From time to time, hopefully more often, I'll post one of these--a little more personal, mostly about whatever is going on right now, with the Independent Individualist, The Autonomist, and the world. This is definitely not a blog, which I have defined elsewhere:

"Blogs—the disgusting Internet phenomenon where totally uninteresting people indulge in revealing every detail of their squalid lives and insipid minds, wallowing in the delusion the world is waiting with bated breath to learn whether or not they have lately changed their underwear."

Burt Has a New Book

That's Burt Prelutsky. Around here the week begins and ends with Burt, at least there is one of his entertaining and thoughtful articles every Monday and Friday.

His latest book is Liberals: America's Termites (or "It's A Shame That Liberals, Unlike Hamsters, Don't Eat Their Young"). Here's a picture of it. If you like Burt's articles, you'll love his book.

Not PC

At the top of The Autonomist column, it says, "A Free Market of Ideas." That means I publish articles by many authors, even when I disagree, even strongly, with the ideas in those articles. If I only published articles I agree with, it would hardly be a free market.

One thing that will never prevent an article from being published is if it is not politically correct. I will not publish pornography or anything hateful, but criticism of "protected" groups (which is nothing more than censorship) is certainly allowed.

For example, the prolific J.D. Longstreet's latest article, "Should God Apologize To Sodom And Gomorrah?" would never be published on any site that is politically correct. I happen to agree, that if you must have a military, it is insane to include homosexuals in that military. My reasons for thinking that however, are totally different from Mr. Longstreet's. Longstreet's perspective is entirely from his personal religious convictions, which I do not share.

My objection to homosexuals in the military is based solely on the fact that those who have chosen (it is chosen) to live the homosexual "lifestyle" [not crazy about that word, but it will do], are entertaining intellectual and psychological flaws of precisely the same kind as those who practice pica, or cut themselves, or are wannabees (Body Integrity Identity Disorder). I do not believe individual's with those kinds of psychological or personality problems are good candidates for the military, and would be a danger to others as well.

Being non-religious (not anti-religious), I cannot agree with Mr. Longstreet's arguments, but I'm delighted to have him express them, no matter how much I disagree with them. I publish an article by Chuck Baldwin, a very conservative Christian pastor, almost every week as well. To me, that is what a free market of ideas is.

It Won't Happen—Regi Sticks His neck Out

Perhaps you've seen the latest dire doomsday predictions: Senators Warned of Terror Attack on U.S. by July, "And one by one, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair, CIA Director Leon Panetta and FBI Director Robert Mueller all agreed an attack was "certain."

Am I really sticking my neck out saying these dire predictions are just so much bunk? I do not pretend to be a prophet, and I have no secret inside information to base my claim on. After all, I've said, "Here's the wisdom. All prophets are frauds." I'm not going to claim to be one.

But I know such predictions are impossible to make, and those who are making the predictions know it too. If they could predict the attacks with that precision, they would prevent them. So why would such people tell such bold-face lies?

H. L. Mencken gave the answer:

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

It is nothing but a play for power. That is the reason for the lie, and they do it because they know they can get away with it. If they are wrong, which they almost surely are, they can take the credit for preventing the dreamed-up terrorist attack. If they are right, which they probably hope they are, I'll apologize, but I won't apologize for telling you, you will not be a victim of a terrorist attack.