ISLAM vs CHRISTIANITY

Graphic map showing the historic advance of Islam   [wpvideo bqwlDLCu]   [simple-payment id=”741″]   [contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Website” type=”url” /][contact-field label=”Comment” type=”textarea” required=”1″ /][/contact-form]]]>

KEN LAM: THE COP WHO DIDN'T FIRE

rd April 2018, Alek Minassian, took a large white van and drove on the Toronto sidewalks for about one and half miles mowing anyone in his path. By the time he had finished his horror drive, 10 people laid dead with 15 left devastatingly injured, some of whom may yet die. The video is a compendium of reports explaining what happened and offers some background information about the attacker. James Williams gives his take in the second half of the video saying we should first look into the psychology of what led to this tragedy. He also explains that in matters of crisis, often a hero steps forward. In this incident that hero was police officer, Ken Lam who remained calm and took down the killer without firing a shot in spite of tremendous provocation to fire. [wpvideo M3oa54of]]]>

Yes, You Should Delete Facebook

How we respond to Facebook today will inform the startups of tomorrow. Nat Eliason Credit: LOIC VENANCE/AFP/Getty Images Ideleted my Facebook a few weeks ago, but it started scaring me last March. A friend and I ran into one of his investors in a café in San Francisco, and the investor asked if we’d heard of a Soylent competitor, Ample. He was curious what we thought of it, and of meal replacement companies in general. I hadn’t heard of Ample, but I shared my concerns with Soylent, and why I personally would never put my money into one of those companies. My friend, for the most part, agreed. The conversation ended and we left. I didn’t think about Ample again, look it up, or talk about it online with anyone. But less than 24 hours later, there were ads for it in my Instagram feed. It was spooky, to say the least. I was used to getting ads for products whose sites I’d visited, and for products I’d mentioned on Facebook, but products that I’d only talked about? That was weird. After a bit of digging, I discovered I wasn’t alone. There were dozens of stories online about people getting freaked out by ads that seem like they only could have come from Facebook eavesdropping on their conversations. Now to be clear, this probably isn’t happening. It would be a massive amount of work and data processing for marginally better ad targeting. Like the Wiredarticle says, Facebook doesn’t need to listen to your conversations. They can target you well enough without it. Facebook Cause for Concern That’s meant to be reassuring: they’re not listening to you because they don’t have to. But if anything, that should be even scarier. Facebook knows so much about you they can make you believe they’re listening to your personal conversations. They have so much data about you they can send you ads that have an uncanny relevance to what is going on in the real world. Imagine, for a moment, that you had a friend with this level of knowledge about you. Someone who knows everywhere you go, what you like, what you fear, what you want, who you hang out with, how happy you are at any given moment. They could be an amazing boon to your life. Or they could be a nightmare. It all depends on what they do with the information, and how well you can trust them with it. Now imagine the friend can use their information about you to make money, say by manipulating your decisions to benefit them. And imagine they’re the kind of morally bankrupt person who would take advantage of their friend this way. What would their incentives look like? Since they can make money by manipulating your decisions, they’ll try to manipulate your decisions. And since they can better manipulate your decisions by learning more about you, the more they’ll want to learn. If they want the greatest success for themselves, they will necessarily have to manipulate you as much as possible and collect as much data on you as possible. This seems to be the situation Facebook has gotten itself into:

