BobL

First, a couple of things to point out here:

1. The following type of posting is meant to MAKE A POINT:

"Take that, Putin!!!! We don’t need no (fill in the blank, hypersonics, helium, educated kids, etc.) because WE ARE AMERICA, and therefore INVINCIBLE!"

If we are so hell-bent on starting wars all over the world (Iran, China and of course Russia), it seems to me that it might have been a good idea to PREPARE for such. We didn't...our civilian industrial base is totally hollowed out, while much of our military industrial base is also hollowed out, along with that of our allies. Even the NY Times has noted that we cannot even obtain the ball bearings needed for our military equipment (any guess which countries now make them?). Starting wars in that condition is simply SUICIDE.

Second, ONE COUNTRY saw that a clash of major powers was coming and they did, literally, EVERYTHING in their power, for 8 years, to prepare. Another country, instead, shrunk their military to pre-WW2 levels, told their military that they are a bunch of White Supremacists, and didn't bother to seriously try developing defenses against Hypersonic missiles (until way too late), or a way to expand artillery production, or loading up on the needed raw materials (like Antimony for detonating explosives). Is it any surprise that Russia and now China are CLEARLY more powerful than the US at this point.

So is it really a good idea for the US to be starting wars all around the world?

Ask yourself a question: Why is Ukraine so important to the West? And exclude the invasion this year. In other words, why was the West SO INTERESTED in Ukraine for the past decade?

Consider that for 24 years (1990 to 2014), Ukraine was a corrupt, back-water, country on the fringes of Europe, with a pro-Russia government, not threatening anyone. Things were stable - Ukraine had all the land it inherited from the Soviet Union, and no threats, and certainly no warfare.

Yet, for the West (I won't say Neocons, since that triggers some people here), in 2014, they felt the need to overthrow the elected government, and replace the government with a pro-Western government (no one denies this fact). But why?

And then 2014 - Russia invades as Gorby, Yeltsin, and Putin promised if Ukraine become hostile to Russia - it was a perfectly clear red line for Russia. Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with the morality of it, if Ukraine became unfriendly to Russia, then Russia would take whatever action needed to go back to having a friendly neighbor. So the invasion shouldn't surprise anyone...again, regardless of whether you feel it was justified or not.

In 2014, the Russian invasion was terminated with the Minsk agreement, and Russia pulled back (other than in Crimea). This agreement was not carried out by Ukraine, and just recently (in June 2022) we better understand the Western strategy, which was as follows: The 'agreement' was never intended to be carried out by Ukraine, but rather to get the Russian troops out of Ukraine before they could replace the government, and then the West woudl arm-up Ukraine and openly talked about NATO membership and nuclear weapons (as they did in recent years).

The NATO/Nuclear talk, along with what was clearly a plan to drive all Russian speakers out of Ukraine (by terrorizing them and making life unliveable for them in Ukraine), and that was guaranteed to get a response from Russia, and it did, on Feb 24, 2022.

So, the response came, as we all know. The Western reaction was anger (no surprise) and then attempts to punish Russia and help Ukraine resist the invasion. Unfortunately for the West, both of these responses have not helped the situation on the ground, Russia continues to roll up Ukrainian territory, and at an accelerating rate in the past few weeks.

Then, instead of suing for peace and cutting losses (both economically in the West, and on the ground in Ukraine), the West continues to up the ante, to the point of partially blockading Kiliningrad, which is clearly an act of war against Russia. It's almost like they want Russia to strike NATO, so as to given them 'justification' to start WW3. That's where we are, today, with no sign of the West backing down (and no reason for Russia to back down). As this war continues, it becomes more and more likely that there will not even be a Ukraine when the war does end.

Now ask yourself a simple question: Why was it first necessary for the West to install a hostile government (hostile to Russia) in Ukraine in 2014, and then have Ukraine militarize and start driving out their Russian-speakers (roughly 10 million)?

Once you understand the answer, then everything starts to make sense.

