Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

People! It’s a “Figure of Speech” … Sheepdogs and Donkeys (end)

“Somewhere In Neverland”, All Time Low, from the album “Don’t Panic”, (2012)

Hey! Wake up! A metaphor is a figure of speech that identifies something as being the same as some unrelated thing for rhetorical effect, thus highlighting the similarities between the two. It is therefore considered more rhetorically powerful, or punchier, than a simile.

A metaphor is a type of analogy and is closely related to other rhetorical figures of speech which achieve their effects via association, comparison or resemblance – including allegory, hyperbole, and simile. In the case of the use of “sheepdog and wolves” for which bringing it into fashionable usage I am indebted to Lt Col David Grossman and others,  it is an allegorical metaphor, rather in the same vein as the old “3 little pigs” stories in the children’s fairy tales.

experts

Nobody believes for a second that certain types of humans are really like wolves and others are really like sheepdogs and others are like sheep, although the “AHA! Gotcha!” fervor with which all the usual suspects jump on it’s use tells me that they might just be fans of Being Liberal.

They really, really, really can’t handle it, when us guys do to them what those guys do all the time to us. I bet they had their own “airport moment” back in the 70’s. Maybe it gave them a sore throat … Awww.

Anyway, we need more emphasis on donkeys and less emphasis on sheepdogs. And while we are pointing fingers, the ongoing misuse of the “R-K” “behaviour theory” on certain websites is particularly annoying. Just because the kinda folks that put out sites like “Being Liberal” misuse stats and indulge in pseudo-scientific jargon to sugar coat their BS doesn’t mean it’s OK for the good guys to do it, any more than it was OK for the allies to put Germans in gas chambers just because the Germans put Jews in gas chambers.

My own bias’s are on full display in this post, obviously exhibited in the links I chose above. I acknowledge my bias’s and I own them. There are things in my life that, in retrospect, after 7 decades, I am not proud of and would do differently if I had a do-over, but my views of the LEFT of all stripes, Socialists, Communists, Fascists, and all the running dogs of evil in this world are deep seated, lifelong, and to change them I would have to surgically remove my brain.

Our cultural polarization of people by simplistic linear viewpoints based on whether or not we disagree with the person in question is the biggest product of the left in history. It is just another manifestation of childish cliques, and the school-yard hate phenomenon we all saw while growing. Simple BS presented because the writers feel that the audience is too stupid to know the difference and would agree anyway. Don’t do it! Rise above the temptation to join the evil in the cesspool because it’s easy and not fair that they do it. There’s always lots of flies on shit.

My bias’s are rooted in my passions and my pride, even my apologies are couched in “Yes, but …” terms. I am still attached to “being approved of” even by those who I understand could never approve of me in any way, shape, or form, as long as I hold the views, and beliefs that I do. But, I keep pointing to things and events which are undeniable, and hence unforgivable in some circles. I had one of these moments last February, 2019 here. Again, I apologize for offense given, “But Still It Moves”.

Cheers

Joe

A Two Coffee morning, courtesy of “Photo Electric Synergy” another Canadian Facebook site.

Disclaimer for nitpickers: We take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately

 

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, The Inner Struggle

Logically Speaking … What If Everything The Progressives Assert Is True?

“Think Of Me”, Andrew Lloyd Webber, from the “Phantom Of The Opera” soundtrack album, (2004)

HotBathMonkey

HotBathMonkey

-8 degrees Celsius, sunny with cloudy periods, or cloudy with sunny periods. Sunday is a good day for thinking. I might even get dressed!  Or not! Sure wish I had a hot tub.

I’d guess that most of this is a personal gedanken experiment,  the meanderings of someone who has too much time to think and not enough experience of the reality of daily life given that I have retreated to the Shire and spend my time congratulating myself about how intelligent and fortunate I am.

So I am indulging  myself by contemplating my lack of charity, patience and humility, my default position (un-vocalized these days) that I know the answer, or at least I am on the right track, and anyone who doesn’t get that is an idiot, full of sound and fury but (fortunately) signifying nothing.

