대통령을 탄핵이 아니라 적과 내통한 죄로 사형에 처해야 할 만큼 중요한 사건이다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
언론에서 숨기는 이태원 외국인 상황
해밀톤 호텔 맞은편까지 심심치않게 히잡을 쓴 이슬람 여인을 볼수있다..
이렇게 된 이유는 내가 수십번도 일베에 설명했듯 미군이 떠났기 때문인데..
언론은 이런걸 자세히 보도 안한다. 왜 그럴까? (아래부터 자세히 설명)
예로부터 언론은 미군의 부정적인 기사만 보도했지 기타 외국인의 기사는 보도 안한다.
그렇게 이태원하면 미군, 무서운 외국인 동네 이미지를 언론들이 씌였고, 이에 주민들은
왜곡된 보도에 한탄스러워 했었음
이렇게 8년만인 2019년 '야간통행금지'가 풀렸는데.. 언론은 기다렸다는듯
미군의 사고뉴스만 보도하는 반미적 행태를 보였고.. 정작 2001년 이태원이
미군의 통행금지가 됐던 가장 큰 이유는 설명하지 않았다..
주한미군 사령부가 용산미군기지에 있었고, 사령관이 미군의 통행금지를 결정을 하는데
사실 가장 큰 이유는 미군의 보호였으며, 911테러후 이슬람으로부터 미군을 보호할수밖에 없었다..
특유의 일본인의 치안, 안보불안등 원인으로 볼수있는데 그부분은 언론이 자세히 설명안한다.
미군부대 앞에 경리단길, 이태원 침체 이유를 딴데서 찾는것만 봐도
얼마나 언론이 편향됐는지 알수있다..
이렇게 이태원의 선진국 외국인은 다 떠났는데.. 세계언론과 마치 짠것처럼 이슬람의 대해서는 전혀 보도 안한다.
만약 이태원을 무슬림거리의 실상으로 보도하면 그에맞게 미군의 중요성이 부각되기 때문이겠지..ㅎ
*** 아 미국 대통령이 묵는 저 "하얏트 호텔"마져도 얼마전 미국직속에서 홍콩계로 넘어간다고..
일베
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
일베, 서울 풍경
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
수학자 힐버트와 러셀이 과학 전체를 몇 가지 공리로 환원하려던 사건을 명렬히 비판하는 글
Hilbert and Russell: The Suffocation
of Science by Mathematics
by Phil Rubinstein
Mathematical Rigor (Mortis)
In August of 1900, Hilbert, as a leading mathematician from Göttingen University, was invited to present a future for mathematics, at the international Congress of Mathematics. His proposal involved 23 problems to be solved, although he only read 10 of them in his presentation. It is in this presentation that the program of reducing knowledge to axioms is, in fact, laid out.
While Hilbert identified a number of individual problems, such as Fermat's theorem, the crucial feature is Hilbert's program of proving the formal basis of mathematics through its reduction to logic, and the reduction of physical science to an axiomatic system. In essence, this program of reductionism has fundamentally reigned ever since, regardless of denials.
Russell had spent time in the 1890s in Göttingen, and was encouraged by this program to move to axiomatize Arithmetic in his Principia Mathematica, modeled on Newton and Euclid. Keep in mind that by 1900, the latter two had been fundamentally discredited by the work of Riemann regarding Euclid as well as Newton. But, ignoring Riemann, the whole model for Hilbert's project was Euclid, stripped of specific axioms and reduced to the form of axiomatizing.
To quote the problems as Hilbert stated them: Number two in his list was "To investigate the consistency of the Arithmetic axioms"; and number six, "To axiomatize those physical sciences in which mathematics plays an important role."
For a science to be valid, it must be of this type, as Hilbert later expressed the primacy of mathematical rigor for physics. And "progress" must be the reduction of science to this form of mathematical rigor.
On the contrary, creative change in human knowledge and capability was ruled out by Hilbert and Russell as a standard of truth or knowability. Russell took this to a dark extreme of pseudo-scientific pessimism and cynicism about humanity, becoming over the ensuing 60 years one of the most famous, and the most evil man of the Twentieth Century.