So, here's the answer. Ukraine is a stepping stone to Russia. As the world well understands, the West hates Putin, which given his domestic popularity, means the West hates Russia. So the goal here is to use Ukraine to somehow overthrow the Putin, and thus the Russian government, and replace the Russian government with one more to the West's liking (and that's been openly stated by the West).

But still, WHY? Yes, Russia has been making threatening noises regarding Europe, but only in response to NATO expansion, which they oppose. But no other actions of a threatening nature.

Once you understand the answer, then everything starts to make sense.

The REAL PRIZE is not even Russia, it's China. Russia, like Ukraine, is a stepping stone. If we get Russia on our side, then we will isolate China, and then can go after them. But why is China so important, and why not team up with Putin to take on China?

Again, once you understand the answer, then everything starts to make sense.

The answer is found on this page (I'd go to Wikipedia, but they try to conceal this fact):

https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/

In 2016, China already had more TWICE the carbon emissions of the US - by now likely 3 times, and more than Europe and the US combined (way more). Over the past 20 years or so, the West signed agreement after agreement to greatly limit carbon emmission, but China and Russia (and India) always got a free pass (at most, they'd sign something non-binding, or with a commitment 40 years in the future). So, those countries were free to keep using and expanding fossil fuels, pretty much forever.

This use of fossil fuels MUST be stopped, and if it means a nuclear war, then so be it - that is the mindset of the leaders of the West, and that is what we need to fight. To the West, a Nuclear Winter is no worse than the planet burning up...and so here we are.

--------------------

WHY UKRAINE IS SO IMPORTANT TO THE WEST

For those wondering, don't look at what's being said about Ukraine, look at what's being said about Russia - which is that Putin needs to go, and a pro-Western government needs to be installed there. Then ask why.

ANSWER: During the Cold War, the biggest threat to the Warsaw Pact (including the Soviet Union), was news of the prosperity of the West reaching their impoverished people. Ditto for China and Taiwan during that time - Taiwan, of course, was never a military threat to China, but they also stood as a beacon, showing the people of China, that Chinese could live wealthy and free, and thus was a huge threat to the legitimacy of the Chinese government. [These days, not as much, due to China's incredible economic growth, now it's just cleaning up loose ends for China.]

Continuing - now picture the future in 15 years, using current political trajectories:

1. The West continues on their Green New Deal path, becoming impoverished with a dying (or dead) industrial base and not even being able to heat their homes, due to the huge cost of electricity (and no other options). Additionally, meat will be a luxury and extremely expensive (think $50 a pound), due to the huge reduction in livestock needed to meet 'climate goals' (for those who don't know, livestock emits methane, a greenhouse gas, and Western countries are now greatly shrinking their cattle herds).

2. Meanwhile Russia, China, many other countries will be wealthy with plenty of meat, due to low-cost energy as they don't have to deal with 'climate goals' or deal with methane releases.

This is the Cold War reversed, with the West at the losing end, and Russia being a huge beacon for Europe*, and China similarly for Japan and other countries that bought into the climate agenda. This is unsustainable for the West, and the West knows that. So they MUST bring down Russia and China, with Russia being the easier of the two, so they're first on the list.

We live in a new reality.

*we're beginning to see that reversal in progress as 'sanctions' that Europe tries to impose on Russia are backfiring economically and driving up the cost of living there, as well as driving down the value of the Euro. At the same time, the vast majority of Russian people (the ones who aren't jet-setters) are doing just fine, as Russia is self-sufficient in virtually all of their needs.

-------------------------------------

COLD WAR 2?

In Cold War 1, there was one side that just wanted to be left alone to prosper, but the other side was a Communist Cabal hell-bent on imposing its Left-Wing ideology around the world.

In Cold War 2, we have one side that just wants to be left alone to prosper, but the other side is a Globalist Cabal hell-bent on imposing its Left-Wing ideology (under the guise of Climate Change) around the world.

In Cold War 1, the aggressors were led by experienced men, who knew the consequences of direct combat between the sides, and thus Cold War 1 ended peacefully. In Cold War 2, we still have one side led by experienced, deliberate, men, but the aggressors are led by fanatics who seem willing to risk WW3 to impose their ideology. If we're lucky, the aggressors in Cold War 2 will be dispatched as they were in Cold War 1, which was peacefully.