Why do I feel deeply offended by some of what I read over at (for example) Being Liberal (how convenient that there is an easily accessible site where the left can effusively wear their heart on their sleeve), and other sites, and by what I hear every day on most of the MSM both Canadian and American (thank God for satellite TV)? Polarized doesn’t even begin to describe the gulf between the views.

001-a-orcIs it uncharitably to imagine progressives in the image of Tolkien’s Orcs and Goblins? I am certain that in fact the orcs and goblins of “The Lord of The Rings” were in fact literary references to the progressives of Tolkien’s day. Was Tolkien uncharitable?

Is it because they and their opinions are truly wrong or is it simply because they don’t agree with me? Why do I strongly feel that they (Progressives) haven’t thought through the implications of their declarations about reality and desirable social engineering, and the concomitant ridiculing and vilification (Bulverism) of virtually any voice raised in disagreement (is this what I am doing?).

cs-lewis-tyrannyMany of these folks are manifestly intelligent and well intentioned. Many of them do a lot of “good” work, spending their lives helping the downtrodden and disenfranchised, the needy and destitute.

But equal or greater numbers seem to spend all their waking hours ridiculing their “enemy” and explaining in great depth and with great volume why anyone who disagrees with them, any religious who do not share their religion, are wrong and not to be credited with any reasonable points.

Any attempt to engage in any discussion is met with an immediate attack aimed at destroying the new opponent which their “sensors” have detected.

In a logically twisted sort of way it seems at times that if they ( Progressives) are right (as in “correct”) to castigate and vilify those whose views they don’t share, that is, if they are truly OK to be writing and broadcasting and posting what they “believe” is reality (because after all they are all “basically good people”), then it must be equally OK for me to do the same thing, right?

And if they are wrong about what they believe and post, etc., then is it not equally wrong for me to indulge myself , so where do we go from this impasse? How do we move from this “preferential option for confrontation” to a place where we can discuss methods and directions “with good will”?

Maybe the answer can be found in looking dispassionately at the declarations and the methods and examining the points, assumptions and observed results, all the while striving not to take anything personally. I think “Not taking anything personally”, even when is is obviously intended to be both personal and as hurtful as possible, is how we get out of this conflict.

That requires a boatload of Charity and Humility, which I find to be in short supply these days. That’s what I’m working on, and I am making progress, albeit glacially at times.

So methods and declarations, the slings and arrows of outrageous fate … I find these days, having arrived at a political position closely akin to “A Pox On All your Houses“, that politics simply no longer provokes anything beyond sadness, but Faith, Logical argument, unreasoned Theological or Philosophical opinions still field barbs I cannot resist. No lack of Pride there, eh?

“The Music Of the Night”, Andrew Lloyd Webber, from the “Phantom Of The Opera” soundtrack album, (2004)

For example, “God can create anything so can he create a weight too heavy for him to lift? (or some other rhetorical impossibility)”.  This is a rhetorical question of the sort I have had thrown at me when I respond or comment on egregious declarations about Catholicism.

In the past, unfortunately, I had great difficulty letting them pass (still a struggle) and my naturally provocative nature makes non-believers uncomfortable.

Which sort of discussions frequently came up (before I learned to keep my damned mouth shut) when being accosted by unbelieving family members (or other acquaintances who are also unbelievers) who in their cleverness and self worship imagine themselves astute. ( AHA!  I’ve got ya now Joe). Let’s discredit Truth and by proxy discredit guilt and responsibility.

Another variation goes like this “If god can do anything, can he create a 4 sided triangle or a square circle?” (Now I’ve really gotcha, eh?). The argument might be termed “Reductio ad absurdum” but is actually “Ad hominum”.  Always looking for a way to put down and belittle believers, insecure in their unbelieving, and unaware of their logical error since logic has been conspicuous by it’s absence for most of their 50 or 60 years on this earth.

Of course God CAN create anything, and God CAN do anything … except self contradiction is not a thing. God is THE absolute almighty being and imagining a weight which The Almighty can’t lift is is to imagine a contradiction in terms. A four sided triangle or a square circle are glib but utterly meaningless constructs.

