Unspinning Official Stories 2015


JAN 1 2015 - World population will pass 7.5 billion this month!

  1 Jan 2015: World population, by just a day or three past mid-January, will reach SEVEN AND A HALF BILLION.   According to the UNC world population clock, it reached 7 billion in mid-April 2010, LESS than 5 years ago. So it is currently going up by somewhat more than a billion per decade, THE FASTEST RATE OF POPULATION INCREASE EVER, and has to reach 8 billion before 2020, extremely contrary to information embedded "scientists" have been feeding you through embedded media ever since 1992.

-Glen Roberts
(an always reliable corrector of unrealistic news)

NY Times supports "battle of ideas"
as long as it's between the same two stupid generic sides

  7 Jan 2015:  Today's NY Times, celebrating Republican recovery of the U.S. Congress, tempered their cheer-leading with insincere concern about the regressives' lack of perfect unity, BUT...   rather than balance that nonsense with a cynical assessment of the likelihood-at-all of right-wing coherence by any clear and honest critic, they reassured their supposedly worried audience with this foolishly solemn quote from Republican John Boehner: "The battle of ideas never ends, and frankly never should."
   Frankly? Only if an asterisk and footnote point to the new House Speaker's unspoken conditional clause (understood by cunning regressives): as long as IT (the battle of ideas) keeps going in circles between two generic SIDES (harmlessly to the rich and just like in sports) and the public keep helpfully thinking THEY think that, since everything is a matter of opinion, the mere NUMERICAL WEIGHT   of the NUMBERS voted onto the scoreboard by the always well-trained MAJORITY (which "is always right") is all that's needed, after all, to DEMOCRATICALLY determine which near identical GENERIC SIDE is safely right again.
    The myth of the virtue of democracy depends heavily on the myth of GENERIC SIDES (almost always just TWO SIDES), which, conveniently to the usually (to me and maybe to you) obviously WRONG side, cancels any logical (as opposed to flat mathematical) comparison between official sides and virtually X's out of existence any EXTRA (low-count and therefore no-account) side that correctly (though maybe only instinctively but, in any case, hopelessly) rejects the myth that everything is a matter of opinion and that the majority is always (or even often) right and rudely threatens the comfortably regular official game with a rudely argumentative battle of UNWELCOME ideas (not generic, you see). That some such EXTRA side may be the only side aiming to achieve anything like the ethically best and most civilized goals of an ideal civil state (not a generic concept, either) never has to be considered in the context of the myth of equilateral GENERIC SIDES.
    In his famous book, you know, Stephen Hawking, the current #1 court astronomer/astrologer, instructed all of us willing to be so instructed, that mere philosophy has been rendered obsolete by the science of mathematics (or any metaphysical nonsense officially passing for said science). So, in perfect keeping with the digital age we now live in and a cinch to be considered logical in any nation of book keepers (though it's really as metaphysical as astrology) the prevailing myth of generic sides cozily holds that all encounters between factions of any sort are best understood as competitions of numbers.
    Therefore, for instance, the embedded media, the chief sales agents of this numbers game, report all wars in terms of body counts, literally implying, at first, that the side which draws the biggest street crowds (no matter how openly dumb or secretly CIA-sponsored they are) is the right side, but that, later, the side that kills the most opponents becomes the right side (whether they do it or NATO does it for them), and that, ultimately, the side that wins a post-war election (with the greatest NUMBER of probably stupid votes) HAS TO BE the right side, even if they then degenerate into barbarism (as in Libya, for instance) or regress to pre-revolutionary poverty (as in Nicaragua).
    To accommodate this view in the Middle East, the SIDES have to be reduced to a handful of acronyms and demonized or expediently allied leaders, and you're not going to read in your GENERIC-SIDE-oriented media that almost all the SIDES in the Middle East are hopelessly religious WRONG sides and that the only likely RIGHT side is an almost never-reported, non-Obama-assisted group of coffee shop philosophers (numerically insignificant, though, realistically, the only significant group present), yearning for a secular government that finally intelligently strips all the region's religious factions (which range from primitive to insane) of any political power in the future.
    Looking from an amazingly unnecessary distance at Central America in the 1980's, office-bound U.S. and thus European media identified the sides in most of the wars there as static governments, "rebels," and the suffering masses "caught in the middle," except in Nicaragua, where, once they'd stupidly (that's objective) adopted Ronald Reagan's tear-blurred LOUDLY and (with their help) CONSTANTLY proclaimed view, the media slightly varied their normal view and counted the three sides as the Russian/Cuban backed government, the "freedom fighters," and the masses awaiting liberation.
    Only because there was no ocean in the way then and not much of a language barrier, so that a few Central American progressives (mainly musicians) could come north and talk to NGO-gathered Americans more easily, and because well-informed and UN-EMBEDDED alternative media people like me and even a few slightly informed movie makers could drive our own cars to the battle fields, a ve-e-ery few Americans learned (but then, under a daily barrage of embedded media spear-headed counter-simplicity, quickly forgot) that most of the governments and the Nicaraguan "freedom fighters" were U.S. puppet Nazis defending ugly capitalism and U.S. business interests, that most of the rebels were fighting NOT for empty religion (as in the Middle East now) but for social and economic justice for the masses, many of whom knew that, and that the already revolutionary Nicaraguan government, with the hands-on constructive help of peaceful crop pickers, teachers, school builders, and even coffee-shop philosophers, etc. from all over the world, were, in spite of Ronald Reagan and the embedded media, slowly moving the masses at least hopefully toward a Cuban level of civilization. Such emphatically NON-GENERIC details were never VERY visible on most of the embedded pages or screens Americans saw (including even the slightly-informed movies) where it was usually rationalized that the stubbornly retained myth of GENERIC SIDES (with no disturbing philosophical, social, economic details thrown in) was (more safely) objective."

    Objective,in America, by the way, tended to mean then and still tends to mean regular.

    The same embedded media, covering U.S. elections, which is where I started back up at the top of this post, having once and for all defined good national management as primarily a matter of holding and manipulating elections (competitions of numbers),  right after helpfully designating the acceptable candidates or positions on acceptably laundered issues (usually years in advance),  always start their election shows with comparisons of NUMBERS of dollars in each SIDE's "war-chest" - always TWO SIDES (not counting the INside that provides the dollars). Then, day after day, week after week, month after month, come paragraph after paragraph of surveys and surveys and surveys - all nothing but COUNTS of the NUMBERS, comparing them to the numbers yesterday and today and predicted for tomorrow and on voting day. I shouldn't call the surveys NOTHING but counts, since their amazingly effective propaganda purpose is to tell always eagerly deceived Americans who and what their "friends" "like" - just like on Twitter and Facebook.
    Anyway, surveys alone usually take up six or seven paragraphs in a typical news story about the election "battles" of GENERIC SIDES, enough to exhaust any unusually thoughtful reader still hoping for a word or two about real issues. But they go on to count the number and cost of commercials aired, the number of minorities who will lean this way, the number of women who will lean that way, how the numbers will slightly change when the circus moves to another state, the number of people who actually MET the candidate's train or plane today, the number of voters who will vote by mail, the number who won't vote if it rains, etc. etc. etc. always numbers, though NEVER even any SMALL number of words about un-pre-selected issues or sides. What do you want? That's at least 15 or 20 paragraphs in a typical election story already.
    A nice wholesome story about a democratic contest of just TWO generic sides would be spoiled (for readers as well as for media)(sorry, I have to say that) by an explanation that one of the sides, the Republicans are still primitive religionists, greedy and heartless capitalists, unconscious anti-environmentalists, and hateful and blood-thirsty war mongers, while the barely different other side, the democrats, are timid "liberals," with slightly head-nodding open minds, tearfully conscious that some poor people deserve charity, self consciously in favor of politically correct abortions and of assisted suicide after an approved AMOUNT of suffering, sympathetic to all exiles and refugees and (tentatively) chickens, and (to show some dutiful respect for some "scientists") ready to pay some memorized attention to "climate change" (though NOT to openly oppose business-side friendly growth or growth-produced ecological collapse), and piously PRO-DEMOCRACY to the hilt.

    (1) That the lumpen majority WILLINGLY buy the idiot myth of generic sides; (2) that the same majority is too often, too easily, manipulated into thinking that THEY think what the embedded media owned by the rich constantly (constantly means a large NUMBER of times - especially every day) tell them they think; and (3) that the majority thus ACCUMULATED is so huge and frighteningly self-righteous that MOST more-rational minority factions USUALLY end up chickening out, setting their own ideals aside, and surrendering to the majority ODDS - ensures (in fact, INsures) that the winning SIDE (in America, for instance) will go on being first the Republicans, then the Democrats, then the Republicans again, and NEVER any intelligent faction that actually knows what needs to be done or honestly wants to do it.
    The most important element left out of the Times story (posted January 7 and now finally done on January 13) is that the few Americans with functioning brains who thought they had finally done something good just a few years ago by so plainly exposing at least the Republicans, as barbarians so ugly that they must never be allowed back into government, are being betrayed, by the media and by all their neighbors who've LET the media lead them back into the regular TWO SIDE LINE.

-Glen Roberts
(an always cynical critic of the media, the government, the rich AND (uh-oh) the people)

As the UNC world population clock ticks past 7,500,000,000,
the vital truth barely visible in these (wow!) scientific numbers
is made far clearer  
here, HERE , here, and here in ENGLISH!

  18 Jan 2015:AND, OH YEAH! HERE, TOO, though this article is more about the vivid difference between important truths articulated in image-plump and perfect English and those same truths merely symbolized in flat arithmetic, WHICH the public unfortunately think they respect more (though without a glimmer of understanding) than they respect words.
   At about 18 to 4 p.m. PST yesterday (Jan 17) the University of North Carolina's world population clock ticked past 7,500,000,000 - seven and a half billion.  I think that's an undercount.
   I don't disrespect UNC's population counting robot. I suspect the U.S. Census Bureau's robot is politically influenced. But I assume that most scientists think they know what they're doing, and do it as honestly as they can with their sterile arithmetic. But, honestly, too, the world population isn't recounted every second. In fact, nobody has ever counted the world population; and, while UNC's robot is probably as respectable as a robot can be, as my daughter quickly pointed out to me, the poor thing "never leaves the lab" - can't even look out the window.
   That's in dramatic contrast to the view of the world's still top population expert, Paul Ehrlich, who, on the first page of "The Population Bomb" (1968), acknowledged that, while he'd thought he understood overpopulation mathematically for a long time, he'd never really understood it until he visited Delhi, India, in the mid-60's, and was briefly immobilized by a frighteningly huge Indian crowd.

