Taking the red pill

Updated on 4.17.23

There was report that the use of the term "Red pill" will get you in bad odor with the new master class in DC.   

What are they so afraid of?



Original post on 3.8.23

Everyone has heard the expression of getting "red-pilled". Those who take the blue pill want to stay in the dream world that the powers-that-be want to keep people in. As long as they are in the dream world, they won't ever know the truth, and will be forever under the control of the tyrants.

Allow me to segue into a deeper discussion. After all, what is real? That very question is asked by the character Morpheñus in that film. It seems that this kind of discussion can be another which would cause people's eyes to glaze over. Perhaps you can say that there are those who don't want you to see with your own eyes, but would rather project a world that they want you to see. That is what the film used as a plot device.

But this happens in the real world with propaganda. Typically, the leadership of an unfree country will not allow free expression of ideas. There is rampant censorship. Such should not be possible in the USA, but it is on display today in the halls of government. There is an increasing drive to censor those who say things that are not considered to be true. But what is true and not true? How will this be determined? In a free society, it is from the bottom up, not the top down. The leadership is not allowed to determine what is said and not said. The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law". But certain politicians are now saying quite openly what cannot be said, and this isn't legally possible, if the Constitution is to be obeyed. Senators Schumer and McConnell have had their say, and that time is over. Now it is the opposition's turn.

There is a way to determine truth in a court room. Such isn't perfect, nothing conceived by man is perfect, but it gives the best opportunity to get as close to truth as humanly possible. It is an adversarial system. For any controversy, both sides get to tell their side of the story. An impartial jury hears the case, and there's a judge to keep the proceeding within the bounds of the law. When the Congress forbids the discussion of information, it is preventing the adversarial system that the courts employ. They'd prefer their own interpretation, which has to be taken as truth. Should a one-sided system be trusted? In the court of public opinion, doesn't the opposition have the right to present their side of the controversy? If it cannot, then how is this country a free country?

Seeing is believing, it has been said. If one is dedicated to the truth, then what harm could there be in viewing anything on a video? There can only be harm if only one side is permitted to show what that side wants to be seen. If the other side has no say, what assurance does anyone have that all the facts are being shown? The Democrats and their allies on the GOP have had their say. The other side now has a chance to speak, but these people object. That alone should raise suspicions about their commitment to the Constitution and rule of law.

Their objection on the basis of security does not appear to apply. That was their rationale for keeping the tapes secret. If nothing else is proven, they have haven't proven that these tapes caused any harm to security. In fact, their claims of security appear to have been cast aside. Now the dispute is over actual content. If the full discussion proceeds, their favorite interpretation will suffer a fatal blow. The Democrats know this, and this is why they object. It is a lot easier to win a game when only one side is allowed to play.

One could stride deeper into this. There is plenty of room for discussion on the basis of such topics as epistemology-- the study of knowledge. How does anyone know what they know?

It has been my opinion from the start that this was no insurrection. As you peel away the onion of obfuscation, and get to the core of the matter, it should be asked how this peaceful demonstration got out of hand. If it is asked, it is my opinion that we'll find that there were interested parties who wanted there to be a disturbance so it could be used to discredit the political opposition. The disturbance was misrepresented as an insurrection, and no evidence to the contrary was allowed to be discussed. This is very suspicious. This is the kind of thing that could be observed in the former Soviet Union and Hitler's People's Courts.

How do I know this? The shortest way of saying it is that you have to connect the dots. It can be shown over and over again that these people do not care about the truth. This case is no different. The thing that they are really afraid of is that people will know the truth, and the truth will truly set the USA free again. Like the Matrix in the film, the powers-that-be cannot have the entire population red-pilled. That will be the end of their power, and perhaps the end of them as well.

Yellow Stain Blues

Re-posted :

Today:

This one is more like the original incident wrt to Tennessee.

From 3-24-23

Re-posted without comment

From 6-13-19

Strawberries, anyone?

