Saturday, April 4, 2015

Understand and so take care of the small things in life, and try to keep principles

Odakyu-sen (1,225 comments) says: 

My experience of poor people in a free society such as Japan or New Zealand is that they are usually poor because of the poor life choices they make. (Exceptions being poverty as a result of physical or mental disabilities.)
There are no “evil oppressors” out there who somehow manage to find the time to individually frustrate the lives of poor people. Inventing such bad guys simply teaches the poor to be more helpless and dependent on the State.
I think a couple of traits hold the “poor” back (I use “won’t” instead of “can’t” as “can’t” would imply that it’s not their fault.)
– Won’t defer gratitude (gotta have it now)
– Won’t think of consequences of actions in advance
– Take comfort in the knowledge that the State will coddle them (in NZ)
– Fear change (don’t want to move out of “da hood”)
Many call the poor “lazy” but I think a lot of this is that they don’t think very far into the future. They don’t think “if I do this (don’t do this) then what will probably happen?”
I remember a story from my childhood. I had a friend who lived with his father. One day his dad brought him a brand new bicycle. My friend didn’t look after his bicycle and left it out in the rain. A month later, the chain was rusted and the paint was peeling. Some time later he threw it into the canal.
I had another friend who father ran a printing company. He wanted a bicycle, so his father gave him his own father’s old bike (that my friend’s grandfather could no longer ride). His father taught him how to repair the old bicycle and how to maintain it properly. A year later, my friend sold the bike, added money he had saved from his part-time job, and bought a brand new bicycle.

Friday, April 3, 2015

Media stories origins and drivers

Fletch (6,908 comments) says: 

Just starting to read this. How a marketer uses / used blogs to influence the media to manipulate the news we see to benefit his clients.
Trust Me, I’m Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator, Ryan Holiday
You’ve seen it all before. A malicious online rumor costs a company millions. A political sideshow derails the national news cycle and destroys a candidate. Some product or celebrity zooms from total obscurity to viral sensation. What you don’t know is that someone is responsible for all this. Usually, someone like me. I’m a media manipulator. In a world where blogs control and distort the news, my job is to control blogs-as much as any one person can. IN TODAY’S CULTURE… Blogs like Gawker, BuzzFeed, and The Huffington Post drive the media agenda. Bloggers are slaves to money, technology, and deadlines. Manipulators wield these levers to shape everything you read, see, and hear- online and off.Why am I giving away these secrets? Because I’m tired of a world where blogs take indirect bribes, marketers help write the news, reckless journalists spread lies, and no one is accountable for any of it. I’m going to explain exactly how the media really works. What you choose to do with this information is up to you.
I learned about the book from some tweets regarding the Indiana pizza place – (*posted below)
“Y’all see how the lies about the pizzeria were started somewhere small and picked up by MSM right? Read this book”
“Learn how the left manipulates the media. Lies, half-truths bubble up from small, obscure sources. Picked up and run with as fact.”
“I’m begging you. If you ever want to beat the left at their own game, read that book. Study it. Learn how to use it for good and not evil.”

Thursday, April 2, 2015

Why does Green peace embellish with nonsense?