001-eskimo-inuit-sunglassesThese geometric and physical fantasies are all nonsense, all nothing, rather like approaching the real world with nothing but theories about how things “should” operate and more theories about why the world doesn’t conform to the first theories. And if the world fails to conform to one’s narrow view, well, I have a theory about that…

If one is accustomed to believing one’s theories about the world and people no matter how incongruent with observed facts and events, when the world diverges from the theories, then it is a small leap to believing that things like square circles are logical.

By way of illustrating the prevalence of illogic in daily life let’s look at the canard of “Pro Choice”. Very popular with my sisters – Pro-Choice – interesting place to build your house of cards.

Imagine us entering a restaurant and being shown to our table by a helpful Maitre d’. The waiter approaches with your drinks and menus and everyone quietly peruses their menu. The waiter returns after the drinks are almost gone to take our order “Ladies and Gentlemen, may I take your order, what are your choices?”.

001-a-vulnerable-the-deception-2

Vulnerable … the Deception

I order Prime Rib Au Jus, rare with all the trimmings and veggies, my partner chooses the Baked Atlantic Salmon with Roast Potatoes and a Spinach Salad, the rest of the guests reply “Yes!”

The waiter, a little confused, repeats “What are your choices, folks?” and the rest of the guests reply again “Yes!, we are pro-choice, therefore Yes!, our choice is “choice”!

“I am very sorry folks but we cannot serve “choice” here, we are unable to create “choice” here, we need you folks to make a choice between the various items which you have on the menu.

Then and only then can we move forward here, you have to MAKE a choice, “choice” is not a choice.  The waiter is faced with an insoluble problem both logical and grammatical.

You have to make a choice!  You can’t choose “Life” because that would make you “Pro-Life”, and unfortunately the only other “choice” is “Death”. Death for the children, death for the elderly, death for the handicapped, death for the ugly, “eugenics” that’s the game, and we are well on our way to the Great Society. Newspeak presents “Pro-Choice” as a euphemism for “Kill everyone who you find inconvenient”.  Pro-Choice is the biggest, most cowardly, cop-out of our modern society.

USHMM 89063 Men with an unidentified unit execute a group of Soviet civilians kneeling by the side of a mass graveWhat’s the moral difference between killing folks in a clinic, and killing folks in a ditch?

The logic of “Pro-Choice” can apply to any behaviour in the entire range of human behaviors, and the language of Progressive Newspeak will give you a get out of jail free card for any perversion or inhuman crime imaginable. Just vote the right way and you can do anything you like, because you are basically a nice person, right?

There is no such thing as sin, “I’m OK, You’re OK” that’s what Progressive Social Theory teaches the voting public. And this social theory leads to some unbelievable practices. But the problem is that “denial” is not the same as “proof”, and material reality in every aspect requires “proof”. Of course, “outside” the material is also part of reality but no proof regarding extra-material things is possible for humans.

Any cursory observation of modern life and the memes dispensed by the talking heads on MSM outlets make it manifestly obvious, that for the Secular Progressive Humanist, the Theory is more important than facts, logic or anything else, especially any part of daily reality that seems to go against the Theory!

Unfortunately, if one is completely immersed in the sea of illogicality it is impossible to understand that God cannot do or create anything that is a self contradiction. All self contradiction, is nonsense, is “Nothing”. There is no such thing as a “Triangle which has three sides, but on some occasions it might have four, maybe.” This is a “nothing”.

Self contradiction is a place reserved for Modern Humanist “Thinkers”.  Self contradiction is a “nothing” and as some of us know “nothing is impossible to God”.

Back before there were “Progressives”, and “Wiccans, and Gia,  and “Atheists”, and “Secular Humanists”, and “National Socialists”, aka Modern Progressive Humanists of all stripes, the folks (and philosophers and scientists for that matter) understood that you needed both “Theories” and “Practice”.

Learn To Be Lonely”, Andrew Lloyd Webber, from the “Phantom Of The Opera” soundtrack album, (2004)

001-a-philo_mediev

Queen of The Sciences

So, our medieval ancestors understood Theology as the “Queen of the Sciences”. Her twin sister Sophia (the Greek word for “wisdom”) was also venerated in the discipline of Philosophy. It was hard to tell the two beauties apart, but together they once ruled the many domains of human knowledge. This was the domain of “Theory”. Theories fell into the disciplines of Theology (The Queen of the Sciences) and Philosophy (Wisdom).

Practice was how you did things in the material world while taking into account the dictates of the Queen and the Handmaid. The practice was guided by the theory, but the theory was proven out by the practical experience of daily life. Theory and Practice are equal partners. Theory without Practice is like a wagon without wheels, a hard load to pull. Equally, Practice without Theory, is like riding swiftly down the road in your wheeled wagon while stone cold blind, a sure recipe for utter disaster!

001-a-star-trek-motivational-posters-captToday we find that Philosophy and Theology are increasingly irrelevant backwaters in the modern university, ridiculed for engaging in seemingly endless “solipsistic” debates. Not surprisingly,  we find the modern view is theoretical, Godless, and endlessly self referential.

Gee! That sure sounds like the actual definition of solipsism! Solipsism is the idea that a person’s mind is the only thing that actually exists. It is a philosophical argument that maintains reality is based on the perceptions of one’s mind, and therefore nothing really exists except for that perceptual reality of one’s mind.

So how do they come off accusing the disciplines of Philosophy and Theology of “solipsism” when the foundation of  both sciences is fundamentally outward looking in search of answers that man cannot find on his own – nothing even slightly self referential there. I’d guess this skull twister would be explained buy the modern concepts of “attribution” and “transference”, but that discussion has to be for another day.

Cheers

Joe

coptic-desertPatience, Charity, Humility. Patience, Charity, Humility. Patience, Charity, Humility. Patience, Charity, Humility. It’s like climbing Everest!

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, Politics and Economics

Disparate Data in the Eather … part 4

(continued from part 3) … Using low-yield weapons and airbursts, this figure drops to as little as 700 fatalities! This makes using nuclear weapons thinkable for the first time since the 1940s. The B61-12 only encourages this trend further.

***

So what has all this to do with Canadian nukes? Well, here’s a clue:  f35-2-bays The F-35A CTOL (conventional take off and landing) will be capable of carrying two B61-12 nuclear bombs, one in each bay.  See that little Canadian flag on the side of the fuselage. That’s the Canadian F-35 we mentioned in part 2 of this series. This aircraft is intended to be one of the primary delivery systems for the new B61-12 guided tactical nuclear bomb.

So as I mentioned in the first paragraph in part 1, I think we are looking at the opening moves in Canada re-joining the international nuclear club. Compared to Iran and North Korea we are a much better candidate (better looking too).  Who would you rather your daughter go on a date with, a North Korean, an Iranian,  or a nice clean cut Canadian. That’s really a no-brainer right?

Would having a nuclear capable Canada help NATO and the US if the US becomes deeply involved in a standoff in the South China Sea? This has all happened before. I have a personal memory of a Canadian “fighter” jet from the 60’s and 70’s. It was called the CF-104 and entered Canadian service in March 1962. I knew a pilot. He transferred from CF-104 to Sea Kings after having to eject from an exploding CF-104 on takeoff (early 70’s). He still thought it was a great jet but it was more relaxing flying Sea Kings. Whatever, all pilots are kinda “out there”. The CF-104 was originally designed as a supersonic interceptor aircraft, but it was used primarily for low-level strike and reconnaissance by the RCAF. CF-104 Tiger

Eight CF-104 squadrons were originally stationed in Europe as part of Canada’s NATO commitment. This was reduced to six in 1967, with a further reduction to three squadrons in 1970, back when the Liberals were bleeding the Forces to death by fiscal attrition under Hauptsturmführer Paul Hellyer. Up to 1971, this included a nuclear strike role that would see Canadian aircraft armed with US-supplied nuclear weapons in the event of a conflict with Warsaw Pact forces.

Low level attack runs in the CF-104 were done visually at 100 feet AGL and at speeds up to 600Kts. Low level evasive maneuvers could increase speeds to supersonic. The 104 was very difficult to attack owing to its small size, speed, and low altitude capability.

Dave Jurkowski, former CF-104 and CF-18 pilot is quoted “Because of our speed, size and lower level operations, no Canadian Zipper driver was ever ‘shot down’ by either air or ground threats in the three Red Flag Exercises in which we participated.”