   No counting robot's view has yet matched (or can match) or has stayed as consistently on-the-mark as my view when I was 10, (in, say, 1946), when, looking out all the philosophical windows I could fashion for myself, I already fully realized overpopulation as a deadly threat to all the blank spots on the map I loved to find and dream of. Nor, in fact, has any regularly reported scientific view ever even matched the casual view of my 12-year-old sister who taunted me in those days that those to-me magical blank spots were just "vacant lots."
   And since then, my early view, having accompanied my feet out the doors and over the horizons that stopped the lab-bound computers and been profoundly (not just mathematically but philosophically) verified by a lot of 3D visual and thoughtful experiences - like staring in horror at the obviously exploding bands of high-rise apartment buildings surrounding and burying every old city in Spain, and like walking through numerous Latin American shanty towns and even living in a couple, where I doubted a census taker would dare to park his car. In fact, cab-drivers, bartenders, tourist guides, street-corner chatter boxes, etc., in a bunch of obviously (to the eye and the mind) overgrown Latin American cities have told me I could be sure their home towns were far more populous than it said in my shiny brochures because, "they don't count population very well around here." And I believed that.
   I post a number from UNC's population clock every morning, because I think it's closer to true than other such clocks (frankly, because it's higher), but it isn't an up-to-the second nose-count; it's a number produced by a computer model - a robot that adds 3-4 digits every second, while v-e-e-ery slowly altering the pace based NOT on any real knowable change but on a long-ago programmed mathematical trick called an algo-rithm, which I didn't need to understand this morning, for instance, since I had already figured out today's figure right after I posted yesterday's figure and had already posted it at about 0625, five minutes before I watched my guess tick by right on the nose at 0630.
   My guesses are sometimes a digit or so high and sometimes a digit or so low (so I politely change them to match UNC's number), but they've usually been right on and they've been averaging just about perfect for a long, long time. So, though the UNC robot's slight, up-and-down veddy high-tech (wow!) scientific inconsistency can't accurately reflect any knowable reality, since its average consistency makes (not perfect but some) sense to me, as long as its total keeps going up something like as alarmingly as I think it should, I'll accept it.
   And why should MY acceptance matter? Probably due to a combination of genes and circumstance, I'd say. But, in any case, I knew BEFORE I'd decided which of all the population clocks to cite each morning that (however awed the public might be by a count based on - WOW - science), just the wide variation between the counts proves that none of them are correct and that their correctness or even near correctness is no more likely, anyway, than it is that anyone has ever counted world population. Nobody ever has. Then I quickly figured out (smart me) that the UNC clock (on reliable average) goes up every 24 hours by the number of yesterday's increase +11 - an extremely unlikely rithm but (even though it's ignored by officialdom and mediadom) as ominous as it needs to be for my purposes, because there are too many people who wouldn't pay any attention to well enough articulated and perfectly clear logic WITHOUT numbers.
   But I also already knew (but you didn't, so pay attention NOW) that all the merely logical calculations I started making, calculation after calculation, in every way I could think of to calculate (decades before I owned a pocket calculator), first, as an open-eyed kid with a very private pencil, and then, just as futilely but more energetically as a teenager with my first typewriter (in 1950) in WORDS AND SENTENCES, not just the few numbers I had, that PROVED CONCLUSIVELY to me that the world's eco-system (a word I didn't know then but understood just the same) would be visibly collapsing by the year 2000 - which (HEY!) it IS, must have been scientific enough.
   Because I was right.
   EXACT numbers don't matter when the disaster in your face is too broadly general and blunt for prissy little numbers to describe. What do you care if Monty Python's famous weight is exactly 2000 pounds if you're awake enough to see it falling on you?

   Yes, I said that EXACT numbers don't matter to the understanding of a concept that needs to be understood without waiting for science to get it. They're worth mentioning when you hand out 10 bowls of rice and there are 1000 people waiting for a bowl of rice. They're worth remembering when you build highways for 6 million Californians and then there are almost immediately 40 million Californians using them. They're worth shouting when politicians propose billion dollar energy projects that will be complete 20 years from now when their added output has already been swamped AGAIN by MORE population growth. But if you're a smart kid, even if you've been deprived of algebra, just looking out the school bus window at vacant lots filling with houses, distant hillsides in what was country-side yesterday being covered with new suburbs, the edges of town being never-endingly bulldozed and cluttered with more and more shopping malls, you shouldn't need a smart phone, any more than I did, to know something is wrong.
   In fact (two very good words that I certainly know how to use), in spite of Stephen Hawking's pseudo scientific, actually metaphysical, and in any case hopelessly wrong pronouncement that arithmetic has made philosophy obsolete, you don't need to COUNT a crowd to know it's a crowd; you don't need to even add or subtract, or work out percentages, or employ quantum physics, to SEE (if you have anything like 20/20 brain vision) that the obviously already far, far (dangerously-far), FAR-too-big human crowd now existing (whatever its actual number) is already squashing the natural world (and all the humans IN the world) that it's too-hugely squatting on.
   Just as a NATO bomb is too blunt a tool, number counting is too finely pointed a tool with which to address the really important issues in our faces. Without even a calculator in his pocket, after all, Columbus knew he was sailing west to put the 250-million or 350-million-strong (who cares; it was too damned tight) old-world crowd behind him. And nobody should need any fancy mathematics or - WOW - scientific OK to SEE - all anyone should need is good philosophical sense, i.e. (20/20 brain vision), to SEE - that, when the fish-eaters outnumber the fish, rather than keep adding fish or inventing plastic fish or tightening the world's belt, it would be smarter, more effective and efficient, cheaper, and less endlessly and hopelessly circular to reduce the number of fish-eaters and KEEP reducing the number of fish-eaters until there are plenty of fish to go around again.
   In fact, you don't have to be even any more mathematically sophisticated than the average newspaper or TV-news editor to SEE that there are too many fish-eaters, too many car-drivers, too many energy users, too MANY Jihadists, too many incoherent bloggers, too many dumb politicians with too many too greedy developer-friends, and even too many - WOW - scientists too politically correctly timid to pronounce the words TOO MANY PEOPLE.    Even if that looks like too many words already, it's not enough, and it's not finished, but it's time for breakfast again. Go back to the top and click the links in the headline for more.

-Glen Roberts

Fidel may be fading and talking to a priest,
but he's still Cuba's best foreign policy guide

  28 Jan 2015: Fidel's talk yesterday with a famed Brazilian friar may have been as close to talking to a priest as Fidel is likely to come,though Granma didn't report it that way, and it may or may not mean what you or I might think.
   Though he's been a government religious mentor for Brazil and goes more by Frei Betto than by his name, Carlos Christo once wrote a book about Fidel and Religion (in which one critic says he showed more awe of Fidel than of his god), he's ostensibly in Cuba for other reasons, and the conversation was part of a flurry of activity reported in Granma to prove that Fidel ya vive.
   And, while I'm guessing he's had a recent stroke and the flurry of reporting may signal the dawn before darkness, Fidel's e-mail to Havana U. students Tuesday, while OKing peace talks, very alertly declared that he still doesn't trust the U.S., and, while one right-wing U.S. reporter stupidly called it "weird," the former president's clear reaffirmation of the revolution in that e-note should be being firmly echoed by Raul every day these days.*

(*And it was echoed by Raul, firmly and at length, in a speech to CELAC also on Jan 28, in which he declared that the U.S. is wrong to think Cuba will move "a milimeter" from it's revolutionary path and also pointing out that CELAC members add up to one of the world's largest economies and, together, are capable of complete self sufficiency.)

   Reading the Times and its clones recently, you may think you understand that Barack Obama's much delayed approach to Cuba means that Cuba is coming out from behind ITS wall and surrendering to U.S. calls for "reform." But the media you get that from do NOT know what they're talking about. Believe me, after 50 years of HIDING Cuban reality from you and themselves, they're still only slightly visiting Havana and still relying on "exiles" and long compromised puppet dissidents for their supposedly "in depth" analyses. And all you're getting is their own same shallow baloney that they've been repeating for years, in the context of which, the important thing is bound to seem to be THEIR hope for (U.S. designed) Cuban "reform."
   Don't believe that. The wall was built by Washington; Cuba has always been ready and willing to "normalize relations" IF Washington would take down its wall and reform its ugly stance toward Cuba; and that has NOT evidently changed. And the truly important HOPE, in the minds of all intelligent Cuba watchers, is that Cuba will stay its very progressive course, through its current, already a bit too prolonged socialist phase, toward communism. The Cuban Constitution insists on that and absolutely prohibits any return to capitalism EVER. Well over 90% of eligible Cuban voters locked that guarantee into their Constitution in 2002.
   Something different has been happening in Cuba recently, though, and though my travels all over Cuba and my thousands of conversations with Cubans, backed by years of very wide and close up experience all over Latin America, mega-exceeds the relevant background of the Times, I haven't been there for seven years, now, not since 2007, and I am worried (just worried, not necessarily alarmed) by what Raul and a lot of newer younger-generation Cuban leaders have been doing recently.
   This probably has nothing to do with stupidly planned and calibrated U.S. intrusion. I think that even the CIA has found Cuba too tough a nut to crack. Furthermore, Cuba leadership-level involvement with new Latin American trading blocs, ALBA and CELAC and also with BRICS, should be strengthening revolutionary resolve rather than weakening it. But a new foreign investment law recently passed in Cuba and the use of economic language by Raul in reference to that law and other economic adjustments DOES sound too much like Wall Street babble. And THAT plus my growing impatience with Cuban progress toward a one-money system and a purer communism DOES worry me.
   I'm paying almost NO attention to U.S. media or presidential blather, and certainly none to the whining of dissidents like Yaoni Sanchez (pandered to by Obama and the Times), and neither should you. But one giant like Fidel is about all one can expect history to allow to a single country, and I trust almost nobody but myself as an outside analyst, so I'm still putting off that critique of Cuba I've been promising until I can get back there for an 8th visit, entailing at least a two-month survey of the island, something my health (I'm 78 and counting) is still preventing.
-Glen Roberts, 30 Jan 2015

Obama struggles to turn his image clock back to 2008,
but it's just the "HOPE-for-change" game all over again

  9 Feb 2015: After 6 years of vainly hoping for change, Barack Obama's hopelessly faithful supporters are being conned again with more mere hope that their skin-deep black president, will now, at last, during his last two years, finally fulfill 2008's false promises, though there's STILL no real change in sight.
   It's been over a month and a half since The NY Times posted the Dec 17 Obama speech video they're still flagging as the latest surprise news of a "change" in the ugly U.S. Cuba policy, and, except for a few rule amendments in favor of Miami gusanos, a prisoner exchange is still all that's happened.
   And, while there's been some other flashy stuff in the news about getting tough on "climate change;" (oratorically) scorning war as Washington's main foreign policy; and closing Guantanamo;- actually, Obama's environmental huff and puff is still almost as stupidly off-target as Al Gore's; he's still hopelessly stuck in the Middle Eastern war-mud that he's spent the last six years stirring up and he's alarming Europe by beating new war-drums at Russia over Ukraine; and all he's done about Guantanamo (which will be very difficult to close) is direct John Kerry to think about it; and while he and his gang, including the New York Times, are still talking, probably daily, to their puppet Cuban dissidents, the only meeting he's had with the Cuban president is still in a chance photo of the two men standing next to each other at Nelson Mandela's funeral a YEAR and a month and a half ago in 2013.
   Meanwhile, the only half-ass (not at all clear) suggestion of a planned meeting is Obama's condescending invitation to Raul to come (for the first time) to a meeting of the defunct OAS in April, presumptuously called by Obama (just as if, and it may be true, he didn't know that ALBA and CELAC have replaced the OAS south of the Rio Grande), and which, if they're as smart as I keep hoping they are, none of the progressive Latin American leaders (including Raul) should deign to attend.

