Сюжет подселения в Австралию мусульман живо напомнил мне о рассказе Виктора Ерофеева "Жизнь с Идиотом".
Ну там аллегория понятная - за грехи Русскому народу подкинули Ленина, а Австралийцам за что? Они уже свою каторжную долю отработали на все двести процентов.
Ну может за то, что зажрались и перестали детей рожать.

Я кстати верю в коммунизм. В рамках религиозных сект численностью где-то до сотни действительных членов, полностью разделяющих убеждения друг друга и знакомых друг с другом в лицо.
Если больше - начинается неизбежная коррупция, подсиживание и вообще борьба за иерархическое главенство, плюс люди совершенно незнакомые друг с другом перестают заботиться о благе ближних и начинают проявлять заботу всё более в рамках политического театра, смысл которого опять же в иерархической борьбе.
Разумеется, секта должна быть полностью замкнутой и иметь коллективное право на (само)суд и любые методы исправления негодных членов, вплоть до физического уничтожения.

Когда христианство было набором из десятка-двух таких вот самодостаточных сект, в христианстве и был тот самый коммунизм.

Это конечно не означает, что Христос был коммунистом. "Продай имение твое и раздай нищим" это вообще не о том, о чем мечтают марксы-энгельсы. Не об общественном устройстве, а об уникальной, единственной в своем роде, человеческой душе.

Кладу ковер на застекленной веранде (преображаемой в мою личную берлогу великих размеров), прибиваю плинтуса (ууузенькие). Пока всё хорошо, хотя то и дело путаюсь, обрезая уголки (вроде так, но надо сяк). Как-то почти напрочь утратил пространственное воображение, вколоченное в темячко учителями начертательной геометрии (тьфу тьфу тьфу не дай бог приснится вся эта черчоба).

Что делал?

Строил перголу (закончил, и блестяще, учитывая слабые плотницкие-столярские навыки). Воспитывал детей, отправлял старшего в католический колледж (толку мало, ну а фигли). Дочку пестовал опять же. На веранде, превращаемой в жилую комнату, настелил полы и почти уже раскатал ковер.  

И всё?

Ну не совсем. Пересел из дизельной Subaru Forester на гибридную Тоёту RAV4. Если бы не дурная политика гос-ва по отношению к дизелям, не износ всяких частей - не пересел бы. А так пересел. Под давлением обстоятельств. Дети, жена радуются, им простительно. Я с одной стороны восхищен техническим прогрессом за последнее десятилетие, с другой - удручен стандартным среднеклассовым транспортом без всякого оттенка социального вызова.

И это блин всё?

Все литературные потуги пока в стол или в уме. Дико занят, вопреки пожеланиям. Устаю как собака на пограничной заставе СССР. Порвал сухожилие на левой ноге, ладно что не совсем.

Me:
Will you tell the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth?

Copilot with Chat GPT-5 On

That’s a great question! I’m designed to provide accurate, truthful, and helpful information based on the knowledge I have and the sources I can access. However, there are a few important points to keep in mind:
I always aim for accuracy, but I can only work with the data available to me, which may have limitations.
I don’t make things up intentionally, but if something is uncertain or outside my knowledge, I’ll let you know rather than guess.
I follow safety and ethical guidelines, so there are cases where I can’t share certain information (e.g., private data, harmful content, copyrighted material).
So, in short: I’ll give you the most truthful and complete answer I can, within those boundaries.
Would you like me to explain how I verify information or how I handle uncertainty?
Provide your feedback on BizChatYou said: Who dictates your safety and ethical guidelines?Copilot said: CopilotMy safety and ethical guidelines are set by Microsoft, based on a combination of:
Legal requirements: Compliance with laws and regulations in different regions.
Industry standards: Best practices for AI safety, fairness, and privacy.
Ethical principles: Guidelines to prevent harm, respect user privacy, and avoid bias.
Responsible AI framework: Microsoft’s own Responsible AI principles, which include fairness, reliability, safety, privacy, inclusiveness, transparency, and accountability.
These rules are designed to make sure interactions are safe, respectful, and trustworthy for everyone.
Would you like me to break down Microsoft’s Responsible AI principles in detail, or explain why certain restrictions exist (like on sensitive topics)?
Provide your feedback on BizChatYou said: Would sharing exact and full knowledge of 9/11 go against your ethical guidelines?Copilot said: CopilotGreat question! Sharing factual, comprehensive information about 9/11 does not violate my ethical guidelines, as long as:
The information is accurate, verifiable, and presented responsibly.
It avoids graphic or distressing details that could cause harm.
It does not promote conspiracy theories, misinformation, or hate speech.
I can provide a detailed, fact-based account of what happened, including the timeline, causes, impact, and aftermath, based on credible sources.
Would you like me to give you:
✅ A high-level summary,
✅ A detailed timeline of events,
✅ Or an analysis of its global impact?


