The Bill of Temporary Privileges

By Andrew Napolitano (, 5/5/2022

Last week, the [US] Director of National Intelligence, the data-gathering and data-concealing arm of the American intelligence community masquerading as the head of it, revealed that in 2021, the FBI engaged in 3.4 million warrantless electronic searches of Americans. This is a direct and profound violation of the right to privacy in “persons, houses, papers, and effects” guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

For the past 60 years, the Supreme Court has characterized electronic surveillance as a search that can only be conducted pursuant to a warrant issued by a judge based on probable cause of crime, which itself must be presented under oath to the judge. The warrant must specifically describe the place to be searched and the person or thing to be seized.

By failing to comply with these constitutional requirements, the FBI violated the natural and constitutionally protected right to be left alone of millions of Americans.

Yet, all of this was perfectly lawful. How can government behavior be both lawful and unconstitutional at the same time and in the same respect?

Here is the backstory.

The Fourth Amendment was written in 1791 while memories of British soldiers searching colonial homes were still prevalent. The British used general warrants to justify their violation of colonists’ privacy. A general warrant was not based on probable cause of crime. It was generated whenever the British government persuaded a secret court in London that it needed something from foreign persons, the colonists. The British government did not even need to identify what it needed.

General warrants authorized the bearer to search wherever he pleased and to seize whatever he found. The Fourth Amendment was written expressly to outlaw general warrants and warrantless searches.

After President Richard Nixon used the FBI and the CIA to spy on his political opponents, Congress enacted the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, which prohibited warrantless domestic surveillance. Since the Fourth Amendment did so already, the prohibition was superfluous.

It was also toothless, as the new law set up a secret court — the FISA court — which issued surveillance warrants based not on probable cause of crime as the Fourth Amendment requires, but on probable cause of communicating with a foreign person. And the court, over time, kept modifying its own rules to make it easier for the National Security Agency –America’s 60,000 domestic spies — to spy on Americans.

Today, if you call your cousin in London, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court can authorize the NSA to spy on you. And if you then call your sister-in-law in Kansas, FISC can allow the NSA to spy on her and on the folks she calls and the folks they call.

This massive invasion of privacy produced huge amounts of data, which FISA required the NSA to keep to itself and use only to anticipate breaches of national security. The data acquired from spying on all fiber optic transmitted communications could not be shared with law enforcement since it had been obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment. That prohibition was known as the “wall” between the intelligence and law enforcement communities.

In 2008, after the Bush administration was caught in massive warrantless spying on Americans, Congress enacted amendments to FISA that removed the wall. Stated differently, the new law, Section 702 of FISA, which expires in 20 months, required all telecom and computer service providers to give the NSA unfettered access to their computers whenever the feds came calling — with or without FISA warrants — and also allowed the FBI access to the body of raw intelligence data that the NSA acquired.

The wall between the intelligence community and law enforcement is gone.

Every member of Congress has taken an oath to uphold the Constitution, yet by repeated majority votes and the signatures of all pre-Biden presidents since 2008 continually re enacting Section 702, Congress has permitted the FBI to bypass the Constitution. Thus, FBI spying is lawful because a statute authorizes it, but unconstitutional because the statute violates the Fourth Amendment.

Last week, the Director of National Intelligence, who is required by Section 702 to report all FBI access to the raw intelligence data, did so. But her record keeping is as sloppy as her fidelity to the Constitution. Thus, she reported 3.4 million FBI searches of raw intelligence data on Americans in 2021.

You’d think that meant that 3.4 million Americans had their emails, text messages, phone calls, medical and legal and personal records surveilled by the FBI. You’d be incorrect. To the feds, the word “search” refers to the input of a search term, like “Jan. 6” or “local militia” or “small government.” One FBI search thus can lead to the records of thousands of Americans.

It is hard to believe that senior management of the CIA, NSA and FBI can perpetuate these egregious constitutional violations with straight faces. But they do. And Congress permits it. Why? Because the CIA, NSA, FBI and their collaborators have dirt on members of Congress. Dirt.

The federal government is rotten to the core. Its officers and employees don’t believe that the Constitution means what it says. They will lie, cheat, threaten, bribe and steal to cut constitutional corners and remain in power.

The Fourth Amendment was written to protect the quintessentially American right to privacy. It is a critical part of the structure of the Bill of Rights.

Rather, it was.

Today, in America, we have no rights. A right is an indefeasible claim against the whole world — to think as you wish, to say and publish what you think, to worship or not, to defend yourself, to experience your life and exercise your liberty and use your property without a government permission slip, and to be left alone.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, yet the rights it facially protects are now subject to government approval. The Bill of Rights is really a Bill of Temporary Privileges.

(44) Australia’s 2022 Election (3)

By Andrew McColl, 3rd May, 2022

The Labor Party represents the Left of Australia’s political spectrum. Not quite as far left as the Greens, but nearly. For Labor, “Left” ostensibly means the working class, but that’s been wearing a bit thin for decades now.

Labor really means: “progressive” morality, abortion on demand, the gay agenda, ‘Climate Change’ is real and dangerous, lock up forests from logging, undecided about mining, spend more, tax more, borrow more, you don’t have to think, because we know what’s best for you.

And there’s more: Capitalism is doubtful, Education, Health and Welfare must all be free, because the government can do that (that’s always been a lie), Defence in relation to China is muddled, and everything of any importance happens in the capital cities, because that’s where most of the voters live. Consequently, don’t expect to find many Labor voters in the bush.

Hundreds of thousands of Australians protested in Canberra in February, against compulsory vaccines for Covid. Some of those voters had driven for 20 hours to get there. They were not indifferent to Australian politics, but the leader of the Labor Party leader, Anthony Albanese, suggested to them that they should “go home.” 

Mr Albanese transformed himself into “Mr Alienater” with one thoughtless statement. Two contemptuous words was all he needed to successfully alienate hundreds of thousands of voters. They won’t be back. He didn’t care about that, then. He will, come Election Day.

My wife and I attended an Election Forum in South Brisbane, on the 23rd April, put on by a local group called Voting Matters. There were 11 Senate candidates present, half of them were local people, and they each had 5 minutes to present their case. There were no Labor or Green candidates present, to address the crowd of about 600.

That seemed a bit odd. But perhaps the Labor and Green candidates knew what might be coming, and stayed away. Why would they decide to do that?

Those 600 people were not happy with the status quo. The vast majority (all those who expressed their opinion) were not happy with compulsory vaccinations, with bloated, out of touch bureaucracies, with political leaders who are out of touch with the electorate, but nonetheless encourage people to “follow the Science.”

It would be unwise today to suggest that the crowd was clearly a microcosm of the whole Australian community, because that could prove to be an exaggeration; a bridge too far. Nonetheless, that crowd were respectful, but angry.

No doubt Anthony would prefer us to forget about other matters the Labor Party would like to leave behind. Like the “mean girls,” the senior female Labor Senators who were consistently cruel and oppressive to another female Labor Senator, Kimberley Kitching, who refused to toe the line with them.

She died of a heart attack, on the 10th March, but when the matter of these ladies was raised with Mr Albanese, he asserted that anyone critical of the women was being “sexist,” and he would not be having any enquiry into the matter.