   Obama hasn't changed, and he's not apparently about to. If you're one of his stubbornly naive supporters, shouldn't it occur to you (once I've put it into occurrence-range by pointing it out) that, since the most obvious CHANGE in presidential behavior in the last half century has been the seizure by one president after another of the right to declare war without Congressional approval, it's absurd to pretend that the supposed Mr. CHANGE-man, Obama, can't declare PEACE (without foot-dragging Congressional approval) - even with a country with which the U.S. hasn't been at war (except carefully by proxy) since the days of Teddy Roosevelt?
   It's NOT true that he can't end the embargo in a minute. For sure, the embargo only continued to exist through 1996 because the U.S. president periodically signed a lie authorizing its continuance "in the national interest" (you're familiar with and know what to think of that b.s. - right?) and any time he refrained from signing, it was over. And though you're being told that that's changed, it hasn't. While some certifiably stupid U.S. Congressmen and their dupes (which include too many pseudo scholars, maybe the president, according-to-itself the Times, and even some Cuban officials) believe that passage of the Helms-Burton Act of 1996, (a pitifully inept bundle of lies) put the embargo into Congress's hands, they're wrong. The 1996 act recently explained fairly clearly by Cuban diplomat Josefina Vidal and translated into English for you in the current edition of Granma, besides being hopelessly flawed all by itself, is as helplessly bound as a train caboose by its own internal wording to the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (vol. 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations, ch. V, part 515) of 1962, so that if Obama's secretary types up a single statement completely voiding that earlier act on overwhelmingly sound legal grounds (its clear violation of the Ninth Amendment and of all existential human rights protected by the Ninth Amendment from Congress AND its failure ever to have sensibly come under the "Trading With The Enemy Act," anyway) and using his authority under Helms/Burton to "license" exceptions to the 1996 act on top of that - AND HE THEN signs that new document and issues IT as an executive order to all relevant State Department divisions, the Cuban Assets Control act will fall and the Helms-Burton Act will fall with it - just like that. Any honest lawyer, if there are any, will have to agree with me.
   The reason Obama is stuck in place is that he's afraid to move. He's gotten himself into an inert behavioral rut - a curious blend of tap dancing and bombing - and he's afraid an overt move toward sanity in the Middle East would be like putting his head under Vladimir Putin's boot - and he's afraid that talking to Raul would risk the possibility that Raul might share his brother's ability to easily (and embarrassingly) dominate stupid U.S. presidents.
   Obama's main concern is his own image - his own historical place. He has nightmares about being spotlighted as the first typically presidentially ridiculous black president. But to BE (during his last two years in office - already quickly ticking by) what he at first pretended to be and his blind supporters continue pretending he is, he'd have to DO what he should have done in 2009 and 2010: join the U.N. as a member with ears and not just a mouth, and join the Latin American movement started by Hugo Chavez to change the goal of government from business promotion to the centuries-overdue achievement of civilization (including social and economic equality for everyone). He fears that it would demean him to do anything like that, and he won't do it.
   And though there IS this OTHER honor still awaiting a leader with the brains and guts for it, Obama will NOT be the first president to utter the simple phrases, TOO MANY PEOPLE, TOO MUCH TOXIC HUMAN HABITAT, TOO MUCH PROFITABLE BUT USELESS AND TOXIC EXCESS TECHNOLOGY, TOO MUCH GROWTH, ECO-COLLAPSE DIRECTLY DUE TO TOO MUCH GROWTH PROBABLY TOO FAR GONE TO RESOLVE ALREADY SO WE DAMN WELL BETTER GET STARTED STOPPING GROWTH AND STARTING REDUCTION (HOLY MOLY!), TOO MANY RICH AND GROWTH DEPENDENT CAPITALIST INSIDERS IN HIGH OFFICES, TOO MANY UNQUALIFIED VOTERS TOO WELL BRAINWASHED BY THE MEDIA OWNED BY THE RICH INSIDERS TO VOTE IN THEIR OWN INTERESTS, TOO MUCH CAPITALIST MEDIA INFLUENCE, TOO MUCH RELIGIOUS INFLUENCE, TOO MANY DIFFERENT LANGUAGES, ETC., ETC, and for ETC., ETC., ETC., review this entire website.
-Glen Roberts, -10 Feb

NY Times redundant claims that Cuba is "Opening Up"
just show how little US media and Obama know about Cuba

  25 Feb 2015: U.S. media lies about Cuba, like the spurt of "news" hyping President Obama's feeble new outreach to the island, are never new or even original.   Return to front page for a moment and see also the column right intro to another article about every American's legal right (unknown by US media also) to travel to Cuba as his own reporter.
   So it's only typical that Tuesday's (Feb 24)NY Times, trying to convince you that "the American reconciliation with the country is ...increas(ing) the pace of private development" pretends Cubans just now started renting rooms and running tiny restaurants, barber shops, beauty salons, front porch ice cream counters and other small home businesses for tourists and their neighbors, when, in fact, I rented rooms in homes, ate in tiny living room restaurants, and talked to Cubans at the next table, who told me it was Fidel's idea, 15 years ago.
   Even before that, the 1997 Lonely Planet Cuba Tourist Guide listed such places in every Cuban city and the author of that still-best-book-of-all about Cuba, David Stanley, explained that this all started in 1992, with a law allowing Cubans to rent rooms in their homes to tourists, and 1995, when all the small home businesses were legalized, as part of a strategy to confront the depression that followed the fall of the Eastern bloc at the end of the 80's.
   SO, very far from being a post-Fidel "reform," as U.S. media have been recently claiming, Cubans I talked to in 2000 thought, since it was Fidel's idea, that it was a new feature of communism. Cubans, I learned long ago, aren't always much smarter than American news editors and willingly embedded reporters.
   But, except for literally hysterical dissidents, Cubans, living all the time (after all) in the most civilized country I have ever seen and out of touch with NY Times propaganda, do NOT imagine, as Randal Archibold (the author of the Feb 24 Times fantasy I'm reacting to) apparently does, that Cuba shares the pervasive "shanty town" ambience found "all over Latin America." That's nonsense. Cuba has a few shanties, but they are NOT systemic and "few" is the operant word.
   Archibold, not surprisingly (though appallingly - in WHAT? - a few days in Havana? - with a lot of help from some eagerly embraced dissident?) found ONE of the SAME 3 tiny shanty clusters in Marianao, San Miguel Padron, and beside the Rio Almendares, that I learned were probably the only such places in the city in 2002. When I walked every single block of Havana inside the Via Blanca periferico in 2004, I couldn't find any sign of other, apparently erased clusters - NOT "shanty towns" - just clusters (which Mark Cramer in his 2000 book "Havana at your Door," called "nooks") that I'd been told existed in Regla and Cerro.
   And when I explored the San Miguel Padron shanty cluster - not a "town" but a very small cluster - of about 25 huts, in 2001, talking to most of the residents, I easily learned (what Archibold could just as easily have learned IF he could speak Spanish and really wanted to know) that none of them needed to be there - that most had left good houses but scanty job prospects elsewhere to found their illegal big city shanty cluster during the depression of the early 90's, and when the relatively brief depression ended, they'd resisted government pressure to return to their good homes and now available jobs they don't want - to hustle tourists in the big city instead. And their tiny enclave has persisted because the government doesn't want to encourage movement to Havana by providing housing to every self-invented refugee who comes along.
   There's an under-construction book on this website, "Cuban Notebooks" -very thorough, that you should read instead of the Times or your local right-wing Times-clone paper - a very honest book, from which you can learn that, among other things, there ARE a few shanties in Cuba, though most of what look like shanties are left over shacks now being used as storage out-houses - especially along river banks, like the bank of the Rio Almendares in Havana and Rios Yumuri and San Juan in Matanzas, where old shanties have become the sheds where fishermen and shipwrights store their gear.
   But most of Cuba, housing included, will look, to your honest American eye, if you have one (Americans have a disgusting tendency to see what they're told they see), a lot like what you're used to, minus street people and enormous ghettos like East Los Angeles.
   The really appalling thing about typical embedded American reporters (NY Times-style for sure), is that, hypnotized by awareness that they are in a demonized country, they'll LET gusano jinoteros lead them by their stupid noses past miles and miles and thousands and thousands of obviously solid homes to ONE TINY group of sordid shacks and then dutifully (to their sold-out editors) actually BELIEVE the gusano jinoteros' lies that THIS is how Cubans live!
   And it will be equally appalling if YOU, dear reader, IF Obama ever gets around to "letting" you visit Cuba (in fact, you can go there any time you want to, though I wish you wouldn't if you don't speak Spanish and haven't traveled a lot at least in Mexico), IF YOU, I started to say, go there and duplicate those stupid embedded reporters' stunt. Don't do it. If You room in Vedado, for instance, use your head and, before you let a jinotero who speaks English lead you to some watch-pocket of what looks like poverty, walk, instead, all over Vedado, which is HUGE - not an enclave at all - enormous - the real Cuba - knock on doors, find out that all the people who live there ARE Cubans for sure, find out that THEY never heard of El Fanguito - couldn't find it on a bet, and put 2 and 2000 together for yourself.
-Glen Roberts (who, unlike the editor of the Times has been there) -27 Feb 2015

Cuba rightly rebukes Obama's threat to Venezuela,
warning him that Venezuela is not alone

  11 Mar 2015: Cuba's statement yesterday rebuking Barack Obama's ugly "executive order" declaring Venezuela "a threat to US national security" is nearly the kind of bold statement all of Latin America should have jointly issued long ago regarding US policy against Cuba, Venezuela and all progressive movements in Latin America.
  Almost, I said.   Paragraph 2 of Cuba's statement:

   How does Venezuela threaten the United States from thousands of kilometers away, without strategic weapons and without employing resources nor officials to plot against U.S constitutional order? The statement is unbelievable, and lays bare the intentions of those who have come up with it.

….should be toughened up as follows to make it less equivocal.

   Venezuela is NOT threatening the United Sates. Thousands of kilometers away and without weapons comparable to those of the U.S.,   Venezuela is employing neither resources nor officials to plot against U.S. constitutional order as the U.S. frequently has done against other nations, including Venezuela and Cuba, in the past. So the U.S. "executive order" is a lie, which lays bare the intentions of those who have come up with it.

