Weird and difficult to explain

29 July, 2016

Here’s some refugees from war-torn Syria, or something:

Now ain’t that the oddest collection of war refugees you ever saw? The more you think about it, the stranger it appears.

Where are the missing limbs and eyes, the shrapnel injuries? Where are the wives and little babies? Where are the carts or bags with the pitiful remains of what’s left of their lost home, gone forever? Where are the pleading eyes, the ribs visible from hunger?

Why are all of these refugees well-fed, fit, healthy young men of military age?

Remember, kids: ‘jihad’ is simply the Arabic word for ‘crusade’. That’s what the word means. It means ‘crusade’. There’s a crusade going on right now as we speak, and these fit young men are crusaders. They have traveled to Europe to demonstrate their faith in God and submission to his will by carrying out the holy work of killing the infidel.

That’s what’s going on. It really is that simple. This is not a crowd of refugees. This is an invading army. That’s why – for instance – there is so much rape going on in Sweden at the hands of these refugees. Rape is what armies do. Like looting, it’s a perk of the job.

The nation that doesn’t shoot these young men at the border (or at the very least turn them back) will get and are getting exactly what you would expect.


Human trafficked sex slaves.

29 November, 2015

This: Religious sisters to expand fight against slavery to 140 nations

LONDON, Nov 18 (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – An army of religious sisters who rescue victims of human trafficking by posing as prostitutes to infiltrate brothels and buying children being sold into slavery, is expanding to 140 countries, its chairman said on Wednesday.

John Studzinski, an investment banker and philanthropist who chairs Talitha Kum, said the network of 1,100 sisters currently operates in about 80 countries but the demand for efforts to combat trafficking and slavery was rising globally.

The group, set up in 2004, estimates one percent of the world’s population is trafficked in some form, which translates into some 73 million people. Of those, 70 percent are women and half are aged 16 or younger.

“I’m not trying to be sensational but I’m trying to underscore the fact this is a world that has lost innocence … where dark forces are active,” said Studzinski, a vice chairman of U.S. asset manager The Blackstone Group.

Dark forces indeed.

The sheer innumeracy of these hysterics is mind boggling. (Innumeracy is hallmark of people who believe in Noah’s ark and the exodus).

Of course, there’s weasel words here – 1% is trafficked “in some form”. But the sly intent of this dudes speech is to gloss over that and to suggest that 1% are trafficked for sex.

So let’s run with this. Let’s say 1% of all people – on average – are human trafficked sex slaves. The sex-slavery hysterics typically quote impossible figures for how many clients these sex slaves see: five a night or some nonsense. That means that every night, 5% of the world’s population are having sex with a human trafficked sex slave. Assuming it’s mainly men who do this, we are talking 10% of all males. Since we are talking only about 1) adult men; with 2) at least some money, we are talking – say – 20% of that subgroup.

In other words: if a) 1% of the worlds population is a human-trafficked sex slave; b) servicing five clients a night; and c) adult blokes with jobs are maybe 25% of the world’s population; then every adult bloke with a job IN THE WORLD is seeing a human trafficked, probably underaged, sex-slave in a suburban dungeon somewhere about once a week.

And that’s not including the regular hookers. It’s a mystery how the porn sites stay in business, considering that between the underaged human trafficked sex slaves, the regular hookers, and the wife, every man in the world must be pretty much tapped out most of the time.

It’s ludicrous.

Oh, and a thousand or so nuns are going to fix this. Why not start with something easier, like poverty and disease in Calcutta? I hear that even with an actual catholic saint on the job, it’s still as bad as ever.


On the Crimean (repost)

8 August, 2015

This is reposted from here: http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/paul-murray/54826/on-the-current-kerfuffle-in-the-crimea . Smirkingchimp is always threatening to run out of money, so in case it goes dark here is this piece on my blog. It’s not currently in the news, but the topic is perennial.


I think I might weigh in on the topic of the recent kerfuffle in the Crimean peninsula.

But before I do, I am going to talk about Panama.

CAVEAT: I am not a defence person, I know nothing about these topics other than general knowledge and access to Google maps.

The USA is and always has been a naval power. It’s simple. To the west, over the Pacific Ocean, is Asia and civilisation. To the east, over the Atlantic Ocean, is Europe and civilisation. While europeans can fight with each other using land armies, the only way the USA can make war is over the ocean. The USA, in fact, has an entire corps of armed servicemen alongside the navy, army, and air force whose entire reason for being is “soldiers who go to places on ships”.

The USA has two coastal frontages – east and west. There are four ways to get a navy from one side of the USA to the other.