Cetacean Strandings – a plea for honesty

Although I have previously written an article entitled “Do seismic surveys cause whales to strand?”, the recent passionate and vitriolic claims by eNGOs that strandings have been caused by seismic surveys, makes this topic worth re-visiting.  I make no apology for drawing the inspiration for my title from the publication by Bradshaw et al (2006) entitled “Mass Cetacean Strandings – a Plea for Empiricism”.  In that publication, Bradshaw et al stated “More specifically, the stranding-prone regions of the world such as southern Australia cannot be used to support the noise-pollution hypothesis because military and other sources of sonar noise pollution are relatively uncommon there”. Clearly, this statement would also apply to New Zealand, given the frequency of strandings there.
This statement was based on an empirical study by Evans et al (2005) entitled “Periodic variability in cetacean strandings: links to large-scale climate events” utilising data spanning 1920-2002 and 639 stranding events many of which occurred BEFORE marine seismic surveys were even invented and off coasts where few, if any, seismic surveys were carried out.
Why therefore do organisations such as OIL free SEAS_Kangaroo Island (OFSKI), Huffington Post writer Dr Reese Halter and Greenpeace NZ in conjunction with Oil Free Otago, continue to ignore scientists and the available observational data, such as that shown in the following photograph?
Humpback whale and seismic array
Humpback whale and operational seismic array
I would not presume to guess what their agenda is but here are a few examples of the way these organisations are misleading a caring and giving community with misinformation, which is plainly at odds with the available scientific and observational data.
1. On their Facebook page, along with lots of other very inaccurate propaganda, OFSKI claims that the sperm whale strandings on the East Coast of the Yorke Peninsula at Ardrossan were caused by seismic surveys approximately 700km away  with two peninsulas in the way. This is inconceivable given:
1a. Sperm whales vocalise at similar sound levels to seismic pulses – 236dB at 1m. Thus, what they hear themselves, or in their pod, from their own vocalisations, would be far louder than they would hear at even 100m from a seismic source. Note that if large whales were any closer that about 100m there would be a greater risk of collision than deafness, even though smaller more mobile whales (eg pilot whales) and dolphins are often seen riding the bow wave during seismic operations. It is inconceivable that any reasonable person could claim they are harmed by received sounds that are lower than those they emit themselves. Why does OFKSI and others insist on claiming such impacts?
1b. As a result of their loud vocalisations, it is not surprising to see many instances of sperm whales continuing to behave normally (dive, feed and rest) in fairly close proximity to operating seismic vessels in Australian waters and other areas around the world. For example, in a 2003 JNCC report entitled “The effects of seismic activity on marine mammals in UK waters, 1998-2000”, Stone concluded “Sperm whales showed no observable effects from these data (although this does not mean that there was no disturbance, as there may have been effects that were not able to be examined using these data).” If there were effects that could have led to strandings, as claimed by OFSKI, surely they would have been observable!
1c. Finally, sperm whale strandings in the presence of NO seismic surveys are not at all unusual (as mentioned in the above introduction). Why does OFSKI ignore such events? One of the most famous historical sperm whale stranding cases occurred on the Dutch coast in 1601 (yes, 1601 – long before seismic surveys were invented) and a very long way from sperm whale preferred habitat (a bit like Ardrossan?). This stranding is immortalised in an etching by Dutch artist Jan Saenredam. Thus, for OFSKI to claim that seismic surveys caused the Ardrossan mass stranding is a clear case of the observable data being ignored.
2. In an article in The Huffington Post entitled “Big Oil destroys the Great Australian Bight, Dr Reese Halter appears to come to the support of OFSKI but is clearly incorrect with the following assertions:
2a. Firstly, he claims “Big Oil Destroys the Great Australian Bight”. How come over 150,000km of seismic traverse have been acquired and 12 wells have been drilled in the area since the 1970’s and there have been negligible impacts from this activity? This does not sound like “destroying” to any reasonable person;
2b. Secondly, Dr Halter makes much of majestic blue whales being in danger from seismic surveys but, despite very close monitoring over more than a decade during seismic surveys conducted along the southern margins of Australia, it is obvious that they are not in the dire danger that he and others claim.  If Dr Halter were correct the impacts would have been obvious.  In addition, some of these monitoring reports are on the public record, so Dr Halter is clearly ignoring and distorting the facts.
