Evil is Undermining the American Dream

 Twitter dumped more information concerning government-Twitter collusion to repress free speech to benefit the Biteme administration's core post-modernist agenda. Evidently the F.B.I. and C.I.A. colluded with pre-Musk era Twitter execs to degrade, repress, spindle, fold and mutilate politically antipathetic twits.

https://nypost.com/2022/12/24/latest-batch-of-twitter-files-shows-cia-fbi-involved-in-content-moderation/

https://nypost.com/2022/12/22/facebook-twitter-stocked-with-ex-fbi-cia-officials/

The Twitter reveal is a disillusiuoning event. Although one may have known since the Obama administration that post-modernist, leftist, corporatocratic social media sycophants were rigging social media search engine listings or outright banning conservative and independent poltical opinion in order to keep the U.S. electorate in a state resembling mushrooms kept in the dark and fed a load of manure, to have confirmation that all is not perfectly fair and balanced in the American wonderland where everyone is living the dream drops a load of crap on the streets and all the aroma that follows.

Seattle's County-King Bans Select Free Speech on Employee Zoom Calls

  Seattle is a shining city on seven hills; one with broad sidewalks hosting the pathos that gumshoes like to  ponder wearing a trenchcoat in the rain. Inside the higher eschalons of government insiders a woke philosophy to ban Christian and Jewish religious symbols has taken hold like mold on soggy bread. A King County Washington State (where Seattle is located) Human Resourcves Manager issued an order that no religious symbols can be seen in employee homes when making zoom calls. Gloria Ngezaho has generated an interesting point of contention about the rights homeowners and renters have when wotrking from home; can an employer reasonably proscribe protected constitutional rights of employees because of the extorting threat of suspension or termination of employment? Some people don't take free speech and the constituion to heart or prioritize it over the values of dictators and the communist party.

It isn't quite as simple of an issue as it seems. Plainly courts wouldn't side against some businesses requiring that workers in their homes wear clothing on zoom conference calls; yet can they ban sex, or nose picking, eating snack foods or watching movies when discussing county business? If a county bans the burka at the job can it extend that control to the home? If a business bans cross-dressing transvestite presentations at work does King County ban that at home too? The woke crowd sides with haters of religious symbols and wants crosses, menorahs and nativity scenes to fade away to Strawberry Fields forever.

I am not sure of Manager Gloria Ngezaho's gender. I am not being facitious or disingenuous. The name is female yet he or she looks mostly male although wearing clothing colored, uh, school lunch sandwhich magenta (see photo with the Daily Mail. To some he or she would be an offensive symbol in-itself. It is a symbol of anti-Christian valuess comprising godless atheism. Christians are fundamentally tolerant of other people and beklieve themselves accountable for their own sin rather than that of others. Interesting questions though; to what extent can business or government decree what employees can do in their homes; can they prevent freedom of expression of the first amendment, or should they even want to?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11573433/Kings-County-receives-Ebenezer-Award-woke-edict-banning-Christmas-Hannukah-displays.html

That is one of the conundrums of the woke movement; a proclivity for banning free speech wherever it is antipathetic to their own values. It was pervasive across social media undermining the earning of countless writers yet should not be gleefully taken up by governments that are supposed to defend constitional rights like freedom of expression and religious freedom, rather than act to suppress them.

Should Pres. Biden AIr-Drop Food and Bicycles to Afghanistan Now that Women Workers Were Banned from NGO's

 When the Taliban decided to ban women from working for foreign non-governmental organization such as help with food, literacy, health etc it handicapped opportunities for those marginally surving to continue to exist without hardship or at all. A theocracy interpreting political economy on the foundation of religious and cultural ideas- mostly cultural in this instance, the Taliban are obstructing the vital economic interests as they have an eye on the afterlife.

https://www.axios.com/2022/12/25/taliban-ban-women-ngo-save-children-nrc-care

The afterlife is important; everyone goes there as sure as a tossed coin will drop to one side or the other unless floating in space or wherever. To help witrh life on Earth in Afghanistan after the ban and the exodus of so many foreign aid organizations that rely on women employees to a substantial extent, the Biden administration should consider air-dropping food, books and mittens all over the nation during winter, and maybe ventilated Make Afghanistan Great Again baseball caps for the summer season.