Yep.  The Captain Queeg crew is looking for the non-existent key in order to solve the mystery of the missing strawberries.

Just thought I'd throw that into the mix.

Airships on Mars

 

An airship might fly on Mars with only its atmospheric components. Consider that Mars' atmosphere 95% carbon dioxide and 2.8% nitrogen. Nitrogen is the least dense of its major components, as the other minor components make up the balance of the atmosphere, and are therefore negligible factors. This means that nitrogen can be distilled out of the atmosphere, and since it is significantly less dense than carbon dioxide, the airship could have buoyancy.

Another factor to consider is that Mars is very cold. Heating up a nitrogen airship just a little will definitely allow it to fly.

What good would airships be on Mars? Once there's a colony there, it would be useful to have a transportation system that is simple and safe. A rocket or high speed plane would require a lot more infrastructure,

These things could be popular. You wouldn't have the Jetsons exactly, but it may be possible to construct one of these in a relatively compact form. It wouldn't work on Earth, because of the hyperabundance of nitrogen already present. That is, it wouldn't work unless it was heated up.

JP Aerospace is working on airships. They hope to take these to orbit. That is extremely ambitious, but the technology could definitely work on Mars, as it would be much easier to get to orbit in the shallower gravity well. Not to mention that JP is working on a high ISP rocket engine for his airships. This could be used on Mars as well with a personal transportation vehicle. JP has to use helium for his balloons on Earth. But nitrogen is much more abundant even on Mars, than helium. Could there be a market for these airships for Mars?

The Ingenuity helicopter is rather small. But they've had a lot of success flying around on Mars. So a transporation system for Mars seems feasible. A little tweaking here and there, and you might have something.

Countdown to the launch of Starship can begin

SpaceNews website says that SpaceX has received the launch license that they've been waiting for. Earlier this week, the news from Elon Musk came the declaration that Starship was ready. All the ducks are lining up, and they can light that gloriously huge frickin' candle.

Hopefully, we don't get an Earth shattering kaboom. If there is one, Marvin the Martian would be pleased.

No kaboom

Address by RFK Jr at Hillsdale College

This is an excellent speech and a sad speech at the same time. It is excellent in its defense of freedom, but sad that it is a rarity these days. The spirit shown in this video should be the norm, not the exception.

The spirit that was once common in this country is now quite uncommon. It think it is like the story from way back during the early 19th century. Thomas Jefferson was so alarmed by the sectionalism arising within the country, that he described it a like hearing a fire bell in the night. This cancel culture is going to be the end of us all if we don't get a handle on it.

The kinds of things happening today should be like a flashing red idiot light on your dash. Everybody should be alarmed at what's happening in this country. So I present things like this to try to get anybody out there who may read this to wake the hell up.

One thing that struck me about what he said was that 2/3rds of the people are willing to abandon everything they believe in order to comply with some authority. Doesn't seem to matter to them that they are violating their most strongly held beliefs. They just surrender to the authority. That's how you get an Adolf Hitler. That's how you get a Josef Stalin. That's how you get a Mao Tse Tung.

If this is an immutable fact, then we are doomed. I'd like to think otherwise. As long as there is the right to dissent, a mad cap leader, or clique of mad cap leaders cannot lead down the path of doom without our knowledge and consent. That is why the right to dissent is precious. Not so much anymore, but it once was.

Maybe we can get it back again. But it doesn't look good at the moment. Cancel the cancel culture. Put it on the trash heap of history like the former Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. There are those would do the opposite. Beware of those kinds of people.

The Night of the Long Knives

The Night of the Long Knives- Hitler's Rise to Power; A Documentary

The same story can be read by reading William Shirer's account of the rise of the Nazis to power before World War II. This video can be considered an alternative to reading the book, which is over 1000 pages. Folks may not have the inclination nor the time to read such a lengthy book, so it is my intention to present an alternative to that book's truth that must not be forgotten. It also must be understood, and counter measures taken, to insure as much as humanly possible, that this cannot happen again.