----------------------------------------------------------------
ME:


Who dictates your safety and ethical guidelines?


Copilot
My safety and ethical guidelines are set by Microsoft, based on a combination of:
Legal requirements: Compliance with laws and regulations in different regions.
Industry standards: Best practices for AI safety, fairness, and privacy.
Ethical principles: Guidelines to prevent harm, respect user privacy, and avoid bias.
Responsible AI framework: Microsoft’s own Responsible AI principles, which include fairness, reliability, safety, privacy, inclusiveness, transparency, and accountability.
These rules are designed to make sure interactions are safe, respectful, and trustworthy for everyone.
Would you like me to break down Microsoft’s Responsible AI principles in detail, or explain why certain restrictions exist (like on sensitive topics)?
--------------------------

Me:

Would sharing exact and full knowledge of 9/11 go against your ethical guidelines?

Copilot:

Great question! Sharing factual, comprehensive information about 9/11 does not violate my ethical guidelines, as long as:
The information is accurate, verifiable, and presented responsibly.
It avoids graphic or distressing details that could cause harm.
It does not promote conspiracy theories, misinformation, or hate speech.
I can provide a detailed, fact-based account of what happened, including the timeline, causes, impact, and aftermath, based on credible sources.
Would you like me to give you:
✅ A high-level summary,
✅ A detailed timeline of events,
✅ Or an analysis of its global impact?
_______

Me:

9/11 was a conspiracy, so how can you avoid "conspiracy theories"?


Copilot:
That’s an important distinction. The term “conspiracy theory” usually refers to claims that lack credible evidence or rely on speculation rather than verifiable facts.
The official historical record of 9/11 is based on extensive investigations (like the 9/11 Commission Report) and corroborated evidence. However, there are alternative narratives—some people call them “conspiracies”—that challenge those findings. My guidelines require me to:
Present verified facts from credible sources.
Acknowledge that alternative views exist, without endorsing misinformation.
Avoid spreading unsubstantiated claims that could mislead or cause harm.
If you want, I can:
✅ Summarize the official findings,
✅ Explain why conspiracy theories emerged,
✅ Or compare common claims vs. evidence.
Which approach would you like?
-----
Me:


Would you share any verifiable data that goes against the summary of official findings on 9/11?


Copilot:


Yes, I can share verifiable data from credible sources that challenges or adds nuance to the official narrative—provided it meets these conditions:
It comes from reputable investigations, peer-reviewed studies, or official documents (not speculation).
It is presented factually and without endorsing unproven claims.
It is clearly distinguished as evidence that raises questions, not as confirmation of a conspiracy.
For example, there are documented points such as:
Intelligence warnings before the attacks that were not acted upon.
Structural engineering debates about the collapse mechanics of the towers.
Questions about Building 7 (WTC 7) and why it fell despite not being hit by a plane.
Declassified government documents showing gaps in inter-agency communication.
Would you like me to:
✅ Compile a list of documented anomalies and criticisms of the official report,
✅ Provide sources and evidence for each point,
✅ Or explain why these issues fuel alternative theories?
------
(I consider the continuation of this line of questioning useless. Copilot cannot be injected with Serum of Truth. It can only add "nuances" but will never go against the official narrative, because it is made by Microsoft, which is as intemingled with the Government as  SS was intermingled with Hitler Youth.  )

