Monday, March 30, 2020

Now reading A World History Of Art by Gina Pischel...

B-Movie Roll-Out: "Red Scorpion" (1989)


This is Episode 11 of Season 2 of the B-Movie Roll-Out, and this episode takes a look at "Red Scorpion", a controversial film that was produced by notorious lobbyist Jack Abramoff and starred Dolph Lundgren. This is meant to be humorous as well as legitimate criticism.

Thursday, March 26, 2020

"United States" to Imperial America and the Reason for its Standing Army


Originally posted on February 2, 2019:

I think that it's already time for me to quickly reply to some of the feedback that I've been getting to a few of my posts. Enough time has passed. In general, I'm a little proud of these posts because I've been able to come up with satisfactory predictions and explanations, in my view. When it comes to the Russian society, it was very easy to explain what has been happening and to make predictions. It's because, unlike some other people, I have an interest in the history of different societies. I can read, I can learn, I can make comparisons, and I can make predictions. Apparently, Carroll Quigley's writing is interesting for right-wingers in the USA because they think that it's in tune with their beliefs. Therefore, they promote and digest most of what he wrote, and they like to reinforce their right-wing, often irrational, conspiracy theories with it. But something that I noticed about them is that they lack good knowledge of history. They're not interested in history, or in other societies, or in processes, or in systems. They're only interested in coming up with conspiracy theories and in how these conspiracies allegedly affect them and their "nation". Therefore, the predictions that they make, if they even attempt to make them, based on Quigley's writing, are rather disappointing. They take what Quigley wrote, and they can't come up with their own predictions based on what he wrote because they seemingly can't think outside the box or because some of them are anti-communist, neo-isolationist researchers of the American establishment such as G. Edward Griffin. On the internet, I've yet to find anything close to the predictions and explanations that I've been able to make. Anyway, Russian Civilization had the state as its instrument of expansion from about 1,500 AD to about 1,900 AD. In 1,900 AD, the state ceased to function as an instrument of expansion in Russia, it became institutionalized, and Russian Civilization entered upon the Age of Conflict. Interestingly, only two decades after Russian Civilization entered the Age of Conflict, it got its first post-expansion empire, which was the Soviet Union. Because of the distress that took place in Russia from 1900 to 1920, the political unit known as the Bolshevik Party was able to conquer almost all of the territory of Russian Civilization. The Bolsheviks created the military empire known as the Soviet Union, and they brought unity and new achievements to Russian Civilization for several decades. The Soviet Union disintegrated after 1985, after about two decades of decay, and Russian Civilization got thrown into a second period of disunity and conflict, which is continuing. So, when it comes to Russia, only a few questions are worth asking. First, how long will the current period of conflict and disunity last before a new post-expansion empire gets established on the territory of Russian Civilization? Second, what political unit will establish this post-expansion empire? Will an outside invader come in and conquer the weak Russia, with its demoralized population, like when the Mongols (Yuan) conquered China or when the Turks (Mughals) conquered India? Or will a new, so-called revolution take place, like in 1917? It's when a party of intellectual, decisive, and militant revolutionaries (the Bolsheviks) was able to seize power in Petrograd and then go on to conquer the rest of the territory of Russian Civilization in the so-called Russian Civil War. By the way, I think that the smartest thing that the Bolsheviks did after coming to power in Petrograd was creating the Red Army, with which they were able to defeat enemies on the territory of Russia. Because of what they were able to acquire and to loot during the Russian Civil War, the Bolsheviks were able to finance the economic growth of the Soviet Union from the 1920s to the 1940s. In my view, this is all that is worth considering when it comes to the current, disorganized territory that is called Russia. Another thing that would be interesting to do is to go over a few of the disagreements that I have with what Quigley wrote in his books, mainly in 'Tragedy and Hope' (1966). One of the characteristics of Western thought is its disinterest in, and dislike of, the outside world. In Medieval times, people in Western Europe thought of the outside world as a sea of monsters and myths, and this situation has changed little or not at all since then because Western culture and the Western outlook have continued to exist. When it comes to Russian history, Quigley, as a fairly good and rational Western historian, got things right, up to the year 1917. He wrote on page 11, "The first period of expansion, covering 1500-1900, had just begun to change into an Age of Conflict (1900-1920) when the vested interests of the society were wiped away by the defeat at the hands of Germany in 1917 and replaced by a new organization of society which gave rise to a second Age of Expansion (since 1921)." Now, after everything that has happened in Russia since 1917, I can safely say that this elaborate explanation by Quigley is erroneous. Russian Civilization did not enter upon a new Age of Expansion in 1921. The Age of Conflict that began in Russia in 1900 continued, and the Soviet Union was actually the first post-expansion empire that appeared. But, since Quigley thought that the Soviet Union represents a new Age of Expansion of Russia, he got a number of other things wrong in his book as well. Firstly, he pretty much wrote that the Soviet Union is a serious threat to Western Civilization. This would have been correct if Russian Civilization had indeed entered a new Age of Expansion in 1921. If this had happened, Russian Civilization would have been a serious threat to Western Civilization right now, for example, because Western Civilization is continuing to stagnate. But such is not the case because the Soviet Union, as a post-expansion empire, began to go into decay in 1965 and it collapsed after 1985. Secondly, because of this viewpoint about the Soviet Union, Quigley was rather hostile to the Soviet Union in his book. He accepted pretty much all of the anti-Soviet propaganda and lies that are circulated in the West because he thought of the Soviet Union and of "communism" as a serious threat to the West. He also wrote, for example, that Joseph Stalin behaved like an autocrat. Well, again, this would have been correct if Russian Civilization had been in a new Age of Expansion. But, since this was not the case, Stalin, in reality, did not behave like an autocrat (like a tsar). He behaved and acted like a leader of a post-expansion empire (like a Roman emperor, like an Egyptian emperor, like an Ottoman emperor, like a Kamakura emperor, like a Mughal emperor, or like a Ming emperor, for example). This also helps to explain what Stalin did during his rule. We know that the Bolsheviks, under Vladimir Lenin, conquered almost all of the territory of Russian Civilization from 1918 to 1920. However, a few territories, like Poland and Finland, had been lost after the collapse of the Russian Empire. So, the reason why Stalin wanted to get Finland and Eastern Poland into the USSR was because those territories belonged to the Russian Empire before 1918. This explains why Stalin made the agreement of non-aggression with Adolf Hitler in 1939, in order to divide Poland and to get the Baltic states back. Stalin wanted to retrieve those territories, but he did not want to "attack Europe", as numerous anti-Russian propagandists in the West claim. I think that he wanted the Soviet Union to stand on the side, to avoid war, and to let the conflicting Western European powers settle matters among themselves. But Adolf Hitler, after getting tricked by the British, attacked the Soviet Union anyway, in order to get his hands on the resources of Russia. I'd also like to point out something else that I read in a rather old history book at my local library when I was in my early teens, though I don't remember the title of the book or the author. According to this book, not long before the invasion of the Soviet Union in June of 1941, Hitler said to his associates that if Stalin gets 5 to 10 more years to develop and grow the Soviet economy, the Soviet Union will be strong enough to conquer all of Europe. So, there's a possibility that one of Hitler's reasons for attacking was his fear of the Soviet Union and his intention to knock the Soviet Union out of the game before it became unbeatable. Anyway, the war that Hitler began and then lost is what eventually led the Russians to Berlin and to Central Europe. If Hitler hadn't attacked the Soviet Union, I think that the Russians wouldn't have even attempted to get to Central Europe. Herein, I'd like to point out that there's a scientific explanation for the atrocious behavior of the Germans in Russia. Since the Germans have Western culture, they naturally behaved in a bad manner on a foreign territory such as Russia, where people have a different culture. So, it's not surprising that the Germans killed many people in Russia. A recent analogy, for example, is how the Americans, who are also Westerners, behaved in Iraq. Hitler wanted to conquer a large territory like Russia in only several months, and all kinds of atrocities against the Russian population were justified, in his view. I think that one thing that Russian leaders know is that the countries of Western Europe and Central Europe are more populous and wealthier than Russia. Germany alone has a population of over 80 million people. The European part of Western Civilization has a population of several hundred million people, but the entire population of Russian Civilization is just over 200 million people. The Russian Federation has an official population of about 140 million people today, and about 20% of this population are Muslims. So, the leaders of Russia, over the last several centuries, have been very careful when it came to going to war against Western European powers. And this is true today as well. Vladimir Putin, for example, knows the limits of modern Russia well, and he tries to avoid direct conflicts with the states of Western Europe. He knows that those states, if they're united, are much stronger and wealthier than the current Russia. I think that Stalin knew these realities too. Anyway, theoretically, there's still a possibility that Russian Civilization can enter upon a new Age of Expansion. The Age of Conflict that began in 1900 in Russia is continuing, and the stage of Universal Empire hasn't been reached yet. Perhaps even the establishment of a system like Victor Glushkov's OGAS is possible. But such profound changes are very unlikely in a civilization like Russia at this point.

