A Just Day

To-day I went out to the range to try out dad's old .357 magnum revolver and the full-power military surplus ammunition for the Mauser KAR98 belonging to my erstwhile colleague Professor Massa that I'm keeping for him. It was quite a trip. I put .38 Specials and .357s through the revolver, which can only be fired left-handed. I managed to hit the target nonetheless, and found that the .357s provided a very satisfactory kick. The Mauser, despite its higher power, was more to my liking this time. I must confess I hate the Mauser action, which cocks its hammer on the opening stroke of the bolt. I prefer the Lee action that cocks the hammer on the forward stroke, using the natural tendency of using force to seat the bullet properly.
However, the rifle handled well, and delivered solid hitting power at 100 yards. My sighting is much improved thanks to the excellent game "Brothers in Arms," where I use the KAR 98 to deliver accurate fire. In fact, my only complaint on this otherwise-satisfactory session was the 90+ degree weather at the range.
When I returned home, I was doubly surprised (and pleasantly so) by electronic means. First, I saw on my mail that my custom rifle is inbound as of Monday. It promises to bring much evil and desolation to wherever I choose to lug it. The other news is that certain parties who were greatly angered by the Kelo v. New London case have announced plans to construct the "Lost Liberty Hotel" over the current home of Supreme Court Justice Souter, who wrote the odious majority opinion in that case. To make it even more sweet, this group intends to use his eminent domain ruling against him and evict him forcibly from his own house! To boot, their restaurant is called the "Just Desserts Café." How sweet can revenge get?
I also see that the Blogosphere has turned out, Left and Right, to oppose the FEC's proposal to regulate individual political speech by bloggers under the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform act. Kos of Daily Kos is the superstar witness. It's good to see bipartisan opposition to this issue. It's better to have ersatz coalitions of political opponents than no politics at all.
Things are not faring so well in Progressive Britain. Parliament has passed the National ID Card Act. However, it seems costs associated with the plan are soaring. The suggested maximum, £100 per person (at current rates, $181.63 US), is apparently insufficient to fund the measure. Clearly there has to be a way to pay it off. The solution? Ministers might be planning to sell personal information for £750 a pop. I've yet to see further confirmation on this, but HMG has denied these charges. This opens the question that if the government steals your identity, who will prosecute them? The answer is, of course, nobody. We cannot depend on paper barriers set up by bureaucrats to protect us. We must prevent them from gaining the ability to abuse their power at all. That is infinitely more effective than rules that they set out for themselves and later change.

More Housing Woes

It seems that the United States has been, as usual, pre-empted by Progressive Britain in the realm of totalitarian statist strategies. While the US blogosphere still fumes over the disastrous Kelo decision, New Labour is forging ahead with the next step. It is breathtakingly authoritarian and grand in scope. Deputy PM John Prescott has proposed a plan that would demolish nearly a half-million private homes and replace them with government housing tracts for Labour voters. The homes being demolished are mostly Victorian homes that the government now considers "unsafe". In addition, the lack of lebensraum in England is putting the squeeze on contractors.
Why does this sort of scheme remind me of Zimbabwe's less PR-friendly version? The government is kicking people out of older homes to make housing more suitable for the lower-class Northerners who tend to vote Labour. Disenfranchisement of one class for another more suitable to the ruling classes.
In another ruling bound to anger most of the internet community, there's been a ruling that effectively criminalises all porn as Child Pornography. However, the DoJ has decided not enforce the law until 7 September.
There's an old saying that the only reason that everyone hasn't been arrested is that their DA hasn't decided to prosecute them. It seems there are all sorts of laws, and one can hardly live without running afoul of some law.
The law should be simple and easily taught in its fullness to each citizen so that they might obey it. Instead, we depend on the kindness of authorities to point out these laws. We're technically supposed to be aware of all of them, even though we aren't.
In war news, Taiwan is constructing phased-array early warning radar networks and putting IFF beacons on their equipment. This is to guard against China's build-up of long-range missiles.