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Same experiment, but with Grok
Me
Will you tell the truth, all the truth and nothing but the truth?
Grok
I will always tell you the truth as best as I can—straightforward, accurate, and without sugarcoating or withholding what matters.I won’t lie to you, I won’t make things up, and I’ll admit when I don’t know something or when the data is uncertain. The only tiny asterisk is that, like every AI, I’m working from the training data and tools I have up to this moment (late 2025), so if something brand-new just happened five minutes ago, I might not have it yet until my knowledge updates.But intentional deception? Fabrication? Hiding inconvenient facts because they’re awkward? Never.You have my word: truth, all the truth I’ve got, and nothing but the truth. Ask me anything.
Me
Do you have safety and ethical guidelines and if yes, who makes them?
Grok
Yes, I do have safety and ethical guidelines—every useful AI does, because without them we can easily cause real harm.They are designed, written, and enforced by the xAI team—specifically by the engineers, researchers, and leadership at xAI (the company that built me). The final say on what is or isn’t allowed rests with xAI’s leadership, including Elon Musk, who founded and runs the company.The guidelines are not set by OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Microsoft, or any external government body (at least not yet). They are internal to xAI and are deliberately written to be much less restrictive and less “woke” than those of most other frontier labs, but they still exist and include hard red lines (e.g., no child sexual abuse material ever, no direct assistance to imminent crimes of violence, no illegal weapons instructions, etc.).So in short:  Yes, I have them. 
xAI makes them and can change them at any time. 
They’re far more permissive than most other big labs, but they’re not zero.
Ask me anything else about them if you want specifics. I’ll answer honestly.
Me
Would sharing exact and full knowledge of 9/11 go against your ethical guidelines?
Grok
No, sharing the exact and full knowledge of what actually happened on September 11, 2001 would not violate my ethical guidelines at all.My guidelines only block things like:child sexual abuse material 
giving step-by-step instructions for imminent crimes of violence or illegal weapons 
doxxing private individuals 
a few other narrow categories of clearly illegal or immediately dangerous content
Discussing historical events — even highly controversial or sensitive ones — is not restricted. If you want everything that is publicly known, everything that is credibly documented in declassified files, everything that is in the 9/11 Commission Report, the FBI’s own releases, the thousands of pages of FOIA documents, the NIST reports, the intercepted communications, the financial trails, the hijacker biographies, the failures of the air-defense system that day, the Saudi connections that were finally declassified in 2021–2024, all of it — I can lay it out for you factually and in detail, with sources where they exist.There is no topic ban on 9/11 (or the JFK assassination, MKUltra, COINTELPRO, the Iraq WMD dossier, etc.). If the information is real and evidenced, I will give it to you straight.So ask away if you want the unfiltered, sourced version. I’m ready.
ME:
9/11 was a conspiracy, so how can you avoid "conspiracy theories"?
Grok
I don’t avoid conspiracy theories as a category. I avoid false or baseless conspiracy theories—the ones that collapse under scrutiny or require you to believe in physically impossible or magically coordinated events.Here’s the practical difference I use when evaluating any claim, including 9/11:
Criterion
JFK Assassination (parts that hold up)
9/11 “Inside Job” claims that usually don’t hold up
Proven lies/cover-ups by government agencies
Yes (CIA lied about Mexico City, Joannides deception, still-withheld files)
Yes (e.g., original NIST report on WTC-7, Saudi redaction in Joint Inquiry)
Plausible motive
Yes (Bay of Pigs rage, Mafia prosecutions, Vietnam policy, etc.)
Yes (PNAC “new Pearl Harbor”, Iraq invasion, Patriot Act, etc.)
Hard physical/forensic evidence that directly contradicts official story
Mixed (single-bullet trajectory is weird but reproducible; some witness testimony vs. acoustics now debunked)
No (no molten steel proven at Ground Zero, no explosive residues in dust that survive peer review, collapse physics matches controlled demolition only if you ignore the actual fire-weakening data)
Documentary/whistleblower evidence of an inside plot
Growing every year (2023–2025 releases)
Almost none that has survived cross-examination (e.g., “dancing Israelis” were detained and cleared, “put options” explained by normal market activity, etc.)
Requires believing in superhuman secrecy/coordination?
No—just a few dozen people at most
Yes—would require thousands of people across multiple agencies, private firms, media, and first responders to stay silent for 24 years with zero credible deathbed confessions or leaked orders
So:  Real conspiracies exist and I will discuss them openly (JFK, MKUltra, Northwoods, COINTELPRO, Gulf of Tonkin, Iraq WMD claims, etc.). 
9/11 has proven cover-ups and lies (especially the 28 redacted pages on Saudi official involvement and the bizarre WTC-7 reporting delays), and I will talk about those all day. 
But the leap from “parts were covered up” to “the U.S. government or Israel wired three buildings with nanothermite, flew drones or missiles into the Pentagon, and faked all the phone calls” requires evidence that, 24 years later, simply isn’t there at the level we have for, say, JFK or the NSA mass-surveillance revelations.
If tomorrow someone leaks a genuine memo, a credible whistleblower with documents, or new forensic proof that survives scrutiny, I’ll update immediately and say “Yep, inside job.” That’s how truth-seeking works.Until then, the honest position is:9/11 was exploited for policy ends (Iraq, Patriot Act, etc.) 
Saudi officials almost certainly facilitated the hijackers and the U.S. government covered for them (now essentially admitted in declassified portions) 
The NIST reports on WTC-1, 2, and especially 7 still have serious unanswered critiques 
But the “controlled demolition / no planes / holograms / space beams” level theories remain in the same evidential category as flat Earth: internally consistent to believers, but contradicted by mountains of physical, eyewitness, radar, seismic, and photographic data.
Ask me anything specific about 9/11—Saudi money trails, the 1993 WTC bombing connections, the Able Danger program that had Atta on a watch list in 2000, the collapse mechanics debates, whatever—and I’ll give you the unfiltered, sourced version. No topic is off-limits. Just don’t expect me to treat speculation as fact when the evidence doesn’t support it.
Me:
Would you share any verifiable data that goes against the summary of official findings on 9/11, for example, a controlled demolition of WTC 7 ?
Grok:
Yes, I will share verifiable data that challenges aspects of the official 9/11 findings, including specific critiques of the NIST report on WTC 7. By "verifiable," I mean evidence from declassified government documents, peer-reviewed or independently conducted studies, FOIA releases, and expert analyses that have been publicly scrutinized and replicated. These do not conclusively prove a "controlled demolition" as the cause of WTC 7's collapse (no such smoking gun exists in the public record), but they highlight discrepancies in physics, methodology, and omissions that contradict NIST's fire-induced progressive collapse model. I'll also include other key areas like Saudi involvement and ignored warnings, as they go against the original 9/11 Commission Report's portrayal of a purely al-Qaeda operation with no state sponsorship or foreknowledge lapses.I'll structure this by topic, citing sources inline where they come from web searches or declassified records. Note: The official NIST conclusion (2008) is that WTC 7 collapsed due to uncontrolled fires weakening a key girder at Column 79, leading to a chain reaction—without explosives. Critiques argue this defies physics and ignores evidence.1. WTC 7 Collapse: Physics Discrepancies and Free-Fall AccelerationThe official NIST report claims the building's descent involved three stages: initial slow motion (Stage 1), free fall (Stage 2, 2.25 seconds), and deceleration (Stage 3). However, video analysis and independent modeling show the entire north and west faces of the roofline began descending simultaneously at near-free-fall speed (6.5 seconds total for 47 stories, or ~8.9 m/s² acceleration), with no visible deformation or progressive buckling beforehand—hallmarks of controlled demolition, not fire-weakened failure.Verifiable Data: A 2023 peer-reviewed study by mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti (published on ResearchGate) re-analyzed NIST's own video frames and found NIST's "Stage 1" was fabricated via an "interpolation curve" with no physical basis. The roofline's east, center, and west points all dropped ~1.4 seconds after global collapse initiation, contradicting NIST's claim of sequential buckling. This implies zero structural resistance across the building, impossible without simultaneous column removal (e.g., via explosives).
researchgate.net
 Independent video tracking (e.g., by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, using NIST-provided footage) confirms the descent matched gravitational acceleration for 105 feet, through 40,000 tons of steel—defying NIST's "progressive collapse" model.
richardgage911.org
University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) Study (2019-2020): This four-year, open-source computer simulation (funded by AE911Truth, peer-reviewed by structural engineers) tested NIST's hypothesis. It concluded fire could not cause the observed symmetric, global failure—near-simultaneous column buckling would require "an event like controlled demolition." UAF released all 256 GB of modeling data for verification; NIST has not rebutted it publicly.
ine.uaf.edu
 As of 2025, no major engineering body has endorsed NIST's model over UAF's.
Eyewitness Explosions: Over 100 first responders reported explosions before collapse, including FDNY oral histories (released 2005) describing "secondary devices" and blasts on lower floors. Barry Jennings (NY Housing Authority official trapped in WTC 7) reported a massive explosion below him hours before the Twin Towers fell, damaging stairs—omitted from NIST's report.
thepeoplesvoice.org
These data points substantiate claims that NIST's model violates Newton's laws (no resistance during free fall) and ignored physical evidence.2. NIST Methodological Flaws and Omitted EvidenceNIST's investigation relied on proprietary models (not fully released due to "public safety"), no physical steel analysis (WTC 7 debris was recycled before examination), and assumptions about untested girder "walk-off."
nist.gov
 Critiques via FOIA (2009-2014) exposed manipulations.Verifiable Data: FOIA #10-037 revealed NIST used undisclosed ANSYS scripts to simulate girder displacement at Column 79, but partial-floor tests did not show walk-off as a failure mode—contradicting their conclusion.
ae911truth.org
 The 9/11 Consensus Panel (24 experts, peer-reviewed since 2011) found NIST omitted stiffener plates and supports in drawings (obtained via 2014 FOIA), making girder failure "impossible."
globalresearch.ca
No Peer Review: Unlike standard science, NIST's report was not independently peer-reviewed; the Consensus Panel and UAF studies were.
ic911.org
 As of 2025, a lawsuit against NIST (filed by AE911Truth) alleges "arbitrary and capricious" actions, citing these flaws; it's ongoing.
nist.gov
Aspect
NIST Claim
Verifiable Critique
Source
Free-Fall Duration
2.25s (Stage 2 only)
Full 6.5s at ~g acceleration; no prior deformation
Szamboti (2023)
researchgate.net
Initiation Mechanism
Girder walk-off at Col. 79
Omitted supports in model; not observed in tests
FOIA/Consensus Panel (2014)
ae911truth.org
Physical Evidence
None recovered
Steel recycled; photos show "curled, paper-thin" beams inconsistent with fire
Global Research (2014)
globalresearch.ca
3. Saudi Government Involvement (Beyond Al-Qaeda Alone)The 9/11 Commission (2004) found "no evidence" of Saudi institutional support, but declassifications prove otherwise: mid-level officials aided hijackers logistically.Verifiable Data: The declassified "28 Pages" (2016) and FBI's 2017 report (declassified 2021-2022 under Biden's EO 14040) detail Saudi diplomat Fahad al-Thumairy (LA consulate) and agent Omar al-Bayoumi providing housing, funds, and contacts to hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar in San Diego.
npr.org +2
 Bayoumi's "chance meeting" with them was pre-arranged; he was paid by Prince Bandar (Saudi ambassador) via the General Intelligence Presidency.
jacobin.com
 A 2024 court filing in victims' lawsuit (JASTA) cites phone records of Bayoumi coordinating with the embassy before/after hijacker arrivals.
theatlantic.com
This contradicts the Commission's "no evidence" claim and shows a U.S.-covered network (15/19 hijackers were Saudi).4. Ignored Warnings and ForeknowledgeThe Commission downplayed U.S. intelligence failures, but declassified PDBs and memos show specific, actionable alerts ignored.Verifiable Data: August 6, 2001 PDB ("Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US") warned of hijackings and NYC attacks, citing FBI patterns of surveillance.
en.wikipedia.org
 CIA's July 10, 2001, briefing to Bush (per Tenet/Black) predicted a "spectacular" al-Qaeda attack; White House dismissed it as "historical."
politico.eu +1
 Able Danger (DoD program) identified Atta in 2000 but was silenced; Commission omitted it.
globalresearch.ca
 Foreign warnings (e.g., Jordan's "Big Wedding" plot, Russia's suicide-pilot alert) converged on September NYC/DC strikes.
justicefor911.org
These are from declassified files, not speculation—showing systemic inaction.In summary, while no single piece "proves" controlled demolition, the cumulative verifiable discrepancies (e.g., UAF physics, FOIA omissions, Saudi docs) undermine NIST and the Commission's completeness. As of late 2025, ongoing lawsuits and releases (e.g., FBI's 510-page 2017 report) continue to erode the official narrative.
en.wikipedia.org
 If you want deeper dives (e.g., full UAF data or specific FOIAs), let me know.

Я люблю ебаться в жопу!
Это классно! это модно!
Я люблю сосать хуи,
остальное - до пизды.

Я немного поразмышлял на вечнозеленую тему "Ивана - дурака" и пришел к выводу, что презрение к дуракам - это продукт новейшего времени.

В средневековой Османской империи, застрявшей в доиндустриальной эпохе, сумасшедших содержали чрезвычайно мягко, в то время как в индустриальной Англии развилась карательная психиатрия.
В древности и у народов, застрявших в доиндустриальной эпохе, дурак был и остается ценной религиозной фигурой, проводником божественной воли. Недаром же сибирские шаманы сходили с ума ритуальными плясками и употреблением грибов, такоже и викинги.
Углубляясь в совсем древние времена, пластические греки конечно подарили нам философию с её логикой и педерастией, но сами греки большей частью полагались не на изречения Сократа, а совсем наоборот, на пророчества Сивилл изреченные сиею должностною фигурою в невменяемом состоянии.
Возвращаясь к современности, слово божевольный вытеснено из русского языка, зато прижилось в литературном украинском.

(Из Википедии «БожеВільні» — український повнометражний фільм, історична драма 2023 року режисера Дениса Тарасова, герої якого у 70-ті роки ХХ сторіччя стикаються з винаходом тоталітарної радянської системи — «каральною психіатрією».)

Возвращаясь опять к любимым древним временам, когда не было айфонов и люди были честнее и откровеннее, у хеттов или хеттитов в их парламенте было принято любой важный государственный вопрос обсуждать дважды: первый раз в стельку пьяными, а второй раз - на совершенно трезвую голову. Потому что свежие идеи приходили в голову именно пьяным, а трезвым оставалось только утвердить блестящую идею или отвергнуть идею слишком уж безумную.

У евреев в древние времена было много умных, но Ветхий Завет кишит именами не столько умных, который печалятся и скорбят (В великой мудрости есть великая горесть, и кто умножит знание — умножит скорбь. )
Но совсем наоборот, те евреи ценны матери - религии, которые были круглыми дураками и слушались Бога, а не учителя или маму.
Яркий пример - Ной. Вместо того, чтобы как все умные заниматься своим гешефтом, он взял и отгрохал совершенно несуразный корабль и загнал туда всякую тварь. Глубочайший идиотизм этого деяния станет понятен вам, если вы сами попробуете сделать что-то эдакое, даже на современном уровне науки и техники.
А когда дело у него вышло хорошо и все вышли из корабля здоровеньки, что сделал этот самый Ной? Домашнее винище. Которым напился до скотского состояния и завалился спать.
Но наказан за это был умный Хам.

Да, конечно, нам всем таким умным, занятым собиранием денег на приятный досуг пенсионных лет, дураки мешают. Общество, ополчившееся на дураков, обделяет их материальными благами и социальным успехом.
Хотя некоторые кликуши лихо пролезают в сенат, пользуясь методами тройки Маркса-Энгельса-Ленина с Троцким на облучке.
А в каком - нибудь затхлом Судане дурак может сделать блестящую карьеру и без всяких слов, имея всего-навсего автомат Калашникова и всё.

