Space Patroller

Thanx. Here's a zip of a screensaver I made of the items in "Cities of Wonder" http://mediazilla.spacepatrol.us/FutureCity.zip EDIT: The screensaver above doesn't look much lide the YouTube flv. I wodner if I could get him to do a build of my adopted image of Terra City http://spacepatrol.us/monoterm.html

I was responding to waht was implied in this post and what I've seen elsewhere in this forum. For myself, most of my life I've been attracted to the exotic and I've met and liked many immigrant families, particularly Portuguese, Araabic, Albanian and Greek. When I was at the University of Rhode Island in the summer of '65, there was a small group of us from the US, Taiwan, Ethiopia, Israel and Austria and we got on famously, we were called the International Command (had to do with THE MAN FROM U.N.C.L.E.) When you're a musician, you get attracted to the music of many exotic cultures and find the cultures themselves interesting. But your casa is your casa and if it gets to strange or balkanized, it becumes alien to its own inhabitants. One thing I do hear the Right get bent out of shape over that should be needless is when schools have exhibits of how persons live in other lands. We did this regularly, usually at the request of us kids and referring to a classmate from another country. What that did to foster understanding of Geography was irreplaceble. I suspect this to be a reaction to the incessent attacks on American culture that comes down from the leftist establisnment

The Right, with the exception of a small cadre of nutbags who have no credibility with anyone anyway, Overwhilmingly has specifically targetted illegal immigration and expressed welcome to legal immigrants. I have heard this specifically and repeatedly. The other issues here are the "Reconquista" of the Southwest, as well as racist groups like La Raza, first mentioned by Davic Brudnoy in the late 1990's and ealy 2000/s as well as bi-lingualism which Ayn Rand discussed in the late 1970's, supporting English as the official language of the US: See "Globabl Balkanization". Brudnoy has stated that "we should close our borders to immigration from third-world countries until we assimilate what we have [which he said would take about a decade] and only allow those with marketable skills to enter". Much of Brudnoy's material comes from CAMP OF THE SAINTS as well as the goings on (Islamization) of Europe and England.

I vaguely remember seeing an ad for that book. But do I need to spand that kind of jack to be told that Objecitivsm is aces when I've known for almost 40 years that it's the best bet

As you will see when you open thie link, This started life as an E-card from one of the "old space dogs". in the Xmas card display at our "Civic Center". It inspired me to do something dynamic with it so I did http://www.service.spacepatrol.us/slideshow.html Why I put it here has to do with Pixel City in the YouTube section. Also Miss Rand seemed to be a city person and cities have been the subject of much speculation. Space Patrol is the only show of its kind where the action is centered in a city and, indeed, Terra City almost becomes "the seventh character" the sixth being the Terra V spaceship in the same way that the Enterprise was a "character'" in Star Trek and the Millenium Falcon was a "character" in Star Wars, except that this was much earlier. I so loved this imatge that I use it for "modern" Terra City of the year 3000 AD For the original Terra City see http://www.swapsale.com/3-DS.Patrol4B.jpg

The link does not work

Two things: 1. The Gores have been rich for 3 generations and have been described as "patrician" 2. Have you ever seen a poor liberal or one that had to earn a living? For the longest time, the 10 richest list in the House and Sente has been overwhelmingly dominated by Democrats. You could call it the "Stearns Syndrome"