   And Cuba's concluding statement:

   Just as Cuba was never alone, Venezuela will not be either.

   …though it is, if you can read, excellent (almost what I didn't expect but hoped for), is still too diplomatically subtle for a US president who above all needs rude clarity. If it were my concluding statement to write, it would say:

   Barack Obama, who, since his election, has become more a self-appointed war chief of the rogue acronym NATO than the responsible elected president of the American people, rather than presenting HIMSELF as a threat to Venezuela's national security, before starting his disastrous Libyan strategy up again in Latin America, should back off and think, because, just as Cuba has never been alone, Venezuela will not be either.

   In fact, I think it would be excellent if CELAC as a 33-country whole (this is now just me saying this, not CELAC yet) would tell Obama, plainly and rudely, that an attack on Venezuela or any other CELAC member state will be regarded as an attack on all of Latin America.
   All of Latin America should tell Obama just that, because Obama is a complete ass who badly needs to be told off. I originally thought he was just not nearly as smart as you'd expect a highly educated black man to be (maybe reverse racism on my part). I very quickly decided, though, that he is just as dumb as any other white Democratic OR Republican president who has misled the US in my lifetime. I now think he's among the very dumbest presidents in US or world history.
   Barack Obama grew up in white schools and neighborhoods and learned to tap dance well enough to dance himself into the White House where, his head being empty of any understanding of foreign affairs, he filled it out of the same ol' White House filing cabinet, and has since proven that the combination of his ugly dancing style and long standing presidential ignorance about the real world is NOT - is in fact just about the opposite of what a world in deep political, economic, philosophical, and ecological trouble needs.

-Glen Roberts


While admitting Middle Eastern war won't work
Al Jazeera keeps touting rebels' unspeakable goals

  14 Mar 2015: Al Jazeera yesterday reported the Syrian war as hopeless yet continued to serve as a pulpit for the NATO and Arab preferred rebels there, whom they quoted as being prepared to fight to the death or "to the end." But to WHAT END other than death, the now virtually American online newspaper continued NOT reporting.
   So, with anything Washington, the annointed rebels and Al Jazeera would consider "victory" no longer even posssible, the most substantive point the quoted rebels could make was, as always, that "the rebels" will NOT talk about anything substantive until Bashar Assad is gone.
   Since the Syrian fray began, the only clear "ends" ever mentioned by any "spokespeople" cited by western media have been just the overthrow of Assad and (less overtly but always there) the installment of a Muslim state. Empty words like democracy - empty words like democracy, I said - have been interjected by western media. But, as far as I know, if there were EVER any tiny rebel faction with an actually intelligent END in mind (NOT imported democracy, please) they've never been allowed a voice by western media and, if they existed, have therefore become and probably always were ineffectual and, for all practical purposes, irrelevant.
   A U.S./Arab approved Syrian rebel spokesperson, lobbying for arms from Arab and western "friends" was once quoted by the Huffington Post that, "all the Free Syrian Army (need is) weapons to bring down the regime."
   Bull! In fact, they also need a good reason. To bring down the "regime"? That's all? Come on! What kind of "regime" would THEY be? Changing a routinely brutal Middle Eastern secular government to a certainly more brutal Middle Eastern religious government wasn't and still ISN'T a good reason for a war, and if that's their only agenda, which it appears to be, in fact, all the "Free" Syrian Army really need is to disband and disappear.
   The overthrow of a "regime" that was relatively peaceful and no more repressive than many other US-friendly "regimes" in the world today was NEVER a good reason for a devastating, CIA instigated military revolt or for international military aid being given to Islamic fundamentalists. And civilized Syrians (if there are any) certainly don't need a transition now into a Libyan style post war chaos presided over back and forth by competing Islamic and military maniacs.
   NATO (itself a worse problem than Bashar Assad), western powers, Arab sheik gangs, and western media are all on the wrong screen. Criticism by the US Congress of Barack Obama for not being even MORE insanely supportive of Islamic barbarians is upside down and backward.
   Obama and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton before Kerry (and after Obama) have already meddled too much in things they don't understand. For his Bush-like foreign policy, Obama should have been impeached long ago. All he has achieved in Libya and Syria is additional bomb rubble and economic and humanitarian disaster and an impasse that probably can't be resolved NOW except by annihilating or at least completely disarming and disempowering all the full-fledged and half-ass Jihadists in the region, including in Syria.
   The Middle-East. like the world, needs an END to religious government or even religious political influence and an intelligent transition through enlightened socialism to civilized communism. And EVERYBODY involved there, including the US, needs to be disarmed.
   Actually, if there ARE any secular reformists in Syria, now that their role, if they ever had any, in the ongoing opposition movement has been rendered nil by their otherwise entirely Jihadist pseudo allies, their best move now (maybe not what they once wanted but the best possible alternative NOW) would be to offer to join forces with and ENDORSE the Assad government, if that government will immediately, starting with the existing fortress remainder of Syria, strip all religious blocs of whatever social, economic and political power they have and pledge to restore Syria as a completely secular and civilized country with a stated goal of transforming its economic structure to socialism.

-Glen Roberts

It's now (manditorially) p.c. to talk about "Climate Change"
but it's still taboo to talk about overpopulation

  5 Apr 2015: "Climate change"?   I don't know.
   Hordes of smart alecs have been smugly advising the rest of us to man up (like them) and "accept" climate change as "science." But what they clearly mean is politically correct "science."
   Real or not in any sense resembling its vague description, "climate change" is only the latest in a series of language-abusive two-word buzz slogans ("sustainable growth," "sustainable development," "global warming"), all remarkably sans syllogistic analysis or real-world context but fortified by vague attribution to usually anonymous but apparently embedded "scientists" (a breed as over-sung recently as firemen) who have been wrong too many times already.
   I'm not "DENYING" anything, foolishly, by the way. But I am getting impatient with reporters and the "scientists" they cite constantly failing to even think of providing just a clear CLAIM that there is, in fact, a comprehensive network of thermometers and weather observation stations all over the world that ARE all being kept track of by an IDENTIFIABLE group of objective, qualified "scientific" bookkeepers, who can show us all that data. Belief, without evidence, is religious FAITH. And I'm not religious.
   But what's most irritating is that, while the probably social-media inspired letter writers, columnists, and speach-makers, and also the embedded media who promote them near-contemptuously castigate the rest of us for NOT being courageous enough to join their chorus, THEY themselves, almost perfectly consistently (and, of course, ironically) ALWAYS shun any sign of the non-p.c. guts it would take to accept or even mention the overGROWTH of human population, habitat, business, and technology more certainly causing a general eco-collapse, which they never mention, either.
   Maybe their letters, columns and speeches are being expediently edited. But what's far more certain is that editors who KNOW what their masters CAN'T "accept," while willing to embrace, print and report a half-smart, half-brave half-grasp of half-science by harmless half-progressives, won't print or report any parallel flood of letters, columns and speeches criticizing GROWTH, the most critical contributing source of capitalist profit flow and the direct cause of comprehensive ecological destruction.
   On the contrary, while continuing to surrender space to harmless half-progressives reciting p.c. buzz slogans that safely never get to the important points, the media will continue, daily, hourly, constantly, celebrating, encouraging, romanticizing, and dishonestly endorsing the GROWTH of development, industry, useless technology and entrepreneurial nonsense that supports their masters' habits and stock market dividends.
   And, simultaneously, they will continue their stubbornly rigid, never-relaxing refusal to EVER mention or allow anyone else (on their air or paper) to mention human overpopulation as the main cause of all environmental decay and disaster, because the end of human population growth and (IMPOSSIBLY UNSPEAKABLE) the absolutely necessary reduction of human population to a realistic level would also necessitate the end of growth-dependent capitalism and thus the end of their and their masters' centuries-old criminally-unfair profit bonanza.

-Glen Roberts

Importance of barely reported OAS meeting is greatly exaggerated

  13 Apr 2015: The so-called "summit meeting" of the should-be-defunct OAS, a quick news blip that started and ended Saturday in Panama, produced nothing but over-cautious or under-cooked blather. Whether it will subsequently be in any way productive remains to be seen. Certainly, it would have been far more productive for most of the attendees to have refused to come.
   Exactly as I predicted in all the pre-meeting southbound e-mails I had the energy to send, urging ALBA and CELAC members NOT to attend, western media were able to present the story as a not-very-significant but also not-very-damaging scrapbook clip-out for Barack Obama supporters and to protect their official story. The American and European audience, including their safelystill-stupid legislative bodies, learned absolutely nothing new that they should have learned.
   The best result was that the embarrassingly trivial story got less coverage even than the story of Hillary Clinton's disgusting presidential candidacy.
   But the worst result was that the really important story of the emergence of a new western world order - the fast budding rise of the ALBA and CELAC trading blocs and, therefore, the assured self-sufficiency of a united world south of the Rio Grande, cutting Washington out, ending U.S. control and dominance of the hemisphere, indeed (I hope) making this the LAST meeting of the OAS, was effectively hidden behind all the silly diplomacy.
   You had to know on your own (you got no journalistic help) that Obama's allusion to Latin Americans who'd finally be taught to read by U.S. good guys, thanks (I guess) to his smirky little southward smile that day, was an unintended proof of his own typical presidential ignorance of the much more universal level of education in Cuba than in the U.S. and of the already ongoing and spectacularly successful Cuban project, "Yo Si Puedo," which, for the last several years has been mega-multiplying the numbers of readers all over Latin America.
   And Obama's still hopelessly hopeful social-media based fans, thanks to the (in my opinion) unfortunate determination of conference delegates (who did not mean it) to be polite to Obama, DID NOT LEARN (and probably neither did Obama) that he is NOT the "leader of the free world" anymore, if he ever was, and, most emphatically, that neither he nor any other U.S. president will ever again be the "leader" of the now much more truly free Latin-American world.

-Glen Roberts

Quit stalling Obama! The time for change is NOW!

  25 Jun 2015: Backing their government's UN vote against the embargo, a Japanese citizens' NGO yesterday impatiently DEMANDED that the U.S. quit stalling, end the cuban embargo NOW and return Guantanamo to Cuba, virtually paraphrasing MY 2008 message   to the already foot-dragging Obama, to supposedly progressive U.S. NGO's who should have made the same demands long ago, and to all Americans who still don't know that it's the U.S. that's the bad guy, not Cuba. At the end of my January 2008 critique of press freedom in Cuba, I wrote:

   While it's OK for me to give Cuba advice, it would make NO sense for Washington to offer to ease the embargo in exchange for ANY concessions.   America has NO right to demand anything of Cuba. The only graceful course open to America is to unconditionally repeal the entire Cuban Assets Control Act, give back Guantanamo, establish normal relations, and tell the so-called exiles in Florida to just get used to it. Oh - and seriously join the UN as one of Cuba's fellow members instead of as the bully in the room.

