Climate-policy is unconstitutional

When the evidence against something is so overwhelmingly compelling as that against the government’s #Climate-hysteria, the choice to believe in it (without regard to the conclusions of science – Both Ross McKitrick and Syan Ichi Akasofu have concluded that CO2-concentration has risen sharply since Kyoto came into effect (1990), while Syan Ichi has added that the observation that the global temperature has remained the same), becomes a religious one (I don’t mean to offend anyone who believes in a creator-god, a sky-god or whatever). Of course I’m all for freedom of religion, but also for seperation of church and state (as the constitution ought to ensure).
So, this forcing of people to join them in prayer at the altar of Gore, is utterly illegal.

They all squeal that CO2 is such a threat, yet they can’t be bothered to make any effort to allow people to reduce emmissions, so that would justify sending them to Scheveningen, the international criminal court, in order for them to stand trial for this deliberate attempt at destroying the planet.

Then again: upon entering office, the US president’l-elect has to swear to defend the constitution, “just a piece of paper”, according to GWB, the same guy who gave the world the Patriot Act which eroded some of the protections in the Bill of Rights. So what use is an oath to protect a constitution if the guy who swore to protect it, personally violates it? They’re just sounds, right, Georgie?

Homo homini lupus est 2: Gulag 1

I just got back from the Resistance Museum in Amsterdam (, they have a very good exposition, today there was also a special feature on The Gulag.
This inspired me to write a bit more on “Homo Homini Lupus Est”, Hobbes’s phrase meaning that “man is a wolf to his fellow man”. Especially so, when given power over said fellow man. There were some video segments of a documentary about the Gulag.
One of those segments, they portrayed a Russian classroom when the subject of the Gulag was brought up. One of the pupils was asked: “Was the terror and murder of millions worth the economic benefits the Gulag-system, yielded?” And the boy actually weighed the pros and cons!
Let me first say that the economic benefits were not all so great: Stalin wanted a railway through Siberia: after several tens of thousands had perished there, Stalin died, the project was halted and never resumed. But the project would never yield a return on investment. It’s just that everyone was too scared of Stalin to stop his preposterously grandioze plan.
I would answer the question as follows: “Who is supposed to benefit from the economic development? The glorious leader? Or the population.? (By whose grace the self-deluding despot’s job exists at all?)”

Homo homini lupus est

Not that I have read Thomas Hobbes so I don’t know exactly in,what exact context he used the expression of man as a wolf, but surely, the suggestion from that phrase must surely be, that submission to the wolves, surrendering all power to them, would be a fatal idea.
Acording to the phrase stands for: “man is a wolf to his fellow man”, if Wiki is to be trusted (never on political issues), then my standpoint must be the correct one.