Actually this whole thing started because I was teeing off on Neil Boortz' lack of logic I could see going after the Taliban. They were shielding Bin Laden. I don't know about Syria, If they are a true Ba'ath state, then they are secular. However they do seem to be involved with Hamas and Hezb-Allah but that may be just for political convenience. I do know that Hussein and Al Qaeda hated each other and he regarded them as a threat to Iraq. I don't know if that's evil or just alien. As I said. we're Martians to them. Unlike us, they are millenia-old homogeneous cultures pretty much and separation of religion and state would be alien to them implying the sapration of the Good from the state. Even we subrogate politics to ethics by virtue of the fact that Politics is derived partly from Ethics by virtue of asking after "good government". but all secular states ought be used as a wedge against the Militant Islamists. However, there seems to be something in the Muslim mentality that the only way you can stop them from doing what they do is obliteration, or if not specifically Muslim then Near Eastern. But then, they have yet to have a Renaissance, let alone and Enlightenment. Secular states in that area may be the breeding ground for just such. Someone once said that we should obliterate Mecca to which I said. "They just might consider it the Will of God and we will have blown our wad. Maybe we should obliterate half of Mecca and ask if they would like us to finish the job but that could be mis-interpeted to. Maybe if we just took it over and made an impregnable forterss of it..." To me it just seems to be what you get when you mix integrity (loyalty to values) with mysticism of a strong type. This is what I think Christianity was like in the Middle Ages. Not evil, just wrong out of ignorance but powered by intense loyalty. In some ways these pople are admirable for their tenacity and strength of character; they live and die as they believe. It's a psychohistorical conundrum But then look at the Old Testament and see what the Israelites did and you can see what would scare the bejesus out of the Arabs. These people LIVE their religion just as we live Objectivism. It's just that we've had our Renaissance and our Enlightenment: For which the Muslims were resopsible. What it does show is what Rand pointed out as to how rare rational entities are in the world. You are in good company with the idea that we ought have taken the Soviets out before they became a powerhouse. That idea was held by Von Nuyman (of the Von Nuyman machine). However, Rand seems to hold that if we had not propped them up they would have collapsed of their own weighlessness. Pat Buchannan has said that we ought to have let them fight it out with Germany on their own. There seems to be a logic to that. Left to their own devices, Germany and Russia would have fought to a draw that would have exhausted them both. We problably would have cleaned up the "winner" very easily. But that became a moot point on 7 Dec 1941. What was really scummy to evil about Bush in this whole mess was a statement from Armatage at the State Department on the week of 2 Feb '03 that I heard with my own ears "I don't think we should include Iran in the Axis of Evi. They are really different..." Care to guess what that was to smooth the way for? Thanx for the corrections.

From what I gleaned of it. they or their leader holds to something called "Liberarted Objectivism" meaning Objecitivism wihout some kind of organization (I read that as ARI) and has accused the Objectivist leadership of ad hominem arguments against Branden, which I have not seen here, Kelley of whom I know nothing and Rothbard (how you can do an ad hominem on a person who supported the Iranian and Sandinista Revolutions with the excuse that "libertarians can't be responsible for the outcomes of them [knowing full well they were repressive in nature]" I don't know. it takes a pretty lowgrade lifeform to do that anyway). The thesis being that Objecitivism will do well without being institutioally organized. The argument has some merit insofar as organizations tend to get into personal feuds and resembles some misgivings I had expressed in 1978 about having an intellectual heir is an attempt to guarantee the future and therefore futile and in say 2500 AD, upon coming upon a problem. Objectivistss may try to solve it be quoting a long line of Peikoffs back to Peikoff then Rand rather than solve it independently. But on the other hand someone has to see to it that it's kept intact. I never got to read OPAR. I'm so much of an Originalist, I wonder if I might consider it Revisionism:). I suppor the closed system thesis http://dancona.spacepatrol.us/thatsall.html I can give it, for knowledgeable people, a nihil obstat, but not an imprimatur. It does look Like I could have some fun with it but that's about all. My comment is the same the one Ayn Rand had when Martha's Vinyard was considering secession from Massatuchitts: "I sort of think they're cute". There does seem to be something about Objectivism that brings out the sci-fi/avante garde in people. Well, in AS you had the ray screen and the Xylophone and I swar that Galt pulled a "Day the Earth Stood Still" number. There were even some moves afoot in the mid-'70's to classify AS as sciencne fiction and some as fantasy.I thik Rand put a lot on that horse and I wonder how many persons got the full breadth of it and she did say it was a "stunt" novel. I would love to have been a telepathic fly on the wall while she was writhing that work. I guarantee we don't know the full story there. The thing is bigger than it looks and has more to it than she every explained. There was more to her than met the eye, too. What I get is "we will control the horizontal. we will control the vertical. We can set the focus to a soft blur or crystal clarity..." When Kendall first laid that one on me, I thought it referred to a style. But no, Actually I'm stylistically more "Archo-Tech" with my roots in the 1950's. That style is natural to me and a part of me, steeped as I am in science fiction culture at many levels from space opera to hard science fiction. But I don't see any sci-fi in Neo-Tech and what is the "neo" or the "tech"? There seems to be no "there" there. I mean people have been trying to get me to develop psychohistory for almost 25 years. The first references to that in real terms I got in the early '70's and they were on the order of analyizing leaders in Freudian terms as in "Kissinger on the Couch". Then I found that I coul use my 36 credits in psych and 20 in history to predict trends, then I found that on the local talk shows of the early 1980's predict a person's ideology by their voice. To check it, I taught an ordinary person how to do ti and she got as good as I was measured by the correct guesses, over 90%, so I knew I was onto something. That was no real great shakes since some repoter used a machine called a Personal Stress Analyser to figure that Carter was lying about something, Criminal Justice curricula were starting to include voice analysis and as a vocalist and an excellent liar I learned to control my voice. What I did identify that was new was what I called a "sense of life" component in the voice; a subtle but omnipresent emotional tone that did not vary no matter how the person tried to use his voice. I was dead scared of the Reagan Administration supporting the Muhajadeem, saying to a friend, "look these are not freedom fighters like you guys are saying. They're muslim holy warriors who hate us as much as the Sovs" I was told "Let them have Afghanistan: The land is crappy and they can't do anything with it". To which I said "they can use it as a staging area to take a shot at us. These guys are fanatics and just don't give a shit". The Enquirer was running the usual psychic crapola once and as part of the article that was read to me, the challenge was to make 5 predictions. I just looked at some of the trends in the news and got about 60% and people started oooing and ahhhing. I look at economics as a branch of psychology. The only unique thing is that I can predict what people will do given their philosophical outlooks and there's a story I can tell about that, too. I figure out how fortune tellers (not astrologers, but card an palm readers or any interactive fortune teller) get it righ so often, and they do, the secret is not occult, but culture. These late middle-aged women know how to evaluate your age (which tells her your stage of life and what's big with you) and your cultural-psychological background. The cards and palmistry just provide a framework for talk and therefore data acquisition. You tell them all they need to know without knowing it. learned that trick from observation before I was 13. So wha'ts the real tech in NeoTech?

