television is Watching YOU!! BTW -- David Rose offered to sell his 1963 (if I remember correctly) Mercedes Benz 600 to my dad for $12,500 (or was it $9,500??), but my dad had a relatively-new yellow and white '59 Cadillac Sedan Deville, so he decided not to!! I'm a little rusty on the details. If my dad had sold the Cad, and bought the Benz, what car would Bill Murray have driven in Ghostbusters?? Just Kidding.

    I once gave a Roman-Catholic a grand-tour of the Crystal Cathedral campus, at least a decade before the Roman Catholic Church bought the cathedral for Fifty-Seven Million Dollars!! He grew-up Episcopalian, but backslid his way out the back-door of the church (where most members are chronically-backslidden)!! He later wished to rejoin the church, but his work-schedule conflicted with the Episcopal classes, so he attended Catholic classes, and became a devout Roman Catholic!! He later worked on a Mother Teresa film-project (but I don't know what became of it).



    Carol wrote:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohHMK20FhAk
    This is what the 2015 Climate Change Paris Agreement is about
    "Preparing for Pole Shift in 2017 by John Moore - 10-12-2016"
    Carol wrote:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0nXjWl7ipQ

    NOW TO THE NIBIRU WIKI LEAK EMAILS and PHOTOS

    John Moore vids are impeccable as he gets his info from the deep state armed forces
    http://www.thelibertyman.com/
    his whole purpose is educating the public on Nibiru

    The John Moore Radio Show: Monday. 14 November, 2016 (start at 30 mins) Remainder of the show, Open Lines. Planet X / Nibiru is the primary subject matter. http://www.thelibertyman.com/

    Earth Changes, Emergency Preparedness, Personal Safety, Alternative Energy, Nutrition & Health
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sherrytalkradio/2016/11/15/11-14-16-monday-night-with-sherry-shriner

















    Live from the Dark-Side of the Moon!!

    Charity: The Ultimate Luxury

    Joan Kroc gave $225 million to National Public Radio at her death
    even though she hadn’t been a devoted listener or regular donor.

    By
    Marc Levinson

    Nov. 15, 2016 6:53 p.m. ET
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/charity-the-ultimate-luxury-1479254027

    Back in the 1950s, when television pictures were mostly black and white and the console set in the living room weighed 100 pounds, a character named John Beresford Tipton made a weekly appearance across America. Tipton, whose face never appeared on screen, was described by his former secretary as “a fabulously wealthy and fascinating man.” His hobby was giving away money. In each episode, the secretary received a check from Tipton’s hands and delivered it to an unsuspecting individual of Tipton’s choice in return for a signed promise never to reveal the source. The check was in the amount of one million dollars.

    A nonfiction version of “The Millionaire” might replace Tipton with Joan Kroc. The widow of Ray Kroc, the man whose boundless ambition built McDonald’s into a global purveyor of burgers and fries, Joan Kroc used her inheritance to become one of the biggest philanthropists in America. From AIDS patients in the Bronx to teenagers in San Diego, people who had never heard of Joan Kroc benefited from her largess. Much of her giving was as secret as she could keep it, and almost all of it was quirky. As Lisa Napoli shows in her breezy book “Ray & Joan,” Joan Kroc gave away money because she enjoyed doing so, and it was none of anybody else’s business.

    Neither Joan nor Ray was to the manor born. Ray Kroc, the son of Czech immigrants, was an inveterate salesman. After a long career hawking paper cups, underwater lots in Florida and malted-milk mixers, in 1954 he convinced brothers Maurice and Dick McDonald to make him the franchising agent for their tiny chain of hamburger stands. Joan, 26 years younger, was the daughter of a railroad worker. What the two had in common was a love of music: In the 1920s, Ray supplemented his income by playing piano live on the radio, while Joan supplied background music at bars and restaurants. They met around 1957, when Ray saw the alluring—and married—blonde playing the piano at a St. Paul, Minn., restaurant. Joan was smitten not just with Ray but with the opportunity he represented. Ray Kroc made sure that Joan’s husband soon won a franchise in Rapid City, S.D., giving her an entrée into middle-class life.

