July 12th, 2008

Cultural Suicide by J. R. Nyquist

“This collapse of national self-confidence arose from a combination of things.” Especially, it arose from the advent of European nihilism and egalitarianism.

For those with eyes to see, the gravity of the situation became painfully apparent during the 1980s – when conservatives were busy congratulating themselves for victories they did not win. Ronald Reagan was a good leader, but the cultural environment that enveloped him was already saturated with delusion-producing opiates.

 While the Reagan Doctrine was proclaimed by the president, it was hardly supported by the nation or by the bureaucracy in Washington. It is therefore no accident that an effective defense against Russian intercontinental missiles has never been deployed, that the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan heralded the emergence of al Qaeda, that President Daniel Ortega has taken back Nicaragua, that Jonas Savimbi lost the Angolan Civil War to the Communists, that South Africa fell to the ANC, that Congo is likewise Communist, and Venezuela, and Bolivia, etc.

Who really won the Cold War? It seems incredible to entertain the thought; but maybe, more than we can ever comprehend: History is something that didn’t happen, told by people who weren’t there.

Consider the reality: The heralded return to traditional values was largely fraudulent. The fall of Communism was engineered from Moscow. The public schools got worse and worse. The growing trade with China was a cancer. An increasingly forgetful president was outmaneuvered and undermined by renegades and appeasers in his own administration.

“Those who cannot remember the past,” wrote George Santayana, “are condemned to repeat it.” Not only was the president’s memory failing. America itself had developed Alzheimer’s.

Here we find a rationalization of hedonism for the ages, and a reason to forget the holocaust, to forget the killing fields of Cambodia’s Marxist butchers, to forget the Soviet gulag, to forget the butchery of Tiananmen Square, to forget the totalitarian legacy and deny its readiness to recur.
Collapse )


Alternative Sources of Fuel


The current approach to having more fuel, is to open areas to drilling for more oil and pipe or ship the crude to the refineries. The timetable for the oil to reach the refineries is approximately 5 years. The amount of money to be spent is in the billions. If we were to take most of the land in the soil bank and pay the farmers to grow a crop that could be converted easily to methanol, we could then develope new forms of fuel. The land would be put to better use, and the product and byproducts could all be used. Use the monies, that we intend to spend on obtaining more oil, to create refineries to produce the fuels from methanol. I feel certain thatthe timetable to obtain an alternate source of fuel would be much shorter.

Most of the research, for the refining process, has already been done. We have allowed ourselves to become much to dependant on oil, a resource that will eventually be gone. The crops used to produce the methanol are replaceable. There will be little waste, if any, from the processing.

Rush, you have available to you, the means to advance this idea. Why in the world would you ever be backing an idea (Oil in 5 years) that would, in the long term, solve nothing.???

With my idea we could create an unlimited supply of fuel and solve a lot of controversial issues in our government, such as; subsidizing farmers in the land bank, by paying them to not grow anything. Please give my thoughts a little time on your show. A lot can be done in five years!

lave na karmane

Methanol Defended as Option. It was introduced by Bush Junior and BURIED by New Yotk Times, BIG OIL

The Environmental Protection Agency's defense of methanol comes as the oil industry is mounting a public relations campaign against the alternative fuels provision in the President's proposed revisions of the Clean Air Act of 1970. Under the plan, one million vehicles powered by cleaner-burning alternative fuels would be introduced each year into the nation's nine most polluted cities after 1997.

The Environmental Protection Agency responded today to oil and auto industry criticism of an important part of President Bush's clean air legislation by defending methanol as both an economically and environmentally sound fuel alternative to gasoline.

The agency said in a report that methanol prices would be competitive with gasoline at the pump, would not leave the nation more dependent on unreliable sources of imported energy and would reduce harmful auto emissions far more than any other pollution control program.

The Administration asserts that expanding the use of alternative fuels, including methanol, is the only realistic way to reduce auto emissions significantly. Tighter auto pollution standards may be too expensive, while regulating the amount of car travel is not feasible, the White House says.

The oil industry supports studying the wider use of alternative fuels. But it contends that too little is known about the environmental effects of fuels like methanol to introduce them as widely as the President Bush proposes. In addition, the industry says the Environmental Protection Agency has dramatically understated the eventual cost of methanol to the consumer.

The oil industry has acknowledged that methanol produces less hydrocarbons, which contribute to smog.

Published: September 20, 1989
Collapse )

(no subject)

Communist Goals (1963) Documention below Congressional Record--Appendix, pp. A34-A35 January 10, 1963


Thursday, January 10, 1963

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.
At Mrs. Nordman's request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following "Current Communist Goals," which she identifies as an excerpt from "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen:

[From "The Naked Communist," by Cleon Skousen]


1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

Collapse )