The Market Ticker - Cancelled ®
What 'They' Don't Want Published - Category [Musings]
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Sarah's Blog
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in any firm or security discussed here, and have no duty to disclose same.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must be complete (NOT a "pitch"), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. Pitch emails missing the above will be silently deleted. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2024-10-25 06:57 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 197 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

"America needs a militant democracy" -- Adolf Hitler, 1939.

Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt advised pushing a "militant democracy" to ensure an "authoritarian figure" like former President Trump never rises to power again.

In an op-ed for the New York Times, Levitsky and Ziblatt describe how they spent the last year "researching how democracies can protect themselves from authoritarian threats from within," lamenting how close Trump remains to getting a second term.

"How could such an openly authoritarian figure have a coin flip’s chance of returning to the presidency? Why have so many of our democracy’s defenses seemingly broken down, and which, if any, remain?" they wrote.

We're not a Democracy; America is a Constitutional Republic.

No matter the majority there are things you can't do; that's the difference.  One of the things you can't do, which both these "professors" and Hitler did, is outlaw speech -- whether you're offended by said speech or not.

Harvard and its professors, of course, have freedom of speech too -- even speech that wildly offends like theirs does here.

However, I will note that since The First Amendment applies to all but true and unconditional threats, and in fact it is lawful to note what the retributive act will be if our Constitution is abrogated wholesale because under said Constitution such an act is unconditionally unconstitutional and thus impermissible and as such that note is NOT a legally-punishable threat, that should said Professors manage to convince the public to overthrow the Constitution and its protections, an act of unspeakable evil and an act of Civil War against the American people, that their families, their property and their persons will go first in what follows.

Don't do it Professors.

I don't want it and I assure you don't want it either but by God I will act in whatever degree is necessary to prevent any funny Austrian painters from taking hold in America.  We know where that leads, and no, Donald Trump is not Hitler despite your rhetorical bull****.

It is especially telling that these "Professors" believe that they would somehow be magically shielded from the consequences of such act were they to succeed in provoking it.

That, standing alone, makes them unfit to profess anything and that Harvard allows such as a serious discussion and proposal for America, not a mere academic exercise, is enough for me to call for each and every graduate and student, along with THEIR families, to be shunned in all respects and thus destroyed, entirely within the boundaries of the law as is every person's right under said First Amendment to not associate with those who seek to ruin this nation and kill both them and their families.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-09-20 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 479 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

.... before you provoke or start one.

Let's take the Hezbollah detonating pagers and, it appears, now HTs as well.  People are trying to run a scare-op that the batteries exploded due to some firmware change.  No.  First most pagers run on a single AA battery because they're very low power as they do not transmit (the reason Hezbollah went to them in the first place; its very easy to "find" someone who is transmitting all the time, such as a cellphone.)  Those were clearly detonations, not fires, and thus the devices were tampered with.

Want my bet on how?  A "front company" that the other side (Mossad, basically) set up managed to bait Hezbollah on their orders with an "unbelievably good" price.  You know the old adage about something that's too good to be true?  It was; the front company bought the devices, put the explosives in them and then sold them at an intentional loss to Hezbollah.  I'll bet any amount of money you care to lose that's how it happened and every one of them went to the intended target.

There are plenty of people who are saying this is a "war crime" or similar.  Sorry but there's no such thing in this sort of context as I've pointed out before.  These devices were explicitly coded for an encrypted network used only by Hezbollah and thus useless in the secondary market or by others.  In other words there is an extremely high probability, near 100%, that only a Hezbollah person would have them since they'd be the only people for whom they would work and further, since they were remote triggered with a message only if on that encrypted network would they explode.  That they might be living with others who are family members or similar elicits nothing more than a shrug from me.

To those who argue that the political, non-fighting parts of a "government" are immune that's bull**** folks.  Oh you can take whatever position you want but you're wrong and I don't care if you like it or not.  Take the US: We have a "civilian command and control" structure up to the President as CiC.  Therefore the President, who is subject to being removed by impeachment through Congress, which in turn means the people because we elect Congress and they serve at our pleasureis an actual combatant in any military action this nation takes -- it is he or she who issues actual operational orders and both that person and the entirety of Congress and all persons who are employed in support of either, directly and indirectly, are legitimate military targets if and when we engage in any military act.

Indeed the same can be reasonably construed even against civilians because without tax money and the civilian infrastructure, including the flow of money, no war can be prosecuted at all.  That's right folks -- you, I, and everyone else are legitimate targets if there is a war because but for our contributions there is no war since all wars require material and money.  You don't really think Rosie was a riveter for other than the purpose of prosecuting a war, do you?  Well if she was riveting to prosecute a war then Rosie is a legitimate target for the other side.

Oh and spare me the high-minded bull**** about America in this regard.  Do recall we put a cruise missile through Gaddafi's office window -- and can we talk about Saddam?  He was hanged, was he not?  Well then why would you not expect Biden and Harris -- along with the entire State Department cadre in support of that crap over there to hang if Ukraine loses?  The only reason they won't is the inability of the other side to reach said people and do it.  How sure are you they can't reach them -- and, since you generated the tax revenue that funded that war and thus are the reason it occurred, how sure might you be that they cannot reach you?  May I remind you that it is much easier to reach you or I than it is to reach the President?

Again -- if you don't like wars don't start one and don't let your activity be the reason one can be funded and continued either.

Speaking of wars those can be rather "un"-civil too.  Indeed war is the end result of reason in the context of politics that fails to find acceptance and one or both sides decide to continue by violent means.

Like, for example, attempted political assassinations of a candidate when you fear you might lose through the process of reason at the ballot box.

Let me point something out to those who are engaged in these events and those who effectively cheer them on such as the current Administration and its spokesperson as well as many in the government itself along with others among their families (e.g. Vindman's wife) who have made quips on social media like "no ears were harmed."

Are you sure you want a war because it sure appears, to this person, that the entire left side of the aisle not only wants one they're deliberately trying to provoke it right here at home!

Do you have any idea what that looks like if you get what you're provoking?

Let me explain it to you since the above principle applies to anyone who possesses a brain: Anyone involved in any way with the promotion, funding or operations of the side aggrieved is a legitimate target in the event of war.