    Ray Kroc found many excuses to visit Rapid City, but it took a dozen years and multiple divorces before the two were wed in 1969. By then Kroc and his associates had transformed McDonald’s from an overleveraged speculation to the darling of the New York Stock Exchange. Joan took to the lifestyle of a CEO’s wife: a new wardrobe, a 5,300-square-foot condo with an organ hidden in a wall, a private jet. But their match was not made in heaven. Ray Kroc was a volatile alcoholic, and Joan seems to have been no less volatile. In 1971, she sued him for divorce, then abruptly called off the separation. Their marriage remained rocky.

    Philanthropy became Joan’s way to establish an identify of her own. She began in 1976 by creating Operation Cork—Kroc spelled backward—to support scientific research on alcoholism. The Ray A. Kroc Foundation was transformed into the Joan B. Kroc Foundation, and after Ray died in early 1984 she took full charge. She arranged to meet onetime Saturday Review editor Norman Cousins, the author of a best-selling book describing how positive attitudes could stave off illness, and offered $2 million to support his research. She gave $100,000 to help the victims of a mass shooting at a McDonald’s near her San Diego home and pumped millions into promoting peace and nuclear disarmament. The San Diego Zoo received $100,000 after reviving an injured hummingbird that Joan found near her house. When she decided that the kids in a poor San Diego neighborhood needed a first-class recreation center, she called the local Salvation Army chapter out of the blue and offered $80 million to build and run it.

    In 1991, Joan closed the foundation and began making gifts personally in order to avoid public disclosure. The final third of “Ray & Joan” is a compilation of everything the author can discover about Joan Kroc’s generosity. The list is puzzling: Greenpeace in 1987; the Epilepsy Society in 1989; North Dakota flood victims in 1997. Joan Kroc was not a cautious donor like Andrew Carnegie or Bill Gates, devoting years to planning how to give away wealth to achieve some desired impact. She had no master plan for the causes she deemed most important. Her interest, as she told Norman Cousins, was “the human condition.” And her whims could be erratic. When she wrote a $5 million check to former University of Notre Dame President Theodore Hesburgh on the occasion of his 85th birthday, Ms. Napoli reports, “she sent a maid scrambling through the house to find a stamp with the new postage rate on it, so she didn’t have to overpay by using two of the old ones.”

    These days, Joan Kroc is best remembered for the $225 million that she left to National Public Radio at her death in 2003. At the time, this was the largest cash gift ever received by a U.S. cultural institution, and NPR still thanks her on the air regularly. As with many of her gifts, the motivation was not clear; she wasn’t known as a devoted listener and had not been a regular contributor through the years.

    Does philanthropy of this sort serve any larger purpose? Ms. Napoli suggests that digging too deeply into the motivation for Joan Kroc’s giving misses the point. Philanthropy, she believes, gave Kroc both pleasure and a sense of independence, much like commissioning a $40 million yacht on which to entertain her friends and zipping off to a Broadway show aboard her private jet. “There was nothing stodgy or formulaic about her approach to giving,” Ms. Napoli writes. “So what if it registered as unorthodox or downright kooky to traditionalists? Joan was relaxing into the ultimate luxury, of being able to indulge her whims—with no concern about cost, outcome, or, better yet, what anyone else thought.”

    Mr. Levinson’s latest book, “An Extraordinary Time: The End of the Postwar Boom and the Return of the Ordinary Economy,” was published earlier this month.




    Things are bad. The technology is unimaginably sophisticated. The management seems rogue. The overall situation seems reprehensible. BUT what if things MUST somehow be this way (for abstract and twisted reasons)?? What would any one of us do if we were at the Top of the Pyramid?? This stuff scares the hell out of me!! I've said way too much on the internet, and I wish to say less and less. I honestly know next to nothing concerning what's REALLY going on. I'm mostly settling on studying 8,000 pages of Bible Commentaries while listening to the Music of J.S. Bach. Honest!!


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_M._Greer Steven Macon Greer (June 28, 1955) is an American retired medical doctor and ufologist who founded the Center for the Study of Extraterrestrial Intelligence (CSETI) and The Disclosure Project, which seeks the disclosure of allegedly suppressed UFO information.