  1. They make money on ads.
  2. Which means they need you to click on ads.
  3. Which means they need to know more about you to send you better ads.
  4. And they need you to spend more time on the site so you click on more ads.
  5. So they’re motivated to get you addicted to spending time on the platform while collecting as much information about you as possible.
Facebook’s product is not the platform, it’s us. If the product is what a business sells to make money, then Facebook’s product is our attention and data. We are the product. And Facebook’s customers are the companies buying ads based on that attention and data. If our time and our attention are Facebook’s true product, then their long-term goal becomes clear: to influence (and tax) how we communicate in the 21st century. Every product they’ve launched and company they’ve acquired is related to this goal in some way:
  • Facebook (app) is the asynchronous, community-focused communication platform
  • Messenger / Whatsapp are the more instant, smaller group communication platforms
  • Instagram is the visual communication platform
  • Oculus can be the future immersive version of all of these platforms
Facebook wants to own how we communicate because it means more data and more attention, which means more ads revenue. Simple enough. But that idea should be a little frightening: a company wants to control how you interact with other humans so that they can make money off of you. This isn’t some secret, evil motivation driving the company behind closed doors. It’s a necessary consequence of the incentives that shape it. Compare this model to Netflix. You pay Netflix a flat monthly fee, and in return, you get unlimited streaming movies and TV shows from their platform. Netflix doesn’t make more money the more time you spend on it (they make less, actually), so they have no incentive to addict you to the platform (beyond keeping you from switching to a competitor). With Netflix, we’re the customers. This isn’t to say that all free, ad-financed apps are bad and all pay-to-play apps are good. I’ve used Foursquare and Swarm consistently for 7+ years. These are apps where I volunteer my location, travel, eating, and shopping habits, and I’ve never had the slightest sense that Foursquare was using this data in a way that made my life worse. The ads in Foursquare tend to be useful. Their goal for the product is to be the place consumers go to find the next restaurant or café to try. They don’t need you to spend tons of time in the app, and they don’t need you to buy products from vendors unrelated to your in-app goals. They just want you to stay in the habit of checking in places and finding places through them, so they serve you ads related to the kinds of foods and stores you tend to like. If Foursquare started using that data in a way that made me uncomfortable, I’d stop using it. If every time I checked into a restaurant I started getting emails from them afterwards, I’d know Foursquare was selling my email address to places I checked in and I wouldn’t be cool with that. I’d delete it, and switch to an app I had more trust in. The problem with Facebook is that its managed to gain such a monopoly on our digital presence that we worry about quitting it. Switching from Foursquare to Yelp doesn’t give anyone anxiety, but deleting Facebook does. The Fear of Quitting How did Facebook get so ingrained in our lives that people who lived without it for thirty years are suddenly concerned about losing it? Partially for the same reason people joined in the first place: information. We want to know what’s going on in the lives of our friends and acquaintances, and Facebook has become the go-to source for doing that. But in the process, Facebook has changed friendship from an active to a passive process. You can sit back and wait for some update to appear from a friend or acquaintance and then respond to it. You don’t have to put in any effort to reach out and ask what’s going on, you get it fed to your by the magical friend algorithms. How often do you reach out to your friends to ask them how it’s going? Or to see if there are any big updates in their lives? There’s hardly any need anymore, since Facebook has automated the process. We don’t have to put in the work, the information comes to us, and so we’ve lost the muscles we used to use for staying updated on our social circle. It’s similar to the problem I outlined in my article on the switch from search to social. As we moved away from actively looking for things on the Internet, having them fed to us instead, we became more passive informational consumers. And as we move more towards passive Facebook-style friendships, we lose our old abilities to stay in touch with people. This would be fine if Facebook relationships were as meaningful as in-person ones, but they aren’t. Conversations through chat apps and getting up to date on your friends through the newsfeed is the relationship equivalent of Soylent. A technological pseudo-improvement over an ancient human process, and one that falls dramatically short of the value it’s trying to recreate. And since we’ve been sipping the Facebook friend juice for so long, it’s legitimately scary to quit. How will you know what events are going on? How will you know if something big happens in your friend’s life? How will you stay in touch with people? The simple answer is… all the ways we did for the last 100,000 years. Talking to people. Being an active consumer of information and knowledge about your friends’ lives instead of letting it passively wash over you. But it would still be fair to ask: why bother. Yes, quitting Facebook does make it more likely that you’ll miss events, updates, and messages, since other people are on it. And yes, it can be a little inconvenient to not have it at times, depending on your friend group. So why is it worth it to delete the social network instead of begrudgingly continuing to use it? Why Bother Deleting Facebook Someone observing the digital landscape a couple years from now could see Facebook continuing its dominance and deduce that it’s fine to play fast and loose with customer data in the name of growth, to optimize your product around addictiveness, and to sell information on your users. Or, in a couple years, they could see the massive consequences Facebook faced for behaving that way. They could see people chose to give their attention to products they trust, and left Facebook in droves. Which is why quitting Facebook matters: it sends the message that companies can’t, and shouldn’t, try to have that much power over our lives. That if other companies try in the future, they’ll get punished for it. If someone in our social circle deceives us or lies to us, we tell our friends. We use gossip to spread information about who is and isn’t trustworthy, partially so there are consequences for not being trustworthy. If businesses aren’t subject to the same consequences for not being trustworthy, they’ll have no motivation to think before they do something that could break their users’ trust. If Facebook thinks they can keep focusing on addiction, ad revenue, and data collection with no consequences, they’ll keep doing it. Reflecting on how Facebook has become such a dominant force in our lives the last five to ten years, and the consequences of that dominance, I think there are a few key lessons from it that we can apply to other technologies: Don’t rely on a product for a natural human process Facebook can’t replace socialization and face-to-face communication. Soylent can’t replace food. Porn can’t replace sex. Tinder can’t replace dating. It’s tempting to try to technologize everything in our lives, but it won’t work for these more old-school processes, and we should stop believing that four guys in their Harvard dorm room can really make a better social network than the one we have IRL. Be the customer, not the product Opt for services you pay for instead of services that sell your information. Pay to remove ads whenever possible. When you’re using a product for free, you’re still paying for it in some way, typically through the data and attention you’re giving it. Watch out for the incentives of companies and products you use, and don’t expect that they’ll all be benevolent masters of your information. Most importantly: treat companies like people If a company can’t be trusted, ditch them, and let them feel the consequences. If a product can get away with mistreating its users to make money, it will keep doing it until they feel the consequences. Facebook has become the abusive partner in many people’s lives. They’ve carved out such a seemingly important role in your life that even though you want to leave, you’re scared of the consequences. But I can’t stress enough how little impact quitting has on your life. I was almost entirely off it for a year before deleting it, and in that time I’ve never missed it. Have I missed an event or two? Probably, but that’s a small price to pay. And as for staying up to date on my friends lives… well I just do it the old fashioned way. Talking to them. Which is wonderful since we actually have something to talk about when we meet in person, instead of sitting on our phones looking at Facebook to get up to date on all our other friends’ lives. Imagine going back 10 years and being told that if you signed up for Facebook, they were going to collect a disturbing amount of information on you, manipulate your emotions, store your conversations, and try to control how you communicate with people online. Would you sign up? Would you let your kid sign up? I wouldn’t, and I don’t think you would either. Here’s how to quit when you’re ready. WRITTEN BY Nat Eliason Founder of Growth Machine, writer on all things interesting at www.nateliason.com, and co-host of the“Made You Think” podcast.    ]]>