I'm using FreFox 3.0.4. This could end no other way. First; we are like Martians as far as they are concerned. Second; we don't have the power to do the job. Third a secular dictatorship that would be a wall against Iran is better than a Shia dictatorship. I have misgivings about the "freer nation may attack a less free nation" doctrine. International Affairs are conducted under the rule that all nations are equal. Also there are no universally understood standards of "free" and "dictatorship" in which to frame that doctrine. By our standards the whole rest of the world is more or less of a dictatorship. For one thing there has been a long-standing tradition that dictatorship is a legitimate option to deal with national emergencies and that there were standards by which it was entered and exiited in an orderly way. There was talk in the Us durning the Great Depression of doing just that, but we did not have the entry and exit means codified, just as we have no laws regarding sedition yet we know that there is such a thing that ought be addressed. The net result is that practical application of that doctrine is a recipe for chaos and constant war. The Dictatorships would feel compelled to strike first. Controlling the use of war has been the driving force behind the formation of international bodies. Generally the Clauwitzian dictum of "War is an instrument of dipomacy" has been a linchpin of Realpolitik which has been the way of the world for over 100 years, and that, too has supposed to have been governed by law and in the US, the Constitution, which Bush sidestepped in a very unmaly way. The standard of judgement to which the US is a signatory is "clear and present danger" which seems to be the rational way to do it since that can be universally defined in military science, at least in the Western Wrold. Also there is the dictum that the more civilized can best lead by example. So that doctrine is not, and cannot be unconditional, and is framed by other principles. Even if that doctrine were an absolute, "May" does not mean "ought" or "must". As I saic, by that doctrine we could attack 85% of the other nations, but must or ought we? We could have done a better job by liberating Cuba, which is much more of a dictatorship than Iraq, was of no use to us and has done us more damage or posed a greater threat. How about North Korea? Iran? Now thanks to this 6 year debacle, we're screwed, blued and tatooed. Our credibility is gone and our strenth is shot to hell, not to mention the economic debacle of "hyperinflation" that is about to fall on us. Besides, this was not the doctrine that Bush used. The three major theses were that WMD posed a significan threat to us which was about 80% of the argument, the Iraqis would welcom us. which was false, only those who had a use for us, which was about 11% and "regime change" which was a floating abstraction attached to nothing in Reality about 5% and the rest was assorted crapola. So we must judge the action on the terms of the actor since it was he, not us, who did the acting. There is also the question of WMD. The M-16 is a weapn of mass destruction compared to the flintlock which is a weapon of mass destruction compared to the gladius which is a weapon of mass destruction compared to the hand etc... Can one nation or group of nations tell any nation what it may posess without destroying the doctrine of international equality thus plunging the globe into warefare? Besides the whole idea sounds leftist to me (I first came across it on Star Trek The Next Generation in c1993 and I know that has about a 45 degree tilt to port and can prove it) and since when have we been an advocate of arms control? Does SALT I and SALT II ring a bell? We fought those on the principle that arms control itself was a bad idea. Besides was Hussein, a secularist, about to take a run at us who he knew could beat him if we set our minds to it and wouldn't we welcome the use of WMD, had he had them, against Iran? We'd be crazy not to. So, in fact, it was in our interest for him to have them. Now if Israel wnated to take him out. well they had "business" with him and that would be their business. Beyond that when Israel correctly bombed Osirak in '81, they got the diplomatic back of the hand from everyone; including the US. I've got FirreFox 3.0.4. Tell me more and how to use it!