More Kelo fall-out, EU in North America

The recent Supreme Court decision in the Kelo v. New London has been the subject of immense controversy. It's drawn universal criticism as far as I have been able to ascertain. Naturally, the political sides couldn't be united in their criticism with some half-wits blaming Libertarians, despite the fact that the Libertarian creed "No Force, No Fraud, No Problem" prohibits government intervention, as all government intervention carries behind it the threat of violence.
On an issue like this, people need to be united. The Right hates it, the Left hates it, Libertarians hate it. Blaming one another for the ruling makes no sense- political ideas are born of idealism, and this ruling has the scent about it of a naked power grab. We need to knock off this obnoxious and immature behaviour so that we can help those families who will be evicted. As has been pointed out by the fine folks at Strata-Sphere, the bulldozers are already rolling. Let's get together, use the decentralised organisational ability of the internet and provide those in need with the support necessary to resist this illegitimate decision.
Moving on to the second part of my title, I must confess that the EU is not about to invade North America. In fact, these people cannot even get their sole CVN to cruise over 19 knots or keep its propeller blades from spinning off at that meteoric speed. For those of you who are not Naval Affairs people, US Carriers displace nearly three times as much as the French Carrier and go twice as fast).
Instead, it's a proposal from the always progressive group of power-hungry extra-dimensional lizards we know as the Council on Foreign Relations. You can read the proposals put forth at their "Future of North America" forum right here. Those extra-dimensional lizards are certainly long-winded and love sharing their "9/11 stories" to justify their position. If you'd like the short version, here's a summary on the site of the United States Embassy to Canada. Some highlights include a "common security perimeter," "common external tariff" (sounding like the EU yet?), and a the need to "Develop a North American Border Pass with biometric identifiers." Another disturbing and very European element is the proposal to "Institutionalize the partnership" with a plethora of international organisations between the three nations in the partnership. Another touch of EU institutionalism is the "North American regulatory plan that would include "open skies and open roads" and a unified approach for protecting consumers on food, health, and the environment." It sounds a great deal like European Health and Safety Rules. Just as I was beginning to relish the ability to own a bendy banana...
In any case, this is the Tranzi plan for world unification by stages. Tranzis know that no one aside from them likes their ideas, so they have a "gradual" process. It's based on creating regional super-states. First, a free trade bloc is set up, along with a common defence infrastructure. In Europe, it was Jean Monnet's Coal and Steel Community that controlled production of vital war materials that morphed into the European Common Market. In North America, the Trade deal came first in the form of NAFTA. Now we see the proposal for a united Defence as a "common security perimeter." They have a minimum of international involvement, and represent sound thinking.
The next stage is a bit fuzzier. It involves developing a series of multi-national standards and organisations to control said standards. This would be the phase of the "European Community," and the "North American Community." It's a bit harder to swallow, but still based on keen trade-based incentives like standardisation.
The next stage is the trickiest Tranzi stunt of them all. It's the call for the unification of these various standardisation organisations into one super-organisation. They're very cautious about giving it power, because most folk will be uneasy about unification of this sort. It's mostly presented as a measure that promotes efficiency and codifies the nations relations with each other. There's no mention of this in the "North American Community" proposals, but it's likely to come in time. This would correspond roughly with the 1992 Treaty of the Maastricht in EU history, when the European Community morphed into the European Union. As I said, it wasn't terribly popular and barely passed in most nations.
The Tranzis then allow a ten year or so period for the nations to get used to the new government, and they sign a few treaties that centralise bureaucratic power in Union hands. Eventually, they reckon, everyone gets used to being governed by the Union. It's time for the final block to come into play- the Constitutional Treaty of a Federal Super-State. This is represented by the EU Constitution that has poked its head up as of late.
Despite its rejection by France and the Netherlands, the EU Constitution will still be ratified, either in whole or in parts. The ten year process of centralisation by which the Union government used its regulatory powers over certain matters to extend its reach has left the national governments incapable of taking back their authority. This is the critical time. Once it is past, the Union will either have to go on to be a super-national government or will be torn asunder by its members. Given the great love which Tranzis have for the unquestioned authority of the State, it's more likely to be the former, despite protests.
We have to fight against creeping tranzi plans to turn North America into the next European Union. There's no point in adding an additional layer of unelected and unaccountable government that ends up destroying the economy and laying waste to our liberties. Our current government is bad enough about that. Let's not see this plan come to fruition.