2c. Thirdly, on the topic of distorting the facts, his claim that the melon-headed whale stranding in Madagascar in 2008 was caused by a seismic survey is totally false. In an IWC report on the incident, the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP) concluded that they “systematically excluded or deemed highly unlikely nearly all potential reasons for the animals leaving their typical pelagic habitat and entering the Loza Lagoon (an extremely atypical area for this species). This included the use of seismic airguns in an offshore seismic survey several days after the whales were already in the lagoon system, which was originally speculated to have played some role but in the view of the ISRP clearly did not.”  Dr Halter has ignored at least two very important pieces of information – the seismic survey commenced several days AFTER the whales were already in the lagoon system AND the panel concluded that the seismic survey CLEARLY DID NOT cause the stranding.
3. Finally, we have Greenpeace NZ and its supporters such as Rosemary Penwarden of Oil free Otago.  The constant “noise” from this group is typified by an extremely misleading opinion piece in the Otago Daily Times on Friday 23 January entitled “Oil search puts dolphins at risk”.  There is very little, if any, valid evidence in the emotive but inaccurate claims by Ms Penwarden (and Greenpeace). For example:
3a. Ms Penwarden “links seismic testing for oil and gas with serious harm to whales and dolphins”. How can this be so if no documented cases of harm to cetaceans exist in over 40 years of seismic surveying (note the correct term “surveying”) using compressed air as the seismic source?
3b. Her description of seismic acquisition is so unrepresentative, using terms such as “detonators” and “blasting,” that it is surely meant to mislead a caring and giving community. “Velcro” has done a good job of presenting a factual description of seismic surveying in an online comment rebutting her article so I will not repeat what he/she says.  In addition, I’d like to counter Ms Penwarden’s statement that seismic arrays “reach about 260 decibels (dB) on a logarithmic scale on which it is known that anything above 170 dB disturbs marine organisms.” as being clearly incorrect.  Firstly, she has used a theoretical value (of 260dB) for the loudness of a seismic array. This would only be achieved if all the 20-30 elements (compressed air cylinders, commonly called “airguns”) in the array occupied the same location. This is clearly impossible!  The actual decibel level within 1m of any part of the array would be between 220 and 240dB, depending on the type of array.  Secondly, given sperm whales and bottlenose dolphins vocalise at 236dB and 225dB respectively (a lot more than 170dB), how can Ms Penwarden claim they would be disturbed, letalone “seriously harmed” as mentioned elsewhere in her opinion piece? After all, these cetaceans (or others in their pod) would receive vocalised sounds at close to their emitted levels whereas any received levels from the seismic array would be significantly lower than their own vocalisations.
3c. She perpetuates the inaccurate claim that the mass stranding of the melon headed whales in Madagascar was caused by a seismic survey. As mentioned above, the ISRP concluded the seismic survey “CLEARLY DID NOT” cause the stranding.
3d. Finally, she and Greenpeace claim that the unfortunate stranding of 3 Gray’s beaked whales on Whatipu Beach near Auckland last week was caused by a seismic survey, which I understand was 200km away. Given that strandings in NZ are very common and there is NO correlation between stranding events and seismic surveys, why are they ignoring the readily observable facts? How do they explain strandings that occurred in the absence of seismic surveys, either before seismic surveys were invented or in seasons when seismic surveys did not occur?  Given the frequency of strandings there will be coincidences but it is disingenuous to exploit these unfortunate incidents for their own ulterior motives.
In summary, these organisations surely have a responsibility to ensure that their claims are factually based and verifiable? “Truth in campaigning” should apply to lobby groups in the same way “truth in advertising/reporting” applies to businesses. Unfortunately, at best, these lobby groups are either displaying a high level of ignorance or, at worse, they have deliberately chosen not to display the same high level of honesty that they themselves demand from others.
The public deserves an open, transparent and honest debate on the unfortunate issue of cetacean strandings, but are misinformed by the likes of Greenpeace, Oil free Otago, OFSKI and Huffington Post (Dr Reese Halter).