With millions of free paperback books translated to Pashtu including the U.S. Constitution, how to books, history books and science fiction novels the poor will have someething to entertain themselves with for free. Maybe some sort of literacy program would be required for Afghans to enjoy philosophy books like Russells 'A History of Philosophy', yet we learn from Sartre's short story 'The Self-Educated Man' that it is possible to learn outside college of college course material- at least in history.

Air-dropping solar cookers in Afghanistan's clear skies could reduce the need for burning combustable materials . Portable tents that won't be destroyed by sunshine would be useful, as might portable bicycles. Random air-dropped acts of kindness would show that the U.S. can donate more than thousands and thousands of millitary weapons to that nation.

Unleash the Dogs of Peace

 On this day of celebration of the Lord’s birth more than two millennia ago the United States leadership should resolve to unleash the dogs of peace and end the Ukraine war. Peace is a virtue for-itself generating manifold benefits and celebrating life. Life is a river of opportunity that grows attacked by its nemesis the necrotic monster of death. Human political leadership ought choose the living waters of life rather than the poisoned blood of death.

Peace was the hope that brought about the end of the Cold War beginning during the final months of the Reagan administration; culminating in Soviet withdrawal of military forces from Eastern Europe beginning December 1988

https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/how-ronald-reagan-won-the-cold-war

https://billofrightsinstitute.org/essays/tear-down-this-wall-ronald-reagan-and-the-end-of-the-cold-war

https://books.openedition.org/ceup/2759?lang=en

https://www.rbth.com/history/332046-how-ussr-pulled-its-troops

The United States once was the leader of the free world. Today it is something more like a sycophant of a military-industrial complex of international scope. Instead of seizing the opportunity for peace through negotiated settlement with Russia that would correct the iniquity of redistributing all of the Ukraine to the west, including the Crimean Peninsula, the Biden administration has consistently promoted war and all of the unfortunate, evil tidings that have followed. It is not too late to have a change of heart and let slip the dogs of peace.

Continuing the war into the new year brings more evil prospects for Americans. While the Biden administration has left undefended the southern border with an anticipated invasion of hundreds of thousands or even millions of illegally arriving aliens ahead it is financing the Ukraine conflict with more than a 100 billion dollars worth of weapons, cash, advisers and other goods at a minimum. The best it can hope to achieve is to end up where it began before the conflict with the former boundaries set by the Clinton administration that precipitated the present conflict. Eastern Ukraine under Russian control would have little practical effect on the people that live there economically or socially if a complete peace with demilitarization and free trade was established. Without a peace that recognizes historical Russian claims; without sharing the Ukraine, the foundation for lasting enmity will be poured like molten lava behind a dam of hate.

The Cost to Start a Nuclear War

 The U.S. Government has spent fifty billion this year on military and other help for Ukraine and the Senate has passed a bill containing nearly 50 billion more. One might wonder if that is enough to get a general nuclear war started.

The United States since 1940 had spent nearly six trillion dollars on nuclear weapons procurement and development by 1998. I would guess that since then quite a bit more was spent. The cost of keeping the nuclear locker is $35 billion each year. A lot of money has been spent to enable nuclear war. The amount of federal dollars spent on finding viable, innovative economic alternatives to war such as is Ukraine are ridiculously small in comparison. The U.S. government and especially the Democrat party prefers to invest in war rather than peace.

https://www.brookings.edu/the-hidden-costs-of-our-nuclear-arsenal-overview-of-project-findings/

The United States has given Ukraine direct assistance in a single year greater than the G.D.P. of more than 100 nations. Settling the conflict with a negotiated solution was and is the more stable course even after a year of blundering political response if the war actual does precipitate nuclear conflict. Russia has valid historical claims on Ukraine and the western government’s claims are understandable too. Demilitarizing the Dnepr frontage except for Kiev and letting Russia keep its eastern Ukraine lands with free travel for each nation over the border is quite possible. To fail to recognize Russian claims exemplifies the blindness that often occurs in the political leadership realms of belligerents of war.

