Second Amendment Nuclear Weapons

Since the dawn of collectivism humankind has engaged in biological, chemical and conventional warfare. The bloodiest wars have always been between collectives that believed almost the same thing. Union versus Confederacy, Christians v. Jews, Protestants v. Catholics, Mohammedans v. Christians, Communists v. National Socialists… these mystical hatreds underlie the deadliest wars of recent millennia. These international wars are all gone now.

Chemical weapons were gasped at in 1916 because they made young men appreciate the 13th Amendment–the one that outlawed involuntary servitude. American conscripts were ordered to shoulder clumsy arms and march into louse-ridden foreign trenches to save the Federal Reserve banks from war loan defaults after Russian communists quit the opium war. The war stopped efforts to use the Hague to curb heroin dumping, so it was a war to make Bayer Great Again–at least in Germany. American youths faced with the prospect of being sprayed like cockroaches in those foreign trenches might prefer imprisonment in support of the 13th Amendment. That’s the Amendment where the Supreme Court “could not see” the military draft as coercive, but COULD cancel the First Amendment right to hand out copies of Amendments from the Bill of Rights. Being blown to bits in distant trenches to protect the French opium regie in Vietnam or morphine acetylizing plants in Marseilles or Scotland was different from being gassed. High explosives were ‘murrican! Artillery shells were okay to politicians on the Republican and Democrat sides of the aisle. Poison gas, however, was baaad. Germs and nukes are also baaad, perhaps because they might muss the hair of the politicians and lobbyists who order attacks. That kind of hair-mussing is “mass destruction.” 

So it was that things muddled along until a nuclear physicist named Sam Cohen worked out ways to make small H-bombs allocate less energy to explosive force and more energy to the production of neutrons. Sam found that neutrons could penetrate an incoming warhead and cause a premature chain reaction to melt an incoming bomb. Neutron-induced chemical reactions in the lensed explosive jacket could likewise be counted on to damage those enemy bombs. Sam Cohen briefed then-candidate Ronald Reagan on this class of weapons and how they might be deployed.

To Soviet military planners this was really bad news. Fighter pilots could not be trusted with enough fuel to cross borders. A Soviet pilot with plenty of fuel could defect and exchange the plane for a good reception from immigration authorities. Bombers and submarines presented that same vexing problem, plus the possibility their crews might nuke the Politburo or Soviet military installations instead of their intended victims.

Intercontinental ballistic missiles were naturally the communist weapon of choice. Fire them off and relax, with no chance of human meddling–until Ronald Reagan as President realized that Sam Cohen’s neutron bombs could cook those incoming ballistic warheads on their simple and predictable paths. Stinger missiles were doing pretty much that to Soviet helicopters in Afghanistan. To Soviet partisans, a way had to be found to stop America’s militias from keeping and bearing arms that could intercept and ruin incoming nuclear missiles.

The Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty was the first such attempt, signed by Quaker Prohibitionist President Richard Nixon. Nixon was promptly ousted, but Soviet Socialists pushed Strategic Arms Limitation talks for a SALT treaty to really disarm These Sovereign United States. Debates in Physics Today were, in 1982, discussions of the virtues of preemptive surrender to communist regimes. That changed in 1986, with the possibility that any such treaty might infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms. That right to bear arms is in the Second Amendment, in the Bill of Rights–a thing that makes These States different from all the ancien régimes of Europe and Asia and their colonies in Africa and Latin America.

What happened next changed the Cold War. Stay tuned…

When the need arises for translations involving nuclear energy in South American or African Portuguese, look me up.

Advertisements

Ticking Turing Machines

Why did British codebreakers—Polish codebreakers, actually–call their cipher machines “bombes”?

Background: before National and International Socialism signed the pact agreeing it was OK to invade and dismember Poland, Polish mathematicians were already working on breaking Enigma machine codes. These gadgets used wired wheels inserted into a cipher machine to scramble and unscramble text. Since business and Die Ewige Staat are much the same in Germanic Altrurias, commercial Enigma machines quickly evolved into military coders to meet the exigencies of the initiation of force. The initiation encountered resistance, much as in Newton’s Second Law, and war was declared.

After actual bombs rained down on British assets, the folks at Bletchley Park hired Alan Turing to work on decryption. Alan was comfortable with mechanical approaches and improved codebreaking machines the Poles called “bombes.” Why bombes?

The explanation in several Turing books that mention the name had to do with the ticking sound they made. The writers then leapt to the conclusion of ticking time bombs, nèe (or is it née?) “bombes,” Quod Erat Demonstratum. This explanation was, for some reason, facile and unsatisfactory.