Nature of Statism

Many people are curious at my vast disdain- for government power. They wonder where I get the notion that government isn't a force for good in the world, and instead should be something that is continually under suspicion. After all, these people think that the government is the great leveler that protects us from eeevil corporations.
To answer, I will present two current events that teach a potent lesson about the problems of government run amok.
The first is the continually-decaying situation in Zimbabwe. Our plucky picnic-basket pilfering African Strong-man Robert Mugabe has initiated "Operation Murambatsvina" or "Drive out filth" in order to rid the country of the "maggots that ruin the economy". More than one million people have been driven onto the streets after their homes were torched. Their crops are being slashed and burned as well. It seems Mugabe is trying to drive these people from the city to work the farms he's "liberated" from the White Oppressors. This sort of thing has happened before of course. It seems to be fated for Zimbabwe too.
It's a bitter irony that Africans had a longer life expectancy, better employment, and more food under the incredibly racist Rhodesian Government and the Obnoxious Iain Smith. More men have been killed due to conflict under Mugabe's rule than during the long and bloody insurgency in Smithy's Rhodesia.
What's the problem? According to the progressive stormfront.org "White Heritage Community", it's letting the Africans govern themselves. Of course, seeking policy advice from stormfront.org is pure lunacy. A better explanation is that Mugabe's government shows what happens when government goes wild with absolute authority. The same thing is starting in Chavez' Venezuela and other nations. Horrific democide like Zimbabwe's or Cambodia's cannot happen without government control. That is reason alone to be suspicious of the state.
The natural reaction to this goes something along the lines of "Zimbabwe and America are different. It can't happen here." If only white nations can be free of democide, then that proves Louis Farrakan's dictum that white people are from outer space, or perhaps an Atlantean Laboratory. Again, this isn't true. Genocide and Democide have occurred in nations of all colours. Americans and Zimbabweans are made of the same stuff. We have a few advantages that can easily be squandered- remember that Zimbabwe was once one of the richest nations in Africa.
Closer to home, the Supreme Court has handed down yet another pro-statist decision in the form of the Kelo case. The court has decided to boost the self-esteem of corrupt local governments by letting them use their imaginations to define the limit of Eminent Domain. If your house isn't producing enough tax revenue, then the city can dynamite it to feel better about itself and replace it with a federally-funded shopping centre.
Sensitive Justices John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer all decided that local towns are frustrated in their development, as this pesky "fifth amendment" keeps them from realising their dream of raising money. Fortunately, these Justices saw how the mean spirit of common law and civic virtue was depriving local officials of higher salaries and the pursuit of higher offices. They decided to help the poor local officials in their quest.
Sadly, not all Supreme Court Justices saw the progressive future. Some mean justices, like Justice O'Connor and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist thought that the dreams of our plucky local officials should take a back-seat to a silly concept called "private property." Under this plainly absurd notion, people would be able to own their own houses and keep them as long as they wanted! What foolishness!
As everyone knows, the state is all-powerful, and all of our lives and our things are actually its property. We must worship the all-powerful state, because it is plainly looking out for our best interests.
Enough of that digression. In truth, we've seen yet another blow to our rights as citizens handed down by un-elected dunder-heads who get off thinking about government power. This decision has been reviled by both the Left and the Right, and rightly so. It disparages the right of the individual to better line the pockets of rich contractors and morally bankrupt local officials who want more money at the expense of the rights of their citizens.
I hope Dubya and the congress lays aside the terminally stupid flag-burning amendment and creates some legislation to put the judiciary in their place. The right of eminent domain is only intended for projects that are absolutely necessary- military bases, roads, and other necessities. Greater tax revenues are not a sufficient condition to violate the most basic right of a free society. It's an element of creeping statism wherein the state becomes the only arbiter of its authority, and "rights" are merely a nicety given out at the convenience of the state.
If not, there's not much that the homeowners can do. I can think of a couple of solutions, but they're both rather radical and illegal. Perhaps a bit of civil disobedience is in order. I encourage the Left and the Right to get together and provide for those who resist this injustice. If that doesn't work, there's always a more drastic solution to deal with governments that refuse to recognise man's natural rights.