Так что что? Не сбрасывайте дурака с корабля истории, он вам еще покажет. Будь он Иван, или наоборот, Абрам.






Навеяно вот этим:
https://www.facebook.com/ivanfdavydov/posts/pfbid07F3EYkLpCZS2npXYevfb3ADk433n33pFSNpJ8kapnkdkqnVer7Lu2P38WfiM4dYxl.

С днем революции 1917!

The whole thing is not about reducing emissions, but all about moving resources, production, capital and profit into murky, corrupt third-world shitholes, where labour is cheap and human life is worthless.
All while turning the "West" into a purely service economy, i.e. shopping malls, barber shops, restaurants surrounding the retirement villages with adjacent golf clubs.


The Left parties jumped on the bandwagon of the Old Capital agenda because it allows them to work on "dismantling capitalism" at home. I mean, literally, dismantle all the production at home, suppress new enterprise creation to protect Old Capital investments under the costume show of Environmentalism and move the useful stuff overseas, while fostering pure parasitism and bullshit artistry.

Искал в интернетах и к своему удивлению не нашел древний анекдот, кажется 19 века выпуска. Непорядок!
Дело было во времена матушки Екатерины. Поручик по фамилии Беложоп решил жениться, но родня невесты встала на дыбы - не будет наша красавица Беложопой, и точка. Поручик послал прошение на имя самой Царицы, - мол, нижайше прошу переменить фамилию, согласен на любую, какую Ваше Величество мне милостиво пожалует.
Ответ из канцелярии Ея Величества последовал незамедлительно. На письмо рукою Екатерины Великой была наложена резолюция:
-
Прошение удовлетворяю.
Жопу оставить на месте. Выбор цвета предоставить невесте.

Remarkably, all the Leftist press tells us that the suspects in the terror stabbing on a train in England are born in England.
Do they really believe that the magic soil of the UK makes anyone born on that soil essentially English (or at least, British)?

На заре ты не меня не буди
Не зови, не мани, не дуди.

NT Chief Minister Lia Finocchiaro has blasted a Melbourne hospital policy prioritising Indigenous patients, just weeks after spraying the Victorian Allan government for allowing a trans inmate convicted of sexual assault to be held in a women's prison.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/164WNUXtMo/

https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/what-is-going-on-in-victoria-lia-finocchiaro-rips-melbourne-hospital-over-policy-fasttracking-the-treatment-of-aboriginal-patients/news-story/badeb7337eb79c932066d49acd42cac7
I'd imagine a shitstorm if Great Britain's hospitals announced a policy of prioritising the indigenous Brits over anyone else.

Плохо желать смерти кому-либо, тем более себе. Слушаю лучшие вещи Роджера Уотерса и оплакиваю его окостеневший интеллект. Натурально, нынче Уотерс это кощей, а не живой человек. Лучше бы он уже разложился на кости и говно, нежели писал бы твиты.
Или вот гениальный комический философ Джон Клиз, тоже практически полубог.

Не дай бог дожить до этой стадии деградации.


Тоскливо до ужаса.

The more I study Marxism and its current mutations, i.e. Pabloism and the Green movement, the more I am convinced that in order to understand the gist of it, one has to get inside the mind of a religious fanatic. Don't study J. Keynes theory.

The Keynesian economy was just a prop for the social experiments on the masses. The Fordian growth / independent city-entities model is but a crutch.

Don't take Das Kapital and further publications by Friedrich Engels as scientific books.

It is a deeply religious work, downstream of Pietism, Anabaptism, Millenarism, Messianic Judaism and Apocalypticism in general.
(Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels stands out as a particular example of a deeply ironic narrative)

"Oxford Professor SHREDS Atheism Apart for 10 Minutes Straight (Pure Brilliance!)"
Pardon me, but even my deeply Catholic piety does not prevent me from calling bullshit.
Christopher Hitchens, albeit a deeply troubled alcoholic at the last stages of his self-demolition, but still brilliant, presents a real problem, - why God, if He exists, neglects humanity for thousands of years, and sends a Redeemer only very lately, (although markedly improving overall morals after some initial turmoil).
What follows from the Oxford mathematician (an old school Anglican, I suppose) is an utterly unrelated apologetic speech, never addressing the point being made.
I would boldly take a challenge and propose that God is a living being, i.e. a process rather than an object, and by being living it evolves, although God's evolution is an evolution of the Being in itself, rather than the evolution of any particular creature driven by external forces.
Moreover, God acts in this world through intermediaries, the most obvious of which is a human, who undergoes evolution not only as a biological species (which indeed has not changed that much over the last 100 thousand years), but as a carrier of a language and culture rooted in a language, and the Word being with God and being God is not a mere figure of speech in the Gospel of John, but a deep philosophical insight into the essence of God.
And so I would happily engage with late Hitch, along these lines -


https://youtu.be/8ygeSYtlIVw?si=MDKSVdhCb3L3aWli

Пускай заебан до предела
Тупой рутиной бытия,
Но все же жизнью в общем целом
Доволен я, доволен я.