Another unsatisfactory answer to a simple question was given by a couple of Brazilian students being prodded, poked, inspected and detected by Amerika’s own imitation of Germanic Altrurian officiousness. I refer, of course, to the Transport Sozialist Arbeiterpartei, affectionately dubbed the Tea Essay at U.S. airports. The unionized government employee doing the poking, prodding, inspecting and detecting produced from their luggage a plastic box with some heft to it, a wire going in and a tube coming out, and asked “Wuz dis?”

The Brazilian students knew exactly what it was: an aquarium pump to keep tropical fish from drowning—a bomba de ar.
“Eat ease a air bomb,” they replied politely–albeit none too fluently–and were immediately surrounded by semiliterate steroid abusers First Responders™ with loaded guns, handcuffs, pepper spray, clubs, nylon straps, badges and governmental impunity.

So returning to the bombes that defeated Europe’s christianizing eugenics program:
Q: what goes tick tick tick and is familiar to Polish scientists?

A: a vacuum pump.

Ever need technical translations?

Soviet Anthropomorphic 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. 

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 Madhouse 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 irresponsible greed? Stay tuned…

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…
Brazilian blog too…

 

My Presentation In The Australian Parliament — The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

This is Rudy’s presentation. Rudy’s baccalaureate was in Geology, followed by an MS in Electrical Engineering. He is a programmer, chip designer and detector of pseudoscientific flim-flammery much like Prof. Petr Beckmann. Here he is in the Southern Hemisphere Land of Auz, in the half of Planet Earth that is home to only 1/9 of humanity. 

Tweet

via My Presentation In The Australian Parliament — The Deplorable Climate Science Blog

Liberal Party of America, 1931

LIBERALPARTYCOVERA proto-Libertarian Party was organized in 1930

This first approach to a Libertarian Party was organized in 1930 to repeal prohibition, the 18th Amendment and block intrusive religious laws–blue laws, Sunday closing laws, baseball bans on Sundays. It is hard for anyone today to imagine we had something like Sharia law during Prohibition in America. Once this Liberal Party published its 1931 platform, the Democratic Party had little choice but to adopt a prohibition repeal plank. Otherwise, frustrated beer drinkers would vote their conscience and those lost spoiler votes would cost the Democrats the 1932 election. The Liberal Party was non-protectionist, non-militaristic, anti-war, forgiving of war debts, opposed to communism and the dole, church/state separatist, favored normal election of senators, legal no-fault divorce, wanted removal of censorship and curbs on employment and abolition of useless federal bureaus. Its existence and positive influence, like the causal connection between Prohibition and the Depression are a well-kept secret.

So, why do the Republican, Prohibition, Consta-to-shun and Tea parties hate “liberals” as much as German National Socialists did in 1932? Here are a few tidbits…

At a meeting held in New York City on February 4, 1930, which was attended by about one hundred representative men from every section of the United States, a proposal was made to create a national political organization to be called the Liberal Party. (…) The discussion developed the general agreement that America is being held tight in a strangling grip by powerful groups of men and women, narrow and fanatical of mind, who had constituted themselves an ecclesiastical union, guided by a fatuous intention of making our people virtuous, according to the peculiar tenets and creeds of each group, by legislative enactments… 

Would people have moral courage enough to break away from the lifelong ties of political fealty? Above all, would the young men and the young women of the nation behold the light and promise of a new day, and would they give their allegiance and support to a movement which aimed to restore to them the vanished liberties which their fathers had established?

http://crablifeadoption.weebly.com/

WHAT CRUSHES NATIONAL ECONOMIES

Does that fanatical strangling grip of 85 years ago remind you of anyone?  Here we are 44 years after the Libertarian Party formed to press for many of the same policy changes, and so far only 3% of the voters have gathered the courage to cast law-changing spoiler votes. Granted, this mid-term election result is a 300% increase over the sort of totals we got before the Asset Forfeiture Crash of 2008, and in a way it makes sense.

National markets collapsed in 1929 in expectation of Herbert Hoover’s Republican Administration wrecking the economy by ramping up prohibitionist asset forfeiture. By 1932 the situation was intolerable and the nation’s honest media made it clear that prohibition and the income tax were the jaws of the pliers crushing the nation’s economy.

The Liberal Party made the historic first move and one of the entrenched looter parties followed their lead. The dactyl that made beer a felony was broken off but replaced by prohibition of other enjoyable drugs, and the income tax propodus remained to cause economic recessions in 1937-38, 1988-92, and the recent 2007-09 asset-forfeiture recession. After 1929 it took Americans three years to come to their senses and vote for repeal. In the nine years since the 2007 ramp-up in asset forfeiture several states have moved to repeal prohibition and need more libertarian spoiler votes to bolster and reinforce this sound policy. Votes for any other party send the wrong message and are wasted.

Are you surprised to learn how the repeal of prohibition began? A simultaneous interpreter has to think outside the box in order to mediate between cultures, concept and languages. Get in touch for translation or interpreting.