||"dawnbreak in the west"|
Tuesday, October 06, 2015
Lawyers are bad for the environment
They're saying that Volkswagen's gaming of the system will cost more than the British Petroleum oil-spill in the Gulf.
Volkswagen let off a few more chemicals than they should have; but those chemicals have been linked to - very little environmental damage, over what a rival vehicle might have let off. BP's oil-spill on the other hand was a horrific disaster.
If Volkswagen's corner-cutting results in more economic Fail than BP's did: that is the result of bad law, not of bad environmental practice. It strikes me that our real pollutant here is American law. I suggest mulching lawyers.
Monday, October 05, 2015
A little helpful note to the state's finest: the real world ain't that scene in The Dark Knight.
As background: American Apparel had a record of cutting costs by, yes, hiring non-Americans. They fired those workers not because they wanted to, but because their discriminatory anti-American practices were just that egregious.
It's of interest that they went for Trump this year. One possibility: that they wanted to impose the same laws that bit them, upon the American garment industry as a whole. That's how corporations roll - self-interest.
Still: if that is the case, then at least this time they were calling for equal-protection. I take their recent endorsement as a sincere apology. For my part I am sorry they are no longer with us.
Seventy percent? Really?
I have met two people with this inner-ear / vestibular condition, or with something like this, in my forty years on this planet. (I mean, besides fall-down drunks.) I do not wish vestibular vertigo upon anyone. But I'm not seeing that it affects seventy-percent. Seven-percent seems too high.
I am smelling one of those conflict-of-interest thingies again. A horrible disease exists; the sufferers and their friends want Something To Be Done; numbers get inflated and, now, unfortunately, people like me have to call shenanigans on those numbers. (And now we look like assholes because we've raised the flag. Well, fine; I'm an asshole. My point stands.)
Please, please, please, DO help those suffering from this condition where they suffer. Please do donate to charities with a proven record of offering such help. But please do not support anyone who lets slip a crap statistic like this. They have an ulterior motive; they're on the take.
Dallas has a problem
- a mental problem. Susan Hawk has taken "me-time" off duty to the tune of months.
I can understand a case of Teh Sadz. I can understand some random person not wanting this stuff out there. But... if you are the District Attorney for a large city, or in Dallas's case a third of a metroplex... then you have this thing called "responsibility".
We all need to match our abilities to our ambitions, and to plan our careers accordingly. If you don't, then you have erred. If you persist, you are a fool.
Carly Fiorina as a war president
Carly Fiorina is a mediaeval historian, by training. She argues that this gives her insight into Baghdadi's mind.
If that were the Presidency's primary function at this time, that argument could work. I hope that we won't, next year, be placed into such a position, that the Presidency require this as its primary function. If my prayers come true: then I still have hope Fiorina will be useful in an advisory role - like Condoleeza Rice, Russian scholar, a decade ago. If they don't... well, we're screwed anyway.
Sunday, October 04, 2015
How to ban a noxious religion
Lawrence Auster once singled out Islam as incompatible with the American way, which it is; and proposed to exclude Islam by name from Constitutional protection. I never did accept this notion as stated, but I hadn't quite gotten to expressing that explicitly (which is mine own fault). So, here we go:
To single out a group for whatever reason is a collective writ of attainder. The Constitution has a ban on attainder, at least for citizens. If we are to have civil-rights at all, that ban is the best in the Western world. It should be a "Forever Clause", like certain parts of the Constitution of Honduras. Therefore, when we get to that other ban on the "religious test for office", I would stick this one asterisk onto it: exclude any candidate for Federal office who supports attainder.
This incidentally also means the Feds won't be able to discriminate on racial grounds. Including outcome-based "affirmative action". There's something for everyone to dislike here! But anyway.
I suggest to whoever it may concern, Herman Cain or Dr Carson or freakin' Stacey Dash or whoever runs next time - that the GOP propose an Amendment based on Auster's proposal but abstracted out. I could give it a shot: religions with a casuistic law-code do not count for the purpose of this Constitution. So a religion would be allowed apodictic statements like "thou shalt not commit adultery" but not "give adulterers 100 lashes". Its priests can say "let us ban abortion" (or "we should spend more on womens' health"), but not "sentence abortionists to five years of labour" (or "impose a 5% tax on gentlemens' clubs").