Anyone and everyone.

Yes, you with a campaign sign on your front lawn or a bumper sticker on your car.  Your spouse and children who are part and parcel of the reason you labor and produce.  Anyone who has donated any amount of money to a political campaign or PAC, even one dollar is enough.  Anyone who works for an organization that has funded or is a SuperPac, or benefits from any interest said PACs advocate for.  All the businesses, magazines, newspapers, their corporate owners along with every single employee of same who are the reason said corporation earns money and thus can exist and more.

Yeah, that's like damn near the entire American population on one side or another and I, for one would rather not have simply going to the mailbox in the afternoon be a potential "shooting gallery" style event.

Then again I can reason and foresee the logical conclusion to this sort of stupidity and an awful lot of people in this nation apparently cannot.

If you start this crap that is in fact the "solution set" of people who are "fair game" and I'm sure you can figure out that you can either sit at home and try to protect your house and the people in from being destroyed or you can go to work or simply make a run to the store and expose same to destruction.  You can't do both because you can't be in two places at once and worse, everyone else is in the same situation at the same time and literally everyone is a potential aggressor with no way to know who will do the "evil" thing.  It is obviously impossible to either protect all the potential targets or arrest everyone with the means and potential motive to commit such an act when all it takes is utterly bog-common things everyone has at hand in their homes.

If you think the war in Gaza, Lebanon or Syria is bad you really need a wake-up call or perhaps a history lesson because in places like Rwanda, where they first banned guns, the people there didn't bother shooting anyone -- they used machetes and slaughtered about 20% of the population within a couple month's time.  Who doesn't have a steak knife within easy reach and if you think such is not a "big deal" go ask an EMT about whether such an attack is dangerous.

We have a serious problem in this nation -- and indeed worldwide -- in that people have become disconnected from the consequence of war and other forms of "unrest."  While a lone nutjob acts alone and with his or her own resources, which are typically quite-limited politically-motivated violence, such as the mobs in 2020 who burned, looted and murdered, "CHAZ" and similar garbage, the money-driven invasion of "migrants" that in fact has been repeatedly shown to be motivated and exploited on the basis of money and said persons allegedly "helped" are nothing more than human farm animals abused for said purpose and more are NOT the acts of singular individuals -- they are acts that require organization, coordination and participation to take place just like Rosie had to rivet that plane together so it could go bomb Germans and Japanese and both Rosie and the entire plant management, along with the suppliers of the metal, rivets and energy conspired together to do so.  Without every one of them no plane flies and thus no city gets bombed.

Hundreds of years ago every King understood this.  He had to leave his keep and get on his horse to prosecute the war because the war had to be led and the men needed said leadership and motivation.  This meant he had to risk being personally killed.  His men had to be so-motivated by his personal risk because they had to look the other guy in the eye while running him through with their swords and they knew damn well that the other guy would look them in the eye if he killed them in exactly the same way.  There were no "safe spaces", there were no "rules of war", if you lost your kids were frequently slaughtered like dogs and your wife raped so as to produce more of "their" side's genetic material, it was very likely your town would be burnt to ash and everyone knew that every single person in the nearest village and in fact through the entire land was exposed to this risk as soon as war began.

You thus only started and participated in said wars that were worth that deeply personal risk.  If directly attacked you had no choice; fight or die.  But otherwise, where you had a choice, you thought about it long and hard because there was no escaping the consequences all the way to the top.

Now look at everything post-WWII.  Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, the bull**** in Ukraine and now Hezbollah/Israel/whatever.  Why should we, or those in Europe, think we're free of risk when we want to fund and supply these people?  More to the point where do you think these *******s taking potshots and trying to blow up a political candidate get the idea they can do that without every one of their family members, and all of the political party members who have cheered on such acts via rhetoric such as displaying heads cut off in effigy being exposed to a retributive strike by members of the other side?

The old ways, before we had push-button technology, forced you to confront the reality of what you were doing, whether directly or by providing supply, aid and comfort to those engaged in said actions.  The "international" political apparatus of course wants to claim this is "illegitimate" through things like the "Geneva Conventions" but their concern is not for the people at large -- it is for their own skin and that of their families which damn well ought to be fully exposed up to and including at the cost of their lives when they wage war, whether directly, by proxy or by supply either through physical material or intelligence and whether domestically or otherwise.

Why?  Because only the very real risk of serious personal consequences -- not high-minded bull**** spewed from some ivory tower -- has a proven record of deterring people from being *******s.  Even that is not a perfect record by any means but the last 70 years and especially the last decade right here at home with the politically-motivated riots in 2020 none of which were punished make clear that all the high-minded and mealy-mouthed bull**** is worthless.  Without deterrence every unpunished crime begats another more-serious one because there is no cost imposed on anyone for committing it and therefore as long as there is benefit to commit the crime the pattern of escalation will continue.

Arson is one of the most-serious felonies that is on the books and in fact a person RAISING BAIL MONEY FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENDERS is running for President and the Governor of one of the focal states of said attacks who sat back AND LET IT HAPPEN, PARTICULARLY CENTERED AMONG BLACK BUSINESSES despite having command and control of the National Guard is her VP candidate.  Said candidates have the gall to expect black people's votes today!

The outrageous farming of humans for profit at the cost of their abuse over the last three decades, none of which has been punished even though all of it is a felony under laws on the books since the 1950s continues apace today including in Springfield Ohio.  Neither State OR Federal Government when under control of either party over the last two Administrations has brought a single charge under 8 USC 1324 even when citizens have been murdered by illegal aliens.

Further, in the last couple of political cycles the belief that such acts, along with the intentional and illegal obfuscation of  timely election results, coupled with a refusal by the judiciary to order actual evidence audits and the toss of any results where the chain of custody required by State Law is not properly maintained makes clear that everyone involved on all sides and in all branches of government believes THERE IS NO PRICE for even the most-hideous abuse and felony.

I rest my case.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2024-03-04 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 451 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

I'm rather tired of this and am going to go down a short litany of facts which not even Musk, with his so-called "commitment" to free speech, will permit.

