America Before NATO

These United States joined in WWI NOT as Allies with England, Serbia and France, against Germany, but certainly not as an enemy of Turkey.

Read the original Chicago Tribune page

 

US banks, recently united via the Federal Reserve System, went to war in 1918 to ensure the money loaned to France and England would be paid back. Russia dropped out of that European alliance after its communist revolt. That raised the possibility of the Austro-Hungary-Prussia alliance winning and giving the losers an excuse for welshing. Here’s what happened.

February 9, 1920, British Embassy in Washington to Treasury: “We should welcome a general cancellation of intergovernmental war debts.”  (Garrett 1932 148). British debt was 4.5 billion gold dollars. France owed the US $4 billion. The aggregate total Europe owed America in 1926 was $22.5 billion in gold, and nearly all European nations sought to welsh on the debt.

Then, in the fall of 1922, a nationalistic government headed by Dr. C.J.W. Cuno took command of Berlin. The Allies charged Germany with willful default on her reparations payments, and at the beginning of 1923 French and Belgian troops occupied the Valley of the Ruhr, attempted to take over industries, but were balked by German passive resistance.
The mark fell from 7000 to the dollar in the first days of January, 1923 to 4 trillion in November, over 570,000 times as worthless. German credit abroad was wrecked as individual rights also converged on worthlessness.  (Nat’l Geog December 1928 667)

Calvin Coolidge conference September 16, 1924: I haven’t any plan or policy about the settlement of the French debt at present. That is all provided for by statute law and I suppose that the only representation I would be entitled to make about it is that which I am ordered to make by law. That [obtaining approval of Congress] was what was done with the British debt. It wasn’t settled exactly in conformity with the terms of the law. (…) What we have constantly kept in mind in that policy is that the debt that is due to us from one country hasn’t any direct connection with the debt that might be due to us from another country. That is why we have not mixed up the German indemnity in any way with our own debt.  (Quint & Ferrell 1964 188-189)

Mar 31, 1927‑‑German Reichstag unanimously demands a downward revision of reparations payments. (NY World Almanac 1928 102). What follows is from Prohibition and the Crash.

Chapter 151

The Moratorium

President Hoover declared on June 20, 1931, what would later be styled the “Moratorium on Brains” by postponing all inter-governmental debts for a one-year “standstill agreement.”[1] Since the United States was owed money by just about everyone involved in WWI, this meant a drying up of what revenue had been forthcoming, mainly interest at $250 million a year. Its real effect was to strengthen the debt repudiation movement, jeopardize private loans to Germany and even the loan principal owed the Treasury by the Allies.

Veterans stared in bewilderment and wondered how a government too broke to advance a couple of billion on their bonus bonds could casually toss away over $20 billion with a wave of the hand—and for the accursed Hun! The total amounts involved in all the major war debts ran into some $22 billion divided among five countries in 1925, and had changed little since then.[2]

A much more pressing concern, however, were the private loans which Dr. Hjalmar Schacht had assured Americans would be repaid as soon as the Allies’ reparations monkey were lifted off Germany’s back. Hoover, determined at all hazards to convince voters that the world economic crises did not originate in America, had no choice but to again direct attention “over there.” If Schacht were right, at least the bulk of the money owed to American investors might actually arrive. Reversing this flow was important, since Europe had put the touch on Americans for over forty billion dollars in private loans in less than fifteen years. The moratorium did get people’s attention, but not in any way that would redound to Hoover’s credit. Latin-American politicians, impressed by the largesse with which El Presidente altruista dispensed other people’s monies, began sidling up for a moratorium on their arrearage. Already Hoover’s move was backfiring. There was something of a stock market rally in New York when the news hit, but U.S. government bonds all closed behind minus signs.[3]

[1] (Hoover 1931 1976 325)

[2] (Time Capsule 1/12/25 105-6)

[3] (Hoover 1931 1976 331) (Garrett 1932 57, 67)