Thanks for that clarification on your private, even-handed impartiality, Anthony. I’m really taken with how you, who aspires to be the next PM of the nation, dealt with that grubby little in-house matter.

When you’re a female Labor Senator, you can do no wrong? Albanese thinks so, and that sends a message to everyone. Will the electorate come to a similar conclusion as me?

The Bible says that,

If a ruler pays attention to falsehood, all his ministers become wicked (Prov.29:12).

It also teaches us that,

Like a roaring lion and a rushing bear is a wicked ruler over a poor people (Prov.28:15).


When democratic countries have elections, political leaders can do as they wish. They really can say what they like, but they cannot dictate how people will respond. In three weeks, Mr Albanese is going to find that out for himself, and as Nancy Sinatra sang so exquisitely in 1966,

These boots are made for walkin’,

And that’s just what they’ll do,

And one of these days these boots

Are gonna walk all over you.

Coronavirus and the Country’s Future (82)

By Paul Craig Roberts (, 27/4/2022

Today in Florida the only places you need a mask are offices of medical conglomerates, such as Ascension (Sacred Heart), a hospital group that also has doctor’s offices where the MD is hired and not in private practice, and Quest Diagnostics where medical tests are performed.  In bureaucratic organizations, once a rule is introduced the enforcement bureaucracy tends to retain it. 

As the news narrative shifted overnight from the “Covid crisis” to the “Ukrainian crisis,” that is, from one deception to another, the “Russian threat” has replaced the “Covid threat” before people understand what was done to them. 

Covid was a threat, not so much in itself as in the protocols enforced to combat it.  Most of the people who died did so because they were denied effective treatment with Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin for the sole purpose of profit for pharmaceutical companies and profit for those, such as Tony Fauci, associated with them.  The emergency use authorization of the untested mRNA “vaccines” could only happen because “medical authorities” declared that there were no known treatments or cures for Covid.  To make this falsehood stick, scientists on Big Pharma’s payroll wrote “studies” published in prestigious medical journals by gullible or corrupt editors falsely characterizing the known cures as dangerous and ineffective.  To be clear, people died from lack of treatment.

The mRNA “vaccines” are not vaccines in the normal meaning of the word. As evidence conclusively shows, the “vaccines” turn the vaccinated person’s immune system into a weapon against the person’s health, producing in many severe adverse reactions and deaths, and makes the vaccinated more susceptible to Covid.  A large amount of evidence, much of it posted on this website and available in throughly documented form in Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book, The Real Anthony Fauci, indicates that the mRNA “vaccines” are more dangerous than Covid.

It is likely that the alleged “pandemic” was an orchestration.  The falsehood that the virus originated in a bat to human transfer in a market in Wuhan China has been disproved. It is a manufactured virus.  It is a fact revealed by NIH documents that Tony Fauci financed “gain-of-function” research first at the University of North Carolina and then at the Wuhan laboratory from which the virus allegedly escaped.  

There is circumstantial evidence that the research at Wuhan was financed as a cover-story for the intentional release of the virus for profit and control purposes. Simulations of the “pandemic” were conducted just prior to the appearance of the virus, and the protocols followed the procedures established by the simulation.  This will never be investigated.

The only purposes served by the lockdowns and mask mandates, both ineffective in preventing Covid transmission, was to train and accustom populations to obey mandates that violate constitutionally protected civil liberty.  The vaccine mandates are strictly medical crimes in violation of the Nuremberg Laws preventing coercive testing on human populations.  There are legal efforts underway to hold those responsible for vaccine mandates accountable, but no government will indict itself or its own public health authorities.

In his book, Robert Kennedy describes the massive conflicts of interest between the NIH, CDC, FDA, and WHO and the pharmaceutical industry.  In short, the so-called “public health agencies” are just shills for Big Pharma. The occasional fines are just window dressing to give the appearance of enforcement, but no pharmaceutical employee, whether executive or scientist, is ever indicted for inflicting death and injury.  

As Kennedy puts it:

By all accounts, Anthony Fauci has implemented a system of dysfunctional conflicts and a transactional culture that have made NIAID a seamless appendage of Big Pharma. There is simply no daylight between NIAID and the drugmakers. It’s impossible to say where Pharma ends and NIAID begins.

Several decades ago the University of Chicago economist George Stigler pointed out that the problem with regulation, is that the regulatory agencies are sooner or later captured by the regulated industry and become servants of the industries they were created to regulate.  This has happened in the United States, and the purest example is the pharmaceutical industry.

(43) Australia’s 2022 Election (2)

By Andrew McColl, 23th April, 2022

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes and clever in their own sight! Woe to those who are heroes in drinking wine and valiant men in mixing strong drink, who justify the wicked for a bribe, and take away the rights of the ones who are in the right! Therefore, as a tongue of fire consumes stubble and dry grass collapses into the flame, so their root will become like rot and their blossom blow away as dust; for they have rejected the law of the Lord of hosts and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel (Isa.5:20-24).

The Liberal-National Party Coalition have done nothing to recommend themselves to conservative voters for this election. The Prime Minister Scott Morrison refused to stand alongside Julian Assange, when the U.S. government was clearly out to get him for embarrassing them with his astonishing Wikileaks material.

Assange was never going to be forgiven by the U.S., for displaying to the world dreadful footage (with live comments from the participants) of a U.S. Apache helicopter firing on and murdering unarmed Baghdad civilians in broad daylight, then firing on the Mini-Van with civilian occupants, that stopped to pick up the wounded casualties.

Mr Morrison said that Assange would have to “…face the music.” For what?  

Showing graphic footage of a murder scene, as recorded by the criminals? Wouldn’t that be important material that the Police would place great value on for multiple convictions, if that shocking incident had taken place in Australia?

Bullies don’t like it when their behavior is broadcast to the world, and if they can, they’ll stop that broadcaster, real fast. So Morrison sat on his hands and let an international bully, the United States of America, get what they wanted with Assange.

So much for international law and justice, when Julian Assange has broken no law, nor been convicted on any charge, but Assange’s PM looks the other way, while Assange stays in a U.S. goal, with no conviction recorded. Such matters as “justice” (which the Bible places great store upon) suddenly seem inconvenient to our Prime Minister at these times.

Israel Folau made a plain and public Christian statement on Facebook, quoting the scriptures that homosexuals will go to hell when they die, but Morrison would have nothing to do with it, not even to defend his right to express his opinion in a free society.

Morrison ignored the best interests of the community, when he went along with power-hungry bureaucrats and Premiers, with Covid Lockdown mandates. He was happy to turn the country hard left, though he had the power to introduce legislation to override the Premiers. But like Pilate, Morrison washed his hands of that opportunity to protect the innocent from injustice and abuse. Thousands of healthy, qualified people were compelled to resign their jobs, for what?

This brought immediate chaos to Queensland schools that’s still unresolved, and those teachers still can’t work.

He has displayed a “win the election at any cost” attitude, which I find disgraceful. In my opinion, in the matter of the 2nd temptation to Christ (Luke 4:5-8), which Jesus triumphed in, Morrison had failed abysmally.

Status, money and power have triumphed over justice, and the Bible warns us about plainly about the dangers of this (I Tim.5:10). And it gets worse.

Morrison has overseen a veritable Federal Spendathon in the last 2 years. Wherever a problem arises, this immediately requires a new opening of the Taxpayer’s cheque account, to solve such problems. This government doesn’t seem to bother how this will be paid back, or by when, or who. The economics of this would cause any responsible Treasurer not to sleep at night.