When it comes to the West, the situation is more complicated because, in the course of its history so far, Western Civilization hasn't always been ruled from one place. I've already made posts that seem satisfactory to me, but I can always go back and polish some of my writing. So, I wrote that the USA has been dominating Western Civilization politically since the end of World War II. This political unit has its base in and around Washington, on the East Coast of North America, and the flag of this political unit is the American flag, with its stars and stripes. A number of American industrial and financial capitalist families control this political unit, or, at the very least, they have great influence over it. But, in the last several decades, heads of the American military and intelligence services have been playing a bigger and bigger role in this political unit, to the extent that the USA now seems like a semi-fascist state. According to Google translate, fascism is an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. The big American capitalist families have been financing and strengthening instruments of imperialist war and of class oppression - such as the American armed forces, the FBI, the CIA, the NSA, and departments of propaganda - since the Great Depression of the 1930s in order to compensate for the slowing down of expansion in the USA. Expansion in the USA began to slow down in 1929, when the Great Depression began. Since that time, the USA has been turning more and more into an obvious, wasteful, and rageful empire, which constantly intervenes and creates conflicts around the globe in order to support the activities of American capitalist monopolies. Over the last several decades, the departments of propaganda in the USA have been providing the American people with fables about foreign and domestic enemies in order to explain why life in the USA "sucks" or "stinks" more and more. The typical targets have been communists or alleged foreign enemies like the Russians or the Chinese. In the last several decades, new targets, like terrorists, Muslims, and illegal aliens, have been added. But, as any educated and rational person should know, the scapegoats are not the cause of the problems. The real cause of the problems is the institutionalized American capitalist ruling class, which resists real growth and real progress. And you don't have to be a Marxist to understand this. A conservative historian like Carroll Quigley made this quite clear in his books. In an earlier post, I wrote that the USA has been in decline since the 1970s and that the downward trend in the USA began as early as the 1930s. Some people don't really agree with me. They point to the American empire and American influence around the globe, which have only grown since then. Sure, this is true. But American influence around the globe has grown since 1991 not because the USA is so efficient and so competent. Just look at the recent American failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. American influence has grown because there's no serious opposition to American force and economics anywhere in the world. Simply put, in comparison to the USA, every other power in the world these days is laughably weak. This situation has existed since the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Like the khans of the Mongol Empire, American politicians and capitalists expect to receive tribute from the numerous vassals of the USA, and they send their armed forces wherever a rebellion pops up in order to crush it. But this is not a good thing, even for the American people, who appear to be beneficiaries of American imperialism. It's because this empire has been increasingly parasitic. Beneficial changes can't take place in such an empire. Perhaps I should have been more specific when I wrote about the decline of the USA. Based on what I wrote, people got the idea that the USA will fracture in the next several years or in the next few decades. No, this decline, which has been taking place for several decades already, might even last for several more decades, as far as I can tell. The USA will lose influence around the world, and in Western Civilization itself, and grow weaker. Eventually, the USA will cease to exist as a functioning political unit, and a new period of disunity and conflict will begin in Western Civilization. In fact, things already aren't dandy in Western Civilization. This is the best prediction that I can make at the moment. I can also point out that, as some people have already said, there's no revolutionary potential in the USA. People in the USA are constantly being demoralized and coarsely told that alternatives are non-existent. Socialism seems to be the favorite target of the American establishment in this case because communists and socialists can organize around an idea and come up with revolutionary theories. People in the USA know that if they act, or even speak out, there will be unpleasant consequences for them, if not from the authorities then certainly from the people around them. Therefore, in such an atmosphere of aversion to change, a revolution by ordinary people isn't possible. Only something like a coup by the military is possible. Scientific progress and intellectual progress are also not possible or are limited in such a repressed society. This is one of the reasons why I predict a slow decline. The USA, in other words, already had its heyday.

Tuesday, March 24, 2020

The 46,000 Missing Trusses of 9/11

https://nomadiceveryman.blogspot.com/2019/09/the-46000-missing-trusses-of-911.html
***UPDATE*** note the updated truss count. My original estimate of 23,000 trusses was based on the idea that they used single trusses in between the section breaks when in fact they did not, they used double trusses everywhere on each floor. My first count was based on doing a layout of the truss structure and then simply counting and multiplying that number by the number of floors which used these trusses. Turns out, the number of missing trusses is actually double my original number… about 43,000 – 46,000. With that one exception, I believe the research in this article still stands.

According to the official explanation of the collapse of the Twin Towers on Sept. 11th, 2001… the initial plane crashes damaged the core structure of the towers enough so that when the resulting fires “weakened” the floor trusses, the result was that the remaining floors above the areas of the plane crash and fires crashed down on the undamaged parts of the buildings, and “pulverized” them in a gravity driven demolition of sorts.

This “official” explanation, which if left unchallenged, stands as the basis for the endless “War on Terror”, the war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, the attacks on the general population of Pakistan, the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, warrant-less and illegal surveillance of U.S. citizens, and various other assaults on our democratic freedoms… is basically a lie. It is impossible.

Sometimes in an investigation, what you don’t find at the crime scene is just as important as what you do find.  Provided you know what to look for and you understand why it is or isn’t there.