First, put the ships on rollers and haul them down the interstate. Good luck with that.

Second, and just as impractical, sail them through north around Canada through the arctic sea, which only recently has not been icebound in summer.
Third, sail them around the tip of south america – a quarter of the circumference of the world away – and through the Southern Ocean.

Fourthly, the ditch. The Panama Canal.

The military importance of the ditch to the USA cannot be overstated. I mean literally – try overstating it, try coming up with a form of words that is maybe a bit much. Can’t do it, right? The permits the USA to threaten both China and also Europe/Africa/The middle east with the full force of its naval power. The USA can field all of its carriers, all of its subs, all of its marines against the enemy du jour in either hemisphere in a matter of days. Without the ditch, the USA would have to run two navies, or only be able to field half a navy to each.

The USA will never, never, never cede control over the ditch to anyone. Ever. Oh, it may be technically in the hands of a foreign power, Panama may be a whole ‘nother country to the USA, but you know and I know and everyone in the world knows that that’s bullshit. It’s a US asset. And the USA would, if it had to, fight WWIII over it.

I am not exaggerating.

What do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis was really about? Nukes striking the American mainland? Pfft. A nuke will take out several square miles of a city – but there’s plenty of those. It will kill a bunch of people – there’s millions more. It will destroy an ammo dump (Dr Strangelove reference there) or a military base. So what? Miami is simply not a military target. Military targets (missile silos, airfields, command centers) are dispersed all over the US exactly in order to make the US military capability more nuke-proof.

But nuking the ditch would be a serious and unacceptable game-changer. It would not only maim the Navy, it would throw the armed forces into chaos for days. No freaking way will the USA permit it, or even the possibility that it might be done. Kennedy would have pressed the button over it.

At this point, dial up google maps, zoom out, and have a look at Russia.

Actually – this is really the main point that this post is trying to make. None of this makes sense unless you look at a freaking map and get an idea of where everything is. It’s all about geography. Look at a goddamn mapnot opinion pieces about gay rights, not comparisons of Putin to Hitler, not blatherings about ethnic russians – you need to look at the damn map. That’s what it’s all about. People are talking about the Crimean business like it’s a battle of words and ideas, probably because that’s what they mainly know about. The Crimean Kerfuffle is not about words and ideas. It’s about ships and troops.

Russia has three naval frontages. In the east, access to the Pacific. In the north and west, access to the Arctic Ocean. Good luck sailing out of that in winter – although I suppose its ok for submarines (and this is why subs are important to Russia).

The third naval frontage is access to the Black Sea. The Black Sea is connected to the Agean Sea and the Mediterranean via the Bosphorus, and from there to the Atlantic Ocean to the west and the Suez canal to the south east.

As you can see because you are looking at the map, Russia has a fair bit of the coast of the Black Sea on the east. But you can see that it’s all mountains – the Caucasus I think. Useless. The land is inhabited by wild, hairy tribes of barbarous inbred wogs, many of whom don’t much like Russians (with, admittedly, excellent reason). You can’t build a road there, and if you could you couldn’t march troops down it to the transports.

However:

At the north of the Black Sea is a booger of land about a hundred miles across. This is the Crimean Peninsula. And at the southern tip of it, on the west coast, a little place called Seavastopol. This place was put there by the Tsars to serve as Russia’s port and access to the Mediterranean. The Crimean Peninsula is Russia’s Panama, and that port is Russia’s panama canal. Thanks to some stuff that went down late last century, that booger of land is technically part of a whole ‘nother country called “The Ukraine”. But you know and I know and everyone in the world who pays attention knows that that’s bullshit. It is a Russian asset.

The kerfuffle in the Crimea has go nothing to do with gays, or ethnic russians (although obviously the Crimea is as full of them as Panama is full of americans), or even Putin. It is 100% about The Great Game. There is no way in hell that Russia will lose control of that port. No freaking way. They will fight WWIII over it, if they have to. They would rather not, but like Kennedy and Panama, Putin will press the button rather than lose that asset.

And that’s what this is about.

Perhaps the main question remaining is: why is this blowing up now? That is a whole new topic, and the answer is probably (as in: you know and I know and everybody else in the world knows) that the Pentagon and the security state of the USA are fomenting trouble there in response to the budget squeeze at home. It’s a fund-raiser.

And a lunatic dangerous one. Russia will not, will not, will not lose control of Svestapol without a fight, and they will escalate as far as it takes, whatever it takes. They are not bluffing. They still have nukes. If they have to, they will march the Red Army south right through the middle of the Ukraine, and to hell with anyone who gets in the way. If Kiev doesn’t like it, fuck them. If anyone wants to help out Kiev, fuck them too.