There are those who believe "it can't happen here". I would submit that it is indeed happening in this country right now. To me, this pursuit of Trump is following the same pattern that led to Hitler's rise. It is virtually being repeated verbatim by the Democrats ( along with Quislings in the GOP). All of this to prevent Trump from opposing their lust for absolute power.

Keep in mind that the "Night of the Long Knives" was a purge intended to dispose of someone who had become an inconvenience to Hitler's ambitions. That would be Ernst Rohm, the leader of the SA. The SA is perhaps better known as the Brownshirts. An accusation was made against Rohm that was cooked up in order to eliminate the possibility that Rohm could seize power in Germany, which Hitler wanted for himself. Rohm was no angel himself. For all intents and purposes, they might as well have been clones of each other. Therefore, the alleged plot of Rohm to take over Germany was not completely out of the question. Hitler used that fact to have Rohm destroyed, and by destroyed, that is quite literal. Hitler also used that to make himself unquestioned master of Germany.

But Rohm was in no position to actually carry out such a threat. It is true that the Brownshirts were a terror group, and was quite useful in stifling opposition to the Nazis, but by 1934, he was essentially powerless. Rohm was in no position to carry out any coup. The Nazis had Rohm and his followers DISARMED. In fact, the Nazis had the entire country disarmed, with the only exception being the state.

How Hitler carried out his plan is terrifying to behold. That's because it was conceived of in deceit, and executed with the full knowledge and understanding of the power structure in Germany. He could not have been successful without their assistance. However, their assistance was made to appear legal and above reproach. But it was certainly not the case. In other words, Hitler used the apparatus of the state to destroy the Weimar Republic. The Weimar Republic wasn't perfect, but it had civil liberties. It had opposition parties, and it had an element of democracy. Hitler destroyed all that, and made the civil authorities partners in his crime.

The question should be why didn't the civil authorities stop Hitler? Indeed, they HELPED him immensely. Given the extraordinary deceit of the man, it might be explained that these "leaders" couldn't understand the nature and intent of Hitler's deceit. He got everybody to go along with him. Once he had them under his power, they lost all ability to resist. The rest became an unfortunate history.

That they didn't understand is even harder to believe when Hitler wrote it all down in his book-- Mein Kampf. It is hard to believe, but it must be true. It is the nature of deceit that it can only succeed when people allow themselves to be deceived. Without this succeptibility to being deceived, Hitler could have been stopped.

It has been said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Alarmingly enough, types like Hitler will erase that history if they could. After all, the winners write the history books. Keep in mind that there are those in this country right now who are trying to keep the truth from being told. They are also trying to write a history that favors themselves. It is being done right under our noses. The pattern is very close to what Hitler did in his rise to power, and is being done right now in this country.

It was all being done in the name of the rule of law and democracy. But it was far and away the Big Lie that the Nazis loved to peddle to a gullible public. History may not repeat, but it often rhymes.

Instapundit won't comment on this gun control move by Tennessee?

Strange silence at Instapundit

Why is it that Instapundit won't comment on this gun control move by Tennessee? For the longest time, I noticed that Glenn Reynolds wrote about the relaxing gun control laws in his home state, but now where is he?

Tennessee had a wacko tranny shoot up and kill a bunch of kids and teachers, and this is an excuse to increase restrictions on guns?

It was followed by a bunch of wackos in the Legislature who took over the floor, and resulted in an expulsion of two of the three who did it. But the Legislature let them back in with no other punishment. What gives here?

I saw this story on Behind the Black blog, and have seen it nowhere else.

It looks like me that the GOP, who controls 75% of the legislature of that state, is going to go belly up on this just because the Democrats made a stink about it. Who was in the wrong here? It was one of the Democrats' core constituency that did the crime, so why do law abiding people get the punishment?

Moreover, why was Glenn Reynolds so loud about it before, and why is he so quiet now?