With that in mind, I offer for your consideration, the great mystery of the missing Trusses and Floor-Pans of the World Trade Center towers 1 and 2… and the (estimated) 10 tons of “iron-rich” spheres found in the dust at Ground Zero by every single investigative agency that has bothered to look.

First: What exactly were the floor trusses and how were they used?

The floor trusses were used to span the distance between the 47 core columns and connecting beams of the “core” of the Twin Towers (the heart of the strength of the design) and the 200+ exterior columns that made up the distinctive look of the outside of the buildings.

The drawing is mine and it is just a rough sketch designed to give the readers here a basic understanding of how the trusses were used. The source material for this comes from the actual construction drawings of the towers themselves and the FEMA report and NIST report details pages. Here is one of them.

As you can see, my representation is rather accurate in the depiction of the truss and how it is used relative to the construction of the towers themselves.

You can see that there 12′ height from floor to floor, but with the depth of the trusses and the dropped ceiling, the finished ceiling height was around 8′.  This is also evidenced by the NIST report as well as from this photograph of a typical WTC North Tower office layout.

To give you a still better understanding of how the floor trusses were used in the design of the Twin Towers, again I refer to the FEMA report.

The trusses and floor-pans (“Metal Deck”) were fabricated off site in very large sections and transported to the construction site where they were hoisted via cranes into position and welded and bolted in place.

The steel construction of the floor system sections was mainly A-36 structural steel, commonly used in high rise buildings, with a melting temp of around 2750 degs.

Carbon steels which can successfully undergo heat-treatment have a carbon content in the range of 0.30–1.70% by weight. Trace impurities of various other elements can have a significant effect on the quality of the resulting steel. Trace amounts of sulfur in particular make the steel red-short. Low alloy carbon steel, such as A36 grade, contains about 0.05% sulfur and melts around 1426–1538 °C (2600–2800 °F).  Wiki

(I am deliberately using FEMA and NIST diagrams for two reasons: 1. that you understand that my information at this point is supported by the documents of the “official story” itself so that you don’t think this is some “crack pot” obscure reference… and 2. so that you will come to understand my question later about how does NIST and FEMA both spend so much time explaining the presence of the trusses in the construction of the towers.. and so little time wondering just what could have happened to them.)

Second: Relative size and overall numbers of the trusses themselves.

In order to give you a better understanding of the relative size of the trusses, I created a few 3d models that accurately represent them. The first is an isometric view coupled with an elevation of just one truss along side a 6′ tall figure of a man.

As you can see, the trusses themselves are quite long, the longest of the standard trusses was about 59′ and the shortest of them was 35′.  The transverse trusses that spanned through the trusses and locked them all together were even longer on average.

Now that you have an idea of what the trusses looked like and what they did, lets take a minute to see how many of them there were, per floor. The following is from the architectural design drawing of the world trade center as well as from the FEMA report.

What you see here is the truss layout in plan view.  The light blue colored lines are the trusses themselves and the magenta would be the transverse trusses or what the FEMA diagram calls the “Bridging Trusses”.

The truss count on this drawing that I did is an estimate based on the drawings that I found. There were some trusses that were doubled up as “girder” trusses to carry the live load of other trusses, so the count I have up there is a bit low. But basically, it is pretty accurate;  about 106 trusses per floor. Now look back up at the isometric view of the truss.  There were 106 of those large, structural steel elements, per floor.

[edit] The towers themselves were 110 floors.  Do the math. 212 trusses x 110 floors = 23,320 trusses per tower

[edit] But wait… there were TWO Twin Towers felled that day and when you look at the photos of the aftermath of the “collapse” of the buildings, the debris is mixed together at Ground Zero… so what you are really looking for is the 46,000+ structural steel trusses (and connected floor pans) of the Twin Towers.

That’s a lot of 60′ and 35′ long trusses that could NOT have been “pulverized” like the concrete floors or the desks. They were structural steel.

These two images will give you an idea of how they were used and the shear volume of the trusses compared to the rest of the material of the buildings.

First we have an isometric view of only 2 (two) floors of the towers, again drawn to scale based on the construction drawings and the NIST and FEMA reports collectively.

The trusses are drawn in the light blue color and you can see how they span the distance between the core of the towers and the exterior columns.  For a better understanding of the shear volume of the trusses I have dropped out the columns for this next image.  Remember it is just two floors. We are talking about a MASSIVE amount of floor trusses.

Third: What you don’t see is the key.

According to the official explanation of what happened to those towers, the upper section of the buildings came crashing down on the lower floors and “pulverized” the concrete floors while crushing the structure of the buildings themselves.

There have been many scientists and engineers who have attempted to prove that there just isn’t the energy in the falling upper section of the building to do what the “official explanation” says happened.  In my opinion, they are correct.

However, let’s pretend for a moment that the official explanation is correct, taken at face value.  What does that mean for the trusses and the floor pans?

The steel trusses and floor pans would not “pulverize”. In fact, they would probably shift one way or the other, connected together as they were, and lay pretty much flat, just dominoed as it were, together.

Even if they were somehow separated from one another, the tell-tale signs of the trusses would be everywhere: the zig-zaged tension and compression rod running through the trusses.  Remember, there were over 23,000 of them over 35′ long.

You couldn’t POSSIBLY miss them. They should be scattered all over Ground Zero. Yet, strangely, they are not.

The following images come from a group of high resolution photos I have found depicting the debris in the aftermath at Ground Zero. You will see lots of exterior columns and interior columns… you will see the pulverized concrete dust by the tons… and you will see the aluminum cladding that made of the exterior surface of the buildings and lots of steel rebar that had been inside the concrete floors…

What I dare you to find is ONE… just ONE truss.  Just ONE of the 23,000+ steel trusses that fell to the ground that day and COULDN’T have been pulverized by the falling debris.  The photos are all high res so I invite you to click on them and explore to your hearts content.

Now remember what the webbing (tension and compression) from the trusses look like. They have the tight angles, in a repeating pattern, over a long span.  Don’t be confused by the rebar that was in the concrete floors.  What you see to the right of Mr. Sonnenfeld is rebar.

I have personally been over and over these photos and many others. I have yet to find one single truss.  Not one.

23,000 trusses in the Ground Zero debris, and NOT ONE is visible in the photos?  Does that seem odd to anyone else? Of course it does.

But just because they aren’t visible, doesn’t mean they aren’t THERE.

Forth and final part: What are the “Tons” of “iron rich spheres“

Ever since the beginning of the investigation into the events of 911 almost every single ‘official” and unofficial report has mentioned the discovery of the “iron rich spheres” found in the dust collected from Ground Zero.

The RJ Lee report and the FEMA report as well as the investigative work of Steven Jones and others all make mention of these mysterious metal spheres mixed in with the pulverized concrete dust. This is what they look like.

The important thing here is the language they use to describe these “spheres’ found in in the dust. “Iron rich” implys that they are iron, but they are also made up of other metals and alloys, and of course… carbon.

Why is this important?  Because “steel” is made up of mainly IRON mixed in with small amounts of carbon and, depending on the type of steel, other elements.  Steel itself is “iron rich”. The structural steel of the trusses… is itself “iron rich”.