So the contemplation of and preparation for a nuclear strike role is not new to the Canadian Armed Forces and the last time was under the Liberals. Pay special attention to the operational history section of this article in Wikipedia.baden-28a

We are again adding a nuclear strike role with a nuclear capable stealth strike aircraft to our arsenal. In spite of those Liberal promises to keep Canada nuclear free, they have no history of keeping any of their promises if they are not convenient.  There is no way that Harper’s Conservatives would feel bound by the promises of a mob of chestless pink tribe socialists.

Speculating about the future … does Canada need Iron Dome to defend nuclear strike assets in a Middle East context, such as a Canadian Expeditionary Force stationed in Israel?

It wouldn’t be out of character. Canada has always been a staunch defender of Israel‘s right not only to exist but to thrive. I don’t know how Israel would feel being associated with a bunch of baby murdering progressives but needs must when the devil drives.

Israel hasn’t got a lot of friends these days, now that the Americans have thrown them under the bus. The Iron Dome deal represents just another example of significant transfer of Israeli defense technology to Canada. We used Israeli systems even back in the 70’s when all our night vision equipment came from Israel. They were just about the only systems we had that were not older than the crews manning them.

A left front view of two multinational variable-swept-winged Tornado aircraft taking off at the Farnborough Air Show.

A left front view of two multinational variable-swept-winged Tornado aircraft taking off at the Farnborough Air Show.

It is reasonable to suppose that Canada and Great Britain could easily work together in this sort of expedition as both have massive common experience in the Sand Box and share a common heritage.

The Brits fly the Tornado which is also a planned platform for the new B61-12. Any one want to lay odds on an integrated Israeli, British, Canadian combined arms force with tactical nuclear capability protected by Iron Dome, handing the Iranians their collective asses on a plate in any regional conflict, even without US involvement?

The notion that we can rely on the US under regimes like Obama’s or perhaps Billery’s is delusional at best and downright suicidal at worst.

Just a thought.

Cheers

Joe

Nitpickers, ya know the drill.

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, Politics and Economics

Disparate Data in the Eather … part 3

(continued from part 2)

Third, a development with no apparent connection to Canada, BUT …B61-12windtunnel

We recently read of the B61-12: The New Guided Standoff Nuclear Bomb.  This is a nice little slide show designed to provoke the usual knee jerk reaction from all the usual pink tribe media types. Hans M. Kristensen, of the Federation of American Scientists, states that this new B61-12 program “signals that it is acceptable for Russia to modernize its non-strategic nuclear weapons as well. However Russia is already modernizing as fast as it can.   So how about a little background information, eh?

2 paragraphs of background note: One should note that the Federation of American Scientists, is a front organization for Project Plowshares, a left wing propaganda organization established in 1981 by the San Francisco-based philanthropist, artist and activist Sally Lilienthal (1919-2006), who had formerly served on the board of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California during the 1960s and 70s, and had co-founded the Northern California Committee of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund in 1971.

From its inception, the Ploughshares Fund’s purpose was to support the nuclear-freeze movement, a Soviet-sponsored initiative that sought to further solidify the nuclear and military superiority which the USSR had gained during the post-Vietnam War era. In other words, the Federation of American Scientists and Project Plowshares, actually work for the Russians, the Tides foundation, and George Soros. And always have for that matter. So which side is their bread buttered on. Which side is yours? Was it Stalin that praised the “useful idiots”?

Anyway, enough background!  A new Bomb, well explained in the slide show by Mr. Kristensen. We can make allowances for a few minor discrepancies attributable to his obvious affiliations and point of view. I wonder if Mr. Kristensen ever met Mr. Solzhenitsyn?  Well, no matter.  The B61-12: The New Guided Standoff Nuclear Bomb  is described as “The most dangerous bomb in the US arsenal“.

***

5 paragraphs of info about what makes Nukes deadly: What makes the B61-12 bomb the most dangerous nuclear weapon in America’s arsenal is its usability. This usability derives from a combination of its accuracy and low-yield. In terms of the former, the B61-12 is America’s first nuclear-guided bomb, As Hans Kristensen of FAS notes, “We do not have a nuclear-guided bomb in our arsenal today…. It [the B61-12] is a new weapon.”