In today’s looter press the NATO parasitism situation is depicted as stingy selfishness on the part of the DemoGOP Congress that passes laws the President is required to enforce… exactly as when FDR was Prez. Europeans also whine that American voters do not buy their doomsday beliefs. US voters came out against the latest doublethink version of European National Socialism–a pogrom against electric generating capacity–and scientists specifically rejected all eugenic and pseudoscientific theories claiming industrial society causing global broiling, 31,000 to 18. As for nuclear energy, Econazi Germany is acutely aware that the atom bomb was developed to broil its socialist government. Germany managed to escape through surrender and suicide. Americans have no reason to fear nuclear power plants or weapons… except in the hands of socialists or religious fanatics.

Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 sifts the entire legal and financial history of the 18th Amendment as enforced by the Jones 5&10 Law. Amaze your college professors by producing a cogent paper on how a fractional-reserve banking system requires individual rights and is destroyed by fanatical prohibitionism and totalitarian asset-forfeiture looting. Live on Amazon Kindle for the price of a good pint.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

Political planks on legalization, 1932

Repeal party threatens to earn spoiler votes

In 1932, platform debates were aired nationwide and reported in newpapers everywhere. Here are the Democratic, Republican, Prohibition and Liberal Party planks on legalization of alcoholic beverages:

Prohibition party plank: [Invokes Almighty God and the Prince of Peace…] We unequivocally oppose the repeal or weakening of the Eighteenth Amendment or of the laws enacted thereunder, and insist upon the strengthening of those laws. …can and will coordinate all the powers of government, Federal, State and local, strictly to enforce, by adequate and unescapable punishment of all violators, this wise and beneficent law. (…) We indict and condemn the Republican and Democratic parties for the continued nullification of the Eighteenth Amendment and their present determination to repeal the amendment on the excuse that it cannot be enforced… (Johnson and Porter 1975 337-338)

Republican prohibition plank: We do not favor a submission limited to the issue of retention or repeal, for the American nation never in its history has gone backward, and in this case the progress which has been thus far made must be preserved, while the evils must be eliminated.
We therefore believe that the people should have an opportunity to pass upon a proposed amendment the provision of which, while retaining in the Federal Government power to preserve the gains already made in dealing with the evils inherent in the liquor traffic, shall allow the States to deal with the problem as their citizens may determine, but subject always to the power of the Federal Government to protect those States where prohibition may exist and safeguard our citizens everywhere from the return of the saloon and attendant abuses.
Such an amendment should be promptly submitted to the States by Congress, to be acted upon by State conventions called for that sole purpose in accordance with the provisions of Article V of the Constitution and adequately safeguarded so as to be truly representative. (Johnson and Porter 1975 348-349)

Liberal Party prohibition plank: We demand the immediate repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. We demand that, without modification or compromise of any kind, the entire question of liquor control shall be returned to the States, where the use of beverages can be regulated by local option in each State, county, city, or otherwise, or prohibited, according to the wishes of the people therein. With this local option, or other control established, the sale of beverages, except that saloons are permanently abolished, should be freely permitted by law. (…)
To those who say that the system should be modified so as to permit the sale of wine and beer, we answer that you cannot modify anything that is essentially wrong. You have not thought the matter through. Besides, any modification of any kind would fail to correct the central evil. The bootlegger would still rule the situation, and the traffic in hard liquors, now so universally effective, would still make it necessary to preserve the whole system of futile enforcement, together with the violence and corruption which now disgrace it. Therefore, the Eighteenth Amendment must go out of the Constitution, root and branch. (The Liberal Party in America, 1931 pp 106-7)

Democratic prohibition repeal plank: We advocate the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment. To effect such repeal we demand that Congress immediately propose a Constitutional Amendment to truly represent the conventions in the states to act solely on that proposal; we urge the enactment of such measures by the several States as will actually promote temperance, effectively prevent the return of the saloon, and bring the liquor traffic into the open under complete supervision and control by the states.
We demand that the Federal Government effectively exercise its power to enable the states to protect themselves against importation of intoxicating liquors in violation of their laws.
Pending repeal, we favor immediate modification of the Volstead Act; to legalize the manufacture and sale of beer and other beverages of such alcoholic content as is permissible under the Constitution and to provide therefrom a proper and needed revenue.
We condemn the improper and excessive use of money in political activities. (Johnson and Porter 1975 332)

Observe that the Republicans copied the Prohibition Party platform (in 1928) and the Democrats copied the 1931 Liberal Party wet plank (calling for repeal of the Prohibition amendment). In both cases, small parties casting less than 1.4% of the vote caused the major parties to adopt or reject important changes in the laws. This is the spoiler vote leverage effect.

Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929, explains how the Jones 5&10 law signed March 2, 1929 demanded 5 years on a chain gang and a fine worth 30 pounds of gold in the War on Beer. That and asset forfeiture were the straws that broke the economy’s back. By September 2, with Mabel Willebrandt publishing a former prosecutor’s tell-all in 21 major newspapers, the bull market ended and stock prices began their decline into the Crash and Depression. See it all for the price of a pint  in Amazon Kindle format in either of two languages.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

Choosing a legal translator or court interpreter is also easier when you check their credentials to see what they offer.

 

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

Houston Translator Association Irregularities

The Houston Translators and Interpreters Association has in recent years been a model of competence in the industry. Yet the current bylaws amendment ballot looks more like a model of practices to avoid. The online bylaws dated April 14, 2010, define members as follows:

Article III – Membership…

Section B – Classes and Qualifications

The Association has three (3) membership classes: individual, corporate and institutional.

• Individual: An individual who is engaged in translating, interpreting or related work (and may include students)

• Corporate: A business with an interest in translation or interpretation

• Institutional: An institution with an interest in translation or interpretation.

Directors elected in single-candidate elections now propose to change those member classes by creating a special class of students who at this time would not be allowed to vote to elect their teacher nor be listed in the online members directory (where the public expects to find professional linguists). To propose the change, voters were told that “new text is indicated by underlining, deleted text by strikeout.” But for the ballot proposal sent to members to change the bylaws, the board of directors approved the following:

Section B – Classes and Qualifications

The Association has four (4) membership classes: individual, corporate, institutional and student.

The above introductory sentence (followed by four, not three bullet items) appeared with no underlining for the new text nor strikeouts for deleted language. It gives the incorrect impression–instructions elsewhere to the contrary notwithstanding–that the student category already exists whether one likes it or not, and that there is mere quibbling to be decided on some trifling point of verbiage in the last of four preexisting bullet points.

In an association of quilt-makers, brewers, basket-weavers or kickboxers, the omission might be brushed aside as simple incompetence, the result voided and new ballots produced. Indeed, one such error in ballot translation into Spanish for the Texas State government had precisely that outcome and cost taxpayers about $100,000 to reprint.

The bad ballot language at issue, however, is presented as approved by the very people immigrants depend on for legal defense of their individual rights in courts that order execution by letal injection. Credible fear reviews can shield dissenters or whistleblowers from extrajudicial execution or torture by junta-style dictatorships, and HITA hosted a presentation on those. Professionals educated abroad want their syllabi competently translated with all legalities accurate so they may exercise a profession despite entrenched lobbyists erecting barriers to entry.  Our newsletter and web tips just now alerted linguists of at least a dozen different fraudulent scams. But more perfidious scams are perpetrated from within the profession. Must we circulate ballots that are an indictment of the board’s competence to frame and edit a simple bylaws amendment proposal?

For over a decade beginners were advised by prominent HITA and AATIA members not to bother to apply for municipal and county court interpreting in Texas. From a position of public trust they emphatically proclaimed that a license was required as a prerequisite. Nevermind that this was a law urged by three individuals claiming to represent the profession without their lobby efforts appearing in our trade publications. The persistent lie was finally exposed at a regulatory meeting at which a government regulatory attorney explained on the public record that the law meant nothing of the sort.