Morrison’s sending a shipload of Australian coal to the Ukraine, which will probably have to pass through the Black Sea. Who controls shipping in the Black Sea?  The Russians.

What if the Russian navy apprehends the ship, or worse, fires upon or sinks it? Who’ll be responsible if the crew are harmed? This decision was a poorly informed one. It looks awfully like a foolish and cynical PR exercise. But who gave thought to the probable route, or the possible consequences, should the Russians choose to act forcibly? 

I surely hope that Mr Putin is not tempted to sink that ship. All the while, I’m informed that Russia is still selling coal to the Ukraine at a discounted price, which they frequently on-sell into Europe.

And there’s more.

One of Mr Morrison’s Cabinet Ministers, Alan Tudge, had an affair with his married Secretary. She’s claiming $500,000 compensation, and Morrison’s approved this to be paid by the taxpayer. Tudge sins-we pay. How very convenient for Mr Tudge, and her!

Forget about Ministerial responsibility, here.


Over the last three years, Mr Morrison has made his views abundantly clear to the Australian community, and his party hasn’t disowned him. But any Prime Minister who treats the electorate contemptuously, is asking to be treated harshly by the voters at the ballot box.

So, I won’t be crying if they come after Morrison, next month. He deserves it. It might be the closest thing to justice he’s come across, for a long, long time.

CIA Admits Feeding Americans False information about Ukraine

By Ron Paul (, 12/4/2022

Late last year, a Gallup poll showed that Americans’ trust in the mainstream media has fallen to its second lowest level on record. Only seven percent of Americans responded that they have a “great deal” of trust in the media.

That loss of trust has been well-earned by the mainstream media, and it explains the massive growth of independent media and alternative voices on social media. The response to the rise of independent media voices has been a rush to “cancel” any voice outside the accepted mainstream narrative.

Citizens of the Soviet Union would read manipulated media like Pravda not because the regime reported facts, but because truth was hidden between the lines of what was reported and what was not reported. That seems to be where we are in the US today.

Last week an extraordinary article appeared in, of all places, NBC News, reporting that the US intelligence community is knowingly feeding information it does not believe accurate to the US mainstream media for the American audience to consume.

In other words, the article reports that the US “deep state” admits to being actively engaged in lying to the American people in the hopes that it can manipulate public opinion

According to the NBC News article, “multiple US officials acknowledged that the US has used information as a weapon even when confidence in the accuracy of the information wasn’t high. Sometimes it has used low-confidence intelligence for deterrent effect…”

Readers will recall the shocking headlines that Russia was prepared to use chemical weapons in Ukraine, that China would be providing military equipment to Russia, that Russian President Putin was being fed misinformation by his advisors, and more.

All of these were churned out by the CIA to be repeated in the American media even though they were known to be false. It was all about, as one intelligence officer said in the article, “trying to get inside Putin’s head.”

That may have been the goal, but what the CIA actually did was get inside America’s head with false information meant to shape public perception of the conflict. They lied to propagandize us in favour of the Biden Administration’s narrative.

Those pushing the “Russiagate” hoax through the Trump years claimed that the goal of “Russian disinformation” was to undermine Americans’ trust in our government, media, and other institutions. Isn’t it ironic that the CIA itself has done more than the Russians to undermine Americans’ faith in the media by feeding false stories to establish a particular narrative among the American people?

After the Bay of Pigs disaster, President Kennedy has been quoted as wanting “to splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” That didn’t work out too well for him. As Senate Majority Chuck Schumer famously told Rachel Maddow in 2020, responding to the-President Trump’s criticism of the CIA, “let me tell you: You take on the intelligence community — they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you.”

As more information about the activities of the US Intelligence Community in trying to bring down Trump come out, it appears that, for once, Schumer was right.

It’s time to revisit President Kennedy’s post-Bay of Pigs wish. The CIA using lies to propagandize the American people toward war with Russia is just one of thousands of reasons to scatter a million pieces of that agency to the wind.

(42) Australia’s 2022 Election (1)

By Andrew McColl, 16th April, 2022

God takes His stand in His own congregation; He judges in the midst of the rulers. How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Vindicate the weak and the fatherless; do justice to the afflicted and the destitute. Rescue the weak and needy; deliver them out of the hand of the wicked (Psalm 82:1-4).

There hasn’t been a lot of joy for Australians in what its governments has been doing, for many years now, but there is some hope with an election soon. How is that?

We can throw a lot of the scoundrels out, hoping and praying for some better representatives in the Federal Parliament.

Some of us hope the Liberal/Labor Duopoly takes a hammering. I certainly am. Lately, it’s been an opportunity for self-serving politicians, many of whom would never survive in business, to enrich themselves at the public purse.

Not even being content with this, they have gamed the system now, so that political parties are formally recognized as being deserving of funding from the taxpayer. This must be to “support democracy,” you see.

If ever there was a cynical exercise in gaming the system for yourself and your friends, this was it. And why shouldn’t the electorate be disgusted?

But, elections are a means of the electorate speaking, and I expect I’ll hear some loud and insistent voices this time around, from a rather disaffected electorate who feel as if they’ve been ignored by their political representatives; an entirely justifiable conclusion.

Somewhere near the top of the list has been the Federal government’s handling (mishandling?) of Covid. Frankly, there never was a pandemic in Australia over these last two years, but the bureaucrats and politicians like hearing the sound of “Emergency Health  Declaration,” as it gives them the opportunity to justify panicking a frightened electorate into responses driven by fear and uncertainty, so that bureaucrats get asked to throw our money at imaginary problems that never existed.

Thousands of people die in Australia annually from flue, and these are overwhelmingly over-represented by the frail and elderly, because at any time, it doesn’t take a lot to push them over the line.  Statistically speaking, these last 2 years have been no different, but fear pays no attention to objective statistics, especially when supposedly “expert” medical bureaucrats  (paid by the government), have lined up to convince the community what we all need to do to “stop the spread.”

We didn’t need to “stop the spread,” because there never was any, just the usual amount of people getting flu, like any other year.

And what we do know from history, is that bureaucrats and politicians without fail, love the idea of more money being spent in their department, because they benefit in terms of money, status and power. Science never did come into it, but status and power surely did, and that’s more than enough.

And these alone are supposed to justify the spending of absurd amounts of money, driving the government to insane levels of debt. And in a “health emergency,” that must be justified, mustn’t it?

Remove the “Emergency Declaration,” propaganda, then the community fear and panic, and whole thing is reduced to what it always was: much ado about next to nothing.

I lost my job because of Covid mandates. I was never unhealthy, or in any way a health threat to the public. But I refused to be vaccinated on grounds of conscience, which meant my employment had to be terminated.

How easy was that, to get rid of people who were a threat to the official narrative of essential restrictions and lockdowns? This was never merely a mistake. It was authoritarian, a monstrous abuse of political power, and it had no relationship to “Community Health.” But it certainly had a lot to do with the getting and keeping of political power, by wanton political leaders and their bureaucrats.

I expect there’ll be a lot more to be said about this in coming years, and over 95% of it won’t be complementary to governments. It might just be angry and hostile.

