"Modernity gives people neither models for noble life nor examples of gallant death, nor compelling reasons for either." - John Attarian
After watching the DNC Convention, I can understand why TPTB don't want us to achieve either one. To them, we're no longer even cannon fodder and most are just useless eaters.
[To be honest, I didn't really watch their convention at all. Just saw some replay snippets, but that was enough for me.]
Here is an essay which predicts Kamala Harris may win the election:
https://www.theautomaticearth.com/2024/08/kamala-harris-may-well-win-the-white-house/
I heartily agree, and she may win by a landslide. I don't want her to win, but unlike Trump I can read the tea leaves.
He's been demonized for the past eight years, and too many people have bought into all the shade and dirt which has been thrown at him. In fact, they relish it:
Trump, you've been chumped - and I would not be surprised if you wind up in jail, too.
A reporter recently asked some US Air Force generals whether "Joe Biden" still could handle his responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief when it comes to the possible use of nuclear weapons. This is one of the responses he received:
"I have no concerns with the current Commander-in-Chief and his abilities to give me lawful orders if required."
Source - https://www.mtracey.net/p/top-us-military-officials-wont-say
Oh I'm sure the orders would be "lawful", but would they be SANE? I suspect not. Just because he CAN do it doesn't mean he SHOULD.
As I've written before, the command and control system is designed and built to ensure "lawful" orders are properly received and executed, but I don't recall there being any provision for second-guessing or hindering the underlying decisions:
https://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2024/07/about-it-outage.html
We never should have started the current game of nuclear chicken, but it sure would be nice if someone in a position to do so would stop it before it gets any worse. And the final chance to stop it is BEFORE those "lawful" orders are ever given.
Apparently in an effort to meet "climate goals", the US will be shutting down its coal-powered generating stations and building more nuclear power plants:
https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/us-coal-plants-shutter-renewed-focus-nuclear
Good luck with that. Ever since the Three Mile Island incident, new nuke plants either have been cancelled, or were WAY over budget and behind schedule. There are many reasons for that, but they all boil down to a lack of leadership at all levels. Without clear, sustained leadership, any "nuclear renaissance" is likely to fail.
We're being told that to facilitate the rebirth of nuclear power, the US will start to reprocess its spent nuclear fuel:
https://www.theepochtimes.com/business/us-plans-to-start-recycling-nuclear-waste-5707349 [behind a paywall]
But as you may be aware, the US previously tried but gave up on that idea in 1977. Will things be any different this time?
https://www.gao.gov/products/emd-80-38
And we still need to construct a working repository for high level nuclear waste, but the US also gave up on that project after a lame effort to build one in Nevada. Again, will we actually finish one this time around, or just give up again?
https://www.yuccamountain.org/
Having worked for 25+ years in military, DOE, and civilian nuclear energy programs, I can confidently predict that any progress will be slow, difficult, and very expensive.
And don't forget that any nuclear power plants which ARE likely to be built will be used to power the data centers so urgently needed to spy on us and keep TPTB in power. Once THAT is accomplished, all the other promises mentioned above are likely to be forgotten.
Once again, we'll go from "too cheap to meter" to "insufficient funds".
It didn't take very long to hear the truth about Tim Walz (or is this just another case of "swift-boating"?):
https://www.wctrib.com/community/letters/the-truth-about-tim-walz
On the other hand, it apparently took quite some time for this to come out about Tulsi Gabbard:
https://uncoverdc.com/2024/08/04/fams-whistleblowers-report-tulsi-gabbard-on-quiet-skies-list
I can think of absolutely no valid reason why Tulsi should be subjected to such surveillance. Can you?
Not only is it nearly impossible to discover "the truth" about any politician, it's now possible to completely weaponize any and all government assets against them if they threaten or offend TPTB.
Our political system has been destroyed. Are you happy now?
By the way, IMO Trump should have picked Tulsi for VP. Just my two cents.
When I was in the first or second grade, my school put on a production of Three Billy Goats Gruff. For some reason (perhaps my stentorian voice) I was chosen to play the Troll.
At the time I thought it was an honor. I later realized being thought of as a Troll is kind of demeaning. I'm pretty sure now choosing me for the role was an indication of how easy it has been for people to trick me into doing things which really did not benefit me ... and sometimes were quite damaging. Go figure.
As you may have noticed, the biggest Troll in the world today is Donald J. Trump. He thinks being President is an honor, and it is. But in many respects, casting him in that role was, is, and will be the cause of his demise. Look how easy it has been to trick him into doing dumb, damaging things (e.g., choosing traitors as his advisors, getting people to take poisonous "vaccines", falling into "debate"/"interview" traps which make him look like a racist or insurrectionist, etc.). These are things from which he may never recover, and perhaps even land him in jail.
I may be one of the few, but I completely sympathize with him; I've been there, too, and once you're type-cast in that role, it's nearly impossible to break out of it.
Later in grade school, I was cast in the role of Ichabod Crane in a radio production of The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. I wonder what they were trying to tell me with that?