    Greer was born in Charlotte, North Carolina in 1955.[1] Greer claims to have seen an unidentified flying object at close range when he was about eight years old, which inspired his interest in ufology.[1][2] He was trained as a Transcendental Meditation teacher and served as director of a meditation organization.[1][3] Greer completed his graduate work at East Tennessee State University James H. Quillen College of Medicine in 1987.[4] He attended MAHEC University of North Carolina where he completed his internship in 1988 and received his Virginia medical license in 1989.[4] That year he became a member of the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society.[5][6][7]

    Greer founded the Center for the Study of Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence (CSETI) in 1990 to create a diplomatic and research-based initiative to contact extraterrestrial civilizations.[2][3] In 1993 Greer founded The Disclosure Project, a nonprofit research project, whose goal is to disclose to the public the government’s alleged knowledge of UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and advanced energy and propulsion systems.[8][9][10][11] The Disclosure Project was founded in an effort to grant amnesty to government whistle-blowers willing to violate their security oaths by sharing insider knowledge about UFOs.[12] Greer says he gave a briefing to CIA director James Woolsey at a dinner party, although this was denied by director Woolsey and attendees.[13][14]

    In October 1994 Greer appeared in Larry King's TV special The UFO Coverup?[15] In 1995, Greer was working as a physician at the department of emergency medicine at Caldwell Memorial Hospital,[3][16] where he was chairman.[1]

    In 1997, Greer along with other members of CSETI, including Apollo astronaut Edgar Mitchell, made a presentation at a background briefing for members of Congress.[17] In 1998 Greer gave up his career as an emergency room physician, in favor of the Disclosure Project.[18][19]

    In May 2001, Greer held a press conference at the National Press Club in D.C that featured "20 retired Air Force, Federal Aviation Administration and intelligence officers".[2][20][21][22][23][24] According to a 2002 report in the Oregon Daily Emerald, Greer has gathered 120 hours of testimony from civilians and various government and military officials on the topic of UFOs, including astronaut Gordon Cooper and a brigadier general.[8]

    In 2013 Greer co-produced Sirius, a documentary covering his work and theories over extraterrestrial life, government cover-ups and close encounters of the fifth kind.[25] The film was directed by Amardeep Kaleka and narrated by Thomas Jane, and covers Greer's 2006 book Hidden Truth, Forbidden Knowledge. The movie premiered on April 22, 2013, in Los Angeles, California, and featured interviews from former government and military officials.[26] Sirius depicted a six-inch human skeleton known as the Atacama skeleton and featured images and a DNA test of the skeleton.[27][28] Genetic evidence showed that it was human and had genetic markers that were also found in "indigenous women from the Chilean region of South America".[29][30]