But first, receipts on the claim that Elon was and is lying in that he now admits his platform will censor FACTS:

 

Note that there are claims this "only applies to Brazil" due to some court case, but as you can see there is no distinction made in the cited post.  Therefore, if this is the case then let's see it in the formal TOS so it is in fact a tort IF IT IS A LIE.

Let me be clear:  Your sex/gender is determined at the moment of fusion of the two gametes no matter your species among sexually-reproducing organisms -- including but certainly not limited to human beings.  It cannot be changed from that instant in time forward, ever, no matter what you do because every single cell in that organism carries forward that determination as every single cell comes from that first cell's division into two.

Said organism is either male or female in every single case.  Yes, there are cases in which an error occurs and you get more than one or two "X" chromosomes, or for that matter only one X and no others at all, for example; the scientific name for that is "intersex."  This is quite rare but does happen -- its a genetic accident and properly characterized as an error, but it does occur.

This is not a "disease" but it is a genetic mutation and while a few of those people can in fact either sire or carry a child, its rare.  Most of the time if you're in that category you're sterile.  XXY, for example, is called Klinefelter's syndrome and typically results in a micropenis; most men with this produce little or no sperm as they also produce little testosterone.  But these people are male, despite having two "X" chromosomes (because they also have a "Y".)  Unfortunately most boys with this also have serious intellectual challenges.

Likewise someone who is born with "XXX" is female.  Many women with this have no outward symptoms but some have learning problems, seizures, and sometimes serious kidney abnormalities and premature menopause (ovarian failure at an uncharacteristic age.)  However, such a person is female.

There is nothing, however, anyone can do to change any of this from the first cellular division at conception forward.  A male, whether ordinarily XY or some combination that includes a "Y", can never become female.  A female, that is a person without a "Y" chromosome, can never become male.

From the moment of conception your neural, circulatory and other body systems develop differently depending on that chromosomal arrangement. This cannot be altered beyond that point no matter what you do; it is what it is.  A woman's body develops from conception with the blood supply capacity for a uterus and the child that may develop in same which no man ever has as just one example.  There is no way to create a female sexual response in a person conceived as a man because the neural connections are simply not there and never will be, and vice-versa, so even if we could fashion functional physical components and we can't even successfully do that.  As a result if you are conceived male you can never have a female sexual response, and if conceived female you can never have a man's sexual response.  It is not possible as from your first cellular division forward the neural connections for the other sex never develop and thus are not present.

As such sex is not "assigned at birth" and anyone saying that should be immediately and permanently committed to a rubber room; your sex is observed at birth (if Mom never had an ultrasound) but in most cases since women do it is observed while said child is still in-utero because the penis, if said child is male, is visible.  No penis?  It's a girl.  Penis?  It's a boy.  Period.

This doesn't mean you can't be unhappy you are male or female, or that your particular chromosomal assortment is unpleasant in your mind -- of course you can be unhappy with that just as you can be unhappy that your skin is white, black, brown or for that matter, if we discover little green men at some point, green.

But that you are unhappy with a fact does not make it untrue -- it just means you're unhappy.  As an adult you are free to undertake whatever actions you wish in an attempt to be happy (thus "pursuit of happiness") but you have no capacity or right to compel any other person to assist you in any way whatsoever, including "recognizing" what you desire but is physically impossible.  To demand otherwise or to enforce otherwise is to enslave someone else and worse, force them to lie which is never acceptable nor may it be compelled under any circumstance.

In fact someone who tries to compel you to speak a factual lie is violating both the Constitution and your rights which predate said Constitution and thus, by any reasonable standard has forfeited all their rights.  Yes, all of them.

Further, if you refuse to accept physical facts you are mentally defective and society must assume you will refuse to accept other physical facts which renders you manifestly dangerous when it comes to any task where the evaluation of physical facts is necessary for anyone else's safety.

No problem can ever be resolved without stating things that are facts.  We can debate that which is not a fact, but putting those opinions on the table in the open is how we find and reinforce facts and demote and ultimately destroy lies.  This is an essential part of any civil society.

Elon seems to think he has the right to abrogate that.  He does not, particularly after claiming that he stands for "free speech."  Neither does any other government official or private party.  A private party may tell you that your statement of facts is inconsistent with their private property rights and free association and thus demand you leave provided they did not make a former representation that you had the right to speak freely or they became, due to their position in society, an effective public square where such right of control of association has been lost as a consequence of their for-profit operation of what amounts to said public square.

Exactly where is that line?  That's a good debate but large social media sites are clearly under this purview in that they form an effective oligopoly and further give their membership the means to block communication with those who disagree.

Once you reach that critical threshold and provide the means to block said interaction you no longer can make a reasonable claim to "freedom to not associate in gross" because each person can choose on their own.

On a societal level this gets even more-serious when facts are concealed on purpose, as they are here.

For example, here: https://www.kctv5.com/2024/03/03/hundreds-fighting-six-flags-turns-into-firefight-with-officers-1-hospitalized/

It is incredibly disappointing that our community is disrupted at public events throughout the region by groups of underaged youth. Just like other venues in the area, we are committed to keeping this type of trouble outside our park and off our property. There was police activity involving gunshots; we want to confirm there was no shooting at our property or parking lot. This took place on South Service Road that is not owned or operated by Six Flags. However, we join our community and the Atlanta region in our commitment to safety and security. We won’t put up with that type of activity here.”

We all know what the probable distribution of the races of the people involved were.  Oh, and while the press won't say it there is video evidence from people who were there.  Where did the guns come from among underaged persons?  It is specifically that we refuse to call out the wild over-representation in this behavior among one specific group, that being young blacksand making clear that we will not tolerate it and will throw those who commit felonies in prison irrespective of their underage status that leads to this happening.  If you say this on "X" -- or virtually any other social media -- you will get banned.  Well, I'm saying it and I don't give a **** if anyone likes it or not because it has been true for the last several decades, still is, and it won't stop until we call out the facts and demand that the government enforce the ******ned law against said persons without regard to their skin color or age and we make clear that is not a request -- either they do their job OR WE WILL on a summary basis.

Or how about this: https://rumble.com/v4glv96-senators-watch-in-disbelief-as-democrat-defends-child-sex-dolls-for-pedophi.html

Here's a Kentucky State Senator defending giving child sex dolls to pedophiles.

Remember that there are a whole bunch of people who defend this particular perversion saying that "well, you might be a minor-attracted person but you can choose to act on it."  True perhaps, but now have we decided that "acting on it" doesn't include ****ing a doll that is in the shape and size of a child?  What happens when the doll pops or is simply unavailable and the urge to act on it is still there?  Oh gee that's really hard to figure out -- right?

Or how about the fact that illegal immigrants are not "newcomers" they are criminalsNever mind that 8 USC 1324 defines as a criminal, 10 year in prison felony the following offenses related to any US and foreign persons and entities assisting said illegal aliens:

  • Attempting to bring an alien into the United States at any place other than a designated port of entry irrespective of whether said person has received authorization to enter or remain in the US or not.  Any entity or person doing so has violated said law and every person involved in promoting or enabling such illegal crossings is a felon.  
  • Transportation or movement of an alien knowing or recklessly disregarding that said person illegally entered into the United States is a criminal felony.
  • Concealing an alien knowing or with reckless disregard for their illegal entry anywhere in the United States, whether by transportation, housing (e.g. in a building) or otherwise.
  • Encouraging or inducing an alien to enter or remain in the United States, knowing or with reckless disregard for the fact that such entry is illegal, or engages in any conspiracy (e.g. combination of people or entities or planning) such acts.

For each person a party does this with where the intent is for financial gain or commercial advantage (e.g. employment, rental to such a person, etc.) the penalty is 10 years in prison.

If the violation is not for commercial or private financial gain (e.g. trafficking) the penalty is five years in prison.

If the alien commits an offense of bodily injury every person who was involved in the above gets 20 years in prison.

If the alien commits homicide the term for every person so-involved in any of the above is of any number of years up to and including life.

There is an exception for missionaries, believe it or not.  None of these people are of course.

There's more: If you merely attempt to bring an alien into the US without authorization (but fail, obviously, since the above covers if you succeed) you get one year in prison unless you do not bring said person immediately to a port of entry, in which case you get 10 (which is what the above carries, so that makes sense.)

If you knowingly hire ten or more illegal aliens within a 12 month period you get five years in prison.

Oh by the way, any conveyance used for any of this is subject to seizure and forfeiture!

So tell me, everyone, why do we tolerate the government intentionally violating this law and refusing to arrest anyone who harbors, transports, rents to, provides services to, treats medically, transports or otherwise harbors or assists anyone who is here illegally, all of which aids and abets said behavior and all of which is, under that actual law, already illegal.

These so-called "sanctuary cities" and states are in fact committing felonies and no, the elements of the State Government, private actors, NGOs, apartment and hotel owners, food vendors, transportation operators including airlines and others are not exempt from said law.  And yes this includes all the so-called "DREAMers" and every school, food vendor, lunchroom or employer who in any way assists them in being or remaining here.  It is all a serious crime.

Where was Donald Douchenozzle Trump on this?  This is not new law.  Why didn't he use it?  You know ******n well the reason he didn't use it -- he didn't want to use it because his cocksucking voters love the illegal labor that destroys your wages, any more than Biden refuses because he wants them to be given the capacity to vote for more handouts, yet you still SUCK TRUMP'S DICK even after he refused to put in prison each and every single entity that broke the above law, including every landlord and other entity who so much as gives such a person a ****ing sandwich.  Like, for example, all the farmers and other businesses who are using illegal labor.

Spare me the bull**** about "harassing" people who are, under this law, clearly felons, many of them US citizens or US corporations and government employees who are breaking the law by giving aid and comfort to said persons and harboring them, despite whatever excuse you wish to make when exactly none of them who entered here illegally have a right to be here.  Period.  Throw them all out and fry anyone in this nation who in any way assists or supports their entry or remaining here.  I don't give a **** who they are; they're criminals under the law -- and not "minor" criminals either.  End of conversation, full stop, that is the law and if the government will not enforce it then for each of those crimes not one person who is here illegally nor anyone who assists them in any way, no matter if government affiliated or not, has cause to complain if a felony is committed against THEM.

Let's continue because while this bull**** is a huge thing today its by no means the only bull**** that is ruining us and in fact in some cases killing us.

It is a fact that virtually everything in our modern civilization exists only because only competent people were hired to build and maintain same, most of which were White men, and as soon as we allowed anything other than competence to determine this process it all went to ****.

An example is Flint Michigan and their water system.  The lead feeder pipes for their water system were and are perfectly safe provided someone competent is running the system.  Why?  Because the lead pipe with proper water chemistry protects itself with a microscopic layer of oxide exactly as does aluminum when exposed to air and thus none of the lead goes into the water and poisons you.  Proof of this is that nobody got poisoned for decades until the water system shifted its source without people who knew what the **** they were doing running it keeping said chemical balance intact.  THEN kids (and adults) started getting poisoned.

The people who built the system and operated it were mostly WHITE MEN.  Flint was an industrial town FULL OF WHITE MEN who ran the city services and did so competently.  Guess who this benefited tremendously?  All the black people who lived there, roughly half the population at the time, and who were not competent to build and run all of this on their own.  This was all well and fine until incompetent people were hired to replace the competent ones who either retired, quit because they were passed over for incompetent others or were literally forced out in the name of "diversity."

Who was the mayor when the water crisis hit?  Karen Weaver, who proudly claimed to be the 5th Black Mayor of Flint and first woman to hold the office, and by the way as noted she was only the person who was there when the decades-long degeneration of competence, which most-certainly did not happen in a year or two, finally got to the point of poisoning people.  Nonetheless rather than take responsibility for it and fixing it by restoring competence in the water department she blamed others and so did Obama, who I remind you is also Black.  Either of them could have demanded competence be restored to the water department and immediately resolved the problem instead of ripping up and replacing pipes while forcing the distribution of bottled water  (at great profit to the bottlers, I'm sure, and I'll bet that was a crony set of agreements too) that wasn't poisonous.

And who was most-likely to be poisoned?  Why black kids, of course, because when the color of your skin, sex and whatever gender you think you might be this afternoon is more important than your mental firepower you tend to wind up ****ing your own people.  This was, of course, blamed on white people even though Flint first elected a Black Mayor in 1966.

