William Scott Scherk

Austin's remarks in full: Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark A. Milley Hold a Post-Ukraine Defense Contact Group Press Conference, Ramstein Air Base, Germany In a fuller context: Now, we also heard today from the European Union on its proposal to speed up the production and delivery of ammunition for Ukraine, and more countries are thinking about how they can increase industrial production not just for the near term, but also for the medium term and the long term, and that is a powerful reminder that we stand with Ukraine's defenders for the long haul. You know, Putin made a series of grave miscalculations when he ordered the invasion of Ukraine more than a year ago. He thought that Ukraine wouldn't dare to fight back, but Ukraine is standing strong with the help of its partners. Putin thought that our unity would fracture, but Russia's cruel war of choice has only brought us closer together. And I'd note that Finland, which has long taken part in this contact group, is here today as a new NATO ally. I expect that Sweden will soon follow, and that makes something crystal clear — Putin's war of choice is not the result of NATO enlargement, Putin's war is the cause of NATO's enlargement. You know, when I first convened this contact group, I saw nations of goodwill that were eager to help Ukraine resist Russia's imperial aggression, I saw a coalition that stood united and firm, I saw countries determined to stand up for an open and secure world of rights and rules, and all of that was just as true at Ramstein today as it was a year ago. The Ukrainians are still standing strong in their fight for their freedom and they have the courage and the capability for the road ahead and we will have their backs for as long as it takes. Alternatively, imperialism of the Russian kind is not popular in the West. If the supreme ruler of the Russian Federation had not miscalculated ... More war reporting from the folks at Kyiv Independent: https://kyivindependent.com/tag/russias-war/

I'd like to see a deep-dive into the Minsk accords that examines arguments and fixed opinions from the (roughly) six sides. As Russian law provides prison for dissent ... this might mean looking beyond media committed to official Russian truth. While we await fresh findings, is it okay to post 'vantage' English-language videos from Russian citizen-reporters both in and outside the Russian Federation?

This query format can beguile with false (undocumented) dichotomy, presented as gnomic analogy -- with the entity 'Z-hater' and 'R-hater' undetermined. That format is about as far from Objectivist inqury as it gets. The equivalent of a fortune cookie. If a 'hater' is the polar opposite to a 'supporter' ... if a 'hater is the polar opposite to a 'lover,' then we are dealing with only one side of an equation being reasonable. As a bifurcation of possible human reactions to Z or R, it's logically insufficient. It satisfies zero criteria for an entity per ITOE chapters one and two. If 'Z-hater' is to be a useful entity it can only designate unreason. What is unexamined? Rational critique. Rational critique of Rand can take many forms, and most of them can be disposed of as naive or in error. Propaganda against Rand's philosopy is almost always characterized by the criteria under ignorance, malicious distortion and ends-justify-means. Is there a body of 'rational critique' of Z (and the culture and ramifications of Z)? If so, what does 'hater' have to do with it? This kind of query is fatally flawed, I submit. It bifurcates where bifurcation is not appropriate. It offers moralism and loaded language in its buried assumptions.

Added link. ... https://8kun.top/qresearch/qposts.html https://qalerts.app/?n=1 https://qalerts.app/?n=4966

Do you follow or pay attention to sites that purport to offer accurate maps of the cut and thrust? What I hear here is that while precise figures are difficult to arrive at ... Ukraine has sufferered more casualties than Russia. Can you please share the sources you may rely on as "impartial observers"? One site that I see cited in many places reporting on details of the conflict is the Institute for the Study of War ... among which projects includes an animated timelapse: Interactive Time-lapse: Russia's War in Ukraine Today's daily report: https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-october-17

I'm not by any means an Objectivist, brother. An interested bystander, perhaps, and one with a great sympathy for folks 'up against the machine,' but not an adherent. Good luck with the sales of your book. When I was in France I was surprised at the 'tightness' of what I could see of that culture. I remember being surprised at gardens in the suburbs of Paris -- so pruned and bollarded and crimped and gated and forced into conformity that it seemed the householders were angry with the poor shrubbery. It wasn't till I spent some time in the Sauterne that I realized Paris wasn't France . . .