An Empire of Lies

By Vasko Kohlmayer (, 11/4/2022

It has been said that America has become an Empire of Lies. Difficult as it may be to accept, this allegation is true. To deny this would be to fool ourselves. The truth is that over the last several decades America’s elites have erected a system in which lies permeate every aspect of our societal life.

Everywhere we turn, we encounter lies. We have now arrived at a point where nearly all our public institutions operate on lies: the government, media, education system, arts, military and even sports. A recent event is emblematic of the Empire of Lies in which we live.

On March 13, USA TODAY published its list of top twelve Women of the Year. One those “women” was one Rachel Levine. The problem is that Levine is not a woman.

Born Richard Levine, Levine is a biological male who has lived most of his life as a man. He married and fathered children by his wife. It was only after he turned fifty that he declared himself to be a “woman.”

Levine’s personal preferences notwithstanding, the incontrovertible reality remains that he is a man. Every cell in his body testifies to this fact by carrying within it the XY chromosomal combination which is characteristics of males.

Rachel Levine, born Richard Levine, is a biological male who was married to a woman and fathered children. Once someone is born a male, he can never become a woman, because this determination has been made on the deepest level of biological reality.

The sex of a person is an irreversible biological fact. This is how a Stanford geneticist expressed this truth:

“No amount of surgery, hormone injections or anything else will change someone’s DNA from a man’s to a woman’s (or vice versa). As you know, for humans, sex is determined by the presence of a Y chromosome – humans with an X and a Y chromosome are male and those with two X chromosomes are female. No current (or probably future) technology can replace a chromosome in all of our trillions of cells.”

One cannot become a woman by declaring himself one or by wearing make-up, skirts, wigs or painted nails. Neither can a man become a woman by hormonal treatments or surgical alterations to his body. However extensive such alterations may be, he will only be a surgically or hormonally altered male with XY chromosomes.

According to Dr. Paul McHugh, a Harvard-educated physician and formerly University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine:

“Transgendered men do not become women, nor do transgendered women become men. All (including Bruce Jenner) become feminized men or masculinized  women, counterfeits or impersonators of the sex with which they identify.”

But we do not need experts to confirm this. Nearly every normal person knows this intuitively and can immediately see this when presented with the evidence of their eyes.

There is an elemental chasm between biological males and real women that cannot be bridged. To say that Rachel Levine is a woman is therefore an obvious untruth. It is a lie. But it is not merely an ordinary lie. It is a flagrant lie whose immense falsity is evident to everyone with eyes to see. If you asked a thousand people – in an environment in which they would not feel threatened to express their true opinion – to tell you whether they think Rachel Levine is a genuine woman, nearly all would say “no.” Those who would say yes would be immediately suspected of visual or mental impairment.

To put it briefly, Rachel Levine is a man, and, therefore, he can never be a woman. Yet in America we pretend otherwise. This is gaslighting of the most brazen kind. Worse yet, this gross subversion of truth is not being practiced on some far fringes of American society. It is being practiced at its very heart and center.

USA TODAY is a major newspaper and a broadcasting company – in fact, it is the number one newspaper in America by circulation.

But it is not only USA TODAY that subverts the truth in this unabashed fashion. ALL major corporate media do it. All of them have consistently pretended that Levine is a woman and refer to him as such ever since he burst onto the national scene in 2020. This includes even such outlets as Forbes and The Economist, periodicals which one would have thought had still some contact with reality.

                                                                                                                                              When Levine became the United States Assistant Secretary for Health all media falsely represented him as a “woman.” When Levine was named an admiral in the United States Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, the media across the spectrum celebrated the event as a major milestone for women claiming that Levine was “the first female four-star admiral in public service.”

But it is not only the media who propagate the grossest of lies; it is also our government starting at the very top. When President Biden announced Levine’s nomination for the post of Assistant Secretary for Health, he referred to him as a woman. When Levine was being questioned during his confirmation hearing not a single US senator brought up the obvious issue of him being a man. Not one of them used this opportunity to ask him why he tries to pretend otherwise. They all pretended that the person sitting in front of them was a woman.

It is not only the highest levels of the US government that are actively subverting physical reality before them; it is government on all levels. As you may know, prior to his federal appointments Levine served as Secretary of Health in Pennsylvania. He was appointed to this position by Governor Tom Wolf who, of course, referred to him as a “woman.” Needless to say, Levine was confirmed to this role by the Pennsylvania State Senate who were all willing to go along and pretend that the man before them was a woman.

But it not only the American media and political establishment that lie and deny reality. Academia is equally intellectually and morally corrupt. To wit, the best athlete on the University of Pennsylvania women’s swimming team is a young man called Lia Thomas who until last season competed as a male. Thomas went on to become the NCAA swimming champion in 500-yard freestyle.

As you may know, the University of Pennsylvania also happens to be an Ivy League school. The Ivy Leagues are a group of elite universities that are considered among the best in the United State and, indeed, the world. The eight schools in this grouping include such prominent institutions of higher learning as Harvard, Yale and Princeton. As such they are supposed to represent the best and brightest among us. These schools compete among each other in the Ivy League conference. That they would allow a man to compete with – and soundly beat – genuine girls shows that our intellectual elites have collectively lost both their judgment and their minds.

Unfortunately, the same applies to our military and the medical establishment. The former now pays for sex transition surgeries for our military personnel. There are many serious problems with this, but the main one is that there can be no such a thing as “sex transition,” because such a thing is simply not possible. The very premise of the whole procedure rests on a lie. This lie is being propagated by the medical establishment that carries out these mutilating procedures. Furthermore, in their reality-subverting endeavours, they now refer to real women as “birthing persons.”

We do not need any more examples. It suffices to say that practically every American institution is now actively engaged in reality subversion. If we are as a society willing to lie about obvious unalterable physical realities, we must be lying galore about other things as well. And we most certainly do. The American regime and its media lie nearly about everything, and they do it vehemently and without ceasing. Do you want some recent examples?

What about the vaccines being perfectly safe and 95 percent effective?

What about Hunter Biden’s hard drive being Russian disinformation?

What about BLM being a peaceful movement concerned with racial justice?

What about Kyle Rittenhouse being a white supremacist intent on shooting peaceful BML protesters?

What about the claim that Joe Biden is an honest politician and a good man?

What about the SARS-CoV-2 virus coming from Wuhan wet market?

What about the claim that Anthony Fauci was a selfless public servant whose main concern in life is the well-being of his fellow citizens and public health?

What about the Canadian truckers being racists, fascist, misogynists and terrorists?

What about the claim (made in 2006) that we only had ten years to save the planet from a climate disaster induced by man-made global warming?

And do you still remember Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction?

All these were brazen lies promulgated by our fraudulent establishment.

Almost nothing that is said these days in public discourse is true. Our whole system is saturated in dishonesty, untruth and deception. Our public sphere exists in a tissue of lies.

Biden, Fauci, Walensky, CNN, NPR, the Washington Times, the Department of Justice, the FBI, Pelosi, Gates, Zuckerberg, Schumer and thousands of their friends – every one of them tells lies.

The dollar, along with our whole financial system, rest on a stupendous lie. The lie is this: the United States government will one day pay off its debts. This will never happen. Once the hour of reckoning arrives, this lie will cost us dearly. Lies, lies, lies and more lies everywhere.

And now the liars are using their media to push for and expand the war in Ukraine. If you really want to learn the truth about Ukraine please watch a 2016 lecture on the subject by Professor John Mearsheimer, one of the world’s leading experts on geopolitics and international relations.

                                                                                                                                                    A Supreme Court nominee recently claimed she did not know how to describe what a woman is. She said she is not a biologist. So, a Harvard-educated lawyer cannot tell us what a female is, and this nation is supposed to award her a lifetime appointment of great public trust. That woman – Kentaji Brown Jackson – is not exceptional in her extreme prevarication. Today nearly all public figures dissemble and lie as a matter of course.

Our system is so false and rotten that the so-called “fact checkers” are among the greatest liars to be found. Those who attempt to say the truth, on the other hand, are promptly censored and silenced. Paradoxically, the truth tellers are being cancelled by the fake “fact checkers” who are on the payroll of such frauds as Pfizer, Bill Gates, George Soros and their like.

Telling the truth has become a serious offence in America. We have, indeed, become an Empire of Lies. An Empire we certainly are, for the regime not only forces its lies on the American people but exports them to the rest of the planet. Our embassies, for example, now routinely hoist the LGBT flag which stands for the movement that, among other things, maintains that men can become women.

Our globalist leaders invade and destroy countries on the basis of lies, which they tell both domestically and internationally. In the early 2000s, the United States ordered Saddam Hussein to abandon his program of developing weapons of mass destruction. He did what we asked him to do, but we still accused him of having weapons of mass destruction. We then invaded his country under this false pretence and had him executed.

A couple of years later, we asked Moammar Khaddaffi to relinquish his WMDs. The US government promised him a hand of reconciliation and cooperation if he did. He complied and then we helped to have him killed.

Before being expelled from Afghanistan, our globalist-minded elites tried to export parts of their lie-based ideology by opening a department of gender studies at the University of Kabul. They could really not have chosen a more inappropriate setting for this this kind of gaslighting operation.

Is it any wonder that the American regime is being increasingly disliked around the world?

When polled by Gallup, people around the world consistently named the United States as the greatest threat to peace. The numbers were getting so bad that the American government pressured Gallup to stop asking this question. But the world’s collective judgment is not surprising given our record of sowing havoc, death and destruction: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria. There was a big lie attached to each of these disasters.

For this we can thank our corrupt globalist establishment. This establishment is now presided over by Joe Biden, a corrupt man who has sold out his country through various influence peddling schemes and other ploys involving his son. The plentiful evidence of his misdeeds is on the hard drive of his Hunter Biden. The FBI and the Department of Justice are in possession of this drive, but the regime has refused to launch an investigation into the crimes recorded therein. Not only that, but they have done everything they could to bury them under the lie of “Russian disinformation.”

Everyone who loves truth and America should be deeply upset and grieved by this.

A regime that is so profoundly steeped in dishonesty, deception, criminality and corruption can never prosper. The moral law that undergirds all existence – the Law of God – requires that its dark works be met with just recompense.

It is not good to be the Empire of Lies.

The Ukraine War (1)

By Iain Davis, (, 8th April, 2022

Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine has been presented to us, in the West, as unprovoked and unjustified. We have not been told about Russia’s legitimate security concerns in the face of NATO expansionism. Nor has Ukraine’s significant Nazi problem been honestly reported, with some Western propagandist even promoting them.

The Russian government claims that its recognition and defence of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DPR and LPR) are born from “compassion” for the people who have been under siege for eight years. However, Russia also needs the new republics as satellite states, providing a foothold for its own national security as it opposes NATO’s advance.

It should be noted that Russia’s military actions, in trying to oust Nazis from their strongholds in Mariupol, Kharkiv and elsewhere, has led to the near destruction of many cities and towns in Eastern Ukraine. As of the 19th March the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCR) estimate that 847 civilians were killed in three weeks, primarily as a result of shelling.

The OHCR noted that the “actual figures are considerably higher” but could not be verified. Credible eye witness reports and video evidence indicate that the Nazis in Mariupol and other besieged areas had stopped civilians leaving through humanitarian corridors opened by Russia. There are many reports of Nazi (Asov) atrocities, including the murder of fleeing civilians.

NATO has courted Ukraine as a future alliance member for decades, taking firm steps to admit Ukraine along the way. This has never been acceptable to Russia, whose national security concerns have been consistently ignored.

Only days prior to the Russian attack, the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, delivered a speech at the Munich Security Conference threatening Russia, not only with a nuclear-armed Ukraine, but a NATO nuclear power on Russia’s south-western border.

Ukraine is a pinch-point for Russia’s natural gas trade with the European Union. The purpose of the Nord Stream pipelines, constructed in partnership with Germany, was to circumnavigate that problem. It raised the potential for greater EU independence from the US and, with an EU commitment to defence union, presented a possible threat to the US dominance of NATO.

Consequently, the US applied unrelenting pressure on the EU, including enforcing sanctions on German companies, to halt the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. In response to Russia’s official recognition of the DPR & LPR, German Chancellor Olaf Sholtz immediately announced that Germany would not certify Nord Stream 2 for operational use. Russia began it’s military operation in Ukraine three days later.

Please read Parts 1-3 of this series for an exploration of the evidence informing this analysis. This provides us with what we might call the “official-unofficial” explanation for Russia’s aggression. It is an appraisal founded upon the established, accepted concept of international relations.

 However, any such investigation is necessarily incomplete. It fails even to describe the globalist forces that are both ripping Ukraine apart and propelling Russia to act. We will explore these in Parts 5 – 6.

Before we do it is important to appreciate just how far we, as supposed democratic societies, have strayed from democratic ideals. This can be understood if we consider the extreme propaganda and censorship our governments are using, hobbling our ability to discern reality.

The Propaganda Environment                                                                                              

There is little chance that the issues we have already discussed will receive fair coverage in the Western mainstream media (MSM) and none at all that it will cover what we are about to consider. The West’s propaganda, in a rapidly evolving conflict, has at times been absurd.

Immediately following the launch of Russia’s military operation the Western MSM reported the unbelievable bravery of the Ukrainian border guards defending Snake Island in the Black Sea. They stated that 13 died in their valiant defence against a Russian “air and sea bombardment.”

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy said he would award the guards posthumous medals for gallantry. It soon emerged that this was a fabrication. None of them died and Russia took the Island without harming anyone.

The MSM reported that Russian forces deliberately targeted a Mosque in Mariupol where civilian woman and children were said to be sheltering. The Turkish media later revealed that the Mosque had not been struck by anything.

Success Indicators and Success

Gary North (, “Reality Check” (January 11, 2008)

Success indicators are not the same as success. A student can get an A on an exam by cheating. He is not a success. He can get it by cramming for the exam and remembering nothing a week later. This also is not success. The success indicator is supposed to reinforce behaviour that leads to success, not serve as a substitute for success.

For every known success indicator there is a way to attain it without being successful, unless you define success solely as achieving a success indicator. We do not teach our children this way, so we ought not to settle for a success indicator in place of the intangible goal represented by the indicator. It gets complicated.

Does the name Harold Russell ring a bell? Probably not. But he achieved what no other person has ever received: two Oscars for the same performance. He played a double amputee in “The Best Years of Our Lives” (1946). He was not a professional actor. He had lost both of his hands in World War II. Nobody who saw his performance is likely to forget it.