If we're serious about Constitutional government, and preserving it, that's what has to happen: a forever-clause stamp on "no attainder", and the lifting of protection from religions that happen to look a lot like Islam. (Neo-reactionaries of course won't care. But this post isn't for them.)
Is Ben Carson fair game?
I am not a Constitutional lawyer, but there's an interesting argument between
The problem with Islam (here) is that the Qur'an singles out a few religions itself. Moreover a practicing Muslim must support the religious test for office. In Sunnism (CAIR is Sunni) only the caliph may command the Believers in offensive war, and it should be exceptionally rare that a non-Muslim may hold a superior position.
Islamist chutzpah aside, CAIR is currently 501c3 which means tax-exempt. They shouldn't be pronouncing on Presidential candidates. They can point out where a candidate is violating the Constitution or other laws. Except... in this case, Carson didn't do that, and hasn't (yet) proposed to. Same as with Cain before him.
In the meantime,
Saturday, October 03, 2015
Upload #117 - an Arabic qur'an
Last weekend I went down to the library and found Mustansir Mir's 1989 classic on Arabic idiom in the Qur'an. That got me thinking about Ahmad al-Jallad's new glossary and grammar of Safaitic: which language he says is Arabic, and which has its own idiomatic turns of phrase. Why not compare one set with the other?
So, new project: "Arabic Influence on the Style of the Koran". I haven't yet used any of this in the mainstream of my projects. But it can, at least, serve as an apologion (if that's a word) for why I'd cited al-Jallad in those projects.
I've additionally taken some changes to "Basmala". Also fixed up: "Against Jihad", "Iconoclast".
Thursday, October 01, 2015
What non-Hindus are up against in India
A mob of a hundred Hindus surrounded a Muslim, and beat him to death - for, um, eating a steak.
Hindus got "ahimsa" like Christians got the Prince of Peace. Neither religions' professions of nonviolence mean anything in practice. These concepts are for insiders only. If someone near to the community has not joined the community, their life is at a knife-edge.
(Note that in Hinduism "ahimsa" is even deader as a letter, given that Hindus also got a warrior caste.)
Anyway, that's human-nature for you: all Yahoos, all chimpanzees after a trip to the barber.
Sunday, September 27, 2015
English and Spanish are still likely to win
Okay, this article is stupid. The raw data are good, but the conclusion is rubbish.
Comparing English, which is a single Germanic language, to all the Chinese "dialects" is stupid. The Chinese "dialects" stem from early-mediaeval Chinese or even before that. They are not dialects; they are languages.
It is even more retarded to compare English speakers to "Arabic" speakers. Nobody speaks classical Arabic; it's debatable whether anyone ever did. What we have instead is a proliferation of Arabic-origin languages, with "modern Standard" Arabic forming a sort of pidgin classical overlay; like Latin for early-modern European scholars and Catholics.
Based on demographics, I don't see Mandarin Chinese expanding beyond where Mandarin Chinese is already spoken. I'm also not seeing the Prakrit languages expanding outside India. Classical Arabic might make a comeback as a mother-tongue, if the caliphate expands through to Egypt and North Africa and East Africa - but that's a long shot.
Google want in on this
Google is keen on
Saturday, September 26, 2015
If you want protection, pay up
But but but I thought the cops were there to protect everybody, regardless of ability to pay! - said nobody.
Anyway, do please explain to me how this "security" racket differs from jizya. And don't say "because the monies don't go to Islam". If it's a state demand for more funds then those funds go straight to the state; if to private security then they go to taxes (and likely "off duty" fuzz). Either way the revenue benefits Choudary.
Upload #116 - in the name
Recently I've been made aware of old Orientalist controversies around Q. 17:1. That sent me to re-reading the Noeldeke-commenced Geschichte. You know, that textbook that took at least five Krauts nearly a century to finish... Anyway, as you might know, I immediately thought that Q. 17:1 might be a basmala - not a verse.
In my other projects I noticed that "Blast", "Women", and "TSM" had separate discussions on early basmala. Further findings bled into the two books. It wasn't easy to keep track of what I'd said and where. My problem then was that I wasn't able to make a publon of it. Now, thanks to Noeldeke, I think I can.
So: new PDF, "The Furthest Basmala". Those aforementioned essays now point thither.