Thanks for the links, Dominique. One question occurs to me . . . why do you use 'the author of Grandoria' and 'Dominique Raymond Poirier himself" rather than 'me'? I don't know what to say, except to quote from a terrible/wonderful scene between Bette Davis and Joan Crawford in the movie Whatever Happened To Baby Jane. The Davis character had been systematically tormenting her sister, and now attempts to reason with her . . . Crawford: You wouldn't be able to do these awful things to me if I wasn't still in this chair! Davis: But you are, Blanche! You are in that chair!

I am a bilingual Canuckistani and followed the links to Facebook and to the two forums noted. There is some apparent suspicion that a newbie poster is actually the author (/a brother or friend of the author) of Children of Grandoria, and so suspicion that the newbie is indulging in a bit of (hidden) self-promotion. These are huge forums with very large readership. As far as I can tell there is no banning or 'censoring' of discussion, just a rather dire dismissiveness and suspicious/supercilious attitudes. In the context of French literary squabbles, this is not particularly notable -- not to take a swing at 'The French' or anything, but the world of literature is taken much much more seriously in France than the average North American can comprehend . . . and the ability to be scornful and dismissive and arch has been taken to a level that is breathtaking at times. Perhaps the author (RichardP) can give some direct links to the worst of the commentary to illustrate the kind of reception his book has received? I would be happy to translate.

According to a message sent to readers/members at her Facebook page "Ayn Rand and the World She Made by Anne C. Heller," and also posted to her Wordpress blog, the author of "Ayn Rand and the World She Made" is shortly to visit the Archives as a registered user. She invites research questions via email (questions based on her book or other reputable sources) and writes that she will report on her visit later this month.

Via Youtube, a highlight from the upcoming documentary film Bloodied But Unbowed. This highlight clip is me in the flesh nowadays talking about sex and status and community and a wave of nostalgia. Wscherk, me, was once Bill Shirt, frontman for a couple of Vancouver bands. In the promo clip you can see some vintage footage of the callow youth cavorting on stage and singing the 1979 anthem "Nothing Holding You." Strange to have the old days return in Vancouver. We were once 300 brave villagers battling the swampy, shitty music landscape of the time, banding together for mutual protection and plentiful libations. Those days are gone, but for better or worse, Vancouver's punk-era nostalgia boom continues unabated. The film premieres at DOXA festival on May 13. I am so excited. I am wearing my new pink sombrero (only those who know me on Facebook will get the in-joke). I post this here so OOites who have only seen my snarkouts here can snark right back. ___________

Jake answers my query: "Objectivism would allow US Marshals to seize and destroy products such as these, or if Objectivism might allow a law against adulteration, and allow policing of such scams." Well, if under Objectivism, a law against adulteration might exist, and a law that allows policing of such scams might exists, I am left wondering just how this would work. If Stiff Nights is investigated, and its product found to be adulterated, who does the investigating? Or rather, what part or arm or agency of the government would be charged with these tasks? Here's what I don't quite get: there is and will be a Fraud Squad, one that has powers to obtain search warrants, and so on. If a customer/consumer contacts the Fraud Squad and says Zyprexa is mislabeled and mismarketed, what next? A corollary is the question of what the detecting/investigating agency would do if it was alerted that a whole type of Stiffy-type supplements probably contain a powerful blood pressure reducer. Would they investigate all those products? How does the detective differentiate between the innocent Stiffies and the adulterated Stiffies? What is the crime to be detected, in actuality? It isn't simply a generic fraud, it is selling a drug as a so-called dietary supplement. If an Objectivist government has the right/power to police such things, how will this power be constituted? Will it be pro-active and investigate widely, or only respond to particular, individual complaints? How would you want the tissue banks to be policed, Jake -- as a potential customer, right now?