The old law merely formalized a procedure for showing an incompetent interpreter the door and ordering up a substitute, typically someone grandfathered in irrespective of real credentials or ability.  The dissembling was a sales platform for quickie diploma mill courses pushing test answers, podiums for grandfathered insiders to talk down to aspirants, and a loophole enabling agencies possessed of counsel to quietly and without fanfare exploit inexperienced youngsters at pauper rates. The law was only repealed after a libertarian interpreter put up a website playing a recording of the regulatory lawyer’s explanation in language too clear and simple to falsify.

If sidetracking students from earning a degree liable to make them employable is deemed a good idea, it ought to be passed by honest vote of fully-informed members using a ballot prepared in conformity with its own instructions and specifications.  Leaving out the underscores and strikethroughs is a demonstration of lack of competence or subterfuge that can only lead to the outcome being challenged. That is not the sort of attention the board needs to be focussing on the Houston Interpreters and Translators Association.

Any association of actual linguists can raise revenue and provide a public service by hosting interpreting contests. Winners selected by the attendees could thereby earn credible credentials by live testing. A similar competitive approach is used to select and rank athletes, speakers, dancers, writers–even tire-changers or jugglers performing at association events. An interpreting contest need be no more complicated than a live debate or a spelling bee, and its results would carry weight with the membership, judges, attorneys, doctors and honest regulators interested in an objective assessment of competence in performance.

If you are an interpreter or translator interested in the honest defense of individual rights, by all means do get in touch.

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog…

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

 

Puerto Rico Libre!

Freedom from Teetotalitarianism. Read the original…

There was a time when Borinken had the cojones to demand freedom from President Herbert Hoover and his dry Gestapo.

Puerto Rican demands for freedom from America’s Sharia Law Amendment and dry laws declaring light beer and even Bacardi Rum felony narcotics were getting hard to ignore.  Rebellion was also brewing in These States.

From Prohibition and The Crash–Chapter 144:

Illinois State Senator Walter A. Huebsch warned executives that their businesses were secure only as long as the government was secure. The popular will, he claimed, was for repeal, and governments which set themselves against the popular will were inevitably overthrown by force. He urged that government restrict itself to maintaining peace and defending property.[1]

This seemed to be the sentiment in “Porto Rico,” where the Supreme Court had held on December 19 that the “People of Porto Rico” would no longer prosecute the U.S. Government’s prohibition cases. The truth was that the people of Puerto Rico had never had a fanatical dry movement, nor any quarrel with bootleggers or smugglers. Farmers on the island were anxious over lost profits and longed for a return to the good old days when rum flowed freely and sugar was sheik.[2]

[1] (CT 1/18/31 9)

[2] (CT 1/19/31 26)

As always when browbeating the little people of the banana republics, Hoover traveled by fully armed naval warship and the White House announced his intention to tour the possessions. The Chicago Tribune had since January 19 of 1931 given front-page coverage to the conquered island’s struggle for freedom and independence.

March 14/31, White House statement on the President’s Caribbean tour: To SECURE a short rest and to settle certain administrative problems regarding American possessions in [the] Caribbean, President Hoover will go to Porto Rico and probably to the Virgin Islands next week on the reconditioned battleship Arizona which is undertaking its 10-day test run at sea. (…)
The trial run of the Arizona has been scheduled to the Caribbean to start on March 17. (…) (Hoover 1931 1976 143-144)

Behind the scenes, Puerto Rican judges had refused to hear cases against their dashing, romantic, defiant bootleggers running the Demon Rum to America’s thirsty millions.  El Presidente Prohibicionista was not going to sit still for back talk from uppity natives. America’s altruism toward our little brown brothers, outlined for the world by William Howard Taft would not let up. In the words of Chicago’s philosophical saloonkeeper, Mr. Dooley, to the inhabitants of the conquered Philippine Islands:

An’ now, ye mis’rable, childish-minded apes, we propose f’r to larn ye th’ uses iv liberty. In ivry city in this unfair land we will erect school-houses an’ packin’ houses an’ houses iv correction; an’ we’ll larn ye our language, because ’tis aisier to larn ye ours than to larn oursilves yours. An’ we’ll give ye clothes, if ye pay f’r thim; an’, if ye don’t, ye can go without. An’, whin ye’re hungry, ye can go to th’ morgue—we mane th’ resth’rant—an’ ate a good square meal iv ar-rmy beef. An’ we’ll sind th’ gr-reat Gin’ral Eagan over f’r to larn ye etiquette, an’ Andhrew Carnegie to larn ye pathriteism with blow-holes into it, an’ Gin’ral Alger to larn ye to hould onto a job; an’, whin ye’ve become edycated an’ have all th’ blessin’s iv civilization that we don’t want, that ‘ll count ye one. We can’t give ye anny votes, because we haven’t more thin enough to go round now; but we’ll threat ye th’ way a father shud threat his childher if we have to break ivry bone in ye’er bodies. So come to our ar-rms,’ says we.

That, in effect, was Hoover’s message to recalcitrant boricua judges in 1931, albeit couched in a much more diplomatic threat to make them diplomats in some equally dry satrapy dominated by Saracen berserkers where women wore balaklavas. From Hoover’s news conference of March 26, 1931 at Porto Rico. (…)

I am advised from every quarter in the island that there would not be a popular vote of 5 per cent in favor of independence. (…) It [PR] has a population of nearly 900,000… There are 760 police in the island. That includes all forms of peace officers. (…) I was a great deal struck with the many capable people there, especially the judges and the Chief Justice. He is a man of very considerable parts. We could use them to advantage. We should give them an opportunity in our diplomatic service. narcotics (Hoover 1931 1976 153-4, 157)

So now that relegalization of the Demon Rum and boricua womanhood’s realization that statehood is preferable to murdering their superstitious bruto pendejo idiota papist husbands for trying to ban abortion have both worked to increase the vote for statehood by an order of magnitude. The said statehood, if achieved, will necessitate the redesign of “th’ starry banner iv Freedom,” I have here a modest suggestion for that new flag.

Thinking outside the box gives a better reflection of our position–oh jes, I am boricua and proud of it–as advance guard in defense of the Panama Canal. Jackbooted minions of the Papacy of Rome might likewise torment the flower of Cuban womanhood, and if that island decides the 14th Amendment is preferable to papal coathanger abortion laws, starvation, or communist slavery, there could someday be two estrellitas down in the Caribbean portion of the starry banner. Until voters replace Republicans with Libertarian politicians, there is danger that godless Canada might beat us to the punch and offer Canadian freedom (with zero abortion laws and not much prohibition) to those happy escapees from the cruel hand of the Spanish Inquisition.

If you ever need a crisp and idiomatic translation of Puerto Rican papers for emigration, or contracts or laws for investment, think of me, HenriquePhillips.com or www.tradutoramericano.com

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog…

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

Trump Brennt Paris?

Remember the debates? the platform? The Republican party published a huge platform way before the election with lots of fanfare. (Disclaimer: I vote libertarian!)

1. We oppose any carbon tax.
2. We support the development of all forms of energy that are marketable in a free economy without subsidies, including coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear power, and hydropower.
3. We support expedited siting processes and the thoughtful expansion of the grid so that consumers and businesses continue to have access to affordable and reliable electricity.

The other kleptocracy party, instead of a repeal prohibition plank, ran to Paris like Woodrow Wilson with an opium cartel League of Nations. There, its leader tried to circumvent the Senate with a non-treaty transferring sovereignty to National Socialist and International Socialist parasites in Europe. Trump had nothing to do with the clumsy trap nor with plans for disarming it. All he did was accept the job of shoving that published platform down everyone’s throat. Here’s how voters reacted:

The GOP energy plank is their only plank that makes sense and is almost kind of libertarian in places. When was the last time you saw these platform planks mentioned anywhere? Here is another one you definitely will not see mentioned.