Why do myths and misinformation drown information, facts and science?

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Say one thing.Do another when it suits

Rupert Wyndham, renowned for his acerbic, accurate, and pointed analysis of the climate fraud, has NAILED the BBC (AND Griffie et al), in a brilliant letter to Lord Hall over ethics… (Fairfax, NZ Horrid, TV One and TV 3 take note):
26 March 2015
Lord Hall
Director General
BBC White City Media Centre
201 Wood Lane
London W12 7TQ.
Dear Lord Hall
Last week the BBC aired an interview with a recent graduate from the University of Oxford, by chance my own alma mater. This young man, it transpired, represented a covey of similarly minded contemporaries. They were driven by a desire to pressurize the trustees of the university finances to divest its portfolio of shares in fossil fuel extractors across the spectrum. With evident, and rather obnoxiously self-preening, satisfaction, he declared this to be ‘an ethical issue’. Given the BBC’s fastidious standards in this regard, no doubt it collectively, as well as you personally, would agree. So, indeed, would I, albeit not be for reasons that would appeal either to your interviewee or to the Corporation.
Let me begin with a simple, and surely an incontrovertible, proposition. It is that the abundant availability of fossil fuels, combined with the wit that has allowed human beings to exploit them, is the greatest blessing ever to have been visited upon the species. After all, without them no BBC at all and no University of Oxford – well, at least not as to be recognisable today. So then, what are the ethical issues that should, but plainly don’t, exercise either this callow youth or the state broadcaster? Here are a few suggestions. In the interests of reasonable comprehensiveness, this may occupy space. On the other hand, the issues are important (the defining challenge of the times, according to the BBC and its mentors), so we should not be niggardly.
So when the BBC:
• Routinely ignores its own Editorial Standards (as it happens, legal requirements), that is an ethical issue;
• Proceeds in the comforting knowledge that its political masters will not hold it to account, that is an ethical issue;
• Subverts the accepted meaning of language in order to generate a spurious justification for institutional bias, that is an ethical issue;
• Claims that its much vaunted impartiality has been ‘calibrated’ on the advice of a specially convened assembly of experts, that is an ethical issue;
• Subsequently spends large quantities of licence fee payers’ money seeking to avoid disclosing the composition of that convocation, that is an ethical issue;
• Has, as it later transpires, lied repeatedly about the accreditation of attendees, that is an ethical issue;
• Is in possession of information indicating gross malfeasance within the climate change community, which for weeks it deliberately suppresses, that is an ethical issue;
• Rejects the findings of an independent committee, set up by itself, to rule on its own impartiality, that is an ethical issue;
• Later, in order to justify its propagandist line, accepts on demonstrably spurious grounds the opposing verdict of a paid lapdog scientist, that is an ethical issue;
• Subsequently, and for years, deliberately and willfully ignores rivers of evidence and reports from unimpeachable sources which run counter to its prevailing orthodoxy, that is an ethical issue;
• Continues to give currency to demonstrable misinformation generated by vested interests, that is an ethical issue;
• By silent acquiescence lends its authority to false and defamatory slurs aimed at eminent scientists who question its prevailing orthodoxy, that is an ethical issue;
• Establishes a complaints procedure which, on artificial and synthetic grounds, is carefully designed to reject all objections to its prevailing orthodoxy, however well attested, that is an ethical issue.
The list is long. It could be longer.
But let us expand this young man’s horizons a little beyond merely the shortcomings of the BBC. He – and, indeed, the BBC – might, for example, consider some/all of the following:
 When scientists, or those claiming to be, concoct evidence, that is an ethical issue.
 When they ‘homogenise’ data, that is an ethical issue.
 When they refuse to expose their data to verification by the wider scientific community, that is an ethical issue.

Saturday, March 14, 2015

Finding the balance of where we are

GoD and DoG
by Wendy Francisco

GoD and DoG Store
GoD and DoG Thoughts
"I look up and I see GoD"
The one thing that bugged me about this line is that I don't really think of God as being "up" in a directional sense. But when you look "up" in your heart, you ultimately conclude God...at least I do.

"I look down and see my dog."
I hope that the first two lines of the song convey that people are in the middle, between two kinds of sincere devotion.

"Simple spelling G O D, Same word backwards, D O G."
In the English language, this is an amusing reality. It doesn't hold true for other languages, but is simply one of those linguistic coincidences that poets capitalize on. It just happens that the inverted spelling of these two words fits my song beautifully. I don't think there is any cosmic signifigance in this.

"They would stay with me all day."
The main reason I wrote God and Dog is that humans naturally seem to think of God as a Zeus-like judgemental guy - and that you have to walk on eggshells or he will pitch some lightening at you, and then turn in an offended huff and leave you. Then we form religions and present this wrong idea of God in an organized and seemingly well founded way. But God loves people, knows each of us deeply, and longs to be close to every one of us.