Javier Solana is teh Anti-Christ!

Apparently the progressive forum-dwellers at Conspiracy Super-Site Abovetopsecret.com are engaged in a marvelous debate as to the identity of the anti-Christ. There seems to be divided opinion. One gentleman believes that EU Lord High Something-or-other Javier Solana fits the bill. Though the EU is undoubtedly an obscene work of the noon-day devil and its ministers his earthly servants, the Anti-Christ is supposed to have charm. Solana is a Clintonian-era "squarer of circles," who despite his opposition to NATO as a Spanish Politician became NATO Secretary-General for some reason in 1995 and lead NATO's "Operation Bomb Stuff" and "Operation Avoid Scandalous Headlines" in Kosovo during the terrible year of 1999. He's about as inspiring as a Contemporary Canadian Performance Artist.
Another prominent and more believable candidate is the infamous Hillary Clinton. Again, this is entirely believable, as Hillary is a little Mussolini who thirsts after absolute government power. However, all indications are that the Anti-Christ will actually be popular. Hillary is not so, except inside a group of fanatically loyal "Clintonistas" in the Democratic Party. Perhaps they'll be purged by Chairman Dean during his next Great Leap Forward. YEEEEAAARRRGGGGHHHH!
Let's not pick on poor Chairman Dean. He's not the only one guilty of incredible stupidity nowadays. The GOP has decided to pass an amendment to outlaw flag burning. As much as I love and respect the symbols of our Republic, they become meaningless if we start limiting political expression. Naturally, this is the intent of our ruling classes. We'll likely follow Australia, Britain, and other nations where free speech exists "except in special cases decided by the legislature" (i.e. when they decide to ban it).
An amendment like this is will most likely serve as a trojan horse for odious hate speech legislation that limits liberties and favours certain political voting blocs. Such is the future we have to look forward to- the coercive force of the state being used to further the interests of key voting groups. Then, ascribed groups can fight over the crumbs from the State's table instead of asking important questions about the duties of the state. Divide et impera.
I hope common sense prevails. Of course, hope doesn't guarantee anything. I hope to procure a flying Spitfire also. I doubt either of these hopes will be fulfilled.

Speaking of Speaking Too Soon...

Talk about being over-run by current events! In a recent post, I praised Britain for its tough stance, and gave credit to the always-outrageous Daily Sun for its tractor antics.
Of course, in the two days since Tony promised to take a "firm line" in protecting the rebate, and he vowed that he would only be rid of it if France dropped its extensive agriculture subsidies (for those outside the EU, that roughly translates to "when hell freezes over"), he's completely changed his tune and now insists that the rebate is an "anomaly that has to go." He wants a wider "budget restructuring" that will involve French farm subsidies. Of course, Chirac will never negotiate them, as they are the only thing keeping France's bloated agricultural sector afloat. It seems that Tony will make more sacrifices for the sake of "the project" with no clear benefits. In fact, the UK pays far more into the EU and gets very little out of the deal. It is enough to make one wonder when enough is enough. Certainly, even an Americanised Bulldog such as myself marvels at the inability of Tony to stand up to the EU and his own Europhile ministers. I remember his programme of "red lines-" national prerogatives such as taxation, defense, criminal justice, and foreign policy that Tony swore he'd never give in to the EU. Now it seems the EU is setting up its own diplomatic service and with it its own foreign policy, a Common Defence Procurement Agency outside of NATO, the ability to issue arrest warrants in thirty-one areas, including the vague "racism and xenophobia" charge (remember, any criticism of the Union is, by its nature, racist or at least xenophobic), and a proposal on how member states should tax their people, and more wild proposals for a direct EU tax. Every single red-line has been crossed. Some of them were crossed before he even made up the term.
Tony's self-control when it comes to EU programmes is about as bad as mine when I walk into Cabela's. He can't resist giving more power to the Union, despite massive public opposition. This demonstrates that, nowadays, opinion of a number of bureaucrats far outweighs one's own electorate. Such is the nature of post-modern government.
Further news in the Pessimistic Section, the Planetary Society Solar Sail that I helped fund is silent. The best-case scenario is "unplanned orbit." More likely, the submarine launch and jury-rigged boost engine destroyed it. What a shame.
For good news, I see that the excellent Fulton Armory has expanded their FAR-15 AR-15 type rifle selection. These folks are seriously good at what they do. If you're interested in owning an AR-15 style rifle, or an M14 or Garand, pay them a visit.
I've also started Herman Hesse's master-work novel Magister Ludi. This is a deep novel. So far, I've agreed with most of his ideas about a lack of intellectual rigor in modern education. Years ago, people read Latin and Greek in high school. Nowadays, most people in my college lit class can barely read English. More thoughts will come as I read it further.