    To further clarify reality in 2008, I added then and (for the benefit of a still hopelessly ignorant U.S. president and Congress and still childishly pro-democracy "progressives" conned by the Times into sympathizing with Cuba's supposed internal "underdogs") I will add again in 2015 the following instruction (with some changes to make it fit THIS article and current conditions:

   An important clarification Nothing I say on this site about press freedom should be taken as support for the traitors jailed in Cuba in 2003, since, regardless of their right to write the wrong things, the Cuban government had the right and the obligation to arrest them for conspiring with the US to overthrow the revolution. And I personally don't support them, anyway, or respect anyone who does, because, whether passing out leaflets from Washington, hijacking planes and ferries, ostentatiously starving themselves, or just foolishly tweeting CIA-contrived propaganda to each other or theatrically whispering to me in the street, most internal Cuban dissidents I know anything about are, in the last analysis, creeps standing in the way of civilization, and even those few who may be definable as journalists only serve to underscore the very correct point of Article 62 of the Cuban constitution, that freedom of the press (even though 99.9% inviolable to me), is not as important as the Cuban revolution (i.e. what has been the world's truest movement and is now the vanguard of what may finally be a continent-wide movement toward the kind of civilized state the world sorely needs and all true progressives should stand up for). Of course, nothing here should be taken, either, as support for any Cuban state policy that distorts the goals of the revolution or any Cuban leader who mismanages it. It IS the legitimate business of honest philosophers and journalists to objectively criticize Cuba's leaders and point out their errors and to to pay carefuly accurate attention to all steps and facets of the evolution of the Cuban revolution, so that its progress and continuing validity can be intelligently judged. But nobody has any legitimate business trying to subvert the revolution and return Cuba to capitalism so he'll be personally "free" to make a profit, and all support for that kind of perversity by Washington, US media, pseudo progressive human rights advocates, or Cuban-born Americans eagerly waiting for Cuba to "change" for their greedy personal benefit is insidiously stupid.


   Upward or anyway onward, due to embedded media tendency to give President Obama credit for actually doing things he has only revealed a vague intention to propose doing - maybe, people who ask me about Cuba almost all assume that the embargo has already ended and that they can now go to Cuba. This isn't true. In fact, very little has been done toward changing U.S./Cuba relations. A few State Department bureaucrats have gone to Havana and conferred with their Cuban counterparts and, in the process, have managed to reveal their own ignorance. A few rules have been altered to benefit Miami gusanos and some carefully screened and shepherded American tourist groups. Cuba attended the hopefully last OAS meeting in Panama, which they shouldn't have done (see directly below), and Obama has gotten a lot of credit he doesn't deserve. That's all.
   Some barbershop level authorities still assume, by the way, that Obama's hands are tied by Congress. They aren't. Just as easily as he can and does keep starting and restarting wars whenever and wherever he wants, Obama CAN, as I explained on 9 February, end the Cuban embargo with a stroke of his pen whenever he manages to figure out that he wants to. -Glen Roberts

My 4th of July wish for Jerry Brown

  4 July 2015: My holiday wish for Governor Jerry Brown, who just absurdly TOLD us that California can "TAKE" (TAKE?!?!) 10 million more people is that 10 million new Californians with picnic blankets and lots of beer and fireworks and all their cars parked at their elbows ALL camp out on his lawn tonight.
-Glen Roberts

The best definition of patriotism

  4th of July 2015: Patriotism IS the first subterfuge of insider scoundrels aiming to trick or intimidate "the people" into assisting in their own exploitation and flag-saluting youth into dying for the rich without asking why.   That's just the beginning of my definition of patriotism.
-Glen Roberts
-born on the 6th of June

New PC slogans coming soon!

  8 Jul 2015: A breakthrough is finally coming and some heretofore unspeakable words are about to go "viral" and "BUZZ.    Watch out! The bounds of political correctness are about to shift, and the masses are about to discover, embrace and start reciting words, phrases, and ideas not allowed before - like "too many people," "ecological collapse," "economic equality," "the failure of capitalism," "socialism," "communism (WHOOPS!)," "excess tech," and (on banners) "We're not going to escape into space from the mess we've made here! We've got to start fixing it!"
   Why? Because the long-obvious ecological collapse has become too obvious. Even the local NY Times clone where I live, maybe for the first time ever, actually published a letter to the editor last week containing the words "too many people," and California Governor Jerry Brown's ridiculous   declaration that California can "certainly" "take" (TAKE?) 10 million more people had to be a desperate garlic wreath held up in the face of an onrushing future flood of truth at last. His shaking of the garlic has to tell any half alert person that there's a real and present threat confronting him and us to shake it at.
   The oft-reborn (in every ugly sense of the phrase) governor had just finished telling Californians they're going to have to stop taking showers and flushing their toilets or face excess-cleanliness fines until the Pacific Ocean can be desalinized (which is ridiculous) or whole rivers can be shipped in from other states (which need their own rivers), OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE (even if he hasn't the back bone or the brains to say it) THERE ARE ALREADY TOO MANY CALIFORNIANS TO KEEP USING THE WATER THEY HAVE IN A NORMAL, HEALTHY WAY - and NOW he's telling them they have to welcome 10 million MORE Californians to share that disappearing water with? Any smart 14-year old can see that THAT'S bullshit and that clearly there's NOT too little water but TOO MANY WATER GUZZLING PEOPLE. And how can obviously doddering growth-worshipping old local media editors keep keeping their hands over the mouths of smart 14-year-olds?
   A couple of days ago in Ecuador, the pope himself came within a rhetorical inch of an honest ecological and economic stance. The Times frantically covered this up, but one more impossible-to-avoid (except by papal miracle) sentence and he'd have been urging continent-wide (and why not world-wide) emulation of Cuba's successful population decline and celebrating Latin America's multi-country centuries-overdue but-now-happening movement in clear emulation of Cuba toward at least quarter-global socialism. Why not go ahead and say it ALL, Mr. Pope? In fact, he will say it soon. He wants attention worse than Hillary Clinton, and this would get it for him.
   A May 25 SF Chronicle piece that reads like a ball of verbal yarn edited by a drunk kitten, citing a tip from a presidential "science adviser"'that "greenhouse gas emissions" are going to "swamp" "efforts" such as raising water prices and building dams to fix a "drier environment," makes me wonder if some science adviser adviser standing with his back to the screen had read and clumsily tried to pass on to the president MY January 18 complaint about

   "constantly proposed billion-dollar energy projects that will be complete 20 years from now when their added output has already been swamped again by MORE population growth."

   I can't be the only one spotting that arithmetical flaw by now. If people's brains are in fact waking up, even half-smart book keepers HAVE TO start echoing me on THAT point, and I'm sure they're about to.
   All the aspiring "noted authorities" in the world, even if the realization is still only 9/10 conscious, certainly subconsciously know they're in a race to see who says it first and the pressure to wake up, stand up and point is getting intense. How COULD the "team of Bay Area scientists" (based in the center of one of the world's worst population jams)- how COULD these so-called scientists the San Jose Mercury reported yesterday as predicting a soon-to-come "mass extinction" of just about all "animals confined to small and shrinking habitats" have been too timid to finish the thought - to shout it out at last that the shrinking habitats don't include the exploding human habitat that's strangling all the others? ONE of them is cited as timidly "support(ing) efforts to educate women in developing nations in order to slow (SLOW?) population growth." COME ON. All of those scientists must have been holding their hands over each other's mouths to smother the loud truthful shout that IS about to come.
   If, when there were only ONE billion of us, Pogo was right - that the enemy was US, even if Pogo himself has by now been squeezed out of the eco-world, the fact that SEVEN AND A HALF BILLION of us constitute a more urgent enemy can't go on being missed - even by US - even by U.S. governors and doddering old newspaper editors.
   A story surfaced a few days ago of the (second recent coming) of a half/ass pseudo intellectual group's claim that "overpopulation" (they actually used the word overpopulation and all the doddering old editors felt forced to include it in the story) in California (as if California had eco-walls up to the sky all around it) is caused by illegal Mexican immigration, and the doddering old editors suppressed the wit needed to cite somebody like Paul Ehrlich in response and even hurriedly reminded readers that overpopulation was something people USED TO TALK ABOUT A FEW DECADES AGO, but they printed the story and felt forced to print the word OVERPOPULATION!
   For years, I've been winning hundreds of rhetorical dollars a day by betting myself at the beginning of every news article that HAD TO lead to the subject of overpopulation that it wouldn't, but constant recent articles about water shortages, almost every one of which stops abruptly (as if someone had clapped his hand over someone's mouth) just before you'd (OR I'D) think the reporter or editor HAS TO finally wake up have become such an always obviously ellyptical drum beat now that I think that final BOOM has to finally burst through.
   The situation is getting too serious. People are being ordered to stop watering their lawns, stop washing their precious cars, stop taking showers, and even the most asinine embedded media are being forced to report that people ARE NOT GOING TO DO IT. Instead, I Think there's growing evidence that they're going to start doing something else. They're going to start talking back. It's got to happen. People are going to finally wake up instead, refuse to stop using water and yell at the growth loving pigs who unfortunately run things including the media, "If there's too damned many of us, let's start doing something about it, and if that can't be done in the context of capitalism, let's get rid of capitalism!
   The level of sustained stupidity on this subject has gotten unsustainable. Governor Brown is echoing a 25-year-old dope dream his half-smart liberal intellectual peers came up with 25 years ago - the amazing optimum population idea that the ideal population would be all that could be squeezed in before the bubble popped - a momentarily convenient talking point in response to the inconvenient world population conference in Rio over 25 years ago, that was over-due for the waste basket by the time it was uttered. He may still be as dumb as he was then, but ideas that dumb won't fly NOW, when the bubble is popping. It's time to say something actually smart, now, and he's got to say something actually smart soon. It would be too outrageous not to. So, very soon, back-bone or not, he's going to. Everybody is going to - even the pope and even the doddering old editors and even Jerry Brown.
   Only for a little longer, his back braced against the near-bursting dam holding back the truth, only because the capitalist system and the entrenched capitalist profiteers who OWN him still require never-ending growth (though the human race trapped in their failed system doesn't - believe me), Jerry Brown must keep protesting way too much that he's eagerly anticipating and telling all the suckers that they must also anticipate the plopping down on the state's tired, sagging, near-used-up surface the equivalent of 33 more big ugly Stocktons or another sprawling L.A. metropolitan area.
   But that's too damned much for even the lumpen masses to keep taking. I'm now HEARING ordinary people at the liquor store and the bakery and even old men in barbershops must now be telling each other they WILL NOT go along with it. In fact, they will not stop taking showers or flushing their toilets or start drinking rebooted toilet water. The truth of my essay about the endless stubborn stupidity of humans has held up all my life, but NOW, at least some kinds of no-longer-sustainable denial have to end.
-Glen Roberts

Like fatherland, like native sons, Americans are shooters

  29 Aug 2015: A country-by-country competition of "mass shootings," easily won by the U.S., says today's LA Times, apparently didn't even count overseas bombings blamed on NATO, which I guess aren't technically "shootings"(though they're just as deadly, conscience-free, and American) or massacres carried out with guns and bullets supplied by the U.S. to assorted world-wide maniacs.
   Though the lines the reporter draws are foggy, particularly when comparing the U.S. to countries like Yemen, she and the professorial "criminologist" she's citing may think it's enough to talk just about domestic "gun violence." But why? Isn't he one of those constantly celebrated "scientists" who are supposedly more reliably relevant than philosophers like me?
   Since several very slight (maybe Times-edited to be slight) references to the capitalist system WERE made by the researcher, and he was supposedly reaching for a culture-wide explanation of the violent tendencies he was describing, why didn't he include America's international character as part of the trend? Any tendency of (far from all but too many) individual U.S. citizens to be more violence-prone than individual Swiss citizens DOES reflect internationally warped behavior of profit-driven U.S. corporations (legally individuals under U.S. law) and the business-driven U.S. State Department's almost always either criminal OR violent foreign policy. Doesn't it? Or haven't you noticed that?
   Just as, so said Voltaire, "man made God in his own image," blood and capitalist greed do make a LOT of U.S. citizens at least the same species as the misleaders they didn't make but DO accept and as the rich sub-species who own them, so, even though democracy doesn't work worth a damn for any respectable end, the democracy show, while keeping the suckers confused AND keeping the rich rich, is bound, however crookedly, to produce a government that, in it's greed, lust for conquest, and psychological warp reflects the image of its individual Little Caesars and Kathie Moffats admirably enough to win the Academy Award for star rogue state.
   Somewhere, awhile back, though I can't find my note, I read a supposedly statistically backed revelation that most American G.I.'s who find themselves in gun battles never pull their triggers. I hope that's true. -Glen Roberts

#1 Safety Rule: Get Business Out Of Government

  6 Sep 2015: If some(greedy)body can make a profit from it, apparently whatever you want can be made, sold, bought, and deployed in America - machine guns, private jets, vicious watch dogs, the neighbors' innocuous arrest records - even any-old-body's very own killer drones.
   And Americans are so used to business friendly atrocities and unconscious political leaders by now, they just stare blankly and say, "Well, ain't that something," when a private drone crashes into the stands of a New York tennis stadium where tennis fans are watching a match, and even the NY Times only reports it in a news brief that softens the truth by claiming the drone hit in a section of empty seats.
   Hey! On MY screen in living color, I could see people sitting 10 feet away from the damned thing, who, after a few minutes, decided (or were urged by someone I couldn't see)to move along the row to the left (maybe another 10 feet), off my screen, while rent-a-cops, unwilling to touch the thing, heroically or just numbly stood around it, shielding everyone else with their bodies I guess, and a tournament official, with no more evidence than I had that (filled with the right stuff) it couldn't have blown the stadium and everyone in it sky-high, decided that the match should go on.
   Are you getting it? Nobody knew what to do, so they didn't do it. Everybody confronted the crazy world they've gotten used to living in with active apathy. Catastrophic probability and the certainty of official idiocy have become so commonplace that, unless somebody actually gets killed or maimed, humanity now just shrugs its shoulders and goes limp.
   Hey, again! About 35 years ago, when I was working in the sprawling, castle-like county office building in Stockton, California, filled with offices and people, a mere rumor that a brown recluse spider had been seen in the building motivated the immediate evacuation of the entire block-sized structure. The black plastic-looking spider the size of a pillow that crashed (on ESPN) into a stadium aisle in New York was REAL, potentially spectacularly deadly, and should have motivated at least the orderly but immediate evacuation of that stadium.
   But that's not what I want to say here, although this WAS, in effect if not by intent, a terrorist incident. Reflecting the unreported thoughts of others in the crowd, Flavia Pennetta, who heard and saw the missile zip only a few yards right over her head into the stands, later reported she was "scared," that she thought it was a bomb, that she thought that (in spite of all the gate security) a bomb had come in out of the sky, and that this could be "IT" - for her personally, i.e. the end of her life.
   Yet people in charge on the spot did NOT know what to do about the apparent inevitability of whatever was about to happen. Flavia and her opponent resumed their match after the official DECLARED everything OK as if nothing had happened. And the crowd turned their attention back to the tennis action with no sign that I could see of what might really have been useless panic, anyway.
   But that's not what I want to say here, either. Even though the drone turned out to be nothing but the play-toy (!?!?) of a young man, who, much like the 10-to-30-old children who have always irritated the hell out of me flying their whining model airplanes around and around in vacant lots, was doing just that WITH A DRONE (HEY! Are you paying attention? WITH HIS VERY OWN REAL DRONE) - in a vacant lot near the tournament grounds and just lost control of where it went; and even though I'm glad the contraption was a dud, I'm not even sure it relieved me at all to know that the young man was later arrested, but that's also not what I want to say here.
   What I want to say here is that the capitalist who made and sold the drone, the amazingly unconscious ELECTED people's representatives who, certainly relevant only to their NON-representative PRIVATELY mindless sympathy with irresponsible but profitable BUSINESS, the damnably complicit news chiefs who literally celebrate all BUSINESS-related atrocities, the near useless BUSINESS-OWNED U.S. Congress and State Department (and please throw in the nothing-but-talk BUSINESS-OWNED president) - ALL of whom LET BUSINESS-FRIENDLY SHIT LIKE THIS HAPPEN - should ALL be jailed and stripped of economic and political power - not because of this one incident but because of a flood of stuff LIKE this (think, for instance, of universal aquifer disappearance for the sake of BUSINESS; and of thousands of Libyans fleeing across the Mediterranean, many of them drowning, for the sake of a NATO BUSINESS-BOMBING VENTURE that didn't even work out; and of endlessly expanding developmental clutter that keeps making our world uglier and uglier, just to profit insider businessmen and inflate the salaries of the politicians they own) and etc. and etc. that goes on and on and gets worse and worse.
   AND I also want (a hopeless dream, I admit) to tell the apparently-too-dumb-for-self-government human race to STOP surrendering what little judgement they have to the above assortment of crooks and idiots and start SHOUTING AND SHOUTING relentlessly until (as Thomas Jefferson also advised *)  they get rid of the useless-except-for-business, designed-for-nothing-but-the-facilitation-of-business, business-as-usual government they've got and GET, instead, the kind of civilized government they should sensibly have - a government with the kind of logical social, civic, civilized purpose very well described under Civil State on this website, and also GET some administrators who come a lot closer to understanding that purpose than the silly celebrity incumbents and candidates that the embedded media have forced on them.

-Glen Roberts

* We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive to these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shown that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.
-Thomas Jefferson, 1776


Uh-Oh! Putin is right and Obama is wrong

  1 Oct 2015: As NY Times clones return to their official Middle-East story, forced to report Russia's smart-bombing of U.S.-backed jihadists for a change, instead of accurately calling them exactly that, all the clones' patriotic embedded reporters are dutifully re-anointing the creeps as the "Free" Syrian Army, because the insiders, fearing you've forgotten, want YOU re-drilled on official Syrian-war jargon, but I'm urging you, INSTEAD OF RE-SWALLOWING WHAT YOU'RE EXPECTED TO SWALLOW, to link six months back to my much more honest March 14 analysis and foil the insiders by getting it all straight BEFORE you read the regular baloney this time.
   OK. Have you read my March 14 post yet? No? BLAST IT! Then do it. Click on March 14 and educate yourself.
   NOW that you've re-read my March 14 post: change the last two words in the headline, "Russian jets launch attacks in Syria" to "...against the same Syrian Jihadists Obama absurdly thinks are the good guys and has been arming all along."
   THEN: salt shaker in hand, and taking it from me, if you haven't been keeping up with this week's news, that Vladimir Putin has already openly declared that his bombers, besides assisting in the bombing of ISIS, are also attacking the NATO-approved rebels, squint hard at the LA Times' report that "Russian officials said the attacks...targeted positions of Islamic State...However Syrian opposition activists...said the areas hit were in the hands of other rebel factions..." and keep it in mind that "opposition activists" means the ones the CIA very early provided with satellite phones so embedded western reporters could get the "facts" from THEM, while "the Free Syrian Army" means a basket of religiously motivated nuts from all over the world with no legitimate standing.
   Skip the prominently positioned citation (talking-point propaganda) from John Kerry expressing "grave concerns" about the Russian aim, and, when you're ominously advised that Putin's reference to "moderate rebels with a democratic agenda" as terrorists echoes the Syrian government, take it from me (Hey, I'm a lot more reliable than Kerry) that these not-at-all moderate rebels have only been artificially inseminated with democracy-agenda serum in the form of U.S.DOLLARS (out of your pockets without your prior approval), and that the Nusruh faction dominating them was sawing off people's heads with serrated kitchen knives on the internet before you ever heard of the ISIS, whom the Russians are also bombing (and whom I don't like any better than Obama does - don't put any words in my mouth).
   In fact, though Putin probably has other agendas, the current Russian bombing that YOUR president (he's not mine) and your embedded media are trying to get you to obediently frown at, is really a wise effort to correct Obama's error, by extending western bombing to include the anti-Assad Islamic Fundamentalists who are just as "bad" as ISIS, whom Obama has been wrongly aiding and arming - a gang of religious fascists who aren't going anywhere but backward to really ugly theocracy or forward into unending chaos and who are NOT an improvement over Assad, who is no more brutal than average in the Middle East and who was (and may still be) at least presiding over a nominally secular government - the only imaginably re-attainable context within which any Syrian progress toward civilization is likely to take place.
-Glen Roberts

Pope and Latin Americans get past old official stories
and finally face up to world's most important neglected crises

  4 Oct 2015: The pope and some Latin American presidents have finally (I mean really LATEly) ALMOST started singing the right end-of-the-20th-century song, though they're still garbling the lyrics, and though U.S., French and G.B. misleaders haven't even found the concert hall door yet.
   THEY, the pope (less importantly than you think) and the Latin American presidents (much more importantly than you think) aren't yet buzzing the exact lyrics that I told you on July 8 will very soon go politically correctly viral: too many people, ecological collapse, excess tech, capitalist failure,guaranteed economic and social equality instead etc...
   If the pope had been that profane in front of the U.S. Congress, they'd've thrown him out on his ear. But my prediction IS coming true, and, far enough south to be out of U.S. media hearing range, they've been getting the melody and one whole verse right (in form, anyway, and partly in all-important phraseology, too, though it should be the second (2) verse), and, in spite of still too-much vague euphemism substitution, they've almost got a second verse (which should be (1)) the first verse) close enough to right to clarify the melody and bring in the chorus, i.e. the poor majority who probably aren't qualified decision makers but need to be told what's really going on, anyway, before their incoherent pent-up frustration explodes.
   HEY! This is serious! The human world is in a fix not QUITE (just not QUITE) as dramatically IMMEDIATE as the unfixable fix featured in the movie, "Dr. Strangelove," but it's just as serious a fix, also probably unfixable and ALMOST IMMEDIATELY ON TOP OF US, TOO, and the politicians, priests, bullies, and conmen unfortunately running the world have got YOU on the wrong page looking in the wrong direction - your backs to the crisis.

   TWO MAIN THINGS! (1) The eco-world we live in and can't live without is NOW collapsing; and (2) we're still trapped in a world-wide winner/loser economic nonsystem the complete failure of which is either NOW plunging us into a probably unstoppable end-times war or at least (evilly enough) ensuring that supposedly noble humanity will bow out still disgraced by majority poverty.

   FAR MORE IMPORTANTLY than issues like drug abuse, unaffordable health care, local and regional economic disasters, gay marriage, women's rights, Arab/Jew relations, Chinese economic ups and downs, Putin's justifiable contempt for Obama, or even terrorism, IN THE REAL WORLD BEING IGNORED, we're ACTUALLY up against (1) an already ongoing collapse of the eco-system that IS our world (not just mine but yours and mine - OUR ENTIRE ECO-WORLD); and (2) we're still trapped in a barbaric winner/loser economic system that should be long gone but is showing no signs of going that is both hurrying the destruction of our eco-world and driving the frustration of the fed-up majority losers toward and past the point of all-out incoherently violent revolt, the sheer noise of which ensures the continued absence of the international intellectual clarity never before so desperately needed.
   So, while Congress and Obama stupidly (but also insidiously) fiddle, Latin American presidents (with the pope recently in on the conversation) have finally been firmly pairing the two main most urgently threatening problems with their two main and ugliest causes. They're finally publicly declaring that (2) eternal poverty is certainly, criminally caused by (2) the second horseman of the Apocalypse - eternal capitalism and they're finally TRYING together to do something about that; AND they've now at last publicly and emphatically DISCOVERED the concept of environmental disaster (still rigidly regarded as a special-interest issue by U.S. media), though, except for Fidel (to whom they ARE now all paying attention), they haven't yet publicly named the disaster a (1) complete ecological collapse - not yet - but they ARE now correctly tracing the no-longer denied problem to the greedy and careless growth of human business and technology, and they've already actually mentioned overpopulation (at least of the poor). So Latin America is about to pin environmental disaster on (1) the FIRST horseman of the Apocalypse - overgrowth of human population, habitat, business, and technology. While talking to the pope, they and the pope almost said exactly that - not nearly emphatically enough - but they will.
   The third, fourth, and fifth Apocalyptic horsemen, religion (tough for the pope to talk about but getting more threatening every day and still the bottom-line perpetuating cause of no-longer-convenient human stupidity), tribalism (which includes racism and sexism but is mainly bomb-and-bullet exchanging nationalism, perpetuating WAR - the world's last reliable business venture), and (already sub-mentioned but suddenly a separately extreme threat) excess technology, haven't yet achieved buzz-song status, and maybe they won't, but I'm just about sure they will.
   Take it from me (a phrase I buzzed a lot in my last Oct 1 post, which is right below this one), YOU will soon be constantly reciting the phrase, ""too many people", and, just as you've been doing with the now hysterically p.c.phrase "climate change," you're going to start sternly admonishing everyone to get p.c. instead about a new, more important phrase and start piously reciting IT. Reciting what? I just told you: "TOO MANY PEOPLE."
   Try reading this aloud: climate change, cli-NO! ENOUGH OF THAT! INSTEAD, READ: too many people, too many people, too many people, too many people, too many people, too many people - unemploy-NO, CAPITALISM HAS FAILED - NATIONALIZE all production of goods and services and guarantee economic and social equality, economic and social equality, economic and social equality, economic and social equality - less technology, less technology, less technology, IGNORE SCIENTISTS WITH THEIR HEADS IN OUTER AND SUB-ATOMIC SPACE - and start urgently telling those precious scientists AND your fellow "occupiers" that we can't escape into space or into any nanoworld from the mess we've made on Earth with more excess technology, excess technology, excess technology, excess technology; because, in the real world, there's NOT too little energy or water, there are too many people, too many people, too many people; too many people, too much business, too much business, too much business, too much business, too much human habitat, too much human habitat, too much human habitat, too much social plastic, too many social packages, too much toxic social human waste. START TELLING YOUR "FRIENDS" AND YOUR PRECIOUS SCIENTISTS, "TO HELL WITH THE ORIGIN OF THE UNIVERSE!" - We've got to start fixing real things on earth NOW, where and when we actually live! ...
   Go on. Try it! READ that last paragraph over and over and over again; copy it and send it to all your "friends." Fuck spiritualism, metaphysical denial, even quantum arithmetic, and all other p.c. games! Change the game plan and stop playing social games! Take reality itself viral instead!
   Of course, I think it's too late. I'm going to breakfast and I don't care if you do anything or not. It's up to you.

-Glen Roberts

Obama admits stupidly arming Jihadists in Syria

  13 Oct 2015: He'll probably say something else tomorrow, but it doesn't matter. Day before yesterday, Barack Obama admitted he's been arming Jihadists all along in Syria (not to mention Libya).
   TO FIND OUT WHEN I FIRST TOLD YOU THIS and how consistently I've reported it ever since, click on and read each of the following links in the order of their appearance: 21 Mar 11; 28 Apr 12; 22 Mar 13; 31 Mar 13; 26 Apr 13; 28 Apr 13; 13 Jun 13; 15 Jun 13; 27 Jul 13; 1 Aug 13; 10 Aug 13; 22 Aug 13; 24 Aug 13; 29 Aug 13; 7 Sep 13; 9 Sep 13; 13 Sep 13; 16 Sep 13; 22 Sep 13; 13 Nov 13; 28 Nov 13; 16 Feb 14; 10 Apr 14; 31 May 14; 5 Jun 14; 23 Jun 14; 8 Aug 14; 17 Aug 14; 11 Sep 14; 23 Sep 14; 14 Mar 15; 1 Oct 15...
   I'm not joining any Republican attack on Obama. I don't care where he was born, and I doubt that he's intelligently insidious for any reason that would offend a Republican. Objectively speaking, his war-mongering in the Middle East DOES suggest that he's supporting Jihad, but I think he's just stupidly power hungry, like most of his predecessors.
   I think Obama tap-danced his way into the White House to be president (same motive now motivating Hillary Clinton), because he wanted power, and, to keep and increase his presidential power, he let himself be advised by the same spooks who'd advised his predecessors, filled his empty head from their filing cabinets and continued acting out their redundant and always-bound-to-be disastrous assumptions and policies - sometimes in somewhat different ways - but, generally the same assumptions and policies.
   I think he's been putting or trying to put creeps into power in the Middle East who he hoped would cooperate with U.S. business (with no unAmerican concern about how many foreign women would be stoned to death or how many foreign heads would be sawed off by those creeps), because he wanted to help the power brokers who'll prop HIS power up if the religious nuts he empowers help those power brokers exploit Syria's natural gas reserves and etc. etc. (at least generally the same etcetera etcetera the Republicans will continue when and if they get back into the White House).
   I'm not campaigning here or even crusading. For my own reasons explained on another page, as much and as regularly as my energy and inclination allow and far more accurately and articulately than can the NY Times, but just FOR myself TO myself, i.e. for the sake of my own more perfect understanding of things (and coincidentally for others who appreciate my aptitude) I'm objectively describing the chaotic world wherein I find myself, its other inhabitants, and its both power-hungry and intellectually mediocre misleaders, including Barack Obama, who just happens to have been in office during all the years I've been posting this news unspinning column.
   So, if, for the first time, you've just learned that Obama's Syrian rebels aren't good guys, IF you're still imagining that Obama's black skin has made HIM one of the good guys, besides the series of informative links about the Middle Eastern rebel reality, I can provide you another handy list of links, to be read in chronological order, which better define Barack Obama's true record from January '09 to the present:

10 Jan 09; 21 Jan 09; 21 Apr 09; 27 May 09; 12 Jun 09; 16 Jun 09; 2 Jul 09; 10 Jul 09; 14 Jul 09; 9 Oct 09; 11 Nov 09; 29 Nov 09; 3 Nov 10; 24 Mar 11;21 Mar 11; 3 Apr 11; 2 Sep 11; 28 Apr 12; 22 Mar 13; 31 Mar 13; 26 Apr 13; 28 Apr 13; 13 Jun 13; 6 Jul 13; 10 Jul 13; 13 Jul 13; 10 Aug 13; 24 Aug 13; 29 Aug 13; 7 Sep 13; 9 Sep 13; 13 Sep 13; 16 Oct 13; 25 Oct 13; 28 Nov 13; 16 Feb 14; 10 Apr 14; 31 May 14; 23 June 14; 8 August 14; 17 August 14; 3 Sep 14; 11 Sep 14; 15 Sep 14; 23 Sep 14; 7 Oct 14; 24 Oct 14; 17 Dec 14; Feb 9 15;

-Glen Roberts

NATO/Obama's Libyan bungling still an ugly secret

  22 Oct 2015: I'm trying to look just as sternly disapproving as Hillary Clinton's "news" pic looked today at a Benghazi "hearing"  which she claims is meant to sabotage her presidential bid but which I say is a red herring meant to avoid ANY "hearings" on the destruction of Libya for big business, a catastrophic blunder that didn't even work because British oil trying to re-take Libyan oil couldn't cope with the chaos wrought by Obama/NATO's unprovoked attack and stupid support of Jihadist rebels there.
   I'm also going to sternly frown at embedded U.S. media's failure to even mention (unless your local rag got it; take a look) the World Health Organization's (WHO's) citation day before yesterday of "Cuba’s public healthcare system as an example to be followed," somehow exactly coinciding their praise of Cuba with another treacherous play by Barack Obama in the U.N. to falsely condemn Cuba on trumped up charges of human rights abuse, which nobody in the world outside Washington and Miami takes seriously, not even his own supporters, who elected him 7 years ago partly because they expected him to get real about Cuba, but which (charges) DO serve as another red herring news topic meant to draw attention away from the hellish human rights abuses inflicted on millions of Libyans and Syrians by Obama/NATO's continued arming and aiding of Jihadist barbarians.
   And, as if that weren't funny enough (you decide if it's funny-ha-ha or funny-strange), a tiny news brief notified us yesterday (as if it were routine - so you'd think it was routine and thus OK) that, in ironic contrast to Cubans who enjoy (red-tape free) a very high quality comprehensive system of socialized medicine, those Americans who continue refusing to surrender to Obama's own "health care" scam, actually a big-insurance/pharmaceutical-business subsidy strategy, will pay (Obama himself has decided) a $695 fine next year for their resistance to the non-product of big U.S. insurance businesses (which DO NOT perform surgery, bandage cuts, or even issue aspirin, but, instead, decrease efficiency and raise costs by intruding between doctors and patients as a useless middle-hand - in your pocket).
   I still won't buy the insurance or willingly pay the fine, by the way. My news and reality focus is good, so I'll keep on paying my own bills, no matter how high they are, maybe even suffer the crooked confiscation of $695 from my bank account by some kind of government bank-invading force, while I keep waiting for the long-overdue arrival in America (maybe with Bernie Sanders, but I'm not counting on that) of socialized medicine.
   What about you? Will you vote for Hillary because the media told you today that your movie-industry "friends" will vote for her, or will you vote for some other clown they let you know about while covering up the existence of any candidates with functioning brains? And, since the media always tell you who's OK and who isn't, so YOU don't need to ask yourself any questions at all, will you join Canada's new p.c.-level-liberal leader in his media approved approval of Islam at home, while going on conceding (by your silence) that, since he has p.c. black skin, Obama's approval of Islam abroad must be OK, too? Will you?
   I won't vote for anybody. And, in fact, whether my individual opposition matters or not, I'll go on opposing any and all kinds and levels of business or political scams, including ANY religion, in or out of government, in or out of marriage or shared housekeeping arrangements, or in or out of political or media favor, here, there, in the Middle East or anywhere - any time. And, in keeping with the KISS principle by which I live and keep my head as much under spook radar as I can, I'll also go on paying cash for most of what I buy (which won't include a giant van or pickup) and go on refusing to join any social media or "sign up" for anything on the internet I shouldn't need to "sign up" for. What about you? Hmmm?
-Glen Roberts

7.6 billion of us on Earth by next week!