"I'm the one who walks away."
Everytime I leave my dog to go do something "important", he gives me a look that says, "I wish I could be with you". Many people think they have failed and that God has left them. So they leave God. Crazy, but quite common. But God loves us in spite of what we consider to be our failures.

"But both of them just wait for me and dance at my return with glee."
My dog has a party when I return even if I have been gone only 10 minutes. The prodigal son left home and squandered everything his father had given him. The father didn't follow his son and hurl judgements and insults. He just waited. When his son returned, the dad didn't say a thing about what his son had done. He was so thrilled to have him back that he threw a big party.

"Both love me no matter what, divine God and canine mutt. "
We know how loving our dogs are. Their relationship to us is not based on a scorecard. Well many people think that God talleys our mistakes like an accountant who tracks every penny. But, if this were true then it would be impossible to have an authentic friendship with God. We would all either be intolerably proud, or we'd be disfuctionally humiliated. This is why dead religion is made of intolerably proud people telling disfunctionally humiliated people what to do.

"I take it hard each time I fail but God forgives, Dog wags his tail".
If you don't believe that forgiveness is a huge aspect of who God is, you won't be able to forgive yourself... or anybody else either.

"God thought up and made the dog, dog reflects a part of God".
The order of creation in Genesis loosely reflects what science is telling us. This is fascinating. My favorite things to read are the Bible, and popular science books of all kinds. I think God expressed himself in the things we see around us.

"I've seen love from both sides now, it's everywhere, amen, bow wow."
When you force and control an animal, something deep inside it retreats and you miss out. Do that enough and your life becomes silent, lonely, and cold. It's the same with our relationships to each other. When people control people, something deep inside retreats and goes cold, intelligence is suppressed, physical health begins to decline, things unravel.

Some people think that God manipulates and controls, but to me it looks like beings have been made to flourish in the presence of love and freedom. This is the most tangible and direct evidence for the existence of God - that love brings health, wholeness, and vibrance. Love is the powerful force that nurtures life. And God is love.

"I look up and I see God, I look down and see my dog
And in my human frailty, I can't match their love for me."

GoD and DoG love me unwaveringly and I can't match it. But I am learning...

Monday, March 2, 2015

Just a tad out of line

At the Senior Citizens Centre they had a contest the other day. I lost by one point. The question was, where do women mostly have curly hair? 

Apparently, the correct answer was Africa.
-------------------
One of the other questions was to name one thing commonly found in cells. 

It appears that Aboriginals is not the correct answer either.
------------------
I’ve heard that Apple has scrapped their plans for the new children’s iPod

 after realizing that iTouch Kids is not a good product name.
-------------------
There’s a new Muslim clothing shop opened in our shopping centre, but 

I’ve been banned from it after asking to look at some bomber jackets.
-------------------

Wednesday, February 18, 2015

White privilege calculated into physics

New High-School Physics Curriculum Includes Lessons on White Privilege 
A Seattle science teacher was concerned students “weren’t learning about their own privilege.” 


It turns out Everything=Racism2
 
Text   
Comments
765
Katherine Timpf 
A high-school physics teacher has developed his own six-day curriculum that he uses to teach about institutional racism, privilege, and social justice as part of his seniors’ physics classes.
The teacher, Moses Rifkin of University Prep in Seattle, has also been promoting the lesson plan to other high-school science instructors.
John Burk, a math and physics teacher from Delaware, said that he learned about the curriculum when he met Rifkin at a People of Color Conference and gushed that it “brilliantly brings lessons about social justice, privilege, and institutional racism into the physics classroom.”