And it’s all down to the pentagon having a hissy-fit over their trillion-dollar budget taking a haircut, the military establishment wanting to remind the world that warmaking is still relevant.


On Gay marriage and the SCOTUS

29 June, 2015

This is a post I made on AVfM on the recent gay marriage decision in the USA, in reply to “keep your dirty government fingers out of my marriage!” fools. I think it sums up my opinions.


Family members have legal status. Should we do away with the notion that – in the eyes of the law – one’s brothers, sisters, parents and children have a status that strangers do not? That they should not be able to see us when we are in hospital on our deatbeds? That if we die intestate, there should be no presumption that our estate descends to them? Should the day come – God forbid – that someone must decide whether or not to turn the respirator off, should this decision not be in the hands of someone we love, and who we believe loves us? Doing this makes the government, or our employers, or the hospital, the only “family” we have. It’s the opposite of what most libertarians and suchlike would want.

Family means something, and it should mean something in law.

Marriage is a declaration to the world at large, and therefore yes – to the state: “We two are family now. This other person is closer to me than my brothers and sisters, and is first in line in my life.” By its very nature, it is not a private act. That’s why it is done in front of witnesses. Its public-ness is the entire point of it, it’s the difference between a marriage, specifically, and just sleeping with someone you like.

Gay people, pleading equal protection (rightly in the eyes of the SCOTUS) have won the right for their partnerships to be legally recognised in this way. It’s not “tyranny” or anything like it: if anything, it’s the reverse – someone who can rightfully stand between oneself and the uncaring mechanisms of state and medical industry when we are incapacitated. It’s an issue particularly poignant for people who, so often, are rejected by their own natural families. The state now recognises that, for gay people, the person they love and care about more than any other person in the world has some sort of legal status in their life.


For @AndreVltchek

21 June, 2015

For @AndreVltchek, in response to In the USA – “I Cannot Write!”.

“During those two weeks I met some of the greatest thinkers living in the United States: Michael Parenti, and John Cobb. Some time ago I worked with Michael on two books, one his and one mine, but this was our first face-to-face encounter. I discussed Christianity with John Cobb, trying to define what is encoded in it that allows the most horrid atrocities to be committed in the name of the Cross. It was deep, philosophical discussion, and we will convert it into a book, soon.”

What do we know about Jehovah, god of the earliest parts of the bible?

Well, he is slow to anger, but his anger is very terrible. When he becomes angry, he shakes the pillars of the earth. He punishes people by making the earth open up and swallow them. Smoke issues from his nostrils. His eyes are a flame of fire, and his mouth is a consuming fire. The radiance of his immediate presence is so great that no man can look directly upon him and live. He led his people across the desert with a pillar of smoke by day and fire by night. Moses received the law by ascending a mountain that smoked and shook.

He kills almost indiscriminately – human lives are nothing to him. His anger against all humanity is so great that he can only be placated by sacrifice. And not just any sacrifice, but one that is pure and unblemished. Innocent. The key to the redemption of man is a human sacrifice, and not just of any human, but of a sinlessly perfect one. But people still anger him even so, so he will cast them into a lake of fire that wil burn and burn forever. His rage is bottomless, limitless. For his enemies (anyone that does not prostrate themselves to him) no vengeance, no matter how extravagant, is enough.

According to the bible, all of humanity is descended from a tribe of people from the region of Mt Ararat. I would wager a considerable amount that 10,000 years ago or so, those mountains were active volcanoes.

What is encoded in christianity that permits atrocities? Only the most fearsome, violent and unpredictable phenomenon in all nature, one that must be placated, pleased, flattered by any means necessary, at any cost, and not always with much success. Jehovah is a volcano god – he is as as frightening and cruel as every other volcano god like him.


Ahhh, Christians!

14 December, 2014

Christians! God love em! I used to be one, you know.

It’s adorable the way they like to think they believe the bible. They don’t, they believe in the bible. The bible as a thing, as a cultural prop, as a sure foundation on which their lives rest.

But the stuff written in it? Not so much. Oh – they like to think they believe it. But they don’t actually. You can tell this by the things that they do.

Here’s some bible verses for you.

John 14:15“If you love me, you will keep my commandments. … 21Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”

1 John 5:1Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him. 2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. 3For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. 4For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith.

2 John 1:5And now I ask you, dear lady—not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning—that we love one another. 6And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it.