-------------------------------------

Seems there is a stupidity virus going around. It’s latest symptom is an involuntary sound emanating from deep inside a person, similar to “Putin Bad! Ukraine Good!”

The most susceptible listen to Hannity, Kilmead, and Levine, and post Ukrainian flag emojis.

The virus first wipes out all memories of “Orange Man is Putin Stooge!” and the Biden Crime Family’s Ukraine escapades. It then wipes memories of Vindman, CIAramella, Nuland, and Chalupa, and the impeachment of The Greatest Patriot Ever over a phone call with Ukraine. Soon, posters of Soros and Klaus appear on their bedroom ceilings.

-------------------------------------

How the parties view the Constitution:

1. Republicans (including most RINOs): We should try to abide by it.

2. Democrats (all Democrats): It doesn't exist.

Vote Democrat, or stay home, you're supporting #2, that simple.

-------------------------------------

SOME THINGS TO KEEP IN MIND, FOR THOSE PLANNING ON MAKING A LAST STAND

(and the point of this is that if you decide to 'teach the GOP a lesson' by allowing Democrats to be elected, it will be too late to fight - once they have the laws in place, it's game over)

They have HUGE advantages over our side. For most people on our side, the ability to even comprehend who these people are simply doesn’t exist. I suspect that’s even the case here. The second advantage is that they take advantage of the freedoms we allow, including freedom of speech and the press. But once they take over, that all gets shut down.

That’s why we USED TO infiltrate these groups, figure out their plans, and stop them early (as in FBI Director Hoover). Once we stopped doing it, it was just a matter of time before they had all the pieces in place to take down the country, and now they’re at that point - and they’re in far better shape to do that than even they ever imagined.

For example, if someone in Texas, on our side (even our governor), wants to ‘actively oppose’ what’s coming, people in DC (not even in Texas), can simply do the following:

1. Empty their bank accounts

2. Place liens on their properties

3. Cancel their credit cards

4. Cancel their passports

5. Put them on the No-Fly List

6. Cancel electricity, phone, and Internet service

7. Cancel postal service or at least package delivery

8. Cancel their Social Security and Medicare*

9. Disable their cars*

*Maybe not done yet, but don’t worry, they’re coming

So, either people comply as directed, as the country collapses economically and crime runs wild, or their lives are destroyed directly by our new masters. And the thing is, just who are they? Who is it that just did the above. Take #1. You go to your ATM and are told "Funds not Available". So you log in to your bank and you get a message "Persuant to Court Order 2022-3759 of DC Federal District Court, the funds in this account are locked". Can you even find out who did this to you? Probably not, it's probably sealed at the courthouse.

Our side will comply. Sad, but true.

Given that, I can’t see a reason for staying here, and I’m not going to do so. If I’m going to be forced to live under Socialism, which will be the case anywhere in the world, it will under a Socialist government that doesn’t also hate me and feel the need to re-educate me and make me repent for the sins they imagine I committed.

And don’t forget, the people in South Africa who left early were able to use their wealth and the relative open doors of other countries (at the time) to find a nice place to live out their lives. Those who waited (while their currency and country collapsed) got less and less, and now most there are trapped.

A bit on you off-the-grid types with your battery-backed up solar power sources. Are you really 'off-the-grid', or are you off-the-grid as long as you're permitted to operate. For example, as we all know, Tesla cars are connected to the Internet, and if Tesla wants to disable your car, most likely some malnourished vegetarian could send a few keystrokes and quickly take it down. Can they do that with your inverter (the part of a solar/battery system required to provide AC power) in their PowerWall setup? Actually I don't know...but I'd be surprised if that were not the case. So be sure to understand those systems, if you're able to understand them, then try figuring out a way to isolate them from the web (likely possible, but beyond what I know).