Indeed, according to Kristensen, existing U.S. nuclear bombs have circular error probabilities (CEP) of between 110-170 meters. The B61-12’s CEP is just 30 meters. The B61-12 also has a low-yield. As noted above, the bomb has a maximum yield of 50 kilotons. However, this yield can be lowered as needed for any particular mission. In fact, the bomb’s explosive force can be reduced electronically through a dial-a-yield system. This combination of accuracy and low-yield make the B61-12 the most usable nuclear bomb in America’s arsenal.

That’s because accuracy is the most important determinate of a nuclear weapon’s lethality (Yield of warhead^2/3/ CEP^2). As one scholar explains: “Making a weapon twice as accurate has the same effect on lethality as making the warhead eight times as powerful. Phrased another way, making the missile twice as precise would only require one-eighth the explosive power to maintain the same lethality.” Furthermore, radiological fallout operates according to Newton’s inverse square law.

In practical terms, all this means that the more accurate the bomb, the lower the yield that is needed to destroy any specific target. A lower-yield and more accurate bomb can therefore be used without having to fear the mass, indiscriminate killing of civilians through explosive force or radioactive fallout. Lieber and Press have documented this nicely.

Indeed, using a Pentagon computer model, they estimated that a U.S. counterforce strike against China’s ICBM silos using high-yield weapons detonated at ground blast would still kill anywhere between 3-4 million people. Using low-yield weapons and airbursts, this figure drops to as little as 700 fatalities! This makes using nuclear weapons thinkable for the first time since the 1940s. The B61-12 only encourages this trend further.

***

So what has all this to do with Canadian nukes? Well, here’s a clue:  The F-35A CTOL (conventional take off and landing) will be capable of carrying two B61-12 nuclear bombs, one in each bay.  Just a thought.

Cheers

Joe

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, Politics and Economics

Disparate Data in the Eather … part 2

Serendip is a satisfying landscape for wandering …  (continued from part 1)

Second, missile defense systems … Canada seems to be walking down a rather un-Canadian path.

The last great manifestation of Liberal “defense policy” was the cancellation of the Sea King replacement program. I routinely flew in Sea Kings in the 70’s as a photographer and rescue swimmer. It was dangerous back then and I can just imagine what it is like now. Suffice to say that one can ALWAYS trust a Liberal to stab you in the back if they think they might look good doing it.  Anyway, missile defense systems …

Over the last 9 years the Conservatives, under Stephan Harper have charted a different course. This course has been fraught with problems and has not moved as quickly or decisively as the Conservatives would like thanks to media propaganda and resistance from the socialist 5th column in the opposition parties and the bureaucracy, but trying none-the-less.

Iron Dome Missile Defense SystemAnd we now have a new program starting.  Israeli Government subsidiary ELTA Systems Ltd. will work with Rheinmetall to bring new sensor capabilities to the Canadian Armed Forces.

On July 29, 2015 in Ottawa,  Canada’s Department of National Defence announced an improved radar system for the Canadian Army that will use cutting edge technology that is part of the successful Israeli Defence Force Iron Dome Air Defence system to defend against incoming rocket fire from Hamas and other terrorist groups.

Earlier this week, Defence Minister Jason Kenney unveiled a plan in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Quebec to acquire Medium Range Radar for the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).

This represents another example of significant transfer of Israeli defence technology to Canada. The technology will provide the Canadian Armed Forces with the capability to quickly and accurately locate enemy forces weapons, as well as provide advanced aerial surveillance capability.

Rheinmetall Canada Inc. has won contracts to produce 10 Medium Range Radar systems and provide the associated in-service support, with a combined potential value of up to $243.3 million. Working alongside Rheinmetall is subcontractor ELTA Systems Ltd, a group and subsidiary of Israel Aerospace Industries. ELTA Systems Ltd will deliver this radar technology to provide the CAF the ability to locate hostile weapons in concert with other acoustic and radar sensors Canada already possesses. These radar systems could save lives and assist and help achieve mission success.

Third, a development with no apparent connection to Canada, BUT … just a teaser …  We recently read of the B61-12: The New Guided Standoff Nuclear Bomb.  This is a nice little slide show designed to provoke the usual knee jerk reaction from all the usual pink tribe media types.