Wotta Ride!!! As good or better than the aircyle scenes in Star Wars: Return of the Jedi.

GRRR! I'm either due for a new keyboard or mine needs a good cleaning. I can see missing letters that I know I struck. Also, Where's the damn spell-check on this boad? Getting sick of editiong 3 times and still finding typo's towards the end of longer posts.

Some time back, Boortz was doing the usual pro-Iraq war rant and said in his usual snide way "You can't prove that the Weapons of Mass Destruction weren't trucked off to Syria" not a week later the final report comes out that these weapons never exixted. Today, still defending the indefensible he said "You can't know what would have happened if Hussein had stayed in power" ans part of the justification for this mess. Now, I always thought logic worked on what you know, not what you don't know, but that's just me. Well I know five thingS 1. Al Qaeda in Iraq would have been confined to the northern no-fly zone controlled by the US, which is where the were limited to prior to the war; his on Fox News some week prior to the invasion. 2. there would be about 35,000 fewer US casualties, not to mention Iraq war vets and Reagan's Secretary of the Navy running as Democrats. 3. there would have been no Valerie Plame incident to demoralize the US intel community. 4. there's one egg Rush Limbaugh would not have on his face: "it will be a cakewalk" Some cake, some walk. 5. we would not have turned the Sunni Arabs against us by supporting the Shia who've been our enemies since '79 and it's a good bet that Iraq is on it's way to being another Islamic Republic, too, anschlossed with Iran, or broken into 3 pieces: More Global Balkanization like Kossovo. Well, here's what we did know in late '02: http://cockpit.spacepatrol.us/iraqnophobia.html This is a whole business we'd be better off withut. But then, how do you defend something that did not go through the normal Constitutional channels of a Declaration of War before removing a foreign government and instead was chivvied through the UN (which Boortz allegedly hates) and that used as a justification? Harry Browne, for whom I would have voted if he'd been in a viable political party, the only good Libertarian in 20 years called it "the biggiest adventure in big goverment; claiming the right to declare war on the whole world [bush having changed the standards of 'clear and present danger' to wage a peremptory rather than preemptive war]". Bit tjem Bpprtz is a Libertarian who supports compulsory seat belt use and the huge cigareete tax increase. Where's the front of the horse?

There's also this It falls in two categories but since I don't wish to cross-post, I'll just give you the address http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.p...mp;#entry216695

I don't know if anone's posted this one but... Should we adpot this band? I say that because there are at least two connections this band has with us 1) in 1978, in an editorial in STARLOG, Kerry O'Quinn describes some of the "Ayn Rand in pop culture" things and rmentions Rush and ANTHEM 2) In 1988 Mark Scott, Objectivist talk show host of IMPACT, 3:00-7:00 p.m. WROR NYC 710 AM said that Rush was his favorite band Ya think?

That is waa-a-ay outtasite I wonder If I can integrate that with Space Patrol? Warren Chaney (Director at SMALLVILLE and a huge SP fan) will kill me: He knows a bit about Rand but thinks she has an "Existentialist" attitude c1998 I saw a rerun of JEOPARDY in which the members of a book club, the name of which I forget, were asked to name the book that had the most influence on them and the answer was THE FOUNTAINHEAD Of course there are many perosons who take from Rand only what they want, I've known a couple who think that Rand was advocating "if you want it just take it" hedonism devoid of any rationality. This shows up in DIRTY DANCING

Now THAT is YouTube the way it ogught to be VERY creative and the music is nice and avante garde but does not interfere with the video and the whole thing has a futuristic touch. If anyone wants it in case it vanishes, I can download it, zip it and put it where it can be taken. or if it's small enough, email it. FireFox and RealPlayer enable me to do that. Make that "already downloaded".