This also gives us insight into the Twentieth Century, its wars, its degeneration, and the seminal role of Hilbert and Russell. By their definitions, there was no human mind, no creativity, no action on the future, and therefore no moral purpose, no mission for the human species. Thus there was no reason for the individual to exist.
https://larouchepub.com/other/2015/4224suffocatn_math.html#container
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCHILLER INSTITUTE
How Bertrand Russell
Became An Evil Manby
Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.July 28, 1994
Britain's Lord Bertrand Russell has been, beyond any reasonable doubt, the most evil public figure of the passing century. England's murdered Christopher Marlowe might have said fairly that the Thule Society's monstrous Adolf Hitler was but a picaresque rogue cast as Dr. Faustus, whereas Russell was a true Mephistopheles. Marlowe would insist upon qualifying his observation: "A truly Venetian Mephistopheles."14
Russell personally did not cause all of the evil which has proliferated throughout our planet during the past hundred-odd years, but he was one of the most influential individuals among those who did. Moreover, if one traces out the influences which caused Russell to become an evil man, one will also come to understand not only what went wrong during the Twentieth Century, but many preceding centuries before that.
The Twentieth Century will go down in future history, as the century which is outstanding for the endless monotony of its popularly believed lies. The myth of Bertrand Russell as an utopian humanitarian, is perhaps among the more widespread such lies which persist as generally accepted among literate people who ought to know better. How is such amazing credulity of presumably literate, educated people possible, even up to the highest ranks in academia and even the intelligence services of the U.S. government, for example? We use the case of Russell here as an example of that problem. Reviewing the highlights of Russell's multifarious evil provides the setting in which to supply the answer to the question, "Why are today's putatively literate people so blindly credulous?"
The answer to that question is the subject of this report.
All British philosophical radicalism, from approximately 1760 to the present day, is premised upon the specific influence of this notion of a "hedonistic calculus," the radical-positivist notion that all ideas, all social relations may be reduced fairly to representation in terms of linear-algebraic functions modelled (as Ortes emphasizes this connection) on the mathematical methods of Galileo and Newton.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Giammaria Ortes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Errori popolari intorno all'economia nazionale e al governo delle nazioni, 1999
Abbé Giovanni Maria Ortes (March 1713 – 1790) was a Venetian composer, economist, mathematician, Camaldolese monk, and philosopher. He is better known for his population predictions that preceded those of Malthus.
Ortes belonged to the Camaldolese monastic order. He was probably the first person, according to Adam Ferguson, to use the term "economics" for the science in which he exercised a remarkable activity, particularly in his works Economia Nazionale (1774) and Riflessioni sulla popolazione (1790), which along with other of his works were reprinted in Pietro Custodi's anthologies "Scrittori classici italiani di economia politica" (1802–16). He was opposed to mercantilism.
He anticipated certain doctrines of Adam Smith and Thomas Robert Malthus, especially the latter, as he felt that the population propagation, if it were allowed free rein, would take place in a geometric progression with a doubling every 30 years. No one knows exactly how he died.
Works
Della economia nazionale (1774)
Sulla religione e sul governo dei popoli (1780)
Dei fedecommessi a famiglie e chiese (1784)
오르테스라는 사람은 대단한 천재였던 듯. 경제학이라는 말을 처음 사용했고, 맬서스와 아담 스미스보다 앞선 사상가라고 한다.
----------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--->아마 정부의 경제 담당자들의 일반적인 생각일 것이고, 주류 경제학의 기본적인 입장이며, 더 나아가서는 케인즈의 생각이기도 하다.
엉터리 경제학자 케인즈 역시 은행에 들어 있는 돈은 잠자고 있는 돈이므로 경제에 해롭다고 믿었다.
하지만 케인즈 이전의 제대로 된 모든 경제학자들은 저축이 경제발전의 아주 중요하다는데 동의하고 있었다. 그 돈을 기업가들이 대출해서 소비자들이 가장 필요로 하는 상품이나 서비스를 생산하기 때문이다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
LET´S TWIST AGAIN BY ANA & JO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daylight Robbery is out now
Daylight Robbery is out now Following this great piece from @LukeJohnsonRCP we present exhibit Ahttps://twitter.com/dominicfrisby/status/1193633724325339136 …
Daylight Robbery is out now
Daylight Robbery is out now Following this great piece from @LukeJohnsonRCP we present exhibit Ahttps://twitter.com/dominicfrisby/status/1193633724325339136 …
영국 세법 천만 단어.