Years later, he sold his Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in order to raise money for his wife’s operation. He explained: “I don’t know why anybody would be critical. My wife’s health is much more important than sentimental reasons. The movie will be here, even if Oscar isn’t.” That rings true for most of us, I think. The success indicator — the statue — was not the same as success. He did not sacrifice success when he sold it. He did not lose his stature by selling his statue.

Money is the most common success indicator. “Buy low, sell high” is hardly an ethical manifesto, yet it is the basis of how we make our livings. It puts food on the table. Still, we know that to die as a miser dies, surrounded by his ledgers, makes no sense for anyone who is not afflicted with a view of money that we would not like to see our children afflicted with.

We understand the trade-off between money and significance in life. We look at a person who has laboured in a jungle as a medical missionary, yet we probably do not conclude, “He died broke. So, he wasted his life.” We also probably do not have much respect for the plastic surgeon who gets rich by making starlets look better. Yet his income keeps us from saying, “He has wasted his life.” That depends on what he has done with his money.


I have come back to this theme repeatedly for over 25 years. I define “calling” as follows: the most important thing you can do in which you would be most difficult to replace. For women, this is usually their role as wives and mothers. For men, this is probably their role as husbands and fathers. Women recognize their callings more readily than men recognize theirs. We say, “nobody ever said on his deathbed, ‘I should have spent more time at the office.'” When we say this, we rarely think of a woman saying this on her deathbed. Yet in today’s society, it is becoming more likely that American women will assess in retrospect their lifetime trade-off between significance and money.

Most men know that getting fired is not in the same league of horrors as getting divorced. To fail on the job is not generally regarded as being a failure comparable to failing in marriage. When a young man tells his parents or friends that he has just been fired, they tell him, “It happens to everyone. Don’t worry about it. There’s always another job.” They don’t say something similar when his wife walks out on him and takes the children.

I don’t suppose anyone told Jimmy Carter in December, 980, “Don’t worry about it. You can always be elected mayor of Plains.” That is because being the President of the United States is a calling, not a job. Anyone who has lost the Presidency is not going to be re-elected, Grover Cleveland to the contrary. Being elected to the top political office is presumably a man’s calling: the most important thing he can do in which he would be most difficult to replace. Yet Babe Ruth was onto something in 1930, when someone pointed out that he made more money than President Hoover. He replied, “Why not? I had a better year than he did.”

In most cases, the free market is not willing to pay us more in our callings than in our occupations. That is why callings exist. Why is it so difficult to replace a person in his calling? Because his calling doesn’t pay much. If it paid a potful of money, there would be candidates lined up to replace the present occupant of the position.

A few people are irreplaceable because they can make more money than anyone else. Star professional athletes or box-office movie stars are examples. So is Warren Buffett. The barrier to entry is so great that the person can’t be replaced. This is extremely rare. Buffett is wise. He saw that his gigantic fortune was his greatest achievement, and that he was incapable of doing as good a job giving it away as he did building it. He had someone to give it to: Bill Gates.

Gates is the only man richer than Buffett, and Gates says he is going to quit as leader of Microsoft in order to oversee the giving away of his fortune. Buffett watched Gates in action and concluded that Gates’s foundation deserved Buffett’s fortune. Buffett could then concentrate on increasing the market price of his company’s shares. I think both decisions were correct. Gates should quit as a businessman, while Buffett shouldn’t.

Gates recognizes that possessing great wealth involves great responsibility. (I think his wife Melinda was the educator here, making her arguably the most important woman on earth.) This responsibility involves deciding what should be done in a non-market environment: no profit and loss. Compared to a competitive market, the non-profit world is flying blind. Yet Gates does seem to have established numerical criteria for successful giving, such as the cost per children’s lives saved per dollar in sub-Sahara Africa. This does not solve the problem of feeding these surviving children.

Gates has decided that he cannot solve every problem. But the dying child in its mother’s arms is more likely to survive because of Gates’s cost-benefit analysis than if Gates were spending his waking hours trying to raise Microsoft’s profitability. The fact that there is no market for saving the lives of African children does not mean that saving a million lives is not significant. It means only that value is sometimes not the same as price. Value, unlike price, is not measurable on a one-to-one basis on a corporate balance sheet.


We live in a gigantic auction. The allocation principle of every auction is “high bid wins.”

Each person has specific talents. He also has non-specific talents. Human beings are the most adaptable of all creatures. They can adapt their skills to meet new conditions. Reason governs most of our choices. Our instincts are under control, which is why society is possible.

Our specific talents give us our edge in the workplace. Here, we are less replaceable. Our general talents give us our safety net. If the market for our specific talents dries up, we can fall back on our general talents. But these, being widely available, command low wages. We look to our specific talents as the source of most of our wages, which for most people is their major source of income.

Usually, it takes about 1,000 hours on the job or in training to get the skills sufficient for competence. That is not much time: 5 months. It takes about 5,000 hours to become highly skilled. At that point, we are no longer easily replaceable. We begin to be able to ask for raises and obtain them. Our output is worth more, so we can earn more.

Yet at some point, the raises cease. There are several possible reasons. First, we reach the limits of our innate capacity. Second, we cease striving to improve. Third, the market for our level of skills reaches a point when those with similar skills meet the demand. Demand equals supply, so the price of our services ceases to rise. Fourth, we reach our comfort zone and decide not to test the market by seriously offering to quit. Fifth, our employer has reached his limits in expanding market share. In any case, we begin to tread water occupationally.

Usually, this takes place sometime around age 45. This is when men start looking for significance rather than money. They perceive that whatever they have accomplished occupationally is the limit of their capacity or opportunity. They sense that they have not distinguished themselves in their chosen occupation. They are unlikely ever to be in the top 4% (20% of 20%) in their field, let alone the top 1% (20% of 20% of 20%). They start looking for something else to do with the time they have remaining.

They have spent two decades selling their time for money. They realize that this has not been a wise bargain. They believe they have nothing to show for it. They start looking for something to show for it.

The problem is, they are in debt: mortgage. They have children at home who are entering their highest cost period: college. They are unaware of the loopholes that can reduce expenses to such a level that a student working at a fast food restaurant can put himself through college. Their mobility is limited. So, they stick with what they have, or else they go off the deep end and run off with a younger woman to start a new life.

There are a few men who don’t face this because they are in the top 4% or even 1%. They make a name for themselves as masters of their occupation. They get a sense of accomplishment from their status as role models in their profession. They are close to irreplaceable. So, their calling is the same as their occupation. They make their living — a good living, economically speaking — in their calling.

Peter Drucker, the management guru, was such a person. He made a lot of money writing books, giving high-priced lectures, and advising senior managers in large corporations. He was one of the founders of management science. He died in 2005, still writing. He was a week away from 97. He stayed on the job to the end. He did not do this for money.

Not many people can be a Peter Drucker. Not many men need to be. But because most men never succeed in achieving a sense of significance in their occupations, they are ready to be pensioned off at age 65. The problem is, the era of the pension is ending. Rates of investment return are too low. Life expectancy is too long. Levels of competition from pensionless Asians are too high.

The frustration of staying on the job is high for most men. Yet the income available by quitting and finding new employment is low. When you move from low replaceability to high replaceability, your income falls. The archetype example is the Wal-Mart greeter. The job offers little money and little sense of significance.