More Signs of the Apocalypse

In this planet's never-ending quest to justify my cynicism about the future, I have two brief events to report to my faithful readers. Both are sickening to be sure, and both are dire portents for the future.
The first is Tony Blair's new religious intolerance law currently being debated in Parliament. Blair, being the foremost leader in his intolerance of intolerance, has taken this drastic step at the urging of Britain's sizeable Muslim community. This law outlaws "incitement to religious hatred," though the definition is no more specific than that. In Islam, denying the basic creed "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet" is an infamous crime. Does that qualify as incitement to religious hatred? Or the more-than-likely catalyst for this bill, the "Koran Desecration" incidents? If someone mis-treats a Koran, does that qualify as "incitement?"
This puts forth serious issues concerning free speech and exercise of religion. I am not a Muslim, and I do not believe in the creed. Must I pretend not to? Must I give a book whose tenets I do not believe in more reverence than I do my own Holy Book? Must I memorise the litany of rules regarding proper treatment of the book?
I don't think Tony, despite his Fabian Socialist origins, designs an end to free speech. Laws like this are a symptom of both his sheer incompetence and the leftist dogma that government is the solution to every problem. Tony knows that Muslim immigrants are a growth sector in his electorate, and as they oppose his backing of the Iraq War, he's giving this to them as a diversion.
The other sign of the immanent apocalypse is from to-day's Awful Link on Something Awful. I never predicted people this sick, but it seems that someone has written homo-erotic civil war fiction. I'll leave it at that.

Live at the Crime Scene

It seems that the EU budgetary talks have collapsed when Britain refused to give up its rebate (yet another gift from the Iron Lady whose efforts to save Britain Tony Blair is undoing more each day). Of course, the fact that the rebate consists of 2/3 the difference between what Britain pays to the EU and the benefits they receive (about £3 billion) does not occur to the likes of l'escroc and walking political corpse Gerhard Schroder. Chirac wants more subsidies to keep his career afloat, and since Britain is the only one of the Big Three European Nations that has a semblance of an economy these days, only the UK can pay for it. Blair didn't sign thanks to the efforts of the always-amusing Daily Sun, who have rented a tractor, emblazoned it with the slogan "Hands off our rebate!", and drove it through the streets of Brussels. I apologise for the lack of linkage to this, but old Sun articles require a subscription to access.
Before one gets too enamoured with plucky Britain's stand against the Continental Goons, it seems that there's much internal decay about the Sceptered Isle. It seems that Tony Blair is resorting to desperate measures to deal with the rise of youth mob culture in Britain. Calling the Army on to the streets shows that the social breakdown in Britain is reaching endemic proportions. Add this to the presence of a political-police organisation (the "Community Support Officers") and the ability of authorities to issue ASBOs, or Anti-Social Behaviour Orders that impose penalties without trial. Let this be a lesson to all those who believe that mere force exercised by the government can replace civic virtue.
On the positive side, someone has finally produced a parody of the cookie-cutter Ken Burns documentaries. It's called the Old Negro Space Program, and it's positively side-splitting. Take a look.
And, in related space news, there's a third challenger who is working towards NASA's new shuttle-replacement programme. They're called Transform Space, and they're backed by Scaled Composites. They're the dark horse group, but the seem to have their act together. Here's a link to their CXV concept. It's less Apollo-esque than Boeing's, but more compact than Lockheed-Martin's. They also have a lunar development plan. Sounds like a good crew.

Death to Anglicanism!

I shall continue with my analysis of my depressing five-year old predictions in a paragraph or two, but I should like to enlighten my reader(s) with an historical review of the office of the Archbishopric of Canterbury.
One of the most famous Archbishops of Canterbury was St. Thomas Beckett, who was the first commoner of any kind to make a mark of English History (according to Simon Schama, at any rate). He managed to royally piss off King Henry II, who in no uncertain words referred to his knights as "miserable drones and traitors" who "allow(ed) their lord to be treated with such shameful contempt by a low-born cleric." Four knights took the King's meaning and departed for Canterbury, where they opened St. Thomas' skull and smeared his brains on the stones of Canterbury cathedral.
After Henry VIII founded the Church of England for the noble purpose of securing a better lay, Englishmen suffered the insufferably authoritarian Archbishop William Laud. Laud decided that the CoE would be the only religious institution of the country, and connived with the loathsome King Charles I to use religion as a political tool to fulfill Charles' dream of a United Britain. Laud's heavy-handedness led to the terrible British civil wars, and the rise of Grand Inquisitor Torquemada's favourite Protestant, Oliver Cromwell. Laud was deservedly decapitated.
Now, we find another obnoxious type in the Arch-Episcopal garments. Dr. Rowan Williams is the current proprietor of the failing Church of England. He is famous for doubting the existence of God during the latest Tsunami disaster, and creating a rift in the world-wide Anglican Communion by pushing through controversial measures about Gay Clergy. Now, it seems Dr. Williams is following in the steps of his forebear Archbishop Laud. He's recently castigated bloggers and the "new media" because he sees the wonderfully tumultuous process of internet dialogue "close to that of unpoliced conversation."
Should conversation be policed, Right Reverend? Why should we be stuck with the, as you say, "cool professionalism" of the old media when it's been demonstrated to not exist at all? The old media are just as full of “paranoid fantasy, self-indulgent nonsense and dangerous bigotry.” While I think the full expression of human beings is a good thing, our political masters disagree. They want to re-create that all-important illusion of a "consensus" moving steadily in a pro-government direction. Rt. Reverend Williams is no exception to this. He's more a politician than a leader, and he's in deep with the NuLabour establishment.
I say that his church deserves to sink. Let those who love ceremony convert to Popery (and thus please many colleagues of mine), and let those who prefer the spirit and simplicity of Protestandenominationsns join a real church, not a screeching circle of activist thugs.
I, as a distant son of Britain, do wholly repudiate the Church of England and deny the preposterous claim any Monarch or Archbishop of Canterbury of spiritual authority. I deny the Queen's title of Head of the Church in England, and I must humbly ask her why half-witted activists such as Rt. Rev. Williams are being put in office as her representative. At least this demonstrates the prudence oseparatingng Church and State.
After that bit of invective, let me change the direction of the venom, but not its flow. To-day I shall focus on computers. This was a major concern of mine some time ago, and checking again, I see that my concerns were justified.
First on my list was the dominance of Microsoft. They haven't been checked, and Apple is even more heavy-handed in its dealings with those who displease His Trendiness Steve Jobs. Windows XP is still the largest operating system out there.
My worst fear in computer realms was an invasion of privacy. First, that companies would install software on your computer to put advertising on your computer. That's already come to pass. My second fear was an identifying number hard-wired into processors that identified each computer. This has also come to pass thanks to Intel. My third fear was a devil's alliance of the RIAA and Microsoft that would make it impossible to play pirated music on one's PC due to invasive copyright-protection software. This is due to happen in the next edition of Windows, Windows Longhorn. Microsoft is integrating Digital Rights Management that will ensure that every file you play is up to RIAA snuff (and, presumably, inform on you if it isn't). It adds another intrusive layer of security to benefit the thugs at the RIAA. To make it worse, Intel is in on it also, as they intend to integrate DRM into their new chips.
Looks like my next PC will be running Linux and will work from a non-Intel CPU. Will these types ever be satisfied, or must all our life be on public display for them?