홍콩 세법 15만 단어
-------------------------------------------------------
Countryside Alliance
Cambridge Uni banned red meat in 2016. It said: "It is hard to imagine any other interventions that could yield such dramatic benefits in so short a span of time.” Bold claim. So we asked them how many flights they'd been on since then: 17,000+
캠브릿지대학이 2016년 육류를 금지했다. 이는 지구 온난화를
유발하는 가축의 고기 섭취를 금지한다는 의미였다. 그래서 우
리는 그들에게 이후로 얼마나 많은 비행을 했느냐고 물었다.
무려 17,000회 이상이었다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
spiked
The green movement has gone mad. Its horror stories about billions of people dying as a result of climate change have no basis in science whatsoever. It’s time more of us stood up to this dogmatic and misanthropic movement, writes Brendan O’Neill
미쳐버린 환경 운동.
수십억 명의 사람들이 기후 변화로 죽는다고 하지만, 아무런
과학적 근거가 없다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TakingHayekSeriously
Ronald Fisher on the resistance of professors to knowledge which would require them to change their understanding of their research program ...
새로운 발견이 있으면 기존의 지식이 쓰레기가 된다. 그러면
기존의 지식을 끌어안고 있던 일부 교수들은 새로운 지식에 맹
렬하게 저항한다.
----------------------------------------------------------------
HumanProgress.org
It's tempting to want to make the story about "us" in the rich countries acting as saviors for the global poor, but the reality is that people in the developing world are lifting themselves out of poverty wherever they have the economic freedom to do so.
개발도상국의 주민들은 경제적 자유가 주어진 곳에서는 어느
곳이라도 스스로의 노력으로 가난에서 빠져나오고 있다.
Economist Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University recently made this claim (emphasis mine):
“We’re so rich in our total production and in our capacities to do things that we could solve absolutely fundamental challenges, such as ending extreme poverty or addressing climate change or preserving biodiversity without much effort … it cannot be the most important issue in the world whether the U.S. grows at another 3% or 3.5% or 2.9% a year, when over the last 65 years there’s been no discernible rise in wellbeing”
That is the theme of his new book, The Origins of Happiness.
By “we” Sachs appears to mean the U.S. and other rich countries and calls for their governments to engage in wealth transfers to poor countries and a plethora of environmental projects. What he does not seem to realize is that humanity is already making swift progress—through the free actions of billions of individuals—toward ending poverty and better preserving the environment.
By “we” Sachs appears to mean the U.S. and other rich countries and calls for their governments to engage in wealth transfers to poor countries and a plethora of environmental projects. What he does not seem to realize is that humanity is already making swift progress—through the free actions of billions of individuals—toward ending poverty and better preserving the environment.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Why We Are Not Living in a Post‑Truth Era
An (Unnecessary) Defense of Reason and a (Necessary) Defense of Universities’ Role in Advancing it
Antonio Gramsci
It's true. Few acknowledge the truth that communism / socialism works great in tiny local groups, but at scale ALWAYS results in tyranny and death. It's not that communism / socialism is bad so much as we need to know and limit their proper place to maintain freedom and dignity.
공산, 사회주의는 아주 작은 지역 집단에서는 잘 작동한다. 하
지만 규모가 커지면 독재와 죽음을 낳는다.
PJ C
THEORY: Most ppl in USA actually resonate most w/ @nntaleb fractalized gov model:
-Family level: communist
-Friends/tribe: socialist
-Municipal->State: democrat
-State -> below Fed: republican
-Fed & above: libertarian
They just haven't taken the time yet to think through it.
가족 사이: 공산주의
친구들: 사회주의....
탈레브는 가족과 친구들 사이에서는 공산, 사회주의를 실시해
도 된다고 말한다. 한국의 공산주의자들도 이를 실천하기를
------------------------------------------------------
Claire Lehmann
I have to admit I did not see this pivot coming: the Weinstein argument for wealth distribution
성폭력을 예방하고 방지하기 위해서는 부의 재분배가 필요하
다는 다소 황당한 주장.
----------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기