Honestly, it doesn't seem like you 'get it' very much.  I'll say again, I'm happy to leave people to their own devices and ignore them in the case that they don't pose a threat to me.  If not 'happy', than at least I find it an acceptable and appropriate course of action.  If people are receiving support that ultimately comes out of my pocket, then I see no problem with asking them to reciprocate in one way or another which is to my liking.

I'm not 'looking for war' with Saudi Arabia, but if misfortune befell their Royal Family I would not shed any tears, and I personally would consider higher gas prices to be an acceptable price.  My reaction would be similar to when I watch a youtube vid of some gas station robber getting his balls shot off by the woman behind the counter.   That is, 'Yeah!'

The trouble is that by supporting a regime, we automatically become at least partially culpable for whatever actions they take.  It's not just the nation of Saudi Arabia where we (the U.S.) defile ourselves in this manner, but they are one of the most egregious examples.  As far as I can tell we do less than zero to influence them to adhere to practices which approach human decency.  If we wanted to just cut them loose to fend for themselves (e.g., North Korea), that's a different thing.  A trade of them making some minimal progress toward being human fuckin' beings in exchange for our support seems fair to me.

Normally I am a big proponent of acting ethically on the world stage if one is a superpower (and doing so would by-n-large make war a thing of the past.)  In the case of the Saudi's, or at least the Saudi Royal Family, I would be sorely tempted to suspend this principle.  As far as I am concerned they are among the most loathsome people to have ever walked the face of the earth.

It would hardly take nukes to screw Saudi Arabia.  The U.S. dropping support for the Royal Family for about 3 months would probably be all that it would take.  Anyway, we'll have no choice but to screw them eventually no matter what we would like to do when we welch on the debts.

My problem is that we have no way to know with anything resembling certainty what is being sprayed where, much less the impact it has.

My solution is to choose something which is undeniable and quite probably a big problem and demand that it be studied openly.  Again, that would be the stone cold fact that we are seeing persistent trails form a dense haze which is surely blocking out solar flux over broad areas.  An open and active study of this will provide a lot of threads to tug on.

I have no doubt that all manners of things are released from sounding rockets and that bothers me not one iota.  Sounding rockets are not a feasible delivery system for any systematic program.  I suspect that other elements in fact are being released into the atmosphere on a more broad scale and there could be a number of reasons to do so.  Among the more mundane would be the introduction of elements which would make remote sensing atmospheric monitoring more precise and effective.  Much more threatening reasons exist.  This is conjecture however.  Even when people provide pretty good evidence in the form of privately commissioned sample analysis it still falls on deaf ears and the majority of the population has been trained to ignore or ridicule such results.

The concern about sounding rocket experiments reminds me a lot of the story about gasses from the operating room acting as a greenhouse gas.  Utterly laughable to worry about it due to the concentrations, but many people on the global warming panic side were suckered into doing just that.  That leads into a whole other range of 'conspiracy theories' associated with our education systems (and one's which I find pretty compelling.)

True!


Not so true.  These are hypothesis, and in my opinion some of them are fairly strong, but the statements are to general and the data is simply not available in a form which permits strong statements.  Doing so opens us up to attack.

One of the less mentioned activists on the subject, and one who I find effective and credible is a Jim Lee.  He (nearly alone) seems to have gotten off his ass and forced the EPA to have a hearing on some of this stuff associated with pollution from aircraft.  That made some of our concerns part of the congressional record and I respect him for that.

I mention Lee because he made a good point:  As you mentioned, it is undeniable that there are persistent trails which spread out into a haze.  The best 'denial' is that 'it has always happened'.  I don't remember it 'always happening', and I have been the kind of person who gazed at the sky and mused about things since childhood.  Even as a kid I had a better conceptualization about the phase changes of water and other simple atmospheric phenomenon than most because I was always interested in science.  Even if we grant that this persistent hazing from pure water vapor contrails is something that has 'always happened', it is pretty obvious that it has a strong likelihood of creating ecological changes due to solar flux changes.  If the 'environmental impacts' of this hazing phenomenon have ever been studied in detail I've run across very little information about it.  Logically, a battery of such studies on this topic would be a good starting point,  Tactically, such studies would necessarily root out information about other things which may be going on.

I find fault with some of the geoengineering crowd for proposing that Dr. Peterson's presentation to the U.N. somehow indicated that the U.N. was aware on conspiring on geoengineering and aware of certain negative effects of doing so.  I personally believe that they almost certainly are (big time!), but Peterson's presentation is in no way indicative of this which was the picture that I see as being invalidly painted.

I personally do not trust Wigington and his Geoengineeringwatch organization.  I cannot put my finger on just why.  My gut tells me that he is controlled opposition. I also find it irrational and suspicious that the most popular global warming skeptic site 'wattsupwiththat.com' strictly dis-allows any mention of geoengineering.  It is not scientific to dis-allow exploration of any hypothesis, and it seems to me that geoengineering is quite plausibly associated with some climate observations at this point in time.