  12 Dec 2015:   Too many people! Too many people! Too many people!   A week from now, i.e. next Saturday, well before the end of 2015, UNC's world population estimate (which I'm sure is an underestimate) will soar past 7.6 billion,   still racing far ahead of the official story - the impossibly timid but only recently THIS honestly alarming embedded-media prediction of 8 billion by 2040 - toward EIGHT BILLION BEFORE 2020.

-Glen Roberts

World population passes 7.6 billion;
Now growing by more than 1/10 of a billion each year!

  19 Dec 2015:   Too many people! TODAY - this morning, the UNC estimated world human population passed 7.6 billion - an alarming number just because it's an alarming number but also alarmingly underscoring the greed-driven ignorance/dishonesty of most world misleaders and embedded media chiefs who front for them.
   This is even a bit ahead of schedule, because it's still 2015, the sixth year of the decade. World population, which has been recently growing at a speed of almost a billion a decade, i.e. almost a tenth of a billion a year, is now growing at MORE than a tenth of a billion a year.
   Ignore your local NY Times enslaved media chief and employ your own pocket computer, and see if you come to the same truth I'll explain AGAIN in a couple of days, while linking you to all the places on this website where I've been explaining it to you over and over for the past 11 years.
-Glen Roberts

7.6 billion people-count after 6/10 of a decade
PROVES official population story is a lie

  23 Dec 2015: (⇚ Look at the date)   A 7.6 billion people-count this month PROVES the official population story is a lie and it's past time to fix both problems: excess growth and our lying official story tellers.
   You CAN'T not see this: you can figure it in your head.
   If we started the century with a population of 6X (6 billion) (which the liars were telling you had stopped growing and was heading toward a disastrous decline - which WOULD have been disastrous for growth profiteers),...
   but then, in a little more than ONE decade (2000-2010) (while the liars stayed silent about it but kept promoting growth), we reached 7X (7 billion),...
   and THEN, in LESS than 6/10 of the next decade (2010-2020), we reached 7.6X (7 & 6/10 billion),...
   OBVIOUSLY, in the remaining 4/10 of that same decade, BEFORE 2020, WE'LL CERTAINLY PASS 8X (8 billion)...
  - a number the liars now, tentatively, maybe-once-a-week, acknowledge is coming but which THEIR apparently mathematically challenged mathematicians still stupidly schedule for 2040) and, while still saying, maybe on Tuesday, that it's not happening, they're NOW sneakily also saying, maybe on Wednesday, that, even though it means they WERE lying, it IS happening - AND THAT IT'S A WONDERFUL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY (for them and the rich faction who own them) (NOT for YOU).

   Get it?   Until they were FORCED by the 1992 World Population Summit to slightly wake up, pay attention for a week and make up a lie to cover themselves, in spite of traffic, suburban sprawl, every kind of shortage, smog, Margaret Sanger, Paul Ehrlich, and all the undeniable evidence in front of YOUR eyes, the politicians and their media had NEVER seriously noticed or mentioned or even slightly dealt with the impossible-to-ignore overgrowth of human population, habitat, business, and excess tech that was obviously causing or exacerbating ALL of YOUR worst problems, and their amazingly arrogant (but apparently OK with most humans) cover-up lie was: "Oh yeah, that WAS happening, but now it's stopped."
   WOW!

   They were lying! And Then, after a another long era of silence during which they kept on energetically promoting more and more (profitable to their rich owners) growth, when, finally, what should have been startling new population figures forced them to slightly wake up again and change to a different lie, they just as arrogantly as before told the sleepy public: "Well yeah, it IS still growing but (according to THEIR embedded quisling scientists) growing so slowly that a population DEFICIT (I didn't make that up - THEY did) is threatening business (THEIR business, not yours or mine) and now we have to speed it up again." And today, they're sticking to THAT convenient alibi, while you keep helplessly watching your real world whimper and die in front of your eyes.

   HEY, YOU! - THINK!   And stop letting the official liars tell you WHAT to think. Of course, I know you won't do that. I'm just telling you to as a kind of exercise, because that's what this website is for.

   The beat goes on.   While your local paper goes on publishing a dozen stories a day clearly related to overpopulation, none of which include ANY negative reference to any kind of growth (because they consider profit-producing growth sacred and want you to stupidly think you think so too) and won't mention any of the never-ending million/billion-more-people posts that we keep passing until the relevance and magnitude of the population GROWTH problem is again forced on them, disastrous overGROWTH of human population, habitat, business, and excess tech aren't just still pinching us hard, they're pinching us HARDER! AND HARDER!
   That we've just GROWN to 7.6 billion people in our NON-growing eco-world is too damned IMPORTANT to keep allowing the ninnies (or crooks - take your choice) that you keep electing to go on ignoring it or equivocating about it! I know you won't but you NEED to start paying serious attention NOW and demand that THEY start paying serious attention, too. The ninnies/crooks I'm talking about are your elected misleaders (who should be serving you, NOT lying to you) and the embedded media (who should be objectively COVERING the facts, NOT conspiring with your misleaders to cover up the facts).
   The editor of my local paper hysterically promotes all development and growth. Every day, reading his paper, I win several hundred dollars (from myself) betting as I begin reading each story THAT HAS TO MENTION the population factor that it WON'T.  And I never lose my bet, and that's ridiculous. Governor Jerry Brown's recent pronouncement that California "CAN TAKE" another 10 million people (the equivalent of two more Los Angeleses) is ridiculous, too. He must still not have a car or he wants you to buy more cars and gas WITHOUT DOING THE MATH FOR YOURSELVES.
   In fact, there were at least 10 X too many people in California and in the world in 1950, when, at 14,   I, almost alone,   began vainly shouting at the world's deaf-and-dumb opinion makers about it; there were 15-20 X too many people in 1992, when forced to acknowledge it for a few days by the World Population Summit, the same dummies, aided and abetted by quisling mathematicians, declared the over-growth they'd just spotted to have then immediately officially ended and started teaching you, by example, NOT to think about it at all; after more years of smug silence, as the 2010 people-post of 7 billion (25-30 X too many), which they HAD to devote a day or two of space to (without ever mentioning OVERpopulation, though) approached and passed, here's how you LET the dummies keep covering it all up. READ THE LINK CAREFULLY -ALL OF IT - AND THEN COME BACK TO HERE.
   In the past 15 years, employing the kind of magical unrealism that you just read all about on the link , your deaf and DUMB leaders (to prove they know what's what, which they don't) have miraculously resurrected the population explosion BUT, with the always available help of quisling so-called experts, including some shameless so-called "scientists," just for your expedient miseducation (and their own enrichment) they've conveniently changed its entire nature from malign to benign. So, now, they (and they expect you to follow suit) are mindlessly or insidiously CELEBRATING explosive population growth as a GRE-E-AT entrepreneurial opportunity.
   But history keeps passing and the actually horrible numbers keep growing and the real-world eco-system keeps collapsing, and total collapse WILL get here, so, to be ready to make a show of saving their faces, to keep up a convincing (to YOU, sucker) pseudo-thoughtful front in the meantime, though (while their never named embedded mathematicians continually, sneakily, keep changing their cyber-buried numbers to come closer and closer to mine, so that when disaster becomes UNDENIABLY horrible, they can say, "Hey, we knew it all the time") your main misleaders keep using their own older numbers as talking points, including an embedded "scientific" but out-of-date designation most recently of 2040 as the year human population will reach 8 billion. And the arrival of the 7.6 billion mark 4 days ago, if you HAVE a pocket calculator, has, embarrassingly (or it certainly should be embarrassing) proven that THAT number is a lie.
   Yes, folks, there were WAY too many people yesterday, and today there are so many more and the numbers are climbing so fast (and, hey, even faster), it's getting embarrassing for the growth loving liars. Why is the 7.6 billion mark on December 2015 so significant? Well, see, remembering that in 2000, we very ostentatiously (with bugles) supposedly reached 6 billion (accompanied by supposedly honest projections of barely more than that in the whole century to come), that we reached 7 billion by April Fool's Day of 2010 (though embedded media kept the lid on that for awhile) clearly meant that we were growing roughly by a billion a decade - i.e. much faster than before, actually at almost a billion a decade. And now, having reached SEVEN AND SIX TENTHS OF A BILLION before the end of 2015, since 2015 is the sixth year of the decade, your pocket calculator has to embarrassingly show you that, with 4 more tenths of a decade to go (2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019), during which the count of seven and six tenths will become seven and 10 tenths, there will have to be EIGHT BILLION of us before 2020 - NOT 8 billion by 2040, the quietly already a couple of times upsped projection of the idiots, but 2020. Got it?
   AND WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? WHAT? You could surely have done the calculation I just did for you in your head. But the royal mathematicians CAN'T. So, HEY, THINK! That the officously official sources and your misleaders who base important policies on their official numbers can't do arithmetic as well any grammar-school kid - IMPORTANTLY MEANS THAT the ninnies YOU regularly elect to high office and are about to elect again - should NOT be considered reliable about much of anything! RIGHT? NO? COME ON!

-Glen Roberts

UNSPINNING THE NEWS 2014
BACK TO THE FRONT PAGE
TO GO ON TO 2016 OR ANY YEAR UP TO THE PRESENT - PICK A YEAR:
2008; 2009; 2010; 2011; 2012; 2013; 2014; 2015; 2016