    References

    1.^ Jump up to: a b c d Thompson, Keith (July–August 1995). "If We Call Them, Will They Come?". Yoga Journal. pp. 70–77, 153–154. Retrieved 8 March 2013. "page 70: By day, he is chairman of the Department of Emergency Medicine at a medium-sized hospital, frequently on call for periods of 12 to 24 hours."
    2.^ Jump up to: a b c "They're Here; UFO watchers to reveal proof that aliens have visited Earth". The Daily Record. May 9, 2001.
    3.^ Jump up to: a b c Alexander S. Heard (1 September 1994). "ALIEN BROTHERS, COME ON DOWN!". Outside (magazine). Retrieved 12 March 2013. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "Outside_Magazine" defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
    4.^ Jump up to: a b Steven Macon Greer Virginia Board of Medicine, accessed Jan 20, 2013
    5.Jump up ^ Author Unknown (1987). The Pharos of Alpha Omega Alpha - Volume 50. Alpha Omega Alpha. p. 54."COLLEGE OF MEDlClNE—Oelta of Tennessee Class of I987: Steven Macon Greer"
    6.Jump up ^ Unknown author. "Locate A Member". Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society. pp. Use the search term: Greer to yield this result: Steven Macon Greer 115–R–1987–0069199. Retrieved March 11, 2013.
    7.Jump up ^ Unknown author. "AOA Members from James H. Quillen College of Medicine". Quillen College of Medicine. Archived from the original on 2006-09-08.
    8.^ Jump up to: a b Schmidt, Brad (25 April 2002). "Alien theorist offers proof of government coverup". Oregon Daily Emerald. Retrieved 2012-12-12.
    9.Jump up ^ Salter, Daniel M; Red Star, Nancy (2003). Life With a Cosmos Clearance. Light Technology Publishing. pp. x–ix, 1–4. ISBN 1891824376.
    10.Jump up ^ "The Disclosure Project Website". The Disclosure Project. 2010. Retrieved 7 March 2013. "The Disclosure Project is a research project working to fully disclose the facts about UFOs, extraterrestrial intelligence, and classified advanced energy and propulsion systems."
    11.Jump up ^ Tudor, Silke (26 September 2001). "Alien Culture". SF Weekly. Retrieved 10 March 2013.
    12.Jump up ^ Cox, Billy (6 August 2008). "Admiral: Never looked for UFO data". Herald Tribune. Retrieved 2013-03-21.
    13.Jump up ^ "Greer Letter". www.ufowatchdog.com. Retrieved 2016-05-10.
    14.Jump up ^ Woolsey, James. "Rebuttal letter to Greer" (PDF).
    15.Jump up ^ Mendoza, Manuel (10 October 1994). "Alien Obsession Hits Even Larry King". The Wichita Eagle. Archived from the original on 2007-05-12. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
    16.Jump up ^ Nelson, Britt (23 April 1994). "Asheville physician's hobby is chasing extraterrestrials". Herald-Journal. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
    17.Jump up ^ Lord, Mary (14 April 1997). "The Unending Search for UFOs". U.S. News & World Report. Archived from the original on 9 May 2013. Retrieved 27 November 2015.
    18.Jump up ^ Oppegard, Brett (Sep 11, 2001). "FOUNDER OF UFO PROJECT IS COMING TO PORTLAND". The Columbian. Archived from the original on September 11, 2001. Retrieved March 10, 2013.
    19.Jump up ^ Berger, Joanne (Dec 1, 2001). "Doctor UFO". Internal Medicine News. Archived from the original on Dec 1, 2001. Retrieved March 10, 2013.
    20.Jump up ^ Duin, Julia (11 May 2001). "Government is covering up UFO evidence, group says". The Washington Times. Archived from the original on 2001-05-16. Retrieved 8 March 2013.
    21.Jump up ^ Katelynn Raymer; David Ruppe (10 May 2001). "Group Calls for Disclosure of UFO Info". ABC News. Retrieved 11 March 2013.
    22.Jump up ^ "UFO spotters slam 'US cover-up'". BBC News. May 10, 2001.
    23.Jump up ^ Kehnemui, Sharon (May 10, 2001). "Men in Suits See Aliens as Part of Solution, Not Problem". Fox News. Retrieved 2007-05-10.
    24.Jump up ^ McCullagh, Declan (May 10, 2001). "Ooo-WEE-ooo Fans Come to D.C.". Wired News. Retrieved 2007-05-10.
    25.Jump up ^ Sullivan, Paul. "New documentary proves aliens exist. We're dead Sirius". Metro News. Retrieved 6 December 2013.
    26.Jump up ^ "Tiny Alien Humanoid Claimed To Exist In Steven Greer's Upcoming Documentary 'Sirius' [PHOTO, VIDEO]". Ibtimes.com. 2013-04-09. Retrieved 2013-04-24.
    27.Jump up ^ "UFO film to provide proof that aliens exist". Zeenews.india.com. 2013-04-10. Retrieved 2013-04-24.
    28.Jump up ^ "UFO Film May Provide Proof of Tiny Extraterrestrial Aliens: Six Inch Body Dissected (Video) : Space". Science World Report. 2013-04-09. Retrieved 2013-04-24.
    29.Jump up ^ "'Atacama Humanoid is Human, Researchers Say'". Medical Daily. 2013-05-01. Retrieved 2013-09-09.
    30.Jump up ^ "Bizarre 6-Inch Skeleton Shown to Be Human". Science magazine, column 'Science Now'. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). 2013-05-03. Retrieved 2013-09-08.