Seems John sure loved hisself some holiness. Yeah, sure – I know perfectly well that there’s no way that “John” wrote the books attributed to him. But that’s not the point. It’s The Bible, right? Christians belive [in] The Bible. But sometimes they seem to forget that Jesus is not just supposed to be your saviour, he is supposed to be your lord. Salvation is not free – it comes with a price tag. (Although actually it doesn’t, because we owe God our fealty anyway – a fine point of contract law).

Now, if you want to say at this point that not everything that the bible plainly, in black and white tells christians to do counts as a “commandment”, then by all means stop reading.

If you actually belive the bible, then let us continue.

Here’s Jesus talking:

Matt 5:31“It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

THAT’S OUT OF CONTEXT!!!!11!!eleven!!!11!

Oh really? Well, lets have a bit of context, then:

Matt 5:27“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

Oww. The context of that verse is Jesus – Jesus mind you – saying “Unrepentant adulterers go to hell. Oh and BTW, that includes divorcees who remarry”.

You know that nice, lovely christian lady who divorced her horrible loser of a husband and remarried a nice christian man and they are very happy and raising their kids well?

Well, they are going to burn in the lake of fire forever and ever. They do not love god, they only think they do. We know this because they do not obey his commandments.

The Catholics are right. The bible clearly states as simply as can be that divorced people are not to remarry. Of course, they have this absurd business of granting “annulments”, but don’t think or a second that God won’t see through such a cheap trick (Monty Python reference, there). “Ok,” says God, “you can divorce. Once. But then it’s over – none of this serial polygamy bullshit.”

Finally: let’s send a shout-out to any Pastor, anywhere, ever, that has knowingly performed a marriage for a divorced person. They will spend a lost eternity in hell, and if God is just so will you.

⁂ ⁂ ⁂

By what criterion did Jesus separate the sheep and the goats? Not by what they believed, not by what they said, not by whether their Sunday clothes were nice. He separated them on the basis of what they did and did not do.

I know that you don’t really believe this stuff. Not really. I mean: come on! Let’s get serious. The bible also says to sell your home and spend every last cent trying to reach the lost for Jesus before his imminent return. Who’s going to do that? Nobody, and idiots, that’s who.

So how about you stop coming to my door all smiley and inviting me to your christmas sermon. It’s bullshit, and you know it is.


#gamergate

9 November, 2014

You know that reddit is censoring posts, right? That means that this is going to be deleted. So I’ll post it here as well.


[–]PieceOfShoe 1 point 3 days ago

This is not Mozilla. It’s an opinion peace on an open blog that they run. The blog post even got called down by them later https://openstandard.mozilla.org/our-sincerest-apologies/. I’m having the hardest time trying to find out what GamerGate is. So much noise out there on this topic. Anyone explain it to me like i’m 5?

permalink

[–]PaulMurrayCbr 2 points 10 minutes ago*

Like you are 5? Ok.

Some people make computer games. Some people write about whether the new computer games are good or not. People who write about the games need to be fair and treat the games all the same, otherwise there’s no point reading them.

Well it turns out there’s this girl who makes computer games, and she kissed a boy who writes about computer games so he would write nice things about her game. It turns out she kissed a bunch of other boys too, and even some girls, and the boy found out and got mad and told on her.

A lot of people are upset because girls can get whatever they want just by kissing the boys, and that’s not fair. And other people are mad at them because they say that girls should be able to kiss whoever they want and it’s not fair to tell on them.

Then all the people who write all the stories about games got together and said that all the people who like games are bad for being mad at the girl. The people who play the games are mad at them because the people who write about games were rude to them, and they thought that those people liked games and liked the people who play games and it turns out they don’t like them at all.

And they are mad that it turns out that all the stories about the games are not really true about whether the games are good or not – it’s really just about who is kissing who – so people who are boys and make games can’t get good stories no matter how good their games are.

And they are also mad because it turns out that all the people who write about games talk to each other secretly and decide together what games are good and what games are bad, so you can’t really believe any of them.

And it turns out it’s not just the people who write stories about the games – it’s the people who run competitions for the games with big important prizes, and the people who make the big websites for games. It turns out that there aren’t really a whole bunch of different websites by a whole bunch of different people – there’s just one really small group of people, and they are all part of the whole kissing and not telling the truth about the games thing.

You see, it’s not just bad for the boys who play the games and write the games if a girl can get nice stories about her not-very-good game by kissing the right boys (and girls). it’s bad for those girls too, because boys only want to be kissed by girls if they are young and pretty, and not all girls are pretty and no girl stays young for very long.

But all the girls who are saying that it’s unfair to tell on girls who kiss the boys to get stuff from them are mad at all the people who say this, because it reminds them that they are not going to be young and pretty forever either, and they don’t like to be reminded of that.

permalink