In fact, Burk loved the unit so much that he had Rifkin write a guest postabout it in his (Burk’s) own blog, in which Rifkin explained:
“I was jealous of my colleagues in English and History who got to talk every day in class about society and how it worked and how to be moral and caring and kind, whereas those conversations with students only happened for me outside the classroom.”
“That I was teaching at a private school only made matters worse: my students weren’t learning about their own privilege (academic and, in most cases, economic and racial),” Rifkin continued.
During one section of the course, Rifkin’s post explains, students study black physicists. For a homework assignment, he instructs students to learn about a pre-1950s black physicist and also a modern black physicist.
Rifkin explains that he expects finding information about black physicists will be tough, which “points to the big question of this project: why is this? Why, percentage-wise, are there dramatically fewer black physicists than black Americans?”
“Is it because black students are not interested in physics? Not capable? Something else?” the homework assignment asks.
Yes — the physicist has to be black specifically and the assignment “will not cover any other minority groups that may not be as involved in science.”
“We do this because it’s a particularly illustrative example; we aren’t going to directly address other scientific minorities, and there are many: women, other races, the economically disadvantaged, the physically disabled, etc.” the course description clarifies.
But he assures us that this is “only because of time restrictions, not because of a lack of relevance.”
It is not clear why — even if social justice was a relevant topic to be discussed in a high-school science class — studies of other groups he himself calls “scientific minorities” would not be acceptable subjects just because they were not black specifically.
Another homework assignment for the class as part of this unit is to read Peggy McIntosh’s White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack, according to apost on Missouri Education Watchdog. Rifkin also recommends listening to Macklemore.
— Katherine Timpf is a reporter for National Review Online.


Friday, February 13, 2015

lighten up, then rock

The Beginning.
In the beginning, there was nothing then Chuck said “Let there be LIGHT!”
Then He created Thomas Edison.
And the first schism occurred, as Nikolai Tesla said, wait a moment. It should be AC, not DC.
AC/DC then tried to reconcile the differences, and published their thesis as For Those About To Rock.

– Elvis 1

Thursday, February 12, 2015

To recognize evil

Are we able to do this?
Can we cut through all this crap in this so called modern world, to see what and who we are and what and who we are becoming, if we are not already are.?
Then what? or the modern riposte "What ever" 

http://www.whiterosesociety.org/WRS_pamphlets_home.html






                                                                           
THE WHITE ROSE SOCIETY
                                                        

It is impossible to engage in intellectual discourse with National Socialism because it is not an intellectually defensible program. It is false to speak of a National Socialist philosophy, for if there were such an entity, one would have to try by means of analysis and discussion either to prove its validity or to combat it. In actuality, however, we face a totally different situation.

At its very inception this movement depended on the deception and betrayal of one's fellow man; even at that time it was inwardly corrupt and could support itself only by constant lies.[and complex explanantions with a glibness] After all, Hitler states in an early edition of "his" book (a book written in the worst German I have ever read, in spite of the fact that it has been elevated to the position of the Bible in this nation of poets and thinkers): "It is unbelievable, to what extent one must betray a people in order to rule it."

If at the start this cancerous growth in the nation was not particularly noticeable, it was only because there were still enough forces at work that operated for the good, so that it was kept under control. As it grew larger, however, and finally in an ultimate spurt of growth attained ruling power, the tumor broke open, as it were, and infected the whole body. The greater part of its former opponents went into hiding. The German intellectuals fled to their cellars, there, like plants struggling in the dark, away from light and sun, gradually to choke to death.

Now the end is at hand. Now it is our task to find one another again, to spread information from person to person, to keep a steady purpose, and to allow ourselves no rest until the last man in persuaded of the urgent need of his struggle against this system. When thus a wave of unrest goes through the land, when "it is in the air", when many join the cause, then in a great final effort this system can be shaken off. After all, and end in terror is preferable to terror without end.

We are not in a position to draw up a final judgment about the meaning of our history. But if this
catastrophe can be used to further the public welfare, it will be only by virtue of the fact that we are
cleansed by suffering; that we yearn for the light in the midst of deepest night, summon our strength, and finally help in shaking off the yoke which weighs on our world.