I've not explored Rosalind Peterson's material which is supposed to be extensive (as is appropriate in scientific investigation.)  My sense from the minor exposure I have seen is that she is likely credible.

Lastly, I will (perhaps again) mention that I've been toying with the idea that one of the main reasons for the whole 'global warming' project is to justify geoengineering to be performed under the direction of the military, and for the primary purpose of the fairly mundane (but highly powerful) project of 'owning the weather.'  If the 1996 document https://archive.org/details/WeatherAsAForceMultiplier is not a hoax and the military (or corp/gov) is somewhat on target for '2025' then it would be expected that some of these ideas are fairly advanced here in 2015.

LOL!

In 15 short years, the highly effective United Nations is going to achieve some remarkable results.  It says so right in their Agenda 2030 action plan.  Just some little stuff like:  'End poverty in all its forms everywhere'  Utopia in our lifetime!  Won't that be great?

Fluoridation of water, vaccinations, and GMO food FTW!

I don't think it's a joke.  When it was recognized that there was to be a hard-fork in association with the BDB mis-config, some decisions had to be made very quickly.  I'm pretty sure that certain people seemed to be lobbying to nix the 1MB block limit at that time because it was a convenient time to do so.  Even by that time it had been a source of heated debate for at least a year.

I was not (and am not) and 'insider' so my visibility into things is limited and based somewhat on intuition and reading between the lines, but I'm pretty sure I remember things this way, and I'm pretty sure that it was the likely suspect who wanted to use the event as the excuse to bloat things.  The event and decisions ultimately made had several main impacts on me:

 1) It gave me to much confidence in Gavin's disposition and judgement and it took longer than it might have for this to wear off.  It would have been interesting to be a fly on the wall when some of these decisions were being made in the heat of battle.  Perhaps I mis-estimated how much impact he had and/or on which side of the equation.

 2)  I've felt very strongly about the bloat issue since I got hooked in in 2011.  The bloat attempt associated with that event was so upsetting to me that I bought a couple of domain names and expended some effort imagining how Bitcoin might scale without killing it, and in the event that the 'dark side' won the battles and the rest of us had to try to do some sort of a salvage operation and make the best of a bad situation.

The desperate moving to the countryside is not what I'm seeing.  If anything it is just the opposite as regulations and financial snares (health care in particular) make it non-viable for people without moderate means to make a living.  As for the crime in my rural area, it seems to be almost exclusively home-grown jackasses.  That is to say, I'm not aware of criminals from the more metro areas setting up shop out here (which, again, I attribute to the high rate of gun possession and the relative simplicity and effectiveness of local monitoring by citizen groups.)

My read of the future is pretty much the opposite of yours.  Those more on the margin will be lured into 'human settlements' by various social services (e.g., free food, child care, etc.)  The more rural areas which are allowed to remain inhabited by humans will be part time homes for the well off with enough 'responsible' citizens allowed to remain permanently in order to keep an eye on things.

I can pretty much promise that those who remain in the 'upper middle class' or above are not going to be living in stack-n-pack shoe boxes in the 'human habitat' zones and riding bicycles or taking buses everywhere.  They will fund the propaganda to convince the plebs that 'this is what everyone wants', but they have no plans to herded into that nightmare.

I would not say that engaging in almost any form of crime is 'cowardly.'  There are a variety of risks, but having one's face peeled off by a shotgun blast is certainly one of the more emotionally potent.

Much crime is driven by desperation and some by run-of-the-mill stupidity and lack of self control.  These classes are the ones who end up losing most often and are certainly the ones who pose the bigger risk to the innocent victim.  Criminals also victimize one another probably at least as often as they do the innocent.  When the FBI studied the problem of 'guns', they realized that for most criminals, not possessing a gun was a non-option largely because of this.  Thus, the strategy of making use of a gun in the commission of a crime carry extra-high penalties.  This was remarkably effective which is why real gun problems (as opposed to phony staged 'active shooter' events) have been declining significantly over the last four decades and are now at very tolerable levels.

I'd say generally that criminal are business people in a particular business and make rational cost/benefit analyses just like any other people in any other business.  As a gun owner I do my best to make sure that criminals are cognizant of the risk side of the equation.

Seems that way.  I feel more at ease and comfortable when I can see my enemy.  I see a few of the clueless and probably unconnected dead-enders left, but the core kill-by-bloat folks have gone mighty quit.  I think it highly probable that they have formulated or are working on a new strategy.

I'm from a fiercely pro-2nd area and I've almost never seen anyone open carry.  It makes one look like a jackass and that has been the case for at least as long as I've been around.  I do 'open carry' on my own property from time to time.  Only when I need to go check the driveway to see why the alarm went off in the middle of the night, or at certain times of the year when there are a lot of bears around.

I hate to say it, but basic background checks make reasonable sense.  As far as I can tell they are already in place...I have to have one run every time I buy a firearm.  It doesn't break my heart if ex-cons (violent ones) cannot legally get a gun, but the flip side is that potential for abuse is a clear danger.