Now we move on to part 3 … lots more good stuff on nukes to come, which never really went out of fashion in Grey circles, even though the media declared that battle won. Now that the Pink Tribe 60’s hippies (can you spell “useful idiots”?) are dieing off we hope reality can re-assert itself.  Of course there is an election coming both in Canada and in the U.S. Who knows what abominations may be unleashed. I guess we will just have to pray.

Cheers

Joe

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, Politics and Economics

Disparate Data in the Eather … part 1

Serendip is a satisfying landscape for wandering … following little strange attractors …  Listening to Studio Ghibli music. My daughter tells me I should give readers some idea of where this is going. So, because I acknowledge that she is probably right about that, I will tell you that this is a post about how seemingly disconnected or unrelated pieces of information often can connect to form an unexpected picture. I am positing, based on the three items of data here laid out that Canada is moving to join the international club of nuclear powers. Shocking, right? ( The next 6 paragraphs are just personal background and anti-Liberal rant, a kind of “full disclosure” of my own anti-Liberal biases. Please feel free to skip them and go on to the data below the 3 stars.)

Strange Atractor_Poisson_Saturne This humble correspondent once earned his daily bread by scanning hundreds of bits and pieces of information from hundreds of contacts and correspondents (this was pre-www, and what is sometimes referred to in some circles as “humint“).

From this soup of data I would then collate and categorize and ponder and eventually write detailed briefing notes for senior officers which the Department of Justice called “Environmental Scans”.

These were little free standing gospels of what if, and what might, and perhaps, and by the way, to which my masters would attach more or less weight depending upon their understandings, catalyzed by other data to which I was not party. Saved quite a few hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years.

To do this successfully one must have a wide web of trusted, and even not so trusted, contacts developed over years and routinely stroked and rewarded with little bits of whatever the contacts are looking for. Those habits never went away any more than an understanding of “CW” communications does to the long time user.

So, here are a couple of items of interest, perhaps, or perhaps not, if one’s interests are more of a “magical” nature.  As previously mentioned, one can always get one’s reality ready made from Salon, the CBC, and Being Liberal, if it suites one’s fancy. Of course I suspect that those sorts of readers would never “waste” time reading anything I write. They are much more interested in prosecuting “Cecil’s Assassin”, for example than talking about, or even worse, actually doing anything about millions of babies murdered, dismembered and sold for parts by our government “health” ministries.

But, “who am I to judge”? I am just an intolerant, homophobic, bigot, right? HEY! The emperor is still naked! What about that? Strange what comes around. The very folks who were calling me a “baby killer” because I served in the military back in the 70’s are now the same constituency who are fully in support of murdering millions of babies and selling their body parts, in the name of “choice”. Strange world. By their works, and all that …

***

So what about “disparate data”?

First, “Fighter Jets” … the “Canadian F-35“. F-35 jpg

In some circles, some commentators pan the F-35 for not being as capable as other jets in the roles advertised for it. For example, Bill Whittle and his Trifecta compatriots  did a remarkable summary of what is actually going on in “The Psychology of Suck, Part Deux”: Static Systems Suck. They have a set of expectations associated with “Fighter Jet”.

If those expectations are in fact the actual parameters which define the success of the F-35 program then they are right to conclude that the only thing that makes sense is the discussion of “Why do government agencies mutate into immortal bureaucracies? Because the actual mission of ANY government program is to spend money.” Once you understand that the rest becomes clear. But are those the actual parameters defining this aircraft’s success?

If they are, then this is a highly entertaining video relating a phenomenon I have personally seen in action several times and been the victim of. Who knew?  Alberta Health is not alone!

Workers can be seen on the moving line and forward fuselage assembly areas for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter at Lockheed Martin Corp's factory located in Fort Worth, Texas in this October 13, 2011 handout photo provided by Lockheed Martin. REUTERS/Lockheed Martin/Randy A. Crites/Handout

Workers can be seen on the moving line and forward fuselage assembly areas for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter at Lockheed Martin Corp’s factory located in Fort Worth, Texas in this October 13, 2011 handout photo provided by Lockheed Martin. REUTERS/Lockheed Martin/Randy A. Crites/Handout

However, maybe those are not actually the REAL paramaters, but rather just a lot of disinformation, smoke and mirrors. In other circles you have industry professionals and media telling us that  this is the fighter jet of choice for Canada’s future needs. It doesn’t specify what those needs are. beyond the “renewal” of Canada’s fighter fleet.