---------------------------------------------------------------------

WHY EVEN DEMOCRATS SHOULD SUPPORT CLEAN ELECTIONS

(now this is a brilliant point)

Although not obvious, yet, rank-and-file Democrat voters are about to learn a HUGE LESSON that unfortunate people around the world have learned the hard way for hundreds of years: The lesson being that once you enable leaders that have NO FEAR of opposition, either from their political 'enemies', or from their political friends (the ones who helped them get into voters, in the case of the United States, that would be people who live an otherwise conservative lifestyle, but voted for Biden over Trump). In other words, with their cheating apparatus in place, not only does Shumer, Pelosi, and AOC no longer have to worry about Republicans, they no longer have to worry about Democrats even trying to (at least somewhat) answer to their voters. So, now, a VERY SMALL minority fully controls all levels of government and they have no interest in either the conservative values of Republicans, or even the conservative values of 2/3's of their (Democrat) voters. They answer ONLY to themselves, and very soon we'll be seeing the results of what just happened.

THE ELECTION

As people ask the simple question of how a country which supports Socialism at 36% can steal an election, they'll figure out just how INGENIOUS the Democrats were. First, they consolidated where they were strongest, which was in our cities, and then, as populations overall grew, people in those counties (which contained those cities) moved out and were replaced by 'city-types'. At that point, they controlled elections in those jurisdictions...and could cheat to the extent that they could get away with it, thereby impacting elections at the state level (and there was a lot of room to cheat, given turnout levels being relatively low). With their cheating, they then flipped states, which flipped the White House. To keep the Republicans in check, they created a credible threat of violence by rioting before the election (along with huge numbers of death threats against key people and their families)...this was more than the Republicans, or their judges, signed up for, so they 'complied'. Then it was just a matter of striking...and they struck in 2020.

RIP, USA - I very much enjoyed my rather long run in your country, and will always appreciate the great time I had. But now it's on to another country, one without labor camps and other re-educational efforts taking place.

-------------------------------------------------------------

KETO, LOW CARB, and DIABETES

If the last 2.4 million years was turned into 24 hours of human existence...

We have eaten meat for the last 24 hours

We have eaten wheat/grains for the last 6 minutes

We have eaten processed food for the last 4 seconds

I think its easy to see where the real problem is.

(Aug 7, 2019) We are now entering the MOST EPIC BATTLE in history regarding what is healthy food, and what is not healthy.

And so to start. Consider these three factoids from the recent past. This is all OFFICIAL RELEASES from CREDIBLE SOURCES (as in the US Government, or leading health organizations):

1) Eggs, including yolks, are no longer unhealthy to eat. The specific advice to minimize consumption of eggs is gone, completely. This is per the US Government and the bad-boy listing of eggs seems to have evaporated in 2005.

2) The REQUIREMENT to limit saturated fats (fats from red meat, including steak, butter, etc.) to no more than 10% of calories has been very quietly eliminated and instead is now only a recommendation. This was done as a FOOTNOTE in the 2015 US Government Dietary Guidelines (page 15 of 144 pages). In the footnote it is noted that if people really do limit saturated fats down to 10%, they will be replaced by something, which is likely worse. This type of footnote DOES NOT EXIST in prior versions of this document. The significance of this cannot be understated, it was not an accident that they made the change and expect it to soon be amplified and brought further forward.

3) The American Diabetes Association, early this year (2019), stated that 'some people' are known to have positive effects on their diabetic condition by minimizing or effectively eliminating Carbohydrates, from their diets. This is HUGE, as I will explain later.

Having listed the above from 'credible sources', on this site, Free Republic, there are many people (at least half a dozen, probably many more) who have had incredibly good results by going off carbs (as in greatly reducing or eliminating Insulin, and even getting off all diabetic drugs). These are America-loving people, many retired, and I suspect virtually no one with anything to gain by falsely claiming these results. Sure, we don't know the real names or histories of these people here, but unless someone can convince me they have a motivation to flat-out lie, I believe them, even more than I believe my own siblings in this area.