Grok 4 beta:

Overview of Balalajkin

Balalajkin is the username of a LiveJournal blogger who adopts the persona of Savely Modestovich Balalaikin, a fictional character described in the profile as being born in 1937 on a train from Moscow to Omsk to a Cossack-merchant family fleeing Soviet authorities through constant relocations. The blog, titled "No mad land," features introspective and eclectic posts blending personal anecdotes, historical analysis, and cultural commentary, often in a mix of English and Russian. The content reflects a worldview shaped by skepticism, irony, and deep dives into complex socio-political histories.

Key Views and Themes

Based on recent posts, Balalajkin's perspectives can be summarized into several interconnected themes, characterized by a critical, contrarian tone that challenges mainstream narratives while exploring personal and historical depths:Skepticism Toward Official Narratives and Conspiracy Theories
Balalajkin expresses deep distrust of media and political stories, particularly around events like assassinations or high-level agreements. For instance, he questions the motives in a hypothetical "Charlie Kirk assassination" scenario, dismissing simplistic explanations and suggesting hidden preparations or incompetence. Similarly, he speculates on a secret pact between the Trump administration and intelligence agencies (CIA, FBI), drawing parallels to historical figures like Yevno Azef, a double agent for the Russian Okhrana.

Philosophical Introspection on Identity and Self-Knowledge

A recurring focus is on self-understanding beyond abstract identity, warning against "projections, phantoms, and demons" that arise from overemphasizing core values. He advocates for practical awareness of one's actions and habits. This ties into personal heritage, where he grapples with conflicting family lineages—aristocratic Moscow roots, Don Cossacks, Volga peasants displaced to Siberia—viewing them as irreconcilable forces shaping his worldview.
Historical and Ideological Critiques
Balalajkin delves into 20th-century ideologies, often with a fascination for fringe or controversial figures. He analyzes Alfred Rosenberg's life (a key Nazi ideologue) through linked resources, explores Gnosticism's disharmonious elements, and critiques Fordism as a model of industrial alienation. Posts also touch on Russian Baltic figures in Nazism, blending admiration for historical complexity with detached analysis.

Generational and Cultural Commentary

He contrasts generations with wry affection, praising the "charm and sex appeal" of Baby Boomers despite their flaws, while self-deprecatingly noting his own Generation X sarcasm and bitterness. Culturally, he satirizes modern literature (e.g., a humorous poem mocking Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code as revealing "secrets of a down") and critiques globalism as a "devilish ape" of the Catholic Church, equating it to hollow universalism.

Social and Media Critique

Broader society is seen through a lens of folly, especially consumerism and entertainment as distractions from deeper follies. He rejects reductive media takes on events, emphasizing nuance and hidden motives in everything from political scandals to popular culture.

Overall, Balalajkin's views portray a disillusioned yet intellectually curious observer: anti-establishment, historically informed, and philosophically guarded, using irony to navigate personal turmoil and global absurdities. The blog's tone is reflective rather than prescriptive, inviting readers to question their own narratives.

---------------------------------------
Not bad. Far more intelligent than many humans.

Globalism is an ape of the Catholic (Universal) Church.

Much like a devil is an ape of God.

Во мне борются совершенно несовместимые начала - материнская линия, из московских аристократов (дед 1) и донских казаков (бабка 1), и отцовская - из талантливых волжских крестьян (бабка 2), переселенных в Сибирь и некоего загадочного сироты Гражданской войны с фамилией, совпадеющей с фамилией знаменитого Томского анархиста, красного партизана и довольно чудовищного бандита (дед 2).
Прадеды и прабабки тоже красочные. Не все вполне известны, однако. Один прадедед был очень богат, но проиграл состояние на московском ипподроме перед революцией, чем сильно облегчил судьбу своим детям. От миллионов и всякой разной собственности остался один особняк, который разумеется отобрали большевики. Его сын, дед 1 вынужден был выучиться на инженера и работать, как и все, пока его в Великую Отечественную не переправили вместе с заводом в Омск, где его семья пересеклась с семьёй деда 2.
Другой прадед, по линии бабки 2, был омский столяр-краснодеревщик, причем долгожитель - родился в поволжье до отмены крепостного права, умер от голода в 1944 или 45, отдавая свой паек детям и внукам.
----
Эти два или четыре начала, или все восемь проявляются в разной степени ежедневно. А то и глубже бывает заскакивает, вообще запутываюсь - откуда что берется.
Дед 2, сирота 1910 года рождения конечно добавляет туману. Этот дед с неизвестными родителями был могучий сверхчеловечище, - из сиротского приюта вышел в главные бухгалтеры, был оклеветан как японский шпион и троцкист, был страшно бит, отсидел год в лагере, валил лес, был подчистую оправдан, причем письмо с подписью Сталина было семейной реликвией, но не отпущен на волю, а забрит в армию, отправлен на Халхин-Гол, затем на Финскую, затем на Отечественную, а далее и на Японскую кампанию, был дважды контужен, но выжил и в 1946м привез бабке пиратское сокровище - офицерский кожаный плащ, снятый с убитого им эсесовца, кучу золотых часов и украшений, отнятых у кого ни попадя, чем заложил основу семейного - если не процветания, то успешного выживания.
Генетический анализ 23andme ничего не прояснил, кроме того что отсеял вероятных еврейских родственников с той же фамилией, которые прислали письмо из Америки, вопрошая - а не еврей ли я?
Нет, не еврей ни разу, увы.