    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7483
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:54 pm

    I keep thinking that All of Us came from Orion (or some exotic location in the universe) in antiquity, and brought a lot of Ancient High-Technology with us. Then, I suspect a Civil-War between Soul-Relatives, which might have everything to do with the War in Heaven, and the Fall in the Garden of Eden. This could also include the Flood of Noah, as well as the Tower of Babel. Most of our Current-Technology might be Ancient-Technology. We might be the Aliens from Outer-Space!! I continue to think that Biblical-Eschatology should be combined with Science-Fiction and Conspiracy-Theories, but NOT in the Context of the Church!! People who pay good-money for peace of mind, shouldn't be given nervous-breakdowns on Sabbath and Sunday mornings!! I don't go to church, but I am NOT opposed to church!! And I refuse to take sides!! I try to present a Spectrum of Viewpoints to make us think!! I might write a book in the future (so I can retire) but it would be much milder and different than my internet-madness!! Don't brace yourselves for anything bad from me!! Not in this incarnation!! I don't know what dastardly-deeds I might've done in previous-lives, but I seem to be extremely passive and peaceful in this particular incarnation!! My next one might be completely different. I don't know. I Belong to the Church of I Don't Know!! What Would Bill Maher Say?? What Would Pat Condell Say?? I think some of these sorts of people believe, but they don't believe the bullshit commonly fed to the general-public throughout the world, throughout history. I continue to know that I don't know. I am truly a Completely Ignorant Fool (no matter who I might've been in previous-incarnations). I'm a big-time loser this time around, and I won't try to be something I'm not, so don't get your hopes up!! I am what I am, and it is what it is (whatever that means)!!


    Thank-you Mercuriel. I'd love to hear how your thinking might've changed in your absence from The Mists. I think I need to leave. I somehow need to stop posting. I keep trying to do so, but I always make one more post. What if the Top One-Percent are simply smarter than the Rest of Us?? What if we should just study the Top One-Percent?? I think I'd like to research what I've posted over the past few years, but would this simply make me more frazzled and bitter than I already am?? I suspect that most everyone wants safety and certainty, but what if this results in a certain lack of courage and honesty?? The so-called "Ancient Egyptian Deity" thought everyone was bad, and that people deserved to die. They seemed to know things about history and humanity which remained hidden and illusive to me. They wouldn't answer most of my questions. They often responded with "You know I can't tell you that!!" I'm considering varieties of possibilities because I don't trust history and the historians. Beware of Historians!! Science-Fictional Possibilities Regarding Life, the Universe, and Everything might be the Road to Reality!! What Would King Ring Say?? Think about the reference to "Papers From the King of Sweden" in the "Vampires of Venice" episode of Dr. Who (from the Fifth-Series). What Would the Borg Queen Say?? What Would Anna and the V's Say?? Notice how Dr. Who is addressed near the beginning of that episode!! This is just to make us think!!









    "Kiss Me You Completely Ignorant Fool!! We Don't Bite!!"


    How the Quad Went Coed

    ‘What is this nonsense about admitting women to Princeton?
    A good old-fashioned whore-house would be considerably more efficient.’

    By
    Leonore Tiefer

    Updated Nov. 20, 2016 5:58 p.m. ET
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-quad-went-coed-1479680187


    In an age when student activists at campuses across the country are focused on microaggressions and safe spaces, it’s a bit surreal to read Nancy Weiss Malkiel’s history of gender desegregation at elite American and British colleges. Fifty years ago, same-sex schooling in higher education had ended for many public colleges and universities in the United States and Britain, but it remained the norm at most elite universities in the Northeast—the Ivy League schools of Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth and Harvard and comparable private women colleges such as Vassar, Smith and Wellesley. Cambridge and Oxford, too, had resisted coeducation.

    How and why, between 1969 and 1974, these prestigious institutions decided to go coed—or not—is the fascinating story Ms. Malkiel tells. And although her narrow focus is gender admission practices, there are clues in this dry but highly informative “study in institutional decision-making” about the obstacles that continue to prevent the harmony between the many diverse groups of students on campus today.

    The idea of admitting women, for many alumni, seemed absurd. The punchy title of Ms. Malkiel’s book, “Keep the Damned Women Out,” comes from a letter written by a Dartmouth graduate as his alma mater debated whether or not to allow female students: “For God’s sake, for Dartmouth’s sake, and for everyone’s sake, keep the damned women out.”