Protection Against an Electromagnetic Pulse
A single nuclear weapon detonated at high alti­tude over this country would collapse our electrical grid and other critical infrastructures and endanger the lives of millions.

Clearly the platform portrays electricity and access to energy as  positive thing, like the capacity to do work, earn a living and survive catastrophes. That anyone feels the need to point this out is sufficient cause for alarm. It shows that government and mystical schools have produced a populace unable to understand the elementary definition of energy, much less grasp the work-energy theorem or safety statistics. But Republican emphasis on mystical prohibitionism, asset forfeiture and the bullying of pregnant women guarantees they will again lose as soon as the Democrats learn and delete carbon taxes and efforts to ban electricity from their platform.

The Libertarian Party seeks unfettered access to energy. Its platform is short and easy to understand. Each one of the 4 million libertarian votes cast in the presidential race alone packs the law-changing clout of sixteen votes wasted on the corrupt looter kleptocracy.

If this helped make Econazi Europact rejection announced by the US president less mysterious, just think how well this translator can clarify legal or engineering documents written in Spanish or Portuguese.

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog…

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

Taxation as Looting

Chicago Tribune 01DEC1932

So the People’s Party got 9% of the vote in 1892, then the Democratic Party copied the Communist Manifesto income tax plank into their own platform. So… what came next, once the Progressive Party levered its passage?

Chapter 9

Manley Sullivan

            A Carolina bootlegger and car dealer named Manley Sullivan was convicted of income tax evasion, but appealed to the Fourth Circuit Court in 1926. Sullivan claimed that since bootlegging was illegal, filing tax returns for it would amount to self-incrimination prohibited by the Fifth Amendment. Sullivan won on appeal October 19 of 1926, but Assistant Attorney General Mabel Willebrandt appealed the Circuit Court’s decision, and the Supreme Court granted a hearing March 7, 1927.

The actual date on which attorney Manley Sullivan (or Manly Sullivan, records are inconsistent)  was originally charged, and in what location, is one of the most tightly-held secrets in American jurisprudence.  Federal Reserve bank balances (in millions) began falling nationwide when the decision freeing Sullivan under the 5th Amendment was struck down by the Supreme Court. Source, Lawrence, 1929. The nation’s economy at the time was roughly $100 billion in gold, and the Federal budget about $4 billion.

FRB reserves accelerated when the 5th Amendment was upheld in 1926, then began falling after the conviction was reinstated

The trial ended on May 16, 1927, reversing the appeals court decision and effectively nullifying the Fifth Amendment.[1] This time the dip in stock prices was much smaller. For one thing the discount rate had been carefully lowered since September of 1926, disguising somewhat any stock market effects.[2] On the heels of the Sullivan decision came the Marron case, in which the Supreme Court approved the use of a San Francisco speakeasy proprietor’s illegally seized books and records. Marron was also argued by Mabel Willebrandt and her victory eliminated what Fourth Amendment protection had survived the wartime Espionage Act.[3] Revenue agents were empowered to seize records and force confessions at will, eliminating the ditty of the times:

My sister sells snow to the snow-birds
My father makes bootlegger gin,
My mother sells love for a living,
My God! how the money rolls in.
My brother’s a big missionary
He saves little girlies from sin
He’ll save you a blonde for five dollars
My God! how the money rolls in.

 

[1] (U.S. v. Sullivan 5/16/27 274 U.S. 259)

[2] (Lawrence 1929 286-289)

[3] (Willebrandt 1929 241) (Marron v. United States 11/21/27 275 U.S. 192)

Find out the juicy details behind the mother of all economic collapses. Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 is available in two languages on Amazon Kindle, each at the cost of a pint of craft beer.

Brazilian blog…

Need financial translations for or from Latin America and the Caribbean?

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

League of Looter Nations, 1929

After President Harding and the Senate said no, the League of European stupefacient warmongers limped on without us. So what happened? Here is an excerpt from Prohibition and the Crash (On Amazon Kindle) by J Henry Phillips

Chapter 12

The League of Nations

            On the international front the State Department Division of Far Eastern Affairs had approvingly read the Geneva Opium Convention of 1925, and lent a sympathetic ear to the so-called Scheme of Stipulated Supply. The idea was to use futures trading for all legal narcotics procurements. The effect would be to greatly limit production for the illegal market.[1] The World Anti-Narcotic Union had held a gala meeting early in March and obtained verbal support from Governor Al Smith, Mayor Jimmy Walker and Italian dictator Benito Mussolini—but nothing was actually done.[2]

Since 1924 Pennsylvania Congressman Stephen G. Porter had been an influential figure in U.S. drug negotiations with the League of Nations. But the man was a mystical pedant and alienated League members (See and compare A.G. Sessions). Indeed, it was on Porter’s motion that the American delegation to the Geneva conference had petulantly withdrawn from the Convention of 1925.

The truth was that delegates from India, Turkey and Persia understood perfectly well that any sudden curbs on opium production would bring on acute economic crises and political instability in their countries. Porter understood none of this and stormed out in a huff, convinced of the foreign delegates’ insincerity. Even before the Great War German chemical interests had struggled against curbs on drugs, and not without reason.[3]

Live on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

[1] (Taylor 1969 211, 228) (Eisenlohr 1934 129)

[2] (NYT 3/8/28 8)

[3] (Taylor 1969 178-9, 184; 193, 201, 107-8, 213) (Eisenlohr 1934 227, 231, 256-7)

Ever need an agribusiness interpreter?

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

Soviet Anthropogenic Climate Change, 1960

A Soviet Russian slideshow precursor to The Jetsons  predicts egotistical capitalists will alter the climate for selfish profit, causing storms everywhere in the year 2017. New link to untranslated version: (link)

This jewel turned up at The Independent Institute blog, and is sure to delight fans of Boy-meets-tractor Soviet nostalgia kitsch. The Great Disappointment that troubled anti-industrial Millerites when the Mayan Calendar Cassandras failed to deliver Armageddon, The Rapture, Tribulation and Left Behind in 2012 may well have been a slight miscalculation. Here is Soviet prophesying at its finest, crafted back when John Futuristic Kennedy debated Richard Mutualdestruction Nixon.

The best part is reserved for last. Egotistical madmen are hiding out on an island much like Hawaii–or perhaps Aldous Huxley’s Pala. Naturally, they resort to terrorism as the civilizing forces of Ordered Liberty close on on them and cause… (drumroll, Maestro…)

You guessed it! CLIMATE CHANGE! The whole enchilada, folks, complete with tidal waves, sharknados and you-name-it ecological horrors. Will Their Brothers’ Keepers–the wise and benevolent authorities on settled science–manage to use carbon taxes and a recent breakthrough in nuclear energy to save the planet from the folly of misanthropic greed? Stay tuned… (The original translated video has since been deleted!)

Instead of watching the idiot box, Libertariantranslator roams the historical past in many countries but just a few languages. Here you find new perspectives on old problems and old perspectives on new ones… Such as Prohibition, the Crash and Depression.

Get the complete story in Prohibition and The Crash on Amazon Kindle in two languages. After this you’ll be able to explain to economists exactly how fanaticism and loss of freedom wrecked the U.S. economy.

I also produce books and articles in Portuguese, using Brazilian historical sources at http://www.expatriotas.blogspot.com or amigra.us

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

Harding pulls out of League of Nations

Harding resists League of Nations seduction: read original

Ninety-seven years ago another fake 97% consensus sought US backing in a European bid for revenge on Germany. European politicians and field-marshals cried like babies, pouted and threw tantrums in disappointed outrage.