As luck would have it, Noeldeke revealed to me a whole new sura! Well, a couplet of a sura anyway - whose second verse is identical to Q. 32:17. So that meant a near-rewrite of "Qudsi".
Also fixed up: "Jihad", "Smoke", "Ethics", "Dispute", "Focus", "Spenders", "Interceding".
Friday, September 25, 2015
The State lashes out
Misprison - this is a word we will all have to learn, those of us who still think we have a Fifth Amendment in this country:
Agents picked up Joseph “Joey” Meek Jr., 21, of Red Bank, while he was at work Thursday afternoon, his girlfriend, Lindsey Fry, told The State newspaper shortly afterward. Meek called her on his cell phone as it was happening, Fry said. “He just said, ‘They want to talk to me, but I think I’m going to jail,’” she said.
Do. Not. Ever. Cooperate. With. The. Police. Unless. You. Have. A. Lawyer. The police are paid agents of a government, and that government is run by politicians, and the politicians are beholden to voters, and the voters are ignorant and emotional and stupid. Also, selfish and evil. And (depending on location) members of a hostile tribe to boot. The tribe wants more blood - it always does - and the local cops don't like looking like they failed to protect the initial victims (there wasn't much they COULD do but hey). Meanwhile, there's you - a schmuck barely out of your teens, and caught up in this mess already. Think you can outlawyer an entire city and its lawyers, by yourself?
No. You can't. So don't.
The view from Avignon
Bergoglio marches on.
We have a name to attach to the raising of this heathen to the Vatican: Cardinal Danneels. Meanwhile Ace had suggested that we should actually listen to the Pope's words; some Christians in the thread didn't want to hear it.
I'll go one further: if you remain loyal to this pope and to the cardinals who put him there, then you are not a Catholic. It's not going to get any better from here on out. It will get worse.
Clockboy's family plays the game
When Clockboy's story started to fall apart, I saw parallels with "Zoe Quinn" Van Valkenburg. I predicted that the next stage would be for the Clockboy family to cry harassment. ("Death threats on Twitter", would be the formulation.)
I am a prophet. There should be a sura named after me.
Free speech online
Roger Pearse gives up:
Increasingly I see a trend whereby the powerful deny free speech to their political opponents. I see companies being advised to Google for job candidates, in case they are “unsafe”. Those who still dare to protest are almost all of one political complexion, and that not the one in power. To protest is increasingly presented, cynically, as a party statement.
Do please read the rest.
Do I think he's right? Well... today I got this latest arrogance from Google:
By ending "poverty" the UN and Google intend attacking independent corporations; by ending "climate change" they intend cutting your power, and by ending "injustice" they intend, basically, ending you. And if you disagree with the UN and Google then you're un-learned.
This isn't the world we were promised, but it's the only world we're allowed to live in.
Tuesday, September 22, 2015
Proposal for private charities
Employees of the government are mamluks, not employees as we civilians understand them. Whatever they get is given them by a vast armed gang. Their customers aren't us civilians; their customers are the party in power.
Meanwhile charities compete against other charities just like businesses compete against other businesses: some might be more deserving than others, depending on the donor's preference. In general, State-directed funds that go to a service that private actors can provide, crowd out individuals' funds that could otherwise go to those private actors.
Those charities which accept donations from government mamluks have taken those donations, second-hand, from us. Maybe we would have supported those charities ourselves. What we can say is that those charities are in unfair competition with non-State charities.
It should be a law that charities - for tax purposes - refuse donations from State employees.
The speaker for the dead would have a field-day
Jake Brewer, in life, was the Left's man to the end.
Brewer was last seen in real-life riding into oncoming traffic, on behalf of a benefit that he was supporting with - I don't know what, since bicycling from A to B has no direct effect on C. Brewer was last seen online promulgating the clock-boy hoax.
Jake Brewer risked the life of two childrens' father for nothing, is what should be inscribed on his headstone.
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Boulder JLF, day two
I attended the festival again. I had the terlit-hobo do the updates in that book thread.
To circle back to that last talk, on Dalrymple's Return of a King, I could not help but compare the British debacle in Afghanistan with the Jaysh al-Fana' in then-called Zabulistan. So, between the two, I came up with a handy chart of when not to invade Afghanistan:
I hope that this chart proves useful to future adventurers in that land.
On this site
Property of author; All Rights Reserved