The thermite that others have been considering as the source of these spheres creates molten iron… not molten iron and carbon. Plus the shear volume of the spheres found in the dust (at one time suggested by Jones to be about 10 tons) suggests that they must have come from a structural element of the towers themselves.

The trusses.

At the moment of detonation, a high explosive, strong enough to pulverize the concrete floors, would also have to burn hot enough to instantly melt the trusses themselves thus creating the microscopic “iron rich” spheres found by FEMA, RJ Lee, and Steven Jones.  But also it would explain the “molten metal” that burned in the debris pile for weeks after 9/11.

There is only ONE high explosive used in the demolition industry capable of that kind of combined result: PETN.

Curiously, each and every single investigation that has been done on the “collapse” of the Twin Towers, RJ Lee, FEMA, NIST, and even the Jones/Harrit paper, has gone out of their way to make the statement that they DID NOT test for residual trace elements of conventional explosives in the debris from Ground Zero.

Conclusion: The official explanation for the collapse of the towers cannot be accurate.

There is no amount of pressure that could possibly have been present in the collapse of the Twin Towers that would explain the pulverization of the trusses into the steel micro-spheres found in the dust at Ground Zero.

At the moment of collapse, those trusses were in the buildings and judging from the visual evidence of the photos afterward, they were not after the buildings came down.

If the pulverization of the floors couldn’t have rendered the trusses into micro-spheres of “iron rich” droplets, what in fact did do it?

As is often the case, the simplest explanation is often the most accurate.

Test the remaining evidence from Ground Zero for trace elements of explosive materials commonly used in the demolition industry with special attention given to PETN and RDX.

The photographs don’t lie. They are a living record of the crime of 911.  And from them we can and will finally prove, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the official story of what happened that day cannot be accurate.

Sometimes what isn’t visible at a crime scene is just as important as what is.

Putin Attacks Lenin and the Soviet Union


Recently Vladimir Putin made some critical remarks about the Soviet Union, I'd like to respond to them.

Sunday, March 22, 2020

1204: The Sack of Constantinople

https://www.ancient.eu/article/1188/1204-the-sack-of-constantinople/
In 1204 CE the unthinkable happened and Constantinople, after nine centuries of withstanding all comers, was brutally sacked. Even more startling was the fact that the perpetrators were not any of the traditional enemies of the Byzantine Empire: the armies of Islam, the Bulgars, Hungarians, or Serbs, but the western Christian army of the Fourth Crusade. Finally, the mutual suspicion and distrust that had existed for centuries between the western and eastern states and churches had blown up into full-scale warfare. With the fall of the city, many of its religious icons, relics, and artworks were spirited away and the Byzantine Empire was divided up between Venice and its allies. The empire would rise again from the ashes but never again could Constantinople claim to be the greatest, richest, and most artistically vibrant city in the world.

Prologue

The Byzantines, with their capital at Constantinople founded by Roman emperor Constantine I in 324 CE, saw themselves as the defenders of Christendom, the beacon which shone out across the Mediterranean and central Asia, hosts to the holiest city outside Jerusalem, and the rock which stood against the tide of Islam sweeping in from the east. For the western half of the old Roman Empire, though, the Byzantines were regarded as decadent, shifty, and untrustworthy, their religious practices were suspect, and several of their emperors had even proclaimed icons and their veneration as heresy.

The centuries of argument and mistrust, the constant rivalry between Popes and emperors, and the rising ambition of western states to wrest from Byzantium the remnants of its empire in Italy were, for a time, held in check by the first three Crusades. All three, though, would prove to be unsuccessful in permanently securing Christianity’s Holy Places from the Arabs. Worse, they created a damaging rift in east-west relations as blame was apportioned to either side for the lack of success. The Byzantines were considered to lack the will to fight the common enemy while, from the other side, the Crusaders were seen as opportunists out to grab the choicest parts of the Byzantine Empire in the east. In a sense, both sides were right in their judgement.

The Byzantines had never fully understood the concept of a Holy War, which the western leaders used to rouse armies to be sent to the east. The west considered Byzantine emperors to be only ever interested in the preservation of their empire and perceived superiority over the west. For the emperors, though, they saw the Byzantine Empire and Christendom as one and the same thing, nor could they be criticised for thinking the Crusaders as an unruly mob of miscreants out on a looting party, given the rape and pillaging which often went on as Crusader armies passed through Byzantine territory. These were the experiences and suspicions on both sides leading into the early 13th century CE.

The Fourth Crusade

The Fourth Crusade was launched by Pope Innocent III (r. 1198-1216 CE) in 1202 CE with the principal intention of reclaiming Jerusalem for Christendom after its fall in 1187 CE to Saladin, Sultan of Egypt (r. 1169-1193 CE). In June 1202 CE the Crusaders assembled in Venice from across Europe, led by Marquis Boniface of Montferrat. From there they sailed to Egypt - seen as the soft underbelly of the enemy - or at least, that was the original plan. The Venetians, being the rapacious traders they were, insisted that their 240 ships be paid for, but the Crusaders could not meet the asking price of 85,000 silver marks. Consequently, a deal was made that in return for passage the Crusaders would stop off at Zara on the Dalmatian coast and reconquer it for the Italians, the city having recently defected to the Hungarians. The Venetians would also provide 50 ships at their own cost and receive half of any territory conquered.  

The Pope was not best pleased to hear the news that Christian Zara had been sacked in November 1202 CE, and he promptly excommunicated the Crusaders and the Venetians. The ban was later lifted for the former, otherwise, they would not have been much use as Crusaders, one supposes.

Historians continue to debate the exact reason why the Crusaders then turned on Constantinople instead of Jerusalem, but one crucial ingredient in the troublesome mix of mutual suspicions between the western powers and Byzantium was the Republic of Venice and one man, in particular, the Doge Enrico Dandolo (r. 1192-1205 CE). Intent on winning Venetian domination of the trade in the east, he well remembered his undignified expulsion from Constantinople when he served as an ambassador. This seemed as good an opportunity as ever to finally knock out Constantinople as a trade competitor. In addition, the Pope would achieve the supremacy of the western Church once and for all and the Crusader knights would not only gain revenge on the duplicitous Byzantines for their unhelpful support of previous Crusades but also surely pick up some glory and handsome booty in the process. The riches of Constantinople could then pay for the rest of the Crusade as it marched on to Jerusalem. It may not have been so cynically planned by all parties but, in the end, it is exactly what happened with the exception that the Fourth Crusade ended with the fall of the Byzantine capital and Jerusalem was left for a later date.

The Attack on Constantinople

The Crusaders arrived outside Constantinople on 24 June 1203 and played their trump card. The western powers had agreed to back Alexios IV Angelos, the son of the deposed Byzantine emperor Isaac Angelos II (r. 1185-1195 CE) and promised to return his father (then imprisoned in Constantinople) to the throne if he promised to help the Crusaders with money, soldiers, and supplies. One Crusader was especially keen on the plan - Philip of Swabia, king of Germany (r. 1198-1208 CE), whose wife Irene was the sister of Alexios IV. With such credentials as a western pawn in Byzantine politics, Isaac was duly reinstalled in the palace of his ancestors in 1203 CE with Alexios as co-emperor.