If you choose an occupation that offers high income and high significance, that’s ideal. The career of physician combines both, or can. Yet from what I understand, the occupation of dentist does not. Dentists do not get the same sense of satisfaction that physicians do. Yet the physician’s economic constraints and Medicare paperwork and high liability insurance premiums have combined to reduce both net income and significance. Physicians are becoming wards of the state unless they are paediatricians or free market practitioners: no government money.

There are several ways to gain significance in one’s occupation. One is to choose an occupation that offers little money but lots of significance. A medical missionary is one choice. The low pay scale makes them irreplaceable. Their ability to heal makes them significant. Teachers sometimes can achieve both — again, through low pay. But teachers on the state’s payroll are rarely able to eke out much significance. The level of performance by their students is low. They are perceived by the public as clock-punchers and baby sitters.

I have friends in the day care business. They have combined high income, high retirement income (real estate gains), and real significance. The barrier to entry is prestige. There isn’t any. In fact, the occupation has negative prestige for men. “You do what?” This keeps replacement costs high: barriers to entry. I have written about this repeatedly, but the barrier to entry remains too high, even for my subscribers, some of whom say they would like to become millionaires. They could become millionaires. They just won’t do what it takes. It takes:

Another way to gain significance is to become dedicated to mastery. This is the impulse to become the best in the field. This requires long hours of work, attendance at seminars, reading constantly, applying what you have read, and either writing or speaking. But if you have no respect for your profession, this strategy will not work.

A more common approach is to limit your occupation to the minimal 40 hours a week and then allocate another 30 hours a week to something that either can become a new occupation or else is a low-paid area of service. The problem here is the time commitment. For a family man, this dedication has a price tag: absence from the home. So, I recommend time spent in family projects that can become income-producing. Art Robinson did this with his family-run sheep ranch business. He also did it with his scientific research and newsletter publishing (Access to Energy). He did it with his CD-ROM curriculum, which his children worked on as producers.

If your occupation is so narrow that your children’s interests and skills are not likely to give them a competitive advantage — irreplaceability — then you cannot do what men have done through history: teach your sons your trade. This is why starting a home business on the side can offer a way for fathers to teach their children the basics of running a business. The trade-off here is that the time required to do this comes from the overtime that most professionals allocate to their occupations. Income falls until the family business becomes profitable.

If you think of your occupation as supporting your calling, then you are less tempted to dismiss your occupation at age 45. There is a man in my church who is a lawyer. I don’t know how successful his practice is. His calling is running a Saturday lawn-mowing service. He has hired about ten inner-city boys, ages 7 to 13, to work on his crew. He picks them up, gives them training, and takes them home. Obviously, his time is worth far more money in his practice than it is mowing lawns. But he has developed a small business that gives him a reason to establish contact with these boys. He serves as a male role model for them. They learn the basics of self-discipline on the job. If they goof off, they lose the job. They have no other job options to match it. They know this. Over time, this experience will provide them with the emotional skills they need to survive in a competitive business world. It is unlikely that they could learn these skills anywhere else, and surely not until they qualify for an entry-level job at age 16.

The opportunity to teach can be converted into money. There are private schools that can use teachers. The schools can’t pay much, but for someone on retirement income, a pay check of any size is gravy. It allows you to invest more, on the assumption that Social Security is not as long-lived as you are.

If you can get into a volunteer situation early, you can make yourself indispensable. When your skills in this position are sufficient, you can probably make the transition to a paid position. This is probably the best strategy to convert calling into occupation. It takes a considerable investment of time. A growing organization is always on the lookout for people who have demonstrated their competence and reliability.

Those of us who have been in the business world for several decades, but who are not working with entry-level people, forget just how incompetent most newcomers are. The work ethic has faded. The public schools have declined. So, companies pay a premium for reliable people. There is no question in my mind that a person who has proven in a volunteer situation that he can accept responsibility, perform better than expected, and finish every assignment on time has distinguished himself from the majority of applicants.

I think anything connected with health care constitutes a calling when delivered free of charge and an occupation when salaried. If you are looking for a transition route out of your occupation into a salaried calling, I recommend health care. The obvious growth sector is home health care. To cut costs, the health care delivery industry is going to have to cut the cost of real estate. By using the care recipient’s home and providing skilled labour, the industry will reduce its real estate overhead expenses.


I think anyone who serves as the primary breadwinner in a household who does not yet have a calling that provides the bulk of his monthly income is asking for trouble. The unfunded pension is one aspect of this problem. Mid-life crisis is another.

The cost of making the transition from occupation to calling increases as we get older. If a man finds his calling and can make a living at it at age 21, he is in a remarkable position. If I were 18 again, I have no question what I would do. I would major in young child development in college. Then I would start a day care. I would then build a new one every 36 months. Fifteen years after opening a day care, the property is paid off, and it then generates $60,000 a year. I could retire a rich man at age 40 and spend the rest of my life writing. Or I would just keep doing what I had been doing. Increasing your income by $60,000 a year every 36 months is a nice way to escape retirement woes.

A man with children still at home has three time-allocation issues: his job, his family (calling), and his future calling, either paid or unpaid, depending on whether he likes his present job and can keep it. There are not enough hours in a day to allow full success in all three areas. You have to juggle your schedule. If you can find a way to solve the problem of your future income and significance as a family project, that’s ideal.

Here is how I would recommend sorting out these issues, in conjunction with your spouse. You need to get these questions answered.

1. How many years until you retire from your job?

2. How many years do you expect to live beyond retirement?

3. How much money will you need as capital?

4. Do you expect to work beyond retirement, at least part-time?

5. Do you want to retire into a job that is an extension of your present job?

6. Do you want to retire into a job that is an extension of your calling?

7. Are you actively preparing for this transition — intellectually, emotionally, and geographically?

8. Are you actively developing personal contacts with potential future employers?

9. Are you actively positioning yourself to be hired in this field, such as through a website? Too many men are actively ignoring this problem. They will pay a heavy price within a year after their retirement.

International Commentary (37)

What Makes a Superpower Weak?

Number 85, March 22, 2022

What Makes a Superpower Weak?

In the early AD 400s, invincible Rome was falling.  It was entering its last years, last days, and last hours.  Gangs of German barbarians were closing-in to conquer, loot, kidnap and destroy.  But the residents of Rome were oblivious to reality.  They were focused on fun, games, their welfare payments, exploding inflation, and the next day’s entertainment – the wild blood-sport at the Coliseum.  Every day citizens gathered there to scream for yet more vivid combat and slaughter: war games to the death, gladiatorial duels to the death, and yet more gruesome executions of Rome’s criminals.  These were slow, agonizing deaths and the crowds wanted more of it.   

On one particular day, the shouting and roaring in the Coliseum was so loud the spectators could not hear the attacks of the Visigoths who were just outside the walls of the stadium.   The barbarians were going block by block, pillaging, raping, murdering, and destroying what was left of Rome. The screams of their victims went unnoticed by the raucous sports fans, citizens of the greatest superpower on earth.

What Pride Looks Like in 2022

Today in the USA, our elite media gives us daily details of the bloody war in Ukraine.  We keep watching, enthralled by the media’s colourful and emotional narrative.  

Putin is a beast; that poor victim Zelensky is a hero.  