The line if from "A Simple Desultory Phillipic" fronm PARSELY, SAGE ROSEMARY AND THYME and is "I bee Rolling Stoned and Beatled til I'm blind. I been Ayn Randed and nearly branded a Communist cause I'm left-handed. That's the hand to use. Well, Never Mind" from 1966-7 EDIT: http://www.youtube.com/results?search_quer...n+and+garfunkel A band out of the Boston area in teh 1990 timeframe called Atlas Shrugged

There's also another thing here. Have they forgotten 1776 and 1812? Just what geves them the arrogance to tell persons how to act on their own soil? I guess they forgot that they pissed away their empire. Especially since World Wars I and II when we violated our professed neutrality on their behalf. Hey guys, just in case you forgot or didn't get it This is the United States of America, NOT the North American Colonies. Something about some poor bloke named Cornwallis... Perhaps we would regard it as a privelege to visit your country if you didn't have classless dolts in high places. We tend to be Anglophiles to start with. And there's always Dr. Who. I hope the print is big enough so that Smith can read it without her spectacles. Oh, and Jackie: Just sign me up as Abdul Hasan Atta-Toud Ibn Al-Speis-Patrollah Sheik Yabouti. aka the Ayatollah of Roq-N-Rollah: And my name better be at the top of the damn list, too! No, Smitty, that's not a gun you see, it's my middle finger: held high and proud and right in your fat face. It's a long way down from Margaret Thatcher to Jackie Smith

No, it just shows what happens when a mind that can't get out of the narrow band of literal interpretation tries to be a wiseass. Intelligent, adult, rational minds know how to interpret infromal language. If we were in a formal sutuation then that would be a different matter. Stop being so uptight-esque and lighten up-esque or you'll die of apoplexy before you hit 50. And also learn about aside comments, too. I guess David Brudnoy was rightg about how miserably Gen-X'ers were educated. When I was your age in 1972 I was writing A level papers and had performed a philosphical synthesis that proved the internal consistency of Objectivism using mathematical logic techniques, Two years later I gave a talk on Objectivism as part of the Philosophy Seminar portion of the 5-credit Western Civ class at Providence College in which class I got an A. and my talk was so good that the instructor had me stay over for the next class. Now if you know anything about colleges and their philosophy departments, you would know the full meaning of that. 30 years ago I did a synthesis of how the special sciences lead up to philosophy, which given the earlier synthesis, proved from a math logical perspective that Objectivism is indeed the proper philosphy, having both coherence and correspondence. There's one thing that a 27 year old wiseass doesn't get: I've been 27, Have you been 37? 47? or 57? If you were dealing in the physical world with real people you'd get a good cuffing for that kind of crap (the one we both should have gotten when we were 14 and I got when I was 19 that says "you're in the garem") and told "You know friggin' well what I menat. What are you? A baby?", or if you tried that on Brudnoy's talk show he'd tell you in a very embarrassing way not to be such a prig and you don't want to know what Ayn Rand would do to you; just her tone of voice would send shivers up your spine. I've heard her do it (on the radio and it sent shivers up mine). And ther'd be no sympathy, either.

Anybody whose head is not 3/4 up their colon and who knows how to read would know I was not speaking literally, hence "-eszue" In fact, beginning with P.J O'Rourke, 25 years ago, anyone who acts like Smith and Napolitano are informally called "nazi" as in "safety nazi", "health nazi" and the like. Grow up!

I heard him and it wasn't as spectacular as I thought it would be. He is right on this one. Damn! Bernie Goldberg (Bias and The Slobbering activism of the media) listed Savage as one of the 110 persons screwing up America. I hope you know that most of this is an act, demonstrating how we should be more "savage" to our enemies. However it overshadows his rational messages and his better moments as in "Psychological Nudity" ( I like that concept as he uses it to mean honesty and a look at one's naked soul). Still he and Levin get bigtime demerits for using the shout-down tactics which are the province of the leftist student rabble. But how come leftist admins like to have fascists as their homeland security chiefs? Jackie Smith and Janet Napolitano are cut from the same gestapo-esque cloth

It seems to me that this question was "biased" toward one brancyh of philsophy: Politics individutalism is a metaphysical concept because it pertains to how things existi in general. You must have one person before you have a society. You must have one wolf before you have a wolfpack. You must have one flower before you have a garden. You must have one grain of sand before you have a beach. A journey of 1000 miles begins with one step. A journey of 1000 light years presupposes that the journey of 1000 miles took place which presupposes that one step. In all cases the individual unit per-exists and defines the group. whether we're talking about human, animal, plant or inanimate. Even water exists in molecules befor all else, the same is true of air. When you count, you count by one's before you count by two's, three's, ten's...... To be so over-arching and integral a part of the existence of all things. this must be built into the way the world works. That is the province of Metaphysics. This is why there can be no ethical or political "defense" of individualism: it preceeds them. Morality regulates the behavior of...individuals. Politics organizes...individuals. Ergo they require the pre-existence of individuals. what if there were no individuals to behave; then where is morality? what if there were no individuals to organize into communities, regions and nations; then where is politics? LIke, Nowheresville, man.

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/05/04/chrysler-and-coercion/ Anybody wanna give me any more lip?

Gee, Thanx