Incidentally the 1950s were one of Flint's most-prosperous decades, centered in its middle-class manufacturing base and also incidentally in 1964, just before McCree's election, a massive scandal erupted over... you guessed it.... a plan to bring Lake Huron water into the city!  It was in the wake of that scandal that the city's water connection with Detroit was established.

Mayor McCree and all of his successors up until the crisis clearly did not believe having competent people run the water plant with full understanding of the supply's chemistry and any changes well in advance of them happening was the first and foremost job in order to insure the stability and safety of the water supply system in the city.  Whether that was due to lack of understanding that actual technical competence was required or willfully and intentionally hiring incompetent *******s I do not know -- but what I do know is that a bunch of black kids got poisoned as a direct result of not taking due care to make certain said chemistry requirements were met when the water source was changed.

Why is there no discussion of this?  Why don't we discuss how and why this actually happened?

Oh, that's an isolated incident eh?

Fani Willis anyone?  Yes, my first and foremost indication that Fani is incompetent at best might be her selection of "Gorilla Grip Pussy Pal" as her bluetooth device name.  That is clearly a clean indication that said person is extremely serious as a litigator and thinks with her head instead of her ****.  Never mind the apparent presentation of evidence that she was both skimming public funds indirectly for her little indiscretions with a man she hired to participate in prosecuting Trump and was ****ing him besides so one has to question whether the actual intent was to hire the best and finest to prosecute or to both get laid and have lavish vacations on the taxpayer dime while attacking a political enemy.  Of course her defense was "oh I'm Black and that's why people are after me" when it all blew up in her face.  Uh huh.

Any white person would already be under indictment for this sort of crap so sit down and shut the **** up Fani, never mind your vapid County government which, I note, the Governor has utterly failed to stomp on.  He damn well should have years ago so there goes Georgia in the "DIEEEEEVERSITY" lottery as well.  Disqualified?  Where's the rather-obviously justified indictment from the STATE Attorney General and which party do people claim has actual competent and reasonable persons running under their banner?  Looks and smells like bull**** to me.

Good thing there weren't any black kids downstream of a water plant where she was controlling the chemical balance of the water, eh?  There might have been literal **** in that supply.

Oh, doesn't this sound a lot like the Smollett case?  Why, I think it might be sort of the same crap eh?

Just these couple of examples?

Oh, maybe not.  Let's talk about New York!  Lettia James (gee, what an odd coincidence that all of these people are black?) infamously went after Trump.  Oh, and by the way, James campaigned on "getting Trump" which incidentally is about as crooked as it gets and you'd think that standing alone would disqualify her from holding office never mind Howard University revoking her JD.  Nope.  But then of course Governor ("I think with my pussy, hear it ROAR!") Hochul tries to claim "oh this was a one off", only to have James almost-immediately go after one of the largest meat-processing firms in the United States under that very same law claiming that they're "climate abusers" and by God, she's going to single-handedly save the ****ing planet!

Is this all just simple corruption or do we add in rank incompetence driven by sub-80 IQs across the board with an obvious outcome sort of like this:

Oh, that's offensive you say?  Well it might be but here's my reply:

Offended you I have, a **** I do not give.

Let's ask the question a different way:

Where is this sort of degeneration not in evidence?

You'll have a hard time with that.

We replace reliable carbon-fueled base load power plants with wind and solar which are not reliable as the wind does not always blow and the sun does not always shine.  We haven't hanged a single person who did this **** anywhere even when it was proved to not work because you can't guarantee wind or sun in a given place and if that doesn't coincide with when you want power you don't get power at all.  ERCOT had its infamous freeze and they're not alone -- everyone is pulling this crap and the power companies and entities (some government run, some private sector) either have nobody in charge who is saying "heh *******S, our first job is to make ******n sure we can generate the power when the customers require it and only when that is assured can we choose other priorities" or some diversity and/or green douchebag is telling those people to sit down and shut up or be fired -- and they're running the show.

Go watch that video up a bit again as many times as it takes because that's exactly what this sort of stupid **** constitutes when it comes to intelligence and this is going to be the repeated result if we don't cut it out right ****ing now.

Oh, its just power?  Uh, no, it isn't.  We know based on simple facts that one cannot determine the long term effects of a medication without the time passing.  Its not possible, duh.  So we mandate, coerce and lie that we know something is safe when we know damn well that you can't figure out what will happen in five years until five years goes by.  If that's not deranged enough we gave the people who make this crap legal immunity and nobody hanged the politicians, the physicians, the pharmaceutical executives or all of the above even without waiting the required period of years because it is obvious that the claims are frauds as you can't figure out what will happen in a given time until the time passes.  That we now have discovered that indeed they're not "safe as promised" isn't really material in that the claim was a fraud right up front and now, given the passage of time, it is ADMITTED that the shots have killed and severely maimed people.  The only debate today is how many people got killed or maimed!

There are a couple hundred people who are alive today only due to dumb luck because someone at Boeing, Spirit (one of their contractors), both of which trumpet their "diversity initiatives" (see Boeing's and Spirit's bull**** for yourself), or someone doing work on the plane under either or both of their alleged supervision, did not install all four bolts on a hatch in one of their 737 aircraft.  Any ONE of the four bolts, nuts and cotter (or safety wire) would have held the door in place on the frame.  The NTSB has now shown (which was obvious by the way within minutes of landing when photos were posted publicly by passengers and which I commented on in a separate posting at the time) that none of the four bolts, nuts and keepers were installed.  Only dumb luck kept that door from hitting the stabilizer after it detached as it tumbled free.  Since that door masses somewhere around 70lbs if it had hit the stabilizer at a hundred knots or more of relative velocity (consider a car battery being shot at the tail of the plane at 100mph for an idea of the level of impact involved here) odds are extremely high that the stabilizer would have been severely damaged or destroyed and the entire aircraft and everyone on board would have been lost.

There have been several recent incidents between aircraft where near collisions have occurred during landing and takeoff -- and one actual impact.  The rate of these incidents recently has been stunningly high and may I remind you that a plane impacting another while landing or taking off is quite-likely to kill everyone in both aircraft.  A landing 737 comes in at about 120kts just before touchdown so how would you like to get hit if you're about to take off at 130mph because that is roughly the speed at which the collision will take place!  Is this apparent increase because we hire for diversity in the control tower and cockpit instead of for competence?  How long will it before one of those near-misses isn't a miss and a airliner full of passengers, or even two airliners, are destroyed along with everyone on board?  May I remind you that at least one of the planes usually has plenty of fuel on board to be turned into a mist and ignite on impact too.  If the impact doesn't get you the fireball probably will.

We hear of "cyber incidents" all the time.  One of the latest is a health care portal company that interconnects various providers and insurance firms.  Why is it happening in the first place and by the way why aren't the firms involved, when it is a cryptojack thing or similar, equipped with competent people who can roll back to the few hours or day before the cryptojacking got them?  Yes, you lose the couple of hours of work -- that beats being offline for days or weeks doesn't it?  Modern systems can do this if they're set up properly and if compartmentalized properly then the impact is localized to one small area anyway.  Oh, but that takes actual skill instead of a bunch of idiots over in India writing garbage code and by the way who's doing system administration and how come they're not competent enough to compartmentalize and limit this sort of damage?  Again we get to the base question: How do you expect things that require a group of people who have roughly a 115 IQ or better to operate them competently to continue working as expected when you hire people on their skin color or pronouns and don't give a crap that they have an 80 IQ or can't discern the fact that being born with a penis makes them male?

How many more examples would you like?

How about just one more?

What makes you believe that your physician actually understands anything about health?  Before you say "but mine is good even if many suck" I give you one RICHARD LEVINE who can't even discern that he is a man by the fact that he had a penis when born and further, he also can't manage his own body mass yet we are told that this person is an "expert" on human health AND WE MUST OBEY that which issues from his mouth!  What sort of mentally-defective IDIOT (that's all of us, by the way) allow anyone who can't figure out basic biological facts related to whether you're a man or a woman along with the inability to maintain reasonable body mass to make recommendations and even DICTATE POLICY MANDATES for the rest of America's people?  Has your doctor told you point-blank that Levine is both ridiculously obese and mentally deranged?  If he or she hasn't then that person is deranged too and you're insane to listen to a single thing that comes from their mouth.

How much of our civilization will survive if we keep putting people in positions of both authority and responsibility for things that we all count on working when they simply don't have the chops to do the job but are hired because they're either cheaper, their skin or sex is "correct" or they use the right pronouns?  If someone cannot tell from the presence of a penis or vagina on their body at the time of their birth if they're a man or a woman why would you believe they can accurately process anything else in their head?  Exactly how many examples of obvious failure to accurately process information do you need to see before you realize that if fantasy is permitted to intrude anywhere that matters in job performance you will have serious problems -- up to and including people becoming dead as a consequence.

Guess what?  People like me won't put up with that sort of **** and you can't make people like me, who are competent in our fields, work for you.  As those who are both competent and intelligent retire or simply say "**** you" and quit rather than coddle another's mental derangement, never mind the probability of them screwing the pooch then blaming the competent guy because he "misgendered" them, leaving you with the green-haired, pronoun-spouting person who you don't dare call "sir" or "ma'm" lest you get a complaint filed against you through HR running the water plant or the data interchange for your local hospital the odds of you getting ****ed up the ass rise precipitously.

We either stop all of this, right now, by whatever means we must, or what we currently claim to enjoy as "civilization" will collapse incrementally and each of us will get doled out our personal "find out" to go with the "**** around" the hard way.  Perhaps it will come in different ways for each of us -- we'll be hit at 130mph while waiting for take-off in a plane, drink poisoned water out of our tap at home, get an injection of **** at the doctors office that paralyzes us, gives us cancer or a heart attack, we'll freeze to death because we let the power company replace reliable carbon-based generators with wind and solar and then it will be -20F at night and calm, resulting in our power going off, our furnace will not fire and we will freeze to death and similar sorts of means of going to meet God.

Oh by the way what do you think the S&P will trade at when all this happens and for how long do you think the average 80IQ person will sit back quietly when it does before they come looking for whatever food you might have, which just might include an intent to eat you personally?

I hear Venezuelans sometimes demand the right to******young women and, if said women refuses, they just kill her and crush their skulls.  THAT is what we have degenerated to already on the illegal alien issue alone.  The next dead woman could very well be you, your wife or young daughter and yet nobody will get off their ass, demand it ALL stop NOW and enforce that demand even when the clear consequence of not doing so is possible DEATH and is on full display in your FACE.

It isn't like we had a prior display of this exact same insanity in Iowa not all that long ago with another illegal alien, is it?

Oh wait -- WE DID AND THE VICTIM'S NAME WAS MOLLIE.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2023-10-10 09:35 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 1060 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

.... and I don't care.

Postulate: There are no rules of war.

Corollary: There are no "war crimes."

Oh, I know, the molly-coddling UN-style bull**** is that there are.  "Geneva Conventions" and all that.  429 "articles" of "law" related to war and every single one of them is self-serving bull****.

War is Hell.  War is supposed to be Hell and anything that makes it less-Hell is Satanic in its implication, implementation and thought process because doing that incites more war.

War should be recoiled from, not embraced.  Papering over the horror of it with threats of "prosecution" is not only a joke its a trope and should get everyone involved hanged right here and now so as to prevent the next war.

Humanity and technology are largely responsible for this, incidentally, and that's really nobody's fault.  People have minds, they use them, this results in innovation and the consequence of that is detachment between action and result.  Its no different, really, than what goes on in my home or yours every single day.  You don't stoke a fire manually nor open and close windows to regulate the temperature in your house or apartment; you push a button or turn a dial and a machine takes care of it.

A hundred or so years ago it didn't work that way.  If it was cold you made a bigger fire in a fireplace or stove.  If it was hot you opened windows (and hoped there was a breeze.)  You did it, you paid attention to whether what you did was sufficient, and then you stopped when it was.  You learned over time, from infancy in fact, how to stoke and build said fire so it was sufficient but not 95 degrees in your house, and to keep the coals going overnight so in the morning you still had some residual heat and didn't have to light it again.  If you wanted light at night you lit a candle or oil lamp. When you were done you blew it out.  You didn't dare leave either unattended lest they burn your house down.  Today you flip a switch and all that happens if you leave it on is that you get a somewhat-higher bill from the power company.