According to Reuters, “Canada is poised to buy 65 Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets, sources familiar with the process told Reuters, marking a major renewal of Canada’s fighter fleet and helping contain costs of the expensive defense program.

An 18-month independent review of Canada’s fighter jet needs (very expensive and provoked by the Opposition Parties for political reasons) has concluded that the government should skip a new competition and proceed with the original C$9 billion (actually C$8.22 billion) purchase, three sources said.”

And, while I am on the topic,  just how the hell does C$8.22 billion become C$9 billion in the media? Who the hell knows, but hey, what’s a few hundred million when you have a chance to smear Conservatives.

We all know that accuracy is a Grey tribe fetish for rocket scientists and engineers. WE Liberal media types don’t neeeed no stinkeen’ accuracy, right ? And this whole accuracy thing is just SO Grey Tribe, through and through. The Pink Feelings Folks will never get it, no matter what happens to them. For all of them it is all about “image” and “optics”. It’s all Cecil vs Babies.

Now, in the past, the Canadian Liberals routinely sent limited numbers of well trained but very poorly equipped military personnel into global hotspots, all in the mushy name of “Peacekeeping”.  What this usually translated as was a dropping a tiny group of Canadian soldiers in blue helmets with no weapons and extremely restrictive “rules of engagement” into the middle of a gun fight to “separate” the two sides. This gave the Liberal government “good optics” and global cover, but resulted in frequent death and or wounding of Canadian personnel. Just gotta respect Lester Pearson, who loved the adulation of the UN more than his own soldiers lives. But what else would one expect from a Liberal. The adulation, praise and recognition of all the right progressive audiences ARE the MOST important thing in life, right? So on to the next item …

along the way I decided that this original post is too long so I will split it up starting here with item 2 ….

Cheers

Joe

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

People! People! It’s a Metaphore …

Hey! Wake up! A metaphor is a figure of speech that identifies something as being the same as some unrelated thing for rhetorical effect, thus highlighting the similarities between the two. It is therefore considered more rhetorically powerful, or punchier, than a simile.

A metaphor is a type of analogy and is closely related to other rhetorical figures of speech which achieve their effects via association, comparison or resemblance – including allegory, hyperbole, and simile.

In the case of the use of “sheepdog and wolves” for which bringing it into fashionable usage I am indebted to Lt Col David Grossman and others,  it is an allegorical metaphor, rather in the same vein as the old “3 little pigs” stories in the children’s fairy tales.

Nobody believes for a second that certain types of humans are really like wolves and others are really like sheepdogs and others are like sheep, although the “AHA! Gotcha!” fervor with which all the usual suspects jump on it’s use tells me that they might just be fans of “Being Liberal“. They really really really can’t handle it when us guys do to them what those guys do all the time to us. I bet they had their own “airport moment” back in the 70’s.

Anyway, we need more emphasis on donkeys and less emphasis on sheepdogs. And while we are pointing fingers, the ongoing misuse of the “R-K” “behaviour theory” on certain websites is particularly annoying. Just because the kinda folks that put out sites like “Being Liberal” misuse stats and indulge in pseudo-scientific jargon to sugar coat their BS doesn’t mean it’s OK for the good guys to do it, any more than it was OK for the allies to put Germans in gas chambers just because the Germans put Jews in gas chambers.

It is just another manifestation of the simplistic school-yard hate phenomenon. Simple BS presented because the writers feel that the audience is too stupid to know the difference and would agree anyway.

Don’t do it! Rise above the temptation to join the evil in the cesspool because it’s easy and not fair that they do it. There’s always lots of flys on shit.

While I’m here again, here’s an interesting link “On Violence“. On Violence is a blog on counter-insurgency warfare, military and foreign affairs, art, and violence, written by two brothers–one a soldier and the other a pacifist.

Cheers

Joe

CSRDisclaimer for nitpickers: We take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately

 

Standard