What makes this an 'epic battle' are the entrenched interests. You have the obvious ones, including Big Pharma (selling diabetes drugs to millions of people), Big Carb (think Frosted Flakes, for starters, but as someone explained here, go to the front of supermarket and then go to the back - everything in between is Big Carb), but also the much less obvious ones (such Big Food spending billions developing good-tasting carb-loaded fake hamburger patties). These people/orgs will NOT go down without a huge fight, obviously. There are millions of people with jobs at risk, and many, many, people with multi-million dollar lifestyles at risk. They will fight, and fight to the death (maybe, actually). Think cigarettes, and if you can remember, about 30 years ago, the execs were all seated next to each other, in front of a Congressional Committee and asked if cigarette smoking causes cancer. To a person, they said NO (almost certainly due to their legal advice). It was game over for them...they didn't have a chance either way.

Not mentioned above is what may end up being the Biggest Player of all - THE LEFT. These are the people who want to get us off meat (think AOC), because they're convinced that the only way to clean up the planet is to stop people from eating meat. But look again at my 'official' examples. Eggs are fine, eating red meat, fat included, is fine, and eliminating carbs, which RULES OUT going off meat, is not only good, but actually healthy. There literally is no room for compromise. The battle lines are drawn, and one side will prevail, at the expense of the other side.

So now you have the Order of Battle drawn out. One side wants to simply live out our lives as healthy and as long as possible, the other side wants to take it all away. Your local Senator my be a RINO, and you may well want to send a message, but ask yourself who is more likely to be on your side here, a RINO, or someone owned by AOC? I only say this because in 10 years Supermarkets will have one or the other, but not both. You will either have HEALTHY FOOD (red meat, etc.), or food that will kill you (Carbs, even if packaged as healthy). You decide which side you're on.

So now to history. Two things of note happened around 1961 (give or take a few years): (1) Dr. Ancel Keyes determined from a now largely discredited study that eating Saturated Fats made one both fat and sick, prone to heart disease and other ailments. (2) Dr. Roselyn Yalow (a friend of my mom's, by the way), along with Dr. Berson (her partner) developed a method to measure concentrations of hormones, particularly Insulin, in human blood - something she won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for, in 1977 (Insulin was well known by then and even being used to treat diabetes, but measuring it in human blood, along with what happened to the concentration response based on types of food eaten, was not possible, until then). This was so ground-breaking, that they had to come up with new units of measurements for her (these concentrations are that super-low). Dr. Yalow died in 2011, but the work she did would lead to the recent and now accelerating efforts of discrediting of Dr. Keys, who was simply an asshole, viciously resisting any peer criticism while he was alive.

Here is a historical write-up that I just came across today. Thankfully Keys is dead, but reversing what he ingrained into the medical community, now protected by the hard-left (animal rights types and now climate change types) is like turning an ocean-liner. It will be slow and we simply have to keep at it, until the truth prevails.

Dr. Keys, dissected

The major takeaway from the above is the following quote: "Unfortunately, when faced with potential reason to change our practice behavior, most doctors behave like herd animals in that we instinctively follow the recommendation of authorities in order to avoid slaughter by predatory lawyers."

Always remember the above - if you're asked why you should be believed in lieu of your brother's personal doctor - he has to ALWAYS worry about the next lawsuit, you don't. You can tell the truth and be safe, he can't.

So here we are. Throughout my life time, and I'm sure yours, we were told that Diabetes is a 'condition' that you 'manage' into old age, until it kills you, or makes you want to be dead. There is NO OTHER OPTION - if you want near-normal (i.e., 100) blood sugar, you need to eat what you're told (i.e., lots of 'good carbs', not much in fats), take your meds, and then Insulin. If you're lucky, heart disease or stroke will take you out before you go blind or the amputations begin. Again, there was simply NO OTHER OPTION, you were condemned to this outcome, you just had bad luck. And the 'bad luck', in roughly 100 years accelerated from 0.1% of Americans to 30% of Americans (soon). Just the breaks, I guess.

(Aug 7, 2019)

For those who say "It can't get any worse", here's a typical middle/upper middle class house in South Africa, found using Google Maps - the entire country is ALL the same. Houses in South Africa are the new ghettos (coming to a country near you):