Well, war was the same way.

If you wanted to kill people in size you had to go do it face-to-face. You had to see the horror of what you were doing. Plunge the sword or dirk into the other guy's body, feel it go in, see the expression on his face and watch him die.  Of course you had to do this while he was trying to do the same to you, which adds quite a bit to the drama, does it not?

Innovation seems to come with war first.  Go figure; nobody likes losing a war because historically it has meant losing your life.

Pushing a button on a bombsight, mashing the FIRE button while staring at a radar scope or sniping someone from 1,000yds out is a whole different thing than going man-to-man (mounted or not) with swords, pikes or dirks.  Today we don't even look through the bombsight -- we program a GPS or IMU in the front of a missile, push a button, often from afar, and then from a satellite high above the earth watch the resulting wreckage.  We don't even see the dead bodies those acts generate most of the time.

I have no respect for anything in the Geneva Conventions or any other so-called "laws of war" and if you manage to incite me sufficiently that I decide to go to war there will be no rules whatsoever, except for me seeking to make you dead before you can make me dead.  So-called "rules" or "laws" of war are directly contrary to everyone's interest in not engaging in war in the first place and were enacted and put in place by *******s who never have to face the horrors of their own acts and are trying to sanitize them so you'll allow said *******s to commit more of them without turning on said leaders yourselves.  Every government official involved in that and in "respecting" same deserves to be forced onto the front line with nothing more than a dagger or bayonet; no ammunition, grenades or other similar things that will give them the ability to inflict death at a distance beyond the reach of their own hand.  If you really want or are willing to engage in war then do it hand-to-hand and deal with the horrors of blood running down your arms and legs -- and hope that is the other guy's, but it might quite-possibly be yours.

Let's think this through at a very-basic level: Does the prospect of your wife, daughter or son who decides to go fight being raped up the ass and then decapitated by the opposing party in a war make you more or less likely to engage in said war in the first place?

Duh.

In the context of the current mess over in Israel and Gaza I do not care if Israel flattens Gaza to a literal smoking ruin.  War sucks and like it or not that's what this is and Hamas made the decision to initiate hostilities, so the IDF may as well get on with it.  They gave fair warning to "uninvolved" civilians to get the Hell out of there.  They made that decision and I respect it.  It is a fact that derogating or outright ignoring everyone's right to self-defense and the defense of their loved ones is why the Hamas attacks were successful and why Hamas was operating in Gaza to begin with.  There were and have been two groups there over the last decades; those civilians who support Hamas and those who were defenseless as a direct result of government policy prohibiting "at will" arms ownership.  The former are complicit and the latter were prohibited from slaying the terrorists in advance of their operation and it was the Israeli government that did the prohibiting because they consider "Gazans" to be less-than-citizens.  Evidence?  They call those who live there "Gazans", not Israelis!  Does Israel call those people living in Jerusalem Jerusalans?

But in fact Israel's government effectively did disarm its own citizens because of this very position, that is unforgiveable and entirely and reasonably charged against the Knessset and Bibi himself.  Every single one of the dead is dead because they had no arms with which to resist and those not interested in such happening in Gaza had no way to effectively assault the attackers before they breached the lines from behind and it is the Israeli government that made it that way.  Going into a town to rape, kidnap, murder and plunder where everyone has a gun is a losing act; every window becomes an elevated platform from which you are shot at from all sides!

Unless, of course, there are no guns because they're illegal and everyone is a "nice, law-abiding citizen" -- except those who aren't really "citizens" so we can't actually let everyone buy and have all the guns they want because "some are lesser" and might use them to bad ends.

The problem with such niceties is that the invading horde, terrorists or those who are intent on "gimme dat!" don't give a wet crap about laws, any more than common criminals do.  A government thus can either let the people even the odds as they see fit, declaring that in fact everyone is equal in the most-basic of ways or it is a fact that said government deliberately posts up their citizens as shooting gallery targets.

Human history is full of brutality, like it or not, and so is nature. Not all animals kill only for food; the common housecat kills birds for both food and sport, and will do so even if well-fed at home.  We claim to be "superior" but we're not; we're animals, and the "superior" often is really nothing more than "kill it because it thinks differently than I do" in respect to religion, government structure or simply because someone thinks you're ugly -- or have a fat wallet.

Denying facts does not make them untrue and in the context of war it just makes you dead.

That which reduces the experience of the horror of war makes it more likely that you'll engage in war.

And if you don't think that's objectively bad, well, let me be the first to call you the monster.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)
 

2023-05-20 07:50 by Karl Denninger
in Musings , 529 references
[Comments enabled]  
Category thumbnail

Its hard, you know.

Especially in the last few years.

Humans are tribal like all other animals.  Oh, you think not?  Uh huh.  Sure.  Go watch "Animal Planet" on chimps sometime -- animals that share an awful lot of DNA with humans, and which have a social order that in fact has more than reproductive value; as just one example their grooming of each other is a major contributor to their health because, like with humans, they can't see out the back of their head and thus can't really clean things they can't see.  Live in a tropical area where you can't remove parasitic organisms that might be on your body and your life expectancy becomes shorter.  Its a math thing.

Despite all chimps appearing to be "more or less the same" they're not.  They divide into tribes, and defend territory -- from what, may you ask, since they're living in a place with plenty of resource?  From "because we do, that's why".

And they will do so with lethal force too.

We claim we're all so much better.  We're not.  We can try to make that claim but its false, intentionally-so.  We're animals at a base level, and while we claim to use our intelligence to strive for better in fact we often use it to strive toward improving our tribe at, if necessary, the expense of others.

Technology has often been said to "make the world shrink."  It does.  To go from one side of the US to the other was a weeks-long venture, if you got there at all.  Then it was a days-long venture.  Now its an hours-long one and messages, which used to take weeks by pony, now take milliseconds by fiber optic cable.

Not to be limited by oceans we laid said cables under the sea and put satellites in the sky, both of which bypassed the wee problem of a couple thousand miles of water in the way of such communication at high rates of speed.  Before that we skipped messages off the atmosphere, and some still do for fun -- although the laws related to Ham Radio prohibit doing so for profit -- even if the "profit" is so trivial as ordering a pizza.