We do not want to discuss here the question of the Jews, nor do we want in this leaflet to compose a
defense or apology. No, only by way of example do we want to cite the fact that since the conquest of Poland three hundred thousand Jews have been murdered in this country in the most bestial way. Here we see the most frightful crime against human dignity, a crime that is unparalleled in the whole of history. For Jews, too, are human beings - no matter what position we take with respect to the Jewish question - and a crime of this dimension has been perpetrated against human beings.

Someone may say that the Jews deserved their fate. This assertion would be a monstrous impertinence; but let us assume that someone said this - what position has he then taken toward the fact that the entire Polish aristocratic youth is being annihilated? (May God grant that this program has not fully achieved its aim as yet!) All male offspring of the houses of the nobility between the ages of fifteen and twenty were transported to concentration camps in Germany and sentenced to forced labor, and the girls of this age group were sent to Norway, into the bordellos of the SS!

[What is happening around the world, in many of the so called hot spots and has in common the same ideology and even practices many similiar evils in its name and books]

Why tell you these things, since you are fully aware of them - or if not of these, then of other equally grave crimes committed by this frightful sub-humanity? Because here we touch on a problem which involves us deeply and forces us all to take thought. Why do the German people behave so apathetically in the face of all these abominable crimes, crimes so unworthy of the human race? Hardly anyone thinks about that. It is accepted as fact and put out of mind. The German people slumber on in their dull, stupid sleep and encourage these fascist criminals; they give them the opportunity to carry on their depredations; and of course they do so. Is this a sign that the Germans are brutalized in their simplest human feelings, that no chord within them cried out at the sight of such deeds, that they have sunk into a fatal consciencelessness from which they will never, never awake?

It seems to be so, and will certainly be so, if the German does not at least start up out of his stupor, if he does not protest wherever and whenever he can against this clique of criminals, if he shows no sympathy for these hundreds of thousands of victims. He must evidence not only sympathy; no, much more: a sense of complicity in guilt. For through his apathetic behavior he gives these evil men the opportunity to act as they do; he tolerates this "government" which has taken upon itself such an infinitely great burden of guilt; indeed, he himself is to blame for the fact that it came about at all! Each man wants to be exonerated of a guilt of this kind, each one continues on his way with the most placid, the calmest conscience. But he cannot be exonerated; he is guilty, guilty, guilty!

It is not too late, however, to do away with this most reprehensible of all miscarriages of government, so as to avoid being burdened with even greater guilt. Now, when in recent years our eyes have been
opened, when we know exactly who our adversary is, it is high time to root out this brown horde. Up until the outbreak of the war the larger part of the German people were blinded; the Nazis did not show themselves in their true aspect. But now, now that we have recognized them for what they are, it must be the sole and first duty, the holiest duty of every German to destroy these beasts. [and dismiss their "bibles books"]

"If the people are barely aware that the government exists, they are happy. When the government
is felt to be oppressive, they are broken. " "Good fortune, alas! builds itself upon misery. Good
fortune, alas! is the mask of misery. What will come of this? We cannot foresee the end. Order is
upset and turns to disorder, good becomes evil. The people are confused. Is it not so, day in, day out, from the beginning? " "The wise man is therefore angular, though he does not injure others:
he has sharp corners, though he does not harm; he is upright but not gruff. He is clear-minded,
but he does not try to be brilliant." - Lao Tzu

"Whoever undertakes to rule the kingdom and to shape it according to his whim - I foresee that he
will fail to reach his goal. That is all. " "The kingdom is a living being. It cannot be constructed, in
truth! He who tries to manipulate it will spoil it, he who tries to put it under his power will lose it. "
"Therefore: Some creatures go out in front, others follow, some have warm breath, others cold,
some are strong, some weak, some attain abundance, other succumb. " "The wise man will
accordingly forswear excess, he will avoid arrogance and not overreach." - Lao Tzu

Please make as many copies as possible of this leaflet and distribute them.

[Will we  lose interest in our duties as citizens and lead others and a younger generation to do the same? 
"Young people will come of age believing that hypocrisy and deceit, (build it self upon misery) will bring them prosperity. And those of us who understand what is happening to our country will be silenced and forced into obscurity".]

Monday, February 2, 2015