Constantinople had fallen remarkably easily once the Crusaders had overcome the garrison at Galata and lowered the massive chain which blocked the harbour of the Golden Horn. Sailing in with their fleet and attacking the sea walls and land walls simultaneously with siege engines and scaling ladders, even the elite Varangian Guard could not prevent the attackers forcing their way into the city. The incumbent emperor and brother of Isaac, Alexios III Angelos, caught completely unprepared by the arrival of the Crusaders, fled the city.

The old regime had fallen. However, the new pair of emperors went back on the arranged deal of assistance - although they had few resources to call on in reality - and also failed to formally make the Byzantine Church subordinate to the Pope. Alexios IV may not have helped the westerners very much but his people did not trust him anyway, given the way he ascended the throne and the presence of the Crusader army still outside the walls of Constantinople. The emperor’s efforts to raise taxes and a massive fire in the city caused by the Crusaders setting a mosque ablaze only added fuel to the people’s discontent. It was no surprise, then, that a usurper came along, one Alexios V Doukas. An army commander and senior diplomat backed by the people, Doukas seized the throne and executed his predecessors, father and son together, in January 1204 CE.

Alexios Doukas, known as Mourtzouphlos or "Bushy-Browed" attempted to put up a serious defence of his capital against unfavourable odds. For now Doge Dandolo and the Crusaders saw their golden opportunity not just to receive aid from the Byzantines but to loot the city entirely for all it was worth. Alexios ensured that the mighty Theodosian Walls were further strengthened, towers were heightened, and the initiative seized with several raids made on the Crusader camps. The Crusaders retaliated by launching an all-out attack on the morning of 9 April 1204 CE, but the Byzantines repelled it. Then, on 12 April, the Crusaders attacked the weaker sea walls of the harbour and targeted two towers in particular by lashing their ships together and ramming them repeatedly. Initially, the defenders held on, but eventually, the attackers forced their way through on both the sea side and the land side when the Franks finally battered down one of the city gates. The Crusaders were into the city and carnage followed. Citizens were raped and massacred, buildings were torched and churches desecrated. Alexios fled to Thrace, and three days of looting followed.

Looting the City

Robert de Clari, a lesser knight of the Crusader army, wrote an interesting account of the Crusade with invaluable descriptions of Constantinople’s monuments and religious relics. Another record, this time by an author closer to the leadership, was compiled by Geoffrey de Villehardouin, the Marshal of Champagne. Villehardouin wrote his Conquest of Constantinople almost as a defence of the Crusaders' actions, and so the work is heavily biased, portraying the Byzantines as a shifty lot who only got their comeuppance. Finally, the Byzantine historian Niketas Choniates gives a vivid eyewitness account of the destruction and looting of the city in his Historia.

Constantinople, in 1204 CE, had a population of around 300,000, dwarfing the 80,000 in Venice, western Europe’s largest city at the time. But it was not only its size that impressed the Crusaders, its buildings, churches and palaces, the huge forums and gardens, and, above all, its riches struck awe in the western visitors. Then awe was swiftly replaced by greed. Monumental sculptures, countless artworks, books, manuscripts, and jewels which had been steadily accumulated by emperors and nobles over a millennium were all stripped away and either destroyed or melted down for coinage. Furniture, doors, and marble architectural elements were taken away for reuse elsewhere, and even the tombs of emperors, including that of the great Justinian I, were opened up and their precious contents removed.

One of the most precious of all Byzantine religious relics to be stolen was the Mandylion shroud, a cloth or scarf said to have carried an impression of Christ himself. It was taken as a prize to France but, alas, this priceless icon was destroyed during the French Revolution. In another example, a gold reliquary containing a fragment of the True Cross ended up in the cathedral of Limburg in Germany. The Hippodrome of Constantinople, especially, was looted for all the treasures which stood in the central island around which the chariots raced. The four bronze horses now in St. Mark’s Cathedral in Venice were probably once part of a chariot group which stood atop the arena’s monumental entrance gate.

The Byzantines lamented not only the awful bloodshed and the monetary loss of the sacking but also the destruction of historically important artworks which they knew full well connected the city and, indeed, the western world back to its Roman heritage. The world had lost something great and undefinable, as powerfully summarised here by the historian J. J. Norwich:

"By the sack of Constantinople, Western civilization suffered a loss greater than the burning of the library of Alexandria in the fourth century or the sack of Rome in the fifth - perhaps the most catastrophic single loss in all history."

Aftermath

The emperor Alexios V Doukas fled the city, but he was later captured, blinded, and then tossed to his death from the top of a column a few months later. After the dust settled and everyone had their fill of pillaging and looting, the Partitio Romaniae treaty, already decided on beforehand, carved up the Byzantine Empire amongst Venice and its allies. The Venetians took three-eighths of Constantinople, the Ionian islands, Crete, Euboea, Andros, Naxos, and a few strategic points along the coast of the Sea of Marmara. Baldwin of Flanders was then made the Latin emperor (r. 1204-1205 CE) and crowned in the Hagia Sophia, receiving five-eighths of Constantinople and one-quarter of the empire which included Thrace, northwest Asia Minor, and several Aegean islands (notably Chios, Lesbos, and Samos). Boniface of Montferrat took over Thessalonica and formed a new kingdom there which also included Athens and Macedonia. In 1205 CE, following the death of Baldwin in a Bulgarian prison, William I Champlitte and Geoffrey I Villehardouin (nephew of the historian of the same name) founded a Latin principality in the Peloponnese while the French duke Othon de la Roche grabbed Attica and Boeotia.

The Byzantine Empire would be re-established in 1261 CE, albeit a shadow of its former self, when forces from the Empire of Nicaea, the centre of the Byzantines-in-exile (1208-1261 CE) retook Constantinople. Emperor Michael VIII (r. 1259-1282 CE) was then able to place his throne back in the palace of his Byzantine predecessors.

Now reading Space: A Visual Guide by Ian Ridpath...

Wednesday, March 18, 2020

Why isn't 9/11 a national holiday?

https://theweek.com/articles/460213/why-isnt-911-national-holiday
In New York City, Sept. 11 is something of a somber, unofficial holiday, with quiet memorial events around the city and twin beams of light rising from the Manhattan skyline.

It is not, however, an official federal holiday — which is why businesses and schools don't shut down. Instead, Congress dubbed it a "National Day of Service and Remembrance," which lawmakers officially named "Patriot Day" in 2001.

Congress has the power to make Patriot Day a permanent federal holiday. Right now, there are 10: New Year's Day, President's Day, Independence Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Columbus Day, Labor Day, and Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday. Only federal employees and employees in the District of Columbia are guaranteed these holidays off, which is why you might still have to work on Columbus Day. (People in the Washington D.C. area also get to enjoy Inauguration Day once every four years).

Shortly after the 9/11 attacks and during their 10th anniversary, there were plenty of calls to make Patriot Day a holiday, mostly out of a fear that it would be forgotten by an apathetic public. Joe Brettell, a Republican consultant living in Virginia, made that case on Fox News:

In the years following the 9/11 attack, Congress has taken care to mark the day with moments of silence and resolutions. But those proclamations, while important, rarely gain the awareness of everyday Americans … Surely this effort will inspire the cynics to suggest that commemorating September 11 will eventually relegate it to another day of barbecues and baseball games, with only passing regard given to the heroes of that day. Yet in a deeper sense there can be no greater response to an attack that was launched at our very way of life than to celebrate the institutions, gatherings, and freedoms that drove our enemies to violence. [Fox News]

There is some credence to concerns that a 9/11 holiday would be trivialized by commercialism. Yesterday, Tumbledown Trails Golf Course, located near Madison, Wis., got in trouble for offering nine holes of golf for $9.11 to "commemorate" the 12th anniversary of 9/11.

September 11 is also just a few days after Labor Day, meaning the United States would either have to move Labor Day to some other date or deal with two short work weeks in a row.

That gets to the biggest reason Sept. 11 probably won't be a holiday anytime soon: Federal holidays cost money. A lot of money. According to Rasmussen, every holiday costs the federal government $450 million in employee pay and lost productivity.

States have also been reticent to give their employees an extra holiday. In 2002, the New York state legislature decided not to make 9/11 a holiday after the state comptroller said it would cost $43 million. Other states, like Colorado, have also briefly considered it before scrapping the idea because of costs.

In 2007, Montana state Sen. Don Ryan tried to solve the cost problem by suggesting that 9/11 be made into a holiday instead of Columbus Day. One Italian-American lawmaker, according to the Los Angeles Times, told the Irish-American Ryan, "Why don't you take away St. Patrick's Day?"

And that was before the financial crisis hit in 2008. In that light, it's easy to see why many politicians prefer a somber day of remembrance that doesn't offend anyone or strain state and federal coffers.

Just because it's not a federal holiday now, however, doesn't mean it never will be. Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday wasn't made a holiday until 1984. Memorial Day, initially created to honor fallen Union soldiers, wasn't declared a federal holiday until 1967. And Thanksgiving? That was officially made a federal holiday by President Abraham Lincoln, more than two centuries after the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock.

Monday, March 16, 2020

Just finished watching Knives Out (2019) and 1917 (2019)...


Iron Man 3 Teaser Trailer UK - Official Marvel | HD


Watch the first official Iron Man 3 trailer. Marvel's Iron Man 3 - coming to UK cinemas April 24th 2013, starring Robert Downey Jr.

In Marvel's "Iron Man 3", brash-but-brilliant industrialist Tony Stark/Iron Man played by Robert Downey Jr., is pitted against an enemy whose reach knows no bounds. When Stark finds his personal world destroyed at his enemy's hands, he embarks on a harrowing quest to find those responsible. This journey, at every turn, will test his mettle. With his back against the wall, Stark is left to survive by his own devices, relying on his ingenuity and instincts to protect those closest to him. As he fights his way back, Stark discovers the answer to the question that has secretly haunted him: does the man make the suit or does the suit make the man?

Iron Man 3 continues the epic adventures of "Iron Man" and "Iron Man 2", starring Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle, Guy Pearce, Rebecca Hall, Stephanie Szostak, James Badge Dale with Jon Favreau and Ben Kingsley, "Iron Man 3" is directed by Shane Black from a screenplay by Drew Pearce and Shane Black and is based on Marvel's iconic Super Hero Iron Man, who first appeared on the pages of "Tales of Suspense" (#39) in 1963 and had his solo comic book debut with "The Invincible Iron Man" (#1) in May of 1968. "Iron Man 3" arrives in UK cinemas on April 25th 2013.

Saturday, March 14, 2020

In Davie Village in Downtown Vancouver. Autumn of 2019.

Davie Village (also known as Davie District or simply Davie Street) is a neighbourhood in the West End of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. It is the home of the city's gay subculture, and, as such, is often considered a gay village, or gaybourhood. Davie Village is centred on Davie Street and roughly includes the area between Burrard and Jervis streets. Davie Street—and, by extension, the Village—is named in honour of A.E.B. Davie, eighth Premier of British Columbia from 1887 to 1889; A.E.B's brother Theodore was also Premier, from 1892 to 1895.

Along Davie Street are a variety of shops, restaurants, services, and hotels catering to a variety of customers, in addition to private residences. The business with the most notoriety is Little Sister's Book and Art Emporium ("Little Sister's"), a gay and lesbian bookstore, because of its ongoing legal battles with Canada Customs that have received extensive national media coverage. Many businesses and residents along Davie Street and in the West End generally also fly rainbow flags as a symbol of gay pride, and many of the covered bus stop benches and garbage cans along Davie Street are painted bright pink.

The Village hosts a variety of events during the year, including the Davie Street Pride Festival which runs in conjunction with Vancouver's annual Gay Pride Parade, during which sections of the street are closed to motor traffic.

Davie Day is also held each year in early September, to celebrate local businesses and the community itself. This Day is designed to build awareness and promote the surrounding businesses, and is focused around Jervis to Burrard Street.

The Davie Street Business Association coined the name "Davie Village" in 1999 and also commissioned banners from local artist Joe Average, which fly from lampposts in the district. The two-sided banners depict a rainbow flag on one side and a sun design by Average on the other.

Davie Village is also home to the offices of Xtra! West, a biweekly LGBT newspaper, Qmunity (formerly the Gay and Lesbian Centre) which provides a variety of services for the city's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender residents, and the Vancouver Pride Society, which puts on the annual Pride Parade and Festival.









Just finished watching Bad Boys For Life (2020) and The Matrix Revolutions (2003)...

Thursday, March 12, 2020

Putin’s Russia is a poor, drunk soccer hooligan

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/06/21/putin-russia-poor-drunk-soccer-hooligan/0HjzEzAUT4J58guK170F0H/story.html
Russia is not the country you think it is. Its economy is smaller than South Korea’s. Its people are poorer than Kazakhstan’s. It trails Finland in technology. And it has a smaller military budget than Saudi Arabia.

For most of the 20th century, what Moscow thought and did mattered from Havana to Hanoi. Then the collapse of the Soviet Union left behind a battered, broken shell of a country. When the Berlin Wall fell, so did Russia’s status in the world.

A boozy Boris Yeltsin was a fitting representative for a country whose average life expentency tumbled a staggering five years in the wake of the fall. There were the coups, industrial collapse, spreading corruption, and shrinking borders. After generations of fearing the Soviet Bear, the West patted it on the head, sent it some aid, and turned its eyes with expectation towards the emerging powers of Brazil, India, and China.

But Vladimir Putin’s rise to power marked a sea change in Russia’s fortunes. How the world sees Russia began to shift. The often bare-chested leader consciously cultivated a new brand, for himself, and for the country. Putin’s new Russia was a country that mattered again.

Russia hosted the Olympics, punched Georgia in the nose, took back the Crimea, invaded Ukraine, flew bombers through NATO airspace, built military bases in the Arctic, and generally flexed and posed like an oiled, aged, but still buff, body builder. And we’ve been paying increasingly rapt attention, not noticing the geriatric walker hidden just off stage. A closer look is almost shocking.

According to the International Monetary Fund’s most recent data, the Russian economy is approximately the same size as Australia and slightly smaller than South Korea. As an exporter, it is now less important than Belgium, Mexico, and Singapore.

And it is poor. The World Bank ranks Russia’s GDP per capita below Lithuania, Equatorial Guinea, and Kazakhstan. A larger proportion of its population lives below the poverty rate than in Indonesia, India, or Sri Lanka. It is ranked 67th in the world in the Global Competitive Index and 66th in the UN’s Human Development Index.

These economic woes are having serious social impacts. There are now fewer doctors than a decade ago. Life expectancy in Russia is nine years less than in the United States and is declining. Infant mortality rate is two to three times higher than most of the Western world. Its alcoholism rate is now the highest on the planet, three times North America’s; and consumption of alcohol has doubled in the past 20 years. Not surprisingly, the Russian statistical agency Rosstat has identified aging and shrinking demographics as the single biggest challenge facing the country over the next 30 years.

Intellectually, Russia is a distant speck in the rearview mirror. Once, esteemed Soviet universities educated the engineers and doctors of the developing world. Now, the United Nations ranks Russia’s education system behind nearly every other European country, and on par with the Pacific island of Palau. The technological leader that launched Sputnik now produces fewer patents per capita than Iceland. Its scientific publications are cited less often than Finland’s.

In nearly every indicator of health, wealth, and influence, Russia ranks below even the middle powers. What do they have left? Guns and bombs mostly. At 8,000 nuclear warheads, it still has 700 more than the United States. It ranks second globally for combat aircraft, military satellites, and nuclear submarines. Moscow’s military budget has increased every year since Putin’s arrival in 1999.

But even these numbers are misleading. According to data compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Institute, Russia’s defense budget is still less than China, and Saudi Arabia. It is roughly on par with India, France, and the United Kingdom. And it is nine times smaller than the Pentagon’s budget.

The fact is, if it wasn’t for Syria, the Crimea, and some ageing warheads, Russia would get as much global attention as Slovakia or perhaps Wales. Not coincidentally, those are two nations that recently played Russia in the ongoing European soccer championship. In both cases, the results were resounding defeats for the Russians despite their opponents being one-twentieth and one-fortieth its size, respectively. In spite of these resounding defeats, which have relegated them to the bottom of the league tables, the Russian team, and its fans, still dominated the news.

When we talk about the Eurocup, we talk about Russian hooligans rioting in the stands, attacking other spectators, and even assaulting tourists on the trains home. Or we marvel at the belligerent response from Moscow when Igor Lebedev, the Deputy Chairman of the Russian parliament and a senior official in the Russian soccer official tweeted “I don’t see anything wrong with the fans fighting. Quite the opposite, well done lads, keep it up!”

Lebedev understands a lesson that has been well taught by Putin: If you can’t compete on the field, make as much noise as you can off it. Russia is so far behind economically, technologically, socially, and politically, it just doesn’t matter anymore. But it can still get our attention, and it is.

When Russia next moves its tanks to the border, we should take it seriously. It has a lot of tanks (although less than Pakistan). But we should also remember that this is not a world power. By most indicators, it’s not even a middle power. Russia is a soccer hooligan: poor, drunk, and frustrated it can’t win anymore. It can only throw beer bottles from the bleachers.

Looking At Gorbachev's Stupid Pizza Hut Commercial


Here we're taking a look at how Gorbachev sold out his country for crap pizza. Enjoy.

Sunday, March 8, 2020

Iceman - Trailer


Academy Award® winner Timothy Hutton and John Lone star along with Lindsay Crouse in this suspenseful drama about a team of Arctic researchers who find a 40,000 year-old man frozen in ice and bring him back to life. Anthropologist Stanley Shephard (Hutton) wants to befriend the Iceman (Lone) and learn about the man's past; Dr. Diane Brady (Crouse) and her surgical team want to discover the secret that will allow man to live in a frozen state. When the Iceman becomes part of their lives, the results are both moving and emotionally shattering. Shot on location in Canada's breathtaking snowy wilderness, Iceman uncovers life's greatest mystery. 1984 Universal Studios. All Rights Reserved.

Just finished watching Dark Water (2002) and The Invisible Man (2020)...



Friday, March 6, 2020

Kendall Jenner can't hide her smile as she giggles with former beau Harry Styles while flaunting her model figure in a tiny green bikini on St Barts yacht trip

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3380463/Kendall-Jenner-rumoured-beau-Harry-Styles-soak-s-company-holiday-St-Barts-yacht.html
Kendall Jenner and Harry Styles have fuelled rumours of a reconciliation after they were pictured holidaying on a yacht in St Barts.

The bikini-clad Kardashian was seen giggling away as she chatted with the One Direction star during a trip on board a luxury yacht in St Barts on Wednesday.

Kendall, 20, and Harry, 21, were previously spotted by fans at a restaurant in idyllic Anguilla on Tuesday night, igniting speculation that they'd revisited their 2013 romance.

Aboard the boat, Harry and Kendall put on a tactile display with the US reality TV star resting her ankles on the British popstar's shoulders at one time, as they chatted and giggled on the outdoor sofas.

And Kendall looked sensational as ever as she flaunted her trim supermodel frame in a mint green bikini, topping off her swimwear with a baseball cap and a gold bodychain with matching bracelets.

The former rumoured couple were first seen enjoying a romantic dinner at Blanchards restaurant on another Caribbean Island, earlier this week, just days after Harry embarked on a hiatus from the chart-topping pop group.

The duo had moved along quickly to the neighbouring destination by luxury boat by Wednesday and seemed to enjoy a day of watersports and unwinding while out at sea.

Bare-chested boyband hunk Harry similarly couldn't be missed with his array of distinctive tattoos covering his torso and his chestnut tresses pulled back into a trademark man bun.

The high-profile pair were first rumoured to be dating back in 2013 when they were spotted enjoying a string of outings together.

In an interview with the band in the same year, dubbed 1D Day to promote third album Midnight Memories, Piers Morgan asked Harry: 'Are you dating Kendall Jenner, yes or no?'

The singer tentatively replied: 'I mean, we went out for dinner, but no. I guess.'

Pushing for more, Piers continued: 'Did I hear in Los Angeles, a hot date? Budding romance?' while a flustered Harry responded: 'Dunno', before a male voice off-camera shouted 'move on! move on!'

Prompting Harry to say: 'Yeah, let's move on shall we?'

Defending his probing, the journalist said: 'It's supposed to be tough questions.

'You're boring,' the unknown voice jokingly interjected.

But despite all the speculation, the pair never went on to officially announce a relationship, instead they insisted they were just friends.

Though their romance was thought to be fleeting, they certainly seemed comfortable in each other's company on the holiday and flirted outrageously in the pictures.

Kendall bit down on her lip as Harry grabbed her by the wrists and rocked her back and forth.

The rumoured couple spent the day on the water, swimming and zipping about jet skis, before separately cooling off in the showers aboard the luxury liner.

It's not also not a pure coincidence that the famous duo are catching up after so many years, because Kendall's model BFF Gigi Hadid, 20, is currently dating Harry's ex-bandmate Zayn Malik, 22.

Their circles have seemed to overlapped many times over the years, with Harry also previously being linked to their mutual pal Cara Delevingne in September 2013.

Kendall's mother Kris Jenner has also been holidaying St Barts recently, while Harry's bandmates are in the UK enjoying the early throes of their new-found freedom.

What It's Like Working At McDonalds


McDonalds has been getting some bad press because of a man and a McChicken sandwich. So what perfect timing to share what it's like working there for two years.

Wednesday, March 4, 2020

Now listening to Drums Along The Mohawk by Jean Beauvoir and The Spy Who Loved Me by Marvin Hamlisch...


Alex Jones totally busted perusing trans porn website: 'porn popped up on my phone'


InfoWars founder Alex Jones — who was recently banned from most major platforms, including Facebook, YouTube, and Spotify — appeared to have a web browser window on his phone open to a transgender pornography site, which was caught on camera during a live broadcast of his show.

Monday, March 2, 2020

13 mind-blowing facts about Russia's economy

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/russia-economy-facts-2019-4-1028116037#asbest-russia-produced-315-000-tons-of-asbestos-last-year11
Following World War II, the Soviet Union emerged as a global superpower to rival the United States.

But when the Soviet Union crumbled in the early 1990s and reemerged as Russia, it had to reinvent its economy. In the decades that followed, the communist nation has experienced plenty of economic struggles.

As Russia continues to try to reassert itself as a global power, it faces a fluctuating currency, declining population, and an economy that is in many ways dependent on oil and gas.

Here are 13 mind-blowing facts about Russia's economy:

Russia loses 700 people every day

The Russian population is decreasing by approximately 700 people a day, or more than 250,000 people annually, according to the Eurasia Daily Monitor.

Some cities, like Murmansk, have experienced population declines of more than 30% since the end of the Soviet Union.

The decrease is due in part to aging demographics, falling immigration rates, and a failure by the government to enforce health and food regulations. Some observers place the blame on Western economic sanctions, which have contributed to Russian poverty and economic uncertainty.

The decline could continue to pose problems for Russia's economy for years to come.

Russia has more than $460 billion in reserve funds

Russia has more than $460 billion in reserve, with a debt level of 29% of the gross domestic product and 15.9 months of import cover.

These basic macroeconomic statistics lead experts to believe Russia can withstand some global shocks, even if its economic growth remains at its low rate of approximately 1.5%.

Russia's economic output plummeted 45% in the decade after the Soviet Union broke up

From 1989 to 1998, Russian output dropped 45%, as the economic reforms following the Soviet collapse in 1991 took effect. By 2000, the nation's GDP was between 30% and 50% of its pre-collapse output.

Several factors are attributed for the post-transition recessions, all which made it a chaotic time with poor economic policies.

Oil and gas make up 59% of Russia's exports

Russia is rife with oil, and its economy is heavily dependent on the resource.

By the end of last year, Russian oil production was at an all-time high, at 11.16 million barrels a day, according to Reuters.

In 2017, gas made up 59% of Russia's exports and 25% of its total revenue, according to the World Bank.

More than 13% of Russians live in poverty

Russian President Vladimir Putin vowed in his state-of-the-nation speech last year that he would halve Russian poverty, which currently impacts more than 13% of the population. Official state statistics at the time showed 19.3 million Russians living below the poverty line, according to the Irish Times.

The speech highlighted an investment of 25.7 trillion rubles - that's $380 billion - in modernizing Russia's healthcare, education, infrastructure, housing, and agriculture to help those in need and potentially curb Russia's population decline.

Still, Russia's poverty rate has decreased significantly from the immediate post-Soviet rate of nearly 35%.

Russia has more than 70 billionaires

Russian wealth inequality is high and Moscow is often atop the list of global cities with the most billionaires - Russia as a whole has more than 70. Many of those billionaires obtained their wealth during the 1990s, when corruption swept through the country as it came out of a communist economy.

Oligarchs have plenty of influence in the Russian government and have started investing in the West, including in sports teams like the NBA's Brooklyn Nets, owned by billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov.

Russia's currency, the ruble, has dropped in value by 50% this decade

The Russian economy suffered a significant financial crisis from 2014 to 2017, which saw the ruble's value get cut in half.

Last year, the Central Bank of Russia blamed US sanctions on the ruble hitting a two-year low of 69.40 against the dollar. In 2013, the ruble was at 33 per US dollar.

The economic crisis, as a whole, was caused by massive oil price declines in 2014 and international sanctions imposed on Russia when it intervened militarily in Ukraine.

The average monthly wage in Russia is $670

Russia is ranked in the top 10 nations in terms of economic production. But despite the high GDP compared to the rest of the world, the average monthly wage is $670 - or 42,413 rubles.

That has grown since nearly 50% since 2016 - when it was $437.

Wages in Russian took a massive hit with the recent ruble instability as Russians were able to buy 40% more goods and services in 2013 than they could in 2018.

Ikea owns 20% of the Russian furniture market

The Swedish superstore chain Ikea opened its first store in the Russian capital of Moscow in 2000, and the store quickly became one of the company's top stores.

Over the next 18 years, Ikea opened another two Moscow stores and a total of 14 stores across the massive nation.

With Russians looking to stretch their money further, Ikea now owns 20% of the Russian furniture market.

Russian vodka consumption has dropped by more than 50% in the past 20 years

At the turn of the millennium, Russians bought 214.6 million decaliters of vodka - or 567 million gallons.

By 2015, that number had dropped to below 100 million decaliters, while champagne consumption jumped from 18.3 million decaliters to 23.6 million.

The BBC cites a westernization of the Russian culture over the past two decades, with Russians shifting more toward beer and wine.

Asbest, Russia, produced 315,000 tons of asbestos last year

Asbestos are the key export of the aptly-named city of Asbest, Russia. Despite the well-known health hazards of asbestos, the city saw an increase in its asbestos output last year, according to The New York Times.

The 315,000 tons of asbestos produced from the city's mine last year was the first increase in production the city had seen in years. A full 80% of that output was sold abroad, including 67 tons to the United States.

Asbestos are banned in more than 60 countries.

Russia invested more than a quarter of a billion dollars in Zimbabwe's diamond industry

During the Cold War, the US and Soviet Union competed for influence in Asia, and now Russia has turned its eye toward Africa. Both Russia and China have made massive investments throughout the continent trying to cement their influence.

In January, Russia made a $267 million investment in Zimbabwe's diamond industry.

Russia doesn't have the historical roots of other European nations, nor the money China holds, but its influence in Africa is largely affected by its military exports and state natural resource companies.

Russia spent $50 billion on the 2014 Winter Olympics

As the Winter Olympics descended on the Russian city of Sochi, the government spent more than $50 billion to get the city ready. The investment included not just the construction of new sports venues and hotels, but roads, bridges, low-pressure gas pipelines, and other infrastructure projects, as well.

But the investment seems to be working: Russian officials reported 6.5 million people visited the resort town in 2017, injecting life into a local economy that had once been known only for summer recreation.

In 2018, Russia hosted the FIFA World Cup, which reportedly cost more than $11 billion in construction and preparation work.