I'm highly negative about 'mental health assessments' for anything, and especially not for gun ownership.  The main reason is that one can hardly find a more fucked up and nutzo group of 'professional' than those in the mental health profession and they are the last people I'd call on to assess mental health of others.  I will bet that within a matter of a few years I would be considered some sort of a 'threat' simply on the basis of my calling bullshit on the various fairly obvious psy-ops that the government is undertaking.  e.g., the Sandy Hook hoax and in terms of 'active shooter' events, pretty much most of the rest since that time.

I would like to see some little thing such as the 'gunshow loophole' (if it even exists) tied up, but a poison pill inserted.  Specifically, something like any time more than 1% of the gun owner's list is rendered for the purposes of gun confiscation, the entire law and every other law which touches on the 2nd becomes null and void and the gun ownership list must be destroyed.

It would fulfill my prediction that when Bitcoin achieves a realistic scaling solution (in this case, subordinate chains) that the price would rise.  Of course I cannot know with certainty that the good price performance over the last month is attributable to this first-cut proof of concept, but I had expected such a rise in conjunction with it.  Hopefully it will be the start of a new leg up, and hopefully the next leg up will take us into the $5000-$10,000/btc range.  If so, it would be worth the wait for me.

I'll certainly try.  There are horses nearby and I could probably only do it if they were out on a walk.  The other ridge lines have to many trees.  I will practice on shooting up-hill to make sure I am proficient at doing so in case the opportunity presents itself.  There are other places on my property where I could take elk but I kind of want them to feel safe in those whereas the preferred ridge leads directly down to my and my neighbor's pastures and orchards where I don't really want the them there anyway.

I'm not enough of a boozer (yet) to where that should be a problem, but I can pretty much promise that I'll have a pinch of Grizzly Green between my cheek and gum.  Always do.  Being a man-sized man I don't believe I'd have much trouble remaining on my feet, but I'll be trying to use a rest since I'm not that great of a shot.  The ridgeline is about 400 yards.


That article is a keeper.  I'd want to research some of the facts before relying on them in an argument.  To bad there are no obvious footnotes.

On guns...I bought a 300 win mag today but have yet to get it in my grubby dick-skiners since I had to special order the thing.  Will be a nice addition to my growing gun collection, and quasi-necessary to utilize my land-owner preference elk tags.  I hope to take the creature from the ridge line while standing in my yard, and this caliber seems like it will be up to the task.  Furthermore, since I have like 4 months to fill my tags, I hope to analyze the herd for a while and pick out a nice tender subordinate cow.  The Fish-n-Game dude would prefer smaller herds in my area for reasons associated with carrying capacity, and if one avoids taking the lead cow then the herd is not disrupted at all.

This is a nice time to thank Visa and PayPal for trying to tell me how I could and could not spend my money in conjunction with Wikileaks, and to Wikileaks for stumbling across Bitcoin as a way to skirt the financial blockade (in addition to a range of other useful info such as the text to the TPP which only multi-national corporations are supposed to be able to see.)  That was how I heard about Bitcoin, and the happy accident of fate has resulted in fun toys like my new Savage to raining down on my head.

I'm not religious but am not scared exactly.   I'm quite concerned of course and thinking a good deal about the various courses of actions I might take depending on which path the future takes.

I really do consider the whole pharma industry in particular to be nothing less than an organized crime racket at this point.  Really!  Worse, our own government is acting as nothing more than hired muscle for their various rackets and I don't think that they do almost anything at all to protect the citizenry.  Possibly just the opposite under a scheme to transfer wealth by, at best, allowing people to get ill from avoidable dangers and remain in a chronically ill state, then using this condition to make it easy for the medical/industrial complex to shake them down.  As usual, most of the transfer of wealth goes from the middle class who managed to accumulate something worth having by working all their lives and straight into the pockets of the so-called 1%.  Like you say, it's pretty sick altogether.

Although I'm not religious and never will be, God bless.  It's increasingly hard for me to ignore the fact that some of the most reliable and out-in-front people in these struggles are those who derive strength from their faith.

Thx for the update and rundown MMH.  There is so much going on that it is hard to follow up on each thing.

Professor Doom1 did an update as well which is interesting.  He's been going through the TPP material leaked by wikileaks and spotted some interesting info about the efforts to get certain kinds of drugs derived from living organisms to get special treatment with respect to intellectual property rights.  He believes there might be a tie-in to GcMAF and this aspect of the TPP (and the dead doctors who were using the substance.)  For my part, I would not rule out this hypothesis and it seems worth exploring.  When one thinks about just the money on the line when it comes to oncology generally not to mention various other more conspiratorial issues, the numbers are mind-boggling.

WTF is that thing?  A 4 gauge!?!

As long as Monbiot and his eco-ilk remain humanophobes with pinko-ish and eugenicist tendencies they'll be useful enough to their corporatist/technocratic enablers to continue to facilitate.  When they grow beyond these mindsets they'll be discarded like a crusty jiz-rag.