Scientific “Consensus”: Gateway to Tyranny

Scientific “Consensus”: Gateway to Tyranny

By William D. Zeranski

The next time someone asks, “Do you believe in Global Warming?”  Inquire why they are asking a religious question, because that is what they are asking.  Belief is for religion not science.
The question should be:  “What do you think about Global Warming” or “Do you think Global Warming is real (i.e. a fact)?” 
Science is about facts, and the fact of the matter is, with regard to Global Warming, there are, and have been, two sides, and two difference trains of thought on the whole Theory of Global Warming. At least two sides are necessary for science to advance. Lord Monckton recently  rebuked Al Gore for his attempt to silence dissent:

“Sceptics and those who have the courage to support them are actually helpful in getting the science right. They do not, as you improperly suggest, ‘obfuscate’ the issue: they assist in clarifying it by challenging weaknesses in the ‘consensus’ argument and they compel necessary corrections … .

No, I am not going to list all the points of contention between the two camps.  We’re all adults here, and those who are looking for the facts can find them.  My point is there are two camps.  But by the MSM, ‘environmental’ groups, and political aspirants/hacks like Al Gore, one would swear that there was no question about the theory, about the facts.
The inconvenient truth is if both sides had equal time the issue of Global Warming would not be considered a ‘done deal.’ 
Okay, what happened here?  What happened to science?  Well, politics hijacked science.  And remember politics always works hand in hand with ‘social concerns’ which can be anything from social reconstruction to environmental Marxism.  But science is about facts–politics is not.
How were the facts circumvented?  Well, the word being bantered about is ‘consensus.’  That’s right.  We have a consensus–scientific consensus.  What we have is a group of agenda driven scientists in cahoots with the MSM and political guerillas, because science–real fact driven science is propelled by experiments which can be repeated, again and again. 
When a theory is espoused as if it was a law and be promoted by a bunch of people who only ‘agree’ something is fact, but have no factual authority–well–I see a danger here, and this danger does have historical roots. 
Walk with me down the path of time and history and I will frighten you with a word–a single–horrifying–example of scientific consensus:  Eugenics. 
A bunch of scientists and medical-types in American and in nations around the world decided by scientific consensus that Black people were inferior because their heads were smaller and their lips stuck out!  Jews!  Jews were considered by German scientists–yes, scientists–to be rats walking on two legs.  Sterilized them!  That was the noble plan put together by a noble scientific consensus.  But hell, why sterilize Jews, let’s just build a camp! 
Beware!  Every thought, idea, belief, and religious belief is constantly being attributed to human biology–Genetics.  Now, when will the Cult of Scientific Consensus decide to come for thee?  Think about that and be afraid.

Hell’s Coming with Us — the quintessential battle cry

Hell’s Coming with Us

By Adriana Ramirez

My favorite line in any movie represents the quintessential battle cry needed in today’s war. It reverberates in the tone of victory. 
It was a line delivered by Kurt Russell in the film Tombstone when he played frontiersman Wyatt Earp. The moment after the death of one of his brothers, Wyatt warned the western gang, The Cowboys, that he was going after them and “hell’s coming with me.” 
The fierceness of the phrase, the seriousness of purpose could not be clearer. After losing close to three-thousand of our citizens and as many of our soldiers, we must let our enemies know their time is up and we’ll be there to deliver their end.  America must make this our mantra. Words that go beyond fake diplomatic verbiage and the soft underpinnings of political threats that run contrary to actual consequences.  “Hell’s coming with us,” epitomizes what the American political herd lack in this war against jihad.  It is a war that requires that we back up our words with action.
Hell’s coming with us….
America is in need of a battle cry, a rallying shout of support that fixates on our desire to win and secure our way of life for generations.  The kind of battle cry that sends a message to our enemies that we will not relent, and they will adhere to only one solution-their defeat. 
Such an example of “hell coming with us” can be seen in the army of Ethiopia, a third world army that has fought the jihadis successfully by actively challenging them with no mercy and no second guessing.  The Ethiopians assessed the situation and purposely engaged the enemy with one goal-their end.  Interestingly, Ethiopian allies took control of the former U.S. embassy, abandoned for a decade, before spreading out across Mogadishu to secure key locations. 
I hope their example is contagious in its basic premise that to win a battle, let alone a war, is to engage the enemy with a focus, not a mild interest; a will, not a maybe; a desire, not a fickleness. 
The recent events in Somalia demonstrate both the jihadis’ ability to successfully wage an insurgency, but yet admits their failure to control Somalia.  This in itself discloses an interesting pattern.  The jihadis are successful in the realm of non-ending battle –  insurgency/terrorism tactics – but when it comes to taking over a country, controlling a people, they fail terribly.  One can bring up stringent Saudi Arabia, but I can point to the unrest in Iran. 
The jihads in Mogadishu proved their inability to control a population and run a government.  As an army they’re weak because their fascistic idealism runs contrary to human nature, its love of life and its many elements: wine, music, film, celebrations, love, the need for family and friends, and the freedom to worship as one wishes to worship, or not to worship. 
Hell’s coming with us….
We also need to stir the media pot in our favor, in spite of the stirrings of a meddlesome old media.  Their dependence on unverifiable sources and witnesses and acts of fauxtography, makes them less credible.  Do they know the word taqquiya, a.k.a “religious deception,” or in more friendly terms an admission by Muslims that allows them to say whatever furthers the case of Islam?  That lying to the infidels, which means us, is the first line of attack in jihad?  So despite a media that demands we, America, hold a gun to our head and shoot because we are really to blame for this whole mess with jihad,
Hell’s coming with us….
Foremost, our enemies must be identified and pointed out.  If we find Iranian agents in Iraq, Iran then must be the object of our military affection.  The same goes for Syria or any other agents found operating in Iraq.  We must meet chaos not with chaos, as we know in chaos theory there’s an underlying order to random data, but with an honest and effective war strategy that attacks this seeming chaos with abrupt action. 
We must acknowledge and solve our weaknesses and propel our strengths.  We should adhere to the battle tactics of John R. Boyd. Everyone should know that name, a man who not only found weaknesses in our military when he proved that most Soviet fighters had dog fighting capabilities superior to those of their U.S. counterparts, but was brought in by then Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney to question General Schwarzkopf’s battle plan in Desert Storm.  Boyd was seen by Marine Corps Commandant Charles Krulak’s 1997 tribute as the “architect of America’s victory in the Gulf War.”  The Boyd-think of disrupting your enemy’s battle decisions is to attack them quickly and disorient them.  This can only be accomplished with decisive behavior, not unending talk, spurious thinking, and meaningless ultimatums. 
Hell’s coming with us….
My research into battle cries led me to words from Benjamin Franklin, from Gandhi, from George Washington, and even Bertrand Russell, on to George Orwell.  Some were simple in their opinion of war, how evil it was and how cowardly men were to participate in it, as if war is something that is chosen by good people.  Others spoke of the necessity of war and the need to face evil rather than allow it to linger and fester, infecting the world with cruel destruction and killing.  One must remember that Gandhi was able to force Great Britain out of his country, because he successfully shamed the British of their oppression and spoke to their virtues as a civilized society.  But what can one do when the enemy has no sense of propriety or civility? 
Hell’s coming with us…  or our enemy will bring it again as it did that one September morning. 

15 rules for understanding the Middle East

15 rules for understanding the Middle East