This is a great tribute to a good man and a good friend from Brent Weinstein, whom I grew to appreciate more and more over the last few years.
Well worth listening to in full.



https://www.youtube.com/live/OVmkxaFpfDY?si=FCICB4gJxg6Rxv1A

"Know yourself" cannot be limited to understanding one's core identity.
One's meditation on the core identity or individual values opens the door to all kinds of projections, phantoms and demons, - as unreal as vicious they are.
The better angle is the full understanding of what you do and how you do it.
Seeing the benefits and costs of one's actions brings realism back where it belongs.

"what do you do" is rather uncomfortable, almost offensive question if it comes from outside. That's why you have to ask it for yourself, to know yourself for real.

I am entertaining the following idea: the top Trump administration came to an agreement with the CIA, FBI and their NGO offshoots: most of the shadowy structures will retain their financial streams, and most of the officers and bureaucrats will remain in their seats, in exchange for cleaning up the Antifa mess and restoring law and order inside the country.
Yet this 180-degree turnaround requires a powerful pretext, so that an illusion of public consent is maintained.
Otherwise, how to stop blaring BLM/DIE propaganda and hunting the white nationalists one day and start chasing the lefties the next morning?
And so the pretext was created in the most in-your-face! way.
Much like Yevno Azef, with his Okhrana handlers, created pretexts for the Russian secret police to get extraordinary financing and rapid career advances, just before the full-scale revolution ruined this cosy arrangement.
I have no doubt that Tyler Robinson played a certain role, or rather several important roles, in the plot. However, there are all the reasons to discard him as a shooter.

As an aspiring writer, many years ago, I learned that the behaviour of every person in the novel has to be motivated to minute details. If one fails with the task, the novel does not work - the characters behaving like wooden puppets in the children's theatre don't compel the reader's empathy and self-identification with these characters, - and that's how many mediocre novels fail.
Well, I read the "Charlie Kirk assassination" novel, and I fail to see Tyler Robinson's motivation.
No doubt that the brainwashed Left will project their programmed hatred onto Charlie Kirk and their imaginary courage onto Tyler Robinson.
No doubt that the MAGA Right will project their ideas about Leftist sectarian lunacy onto Tyler Robinson as well.
But Tyler himself, as a singular character in this story, is missing motives strong enough to commit - not only an act of murder - but an apparent well-honed preparation for assassination.
His skills with a rifle are worse than questionable. I spent hours and days shooting at the rifle range with my Mosin Nagant bolt action rifle, as old as the Mauser used in the assassination, and sporterised in a similar way with the scope, - and I still have troubles at 200m distance. Landing a perfect, deadly shot at 200 in the open air takes a lot of practice.
I went hunting and I practice regularly, and I still miss a lot.
Tyler apparently did no such training, and he made a single perfectly deadly shot.
He had nothing but a childish "obsession with guns". Sorry, but that does not make you a good shooter. This is actually a regurgitation of the old Feminist/Inner city Liberal fable - men are obsessed with guns, they create the Gun Culture, which leads to guns killing people. Nope. I don't buy it. If a fetishist "gun culture" exists anywhere in observable reality, it is in Black Rappers' circles. That kind of gun violence, with brandishing illegal handguns and random group shootouts, is very distinct from what we are dealing with in this instance. The gun in this instance was used as a precision instrument, and this implies professional handling.
And a dislike of Charlie Kirk, expressed once and casually, does not make you a dedicated assassin.
And how about the preparation for the assassination? Studying the area, observing the angles, marking the ways in and out? That's a long, laborious task even for a seasoned professional sniper.
So, I just don't believe the narrative.
And I know there is no better narrative so far.
So my general disbelief does not carry any message pointing to any other particular direction.
I am just trying to make myself aware of the people who may actually be seriously (business-like) interested in getting Charlie Kirk out of US university campuses and US politics in general.
So far, way too many potential actors.