    Reading about the culture of schools like Dartmouth makes this alumnus’s attitude easier to understand. Insular country-club traditions—eating clubs, “proper” attire and male-bonding rituals—dominated campus life, and the discriminatory habits of student and faculty recruitment ensured that each generation came to replicate its predecessors. The deeply self-serving conviction that educating leaders required elite schools to choose primarily white Protestant male students remained unquestioned until the 1960s, when widespread quotas for the admission of Jews and blacks began to fall.

    Ms. Malkiel convincingly argues that it took the tidal wave of social movements in that decade—student free speech, war opposition, civil rights, sexual freedom and women’s liberation—to disrupt the northeastern elites’ complacency. Change came, but it came kicking and screaming, and not from any sense of fairness or feminist impulse. It was pragmatic: Scrupulously monitored application trends made it clear that, as the 1960s progressed, the best of the boys were going where the girls were. Although Ms. Malkiel tells the stories of, first Harvard, Princeton and Yale, then Vassar, Smith, Wellesley and Dartmouth, with careful attention to the specific details of each institution’s process, the story here is ultimately that of a rapid chain reaction that was over in half a decade.

    The author was a Princeton history professor for more than 40 years. She is steeped in Ivy League culture and conducted scores of interviews with movers and shakers she doubtless knew personally. She also seems to have footnoted every scrap of paper she found in the archives: She walks us through committee reports, administrative minutes, campus news coverage and contentious correspondence from all the stakeholders. She describes how various alternative arrangements were considered (such as moving Vassar to New Haven and Sarah Lawrence to Princeton!) and discarded.

    At each school, the administration worked to develop plans to satisfy the interests of students, faculty and alumni. But getting the buy-in of the last group was difficult because the deep-pocketed alumni were, as Ms. Malkiel gently puts it, “grounded in sentiment and history.” By and large they were outraged—and weren’t hesitant to say so in the bluntest terms. “What is all this nonsense about admitting women to Princeton? A good old-fashioned whore-house would be considerably more efficient and much, much cheaper,” wrote one anonymous alumnus to the Princeton Alumni Weekly in 1968.

    Most participants in the Ivy League debates over whether to admit women students looked at the question of coeducation solely from the male students’ point of view: Would women water down the school’s intellectual seriousness? Would women’s curricular choices drain the coffers? Or, on the positive side, would women on campus reduce, for male students, the time, effort and money involved in acquiring female company on the weekends?

    But at least one eminent man dissented. In 1968 Paul Swain Havens, a member of the Princeton class of 1925 and then president of Wilson College, a small women’s school in Pennsylvania, wrote of his alma mater: “The emphasis is everywhere on what might be good, bad or indifferent for Princeton or its male students. But women are not to be regarded as merely tools of the welfare and comfort of Princeton and her male students. Their education must be seen to be as important as that of Princeton men.”

    The evident lack of concern for women helped Smith and Wellesley resist the siren song of coeducation, as did feminism. Ms. Malkiel describes Gloria Steinem’s 1971 Smith commencement speech, which exhorted the college to become “a radicalizing institution, so that when we integrate we will understand that we are not receiving the benefit of the great intellectual male presence . . . but that we have to offer the elements of the female culture.”

    It wasn’t easy for the first generation of women who desegregated the Ivies. Dartmouth boys, for example, rated their female classmates’ looks from one to 10 with placards in the dining hall. Signs hanging on campus declared, “Better Dead Than Coed.” The college anthem, “Men of Dartmouth,” remained unchanged until 1988.

    Opening the doors to students of both sexes was a first step in changing the culture of the ivory tower. It appeared momentous at the time, but in retrospect seems only a small step toward inclusivity. After all, here we are in 2016 reading about how the Harvard male soccer team kept a sexually explicit “scouting report,” ranking recruits for the women’s team. American colleges have achieved gender diversity, but sexism endures and the challenge of civility remains daunting.

    Ms. Tiefer is a clinical associate professor of psychiatry at New York University School of Medicine.






    Carol wrote:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOBEg0VbD98&t=66s
    This is well worth listening too.
    Published on Nov 18, 2016
    Obama declaring Marshal Law, would cancel the results of the election, and he would remain in power.



    Sponsored content

    Re: The Wall Street Journal

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Sep 23, 2017 7:54 am