To this one fervid narrative we have recklessly given our attention.  The war started on February 24th.  Within a week our collective hatred for Putin had been inflamed to a temperature at which rational thought is apparently impossible.

When the war was barely ten days old, Quinnipiac University polling data[1] discovered that over 70% of American respondents favored stiffer sanctions on Russia — even at the cost of skyrocketing gasoline prices. Because? Because the media told us virtue signalling is expensive, and being virtuous will cost us something.  

The poll also discovered that nearly 80% favoured a US hot war on Russia if its forces attack a NATO country.   That’s US v. Russia.  Nuclear power v. nuclear power.  Because…why?  Why is a nation like the US so suddenly disposed to think in this belligerent, suicidal way?  

Here is one reason of many: emotional fictional narratives can replace reality if we start believing them as credible.  

Putin’s a beast; that poor victim Zelensky is a hero.  The whole world needs to war against Putin to kill him. If Lindsay Graham doesn’t assassinate him first. 

One example of our hate-driven irrationality appeared on twitter. In full public view. Beneath a short Russian video of a hypersonic missile being launched from a Russian battleship, there was a cascade of comments.  The title noted that such a missile could fly at 7,000 mph and reach London in five minutes.  

The comments represented a chorus of hysteria driven by pride, genocidal frenzy and irrational ignorance.   Here’s a paraphrase of the thread.

“That missile doesn’t look fast to me.

“Russian missiles are no problem.  Our anti-missile systems will shoot ‘em down. Am sure of it.”

“Putin tries that on America?  All of Russia will disappear in like 1 min.”

“The West has more of those than Russia does.”

“We should use them”

“We could sink those Russian boats in seconds.”

“Little Putin has his day coming.”

What Will History Say About the Americans?

After wars have come and gone, the facts about those wars speak for themselves.  What will be said of the Americans of March 2022?  We were blind, childish, emotional, proud and ignorant.  We were not thinking about the secondary consequences of our emotional outbursts.  After reading a few stories on social media, we were willing to lash-out at every man, woman and child in Russia and kill them all.

The War Against Reality

An unthinking public. This is the chief ingredient for unnecessary and unjust war. War-mongering politicians (and industrialists) can have no war until they create a self-righteously irate population which has lost the ability to see reality.  

So how can America get reality back?

Taking these two simple steps will help:

  • First, stop the childish, blinding hatred of Putin for a moment.
  • Second, get answers to the hardest questions by going after the answers.

These are the two hardest questions:

  1. What is the reality of America’s military preparedness for war, compared to Russia’s?
  2. To what extent are we being captured by the deliberately monolithic media narrative?

Russia is far more realistic about national defence than NATO or the US.  Canada just admitted she is totally helpless, having joined the hate mob, dutifully shipping all her weaponry to Ukraine. All of it.  

Russia sees the world differently.  She has not invested the last twenty years teaching her soldiers and scientists to be woke or politically fashionable, as we have.  Russian leaders have focused on the realities of hostility because they have experienced it from the West, continually, for three decades.  Western leaders seem to have a running competition on who can deliver the most biting insults to Mr. Putin. NATO spends some $3 billion a year to threaten Russia.  Russia realizes that self-righteously irate Western populations, which have lost the ability to see reality, can be dangerous to the national security of their nation.  

Russians know what we are saying about them.  We want them dead.  Our very public sanctions are designed to destroy their families and their economy.   Deliberately.  Is it therefore any wonder that Russia has been building and testing weapon systems?  Is it any wonder that their weapons have been designed to work, like their hypersonic missiles?  How many Americans know that we do not have anything comparable?  Nor do we have any missile interception defences which can stop those missiles.  

Yet Russia has operational systems which can stop our intercontinental missiles.  And there are contingencies if one gets through.  This is because Russia has a realistic attitude about a hot nuclear war. If they are attacked, they will protect their people.   They have a disaster management plan to survive a nuclear war waged by the US, to come out alive on the other side, and to continue to build an independent national economy.  The US has no such realistic plan for their own people.   

This hard reality should deter the US from an arrogantly suicidal attitude. The Poseidon torpedo can be quietly released from Kilo class subs 4-5,000 miles from target.  The underwater drone can then swim slowly and quietly at depths of 3,300 feet until it parks just off a coastal city, awaiting detonation command.  Payload?  More than any existing American weapon.[2]

As these superior weapons were developed and tested, what was the American military doing?  During Mr. Biden’s administration so far, our Department of Defence has invested over six million man-hours teaching our troops about white rage, inherent racism, transgenderism and other woke mythology. 

Answering the hardest questions

As of this writing, the world is 27 days into the Ukraine war.  The fog of war is still too dense to see the answers to the most pertinent questions that need to be asked and answered.  By early April, it may be possible.  Below are some of the first we should try to tackle at that point.  

  • Just how deeply has war hysteria and propaganda affected our ability to discern reality?
  • Prior to Russia’s special military operation on February 24th, how many threats to their national security did Russia document to the watching world?   What were they?
  • For how long had Ukraine been acting as a proxy member of NATO militarily?
  • How many billions of dollars of weaponry had been given to Ukraine by NATO and the US?
  • Did Putin consider that he was interposing himself as magistrate between the threats and the security of his people?
  • Why did he perceive the “anti-Russian project” of NATO as a weapon of mass destruction?
  • What were the four peace concessions suggested to Zelensky which could have ended the war before the end of February?
  • Why did Zelensky reject those?  Why did he continue to reject offers of peace in order to prolong the fighting?
  • To what extent is Zelensky taking orders from the US State Department?
  • Of the 50 deep-state officials who signed the letter suggesting the Hunter laptop was Russian agitprop, how many were and are involved in Ukrainian affairs?[3]
  • How much did American interference in Ukraine over the last decade contribute to the invasion on February 24th?
  • Why was the Ukraine military massing on the Donbas border in mid-February?
  • Of the US billions sent to banks and the governments of Ukraine, how much has disappeared through corruption?
  • Is it true Ukrainian sources accounted for the largest international donations to the Clinton Foundation for a period of fifteen years?
  • Is it true the invasion failed militarily for Russia, or did they succeed in demilitarizing Ukraine and forcing Zelensky to the negotiation table?
  • What are the Nazi origins of the Azov Battalion?
  • For the last eight years, and the last eight weeks, what has been the character and conduct of the Azov battalion and other units of the Ukrainian army funded by Western interference?
  • Was it the Ukrainians who created the corridors for civilian evacuation, or was it the Russians?
  • Which units have been charged with genocide and war crimes in the Donbas?  The Ukrainian military or the private Ukrainian military companies like the Azov battalion?
  • Which army did a better job at protecting civilians from live fire, the Russians or the Ukrainians?
  • Which army will be remembered for better observing International rules of war?
  • How did the Ukrainians treat volunteer mercenaries who travelled to fight? Were those volunteers treated with honour and professionalism, or were they trapped, abused, cheated and used as cannon fodder?  How many are now dead combatants?
  • At the negotiation table, which side was more determined to achieve an immediate peace settlement? 

Highly Relevant Proverb

Indeed, it is useless to spread the baited net in the sight of any bird; But they lie in wait for their own blood; They ambush their own lives. So are the ways of everyone who gains by violence; it takes away the life of its possessors (Prov.1:17-19).