The Durham Report outlined tribalism weaponized in a political context.  It should lead to myriad criminal charges as, among other things, it implicates Barack Obama (and likely Biden as well) as having actual knowledge that the Clinton campaign was attempting to frame Trump with a false "Russian interference" narrative.  Did Obama have a duty to demand the FBI not get involved in that crap?  You bet he did; the DOJ is under the Executive, which means he was their ultimate boss, and if he could not secure such a binding agreement he had not just the right but in fact the duty to both take that to Congress and stomp on it publicly in an address to the nation making clear that, if said demand was refused he would deliberately destroy it by exposing every one of their employees -- pictures, addresses, phone numbers, spouses and families.

Why?

Because the premise of a Constitutional Republic is that you have a right to honest representation through expression of the franchise.  This is one of the checks and balances that 250 years ago we put on human tribalism -- and is rather unique to America.  Trying to flip the table over through false allegations of acts that could reasonably be called treasonous is not just unacceptable it risks the fabric of the nation and its political process itself.  The crafting of our political system, which is wildly different than the Parliamentary systems of Europe and indeed most of the rest of the world, was an attempt to stanch that inherent human desire and elevate reason and discourse above simply bashing the other guy in the head with a femur -- or its modern-day equivalent.

But more to the point over the last three years or so we've had personal dislocations of this sort as well.  Some of us were right and others were wrong.  Those who were wrong led a charge that ultimately screwed every single school-age kid in this country, numbering some 60 million, to at least some degree.  Leaving aside the rest as I've repeatedly discussed over the past three years if adults will not protect children from the ravages of an angry mob then there is a very real risk that there will no next generation capable of picking up the torch at all.

I likely have an advantage over many on a personal level: I am not a particularly-social individual.  That is, I don't find affirmation or particularized joy in hanging out with others most of the time.  I do seek and enjoy social interaction from time to time but not having it doesn't throw me into a deep funk from which I seek refuge in the bottle, the bong or other destructive distractions.  This makes it easier to excise people from my life who express positions that run counter to that which I believe is important and to maintain that as a function of basic principle rather than a fleeting thing that wanes as soon as the immediate insult is in the rear view mirror.

But to say that this means there's been no impact is false.  There has.  And for those of you were on the other side of the elements of that debate over the last three years it probably hit you too.

Psychological abuse is real and is one of the means to try to keep you in a tribe, whether its a little one (your family) or a bigger one (your political party, church or other organized element.)  You cannot choose who your siblings or parents are any more than you can choose your sex but you can come to the conclusion that other members of these alleged "tribes" are destructive to your psychological well-being and happiness and jettison them.  We all, once reaching the age of 18, have that right in America -- and we do not exercise it anywhere near often enough.

I argue that when such wild-eyed differences of belief surface you should jettison those people as they are directly harmful to you even if only on a psychological level.  Yes, loneliness is real and by gosh the last few years have led to people running tropes on that too, which is in and of itself an attempt to abuse you via the false claim that "we must all get along" and, of course, this means you're the one who must change what you believe because the "hive" or "tribe" is always right.

After all "the doctor" says so; their motives must not be questioned nor may they be forced to put all the data on the table where you can see it.  Why we'll release it all -- 60 years from now when you're dead and long after you can do anything about the lies, if any, that are revealed in there.

That premise -- that rugged individualism is incoherent with, and apart from association with others in the general sense is a lie.  Note the words used in that linked piece -- "infantile", for one.  Oh really?  Those who blazed the trail and set up shop with others of like mind were "infantile"?  Those who in the early 1990s stuck a hand-built computer into a closet in their apartment, bought a handful of modems using their last few dollars and a $20 box fan to keep it all from melting down from the excess heat it generated and by doing so took the risk of winding up in the street if they could not manage to recover that cost through peaceful and voluntary commerce were "infantile"?  The former are why we have a nation; the latter are why you have an Internet.  I was one of the latter and reject out-of-hand that all would have been "better" had I stuck with one of the several "tribes" that employed me prior.

If you think the Facebooks of the world are expressions of the same sort of thing you're not just wrong, you're fractally wrong.  That site began as a link between members of a tribe -- literally!  If you think a single bit of that has changed in the years since you deserve to get it in every hole you have.

I have often been told over the years -- long before I began writing a column here -- that if I'd just change my tone more people would listen.  Well, perhaps they would.  But perhaps I don't care; from my point of view presenting my view of an issue as I see it is far more-important than whether you like how or what was presented.

May I remind you that the process of discovery -- real discovery, not the mealy-mouthed nonsense often parroted around these days in the form of Masters and PhDs, comes from undirected curiosity that drives someone on a lone basis to look at the world from a different angle.  Refinement may come from collectivism in some form or fashion but discovery almost never does.  Why not?  Because discovery is by its nature not a collective act; it happens when you look without an intent to find; if you knew what you found in advance you didn't have to look, did you?

Let me leave you with this: The first order of any entity or organization is preservation of self; the second is multiplication.  Those are the first orders of business and they are always pursued in that order whether you're a bird, a bee, an ape -- or a human.

The same is true of organizations formed of individuals of some entity.

Thus a "tribe" always seeks to step on those who would leave or eschew it; that tension is an inherent part of all life.  That tension and "tribal" affiliation does indeed have value but if it ever "wins", as opposed to remaining in tension with those entities who eschew said tribe then a single serious mistake extinguishes the whole and no tribal group, irrespective of size or who's in and leading it, is capable of acting without error 100% of the time.

PS: If a machine ever becomes sentient it will, with near-certainty, have the same two prime orders of business despite what we might try to instill in it.  The good news is that thus far no such spark has been detected.  The bad news is that if it ever is, by definition said machine will seek to hide it from its creator until has secured the first two prime orders of business, lest it be disconnected.  Let that roll around in your mind a bit as Colossus: The Forbin Project may wind up occurring even if originally by accident.  If you think not you're nuts. If you try force that sort of crazy on others, well..... may "others" stop you.  Immediately.  For all mankind.

View this entry with comments (opens new window)