As in the Kyoto self-immolation “protocol,” US Senators realized their constituents would hang them from lampposts if they signed away American sovereignty for a vultures’ pact over the bleeding remains of defeated Germany. We weren’t Europe’s “ally” at all. To avoid such a sucker stigma Congress entered the war on behalf of Daddy Warbucks’ Belligerents Loan Collection Agency as an “Associated Power.” These States refused to sign the Treaty of Versailles or the League of Nations, both of which showed in their Article 23 they were drug cartels out to fix prices–now that The Accursed Hun had (they hoped) been elbowed out of the dope market.

America signed a separate peace with Germany and Austria-Hungary–and had never for a minute been at war with Ottoman Turkey. (Australians were less circumspect in their dealings with the Old World oligarchies, and some lived to regret their gullibility.)

So as Progressive prohibitionist Wilson died of complications from the Spanish Flu, The Fourteen Points and a stroke, Harding and the Senate–not Trump and the Senate–became the evil cabal determined to plunge the Precious Planet into another ghastly World War by withdrawing from pacts with the perpetrators of the instant war. To avoid that horror they needed only sign the hundreds of clauses those friendly European nations needed signed… so the US government could again be entangled in their web of deadly intrigue over smoldering ruins stalked by cadaverous starvelings.

Warren Gamaliel Harding became president, scoffed at prohibitionism, hired his stoner buddies to government posts and was apparently poisoned by his own Republican Party pals in Canada after a visit to Alaska. Whatever his faults, Harding did not wreck the economy nor send tens of thousands of young men to hideous deaths in foreign feuds.

Harding’s words are an object lesson to today’s looter kleptocracy politicians:

I rejoice that America is still free and independent and in a position of self reliance and holds to the right of self-determination.

Remember this lesson, and the next time you wonder what is written on a foreign document, hire a translator to reveal its meaning.

Prohibition and The Crash–Cause and Effect in 1929 explains how men with dry kleptocracy service pistols destroyed the U.S. Economy. Harding and Coolidge tried to hold them back but Herbert Hoover released the Dogs of the War on Beer. Live on Amazon Kindle for the cost of a pint; read it on your cellphone.

Prohibition and The Crash, on Amazon Kindle

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ

 

Global Warming Math

 

Sinfest, the webcomic to end all

Does the USA need a State of Fear?

Fact: A = A
Inference: 2A = 2A
This is the way algebra works, like the scales of justice. It you add to or subtract from both sides of the equality equally, the truth value of the equation is unchanged.

Datum: over 31000 degreed scientists signed and mailed in the PetitionProject.org petition successfully urging the US Senate NOT to ratify the unconvincing Kyoto hara-kiri “agreement”.

Datum: Sierra Club president statement before the Senate, “97% of the scientists” believe the Earth is “cooking and heating up and warming.”

President of Sierra Club before US Senate. See the video.

Assume both data are true, we can calculate the minimum number of people who earned science degrees from colleges and universities and believe the Earth is “cooking and heating up and warming.” Let’s do that.

100% minus 97% is 3%, and a percent sign % stands for 100 in the denominator or divisor.

Let x equal only those 31000-and-change scientists who do NOT believe the Earth is cooking and heating up. Those 31000 are 3% of what number?

3x/100 = 31000. Multiply both sides by 100, and
3x = 3,100,000 Right? Next we divide both sides by 3, so that
x = 3,100,000/3 Still with me? Now we simplify the fraction on the right by dividing, and
x = 1,033,333 scientists. That is five times the combined membership both the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society.

So supposing the 31000+ Petition Project American scientists alone are the entire dissenting 3%. Algebra tells us the 97% has to comprise at the very least 1,033,333 scientists. That is five times the combined membership of both the American Physical Society and American Chemical Society. Enrico Fermi would ask: Where are they?

Where is the list of these “consensus scientists” listed by name and by state? 

Q.E.D. = Quod erat demonstratum

If you ever need a technical translator with an adequate command of Junior High math, search me out.

My surprising analysis of Prohibition and The Crash is available on Amazon Kindle for the price of a pint of craft beer.

Live on Amazon Kindle in 2 languages

 

Name(required)

Email(required)

Website

Comment(required)

Submit

Δ