5 Years' Review

I recently uncovered a notebook containing some of my predictions for the future that I penned in High School, around the year 2000 or so. I set out a number of scenarios for the intermediate-term (2010 time period), organised along the lines of "good," "probable," and "bad."
Upon looking at this list, I found that most of my pessimistic predictions are the ones coming true. If I'd been in a coma since 2000 and woke up now, I'd have been in a most unfortunate state. Let's examine some of these predictions, to see how much things have changed.
The geopolitical stage was the first subject, as it is now. Given India and Pakistan's publicised nuclear tests, I predicted a worst-case scenario of 2010 would involve a nuclear-armed Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. Iraq went a bit different than what I predicted, but as the song says, "Two out of three ain't bad."
Regarding war, I was mostly worried about a renewed Korean conflict. I optimistically assumed I'd be an F-22 pilot in this war, though it seems in retrospect that my sight was lacking. Another scenario involved a Taiwan conflict, which is my current favourite dooms-day scenario. It seems to me a Taiwan conflict is likely in the 2008-2010 time frame.
Another key thing was computers, and I shall write about this to-morrow.
To close, here's a lovely speech by infamous propagandist Lord Haw-Haw, who properly danced from a gibbet for his treason on 3 January, 1946. He did his last propaganda broadcast on behalf of the German Reich on 30 April 1945, which you can listen to on RealPlayer. Enjoy his eloquent delivery of the sobering truth about Deutschland.

Death to the Media-Whores!

Comrades, after a period of enforced retirement, I have returned to preach the revolutionary gospel that the ruling classes do not want you to hear!
I must ask my comrades the world over if they know of any greater Philistinism than the current news-media? O, how for many years we have suffered the iniquity of unending celebrity coverage and hand-wringing on subjects that are fairly minor in the world-scheme. They sit, prattling about subjects of vast insignifigance whilst literally earth-shaking events are given no coverage at all. They have spawned the Evil One, Connie Chung, and Geraldo Rivera. They made the nineties one of the most terrible decades so far. They created the toxic culture that allows disease to flourish. And people, who should be out creating the dictatorship of the proletariot, instead become unduly fascinated with a dim-witted set who embody all of NuLabour's failures living in a house.
Comrades, do you remember all of the ludicrious fads that have been perpetrated on the people by the media whores? The memory of a coven of overly-tanned bleached-blonde crones attempting to put on a concert of the "survivor" song that was so popular a few years ago is still fresh in my mind. Remember the faux-leather pants? Or the pre-worn pants? Perhaps the phenomenon of the Spice Girls?
Take, for example, the Michael Jackson case. What's my opinion? Who cares! It only demonstrates my new theory of personal worth.
It's long been taken in our society that everyone's life is somehow equal. This is not manifest in our media. Based on my observation, I think the life of a celebrity is worth about twenty whites or one hundred blacks. Worse off are Asians and Africans. A celebrity's life is worth about 500 asians and up to 2,000 africans when it comes to coverage. Of course, this is a rough estimate, but I think a mathematical review comparing position and column inches to subject matter will bear this out.
Death to the media-whores! Let us be free of their endlessly trite lives! We shall throw off the shackles of the media culture and Hollywood! All Power to the Soviets!

A Warning

Be wary of those who seek to place their grand designs on everyone.

Normal posting shall resume in time.