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-much-aid-has-us-sent-ukraine-here-are-six-charts

President Reagan wanted to rid the world of nuclear weapons and that is still a good idea. Yet when the United States proves again and again that nuclear weapons is the only thing it really respects among nations when it wants its economic way with things it is easy to understand why nuclear proliferation is apparently viewed as a declaration of independence by those newly arming. Others seem to acquiesce in the power of the nuclear powers with economic assets too.

If a nuclear develops from the Ukraine conflict it probably will need another 50 billion besides the 100 billion earmarked for Ukraine already to light the fire. Maybe Pres Putin will demure from using nukes if the war goes really bad and troops need to withdraw to old Russian borders. Even if they did stability might not follow for the U.S.-Russian relations.

The 118th Congress Ought to Investigate Democrat Politician Investments in Ukraine

 The next congress- a Republican led one, should inveestigate House, Senate, Judiciary and Executive branch personnel to find out who owns land or has onvested otherwise in Ukraine. The Biden administration was obviously conflicted with Hunter Biden's deep interaction with Uklrainians yet that may be just the tip of an iceberg. One wonders if crooked congresspersons would rather risk nuclear war than share Ukraine with Russia or make an honest settlement that would have the collateral benefit of ending immediate prospects for a world nuclear war involving RUssia and N.A.T.O.

Ukraine may be blackmailing some U.S. politicians. Ukraine had a reputation for being somewhat fast and loose before the war and U.S. politicians may have put themselves in compromising situations. Democrats won't spend anything to secure the southern U.S. border and yet spend billions and billions on war instead of ending one through rational, peaceful negotiations that would provide land east of the Dnepr for Russia. Without a mutually satisfactory end of the war hostilities will continue for some time and harm the U.S. economy that is apparently a bit vulnerable to a cascade of disaster.

Mr. Zelinsky is a hawk and wants more and more weapons and cash. Republicans should find out who is obligated to in order to keep their investments secure. Such people would rather risk end of the world scenarios than end a war if it cost them anything personnally.

Open Negotiations to Limit General Nuclear War

 I wonder if it would be worthwhile for the Biden administration and Russian President Vladimir Putin to hold talks to limit the range of any potential nuclear war. Atomic scientists have continued advancing the clock toward midnight since the Obama administration and now it is just 100 seconds to midnight.

Nuclear war might not be all bad- just mostly bad. Casualties might be horrendous if it is a general MAD exchange, yet if tactical nuckes are used first in Ukraine, and if the United States doesn't choose to immediately respond and upgrade the war to full scale MAD (as if Democrat policies hadn't already achieved crazy in partnership with N.A.T.O. that colluded with Democrats to surveil Americans and censor the internet) it is possible that casualties might be comparatively low.

It could be useful though to consider the range of a MAD war, or a general nuclear war and try to agree to limit the damage; each side could choose cities before the nukes fly that wouldn't be hit and would in effect be nuclear free zones. The game theories of nuclear war are many and complex. They would continue to be, however a battleship game inversion would tell the players what cities would not be hit by nuclear weapons at the negotiations and would approximate equality in population and value.

Per example Russian seaports are fewer with less population than U.S. ports. Russia might not want Petersburg or Archangelsk hit while the U.S. woulds want New York and Seattle spared and sacrifice Boston and San Francisco.

Russia might want Moscow spared in exchange for Chicago being spared- choosing to sacrifice D.C. because it has fewer people.

There could be some sort of environmental analysis that would limit nuclear winter yet liberate the use of nuclear war when needed to work out political disagreements. Some cities could be spared for humanitarian reason, economic reasons post-war etc, while others would be free nuclear-fire targets. There is no reason to not make nuclear war preperations to limit or moderate hypothetical conflict when the defauklt tends toward being worst-case saturation with nuclear weapons; MAD policy.