Helen Dale

Helen Dale – Writer for The Spectator  Helen Dale, known for a time by her pen name Helen Demidenko, is an Australian writer and lawyer. She served as a senior adviser to David Leyonhjelm, a Liberal Democrat member of the Australian Senate, from 2014 through to the election in 2016. In the 13 years of Labour Government (1997-2010) more laws were passed than in over 900 years (1066-1997). The legislation that is being used by the current Conservative Government was brought in by Labour. Section 127 of the Communications Act needs to be repealed.

HELEN DALE SPEAKS OUT IN DEFENCE OF COMEDY AND FREE SPEECH

  [wpvideo m6CpF7aR]]]>

FREE SPEECH DEMO SEES PASSIONATE CONDEMNATION OF UK & SCOTTISH GOVERNMENTS FOR AUTHORITARIAN ATTACKS ON LIBERTY

The Bagpipe March for Free Speech   A good natured but passionate demonstration took place Monday 23rd April 2018 to protest about the threat to humour and free speech. This video is filled with inspiring bagpipe music which uplifts the spirit and made it a joy to participate in. About protesters gathered in Leicester Square and marched on Downing Street to melodious bagpipe tunes. There was a friendly liaison with police, but the protesters  conveyed a strength of feeling about the UK political and legal establishment penalizing comedy and attacking those they think have committed hate speech. Many bystanders voiced their support along the route. VIDEO 3 [wpvideo Je6knhIi]


INITIAL REPORT AFTER DEMO

I was the first to arrive at Leicester Square. I got there just before 11am on 23rd April 2018. It was a sunny but with a thin veil of cloudy patches and a chill wind, just to enough to take away the desire to strip and absorb the sun’s rays. Although, these days, I feel the threat of contracting skin cancer has been a sufficient deterrent for some years now. People started to show up from about 1115 onwards and it was a very friendly atmosphere. I heard from a police officer that Mark Meechan (Count Dankula) had been fined £800. Milling among the various gatherings I was struck by the passion that seemed to ooze from the attendees, but it was not mindless passion, but a grouping of people who had thought thing s out and who had decided that our society is under serious threat from radical authoritarians who are intent on turning us all into a passive automatons , fearful to think anything let alone say anything. I overheard one young man, probably not a day over 20 years, tell of how he had suffered abuse from a young woman who made derogatory remarks about his sexual organs after he had turned her down for a date. There were stories abounding of how a young woman had said the ‘wrong thing’ on Twitter and been booted off the platform. I heard word that a regular attendee to Speaker’s Corner, Tam, a Malaysian student had gone to Paris for a filming with Tommy Robinson, but had been refused entry back into the UK. He had had a clash with London Mayor Sadiq Khan a few days earlier. In the event he had had the microphone taken off him by officials and then evicted. There was a lot of friendly exchange with the police attending and not a hint of any trouble. I reckon numbers attending were probably about 500 in number. Perhaps one of the biggest cheers that went up when Karl Benjamin arrived. Karl is perhaps better known by his online pseudonym, Sargon of Akkad. He has many hundreds of thousands of fans worldwide and something of a global star. There was appropriately, as it was a pro-Count Dankula march. a bagpipe player whose very accomplished talents played some classic Scottish melodies that went down well with the whole crowd. At 1300 we began the march from Leicester Square through Trafalgar Square and to Richmond Terrace across the road from Downing Street. I had been provided with a blue T-shirt with the slogans:     [gallery ids="9395,9396" type="rectangular"]   Along the way a number of bystanders took photographed and I was asked by several of them what it was all about. There was a heavy police presence, but throughout relations were cordial and, at times, jovial. There was ton of footage taken. Too much for it all to be processed, but one of the important things is to meet with others and establish links and friendships. At Richmond Terrace several people took into in turns to speak with a handful of nominated ones such as Karl Benjamin being among them and a well spoken reporter from The Spectator who was non-too-pleased with the Conservative Party administration over the whole free speech affair. There will be a selection of clips published here once I have had time to go through the footage. In the aftermath of the march, the organizers, from a group identifying as Liberalists UK, had booked up a session at a floating pub called the Tattershall Castle on the Thames.

DEMO GATHERING

VIDEO 2   [wpvideo bVsfVb6G] While Mark Meechan was receiving his sentence in Scotland, a demonstration, organized by Liberalists UK was underway in London. This is the second film on the event by Chimes Media and is about the gathering – Bag pipes, You Tube star Sargon of Akkad and the humour of being silenced. Fun as well as serious. No trouble; no arrests; good relations with the police.

Pre-departure to Free Speech march in London

VIDEO 1   [wpvideo y7i9fhjm]]]>

Scientists Create Superionic 'Space' Water

ice seven (ice VII). First discovered in 2016, it remains solid at room temperature. Laser pulses were passed through this material, which heated it and created shock waves throughout the material. These extreme conditions, which only occur naturally in otherworldly environments , were enough to produce the superionic ice. Lead author Marius Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetec…

This Ice Is Nearly As Hot As the Sun.

From Live Science Basic Features of superionic ice:
  • It’s both solid and liquid,
  • It’s 60 times denser than ordinary water ice
  • It forms at temperatures almost as hot as the sun’s surface.
  • This high-pressure form of water ice has long been thought to exist in the interiors of  Uranus and Neptune. But until now, its existence was only theoretical.
Superionic Ice  

“Our work provides experimental evidence for superionic ice and shows that these predictions were not due to artifacts in the simulations, but actually captured the extraordinary behavior of water at those conditions,” Marius Millot, a physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, said in a statement from the laboratory. Millot was the leader author of a new study describing the work.

Scientists first predicted the existence of a weird water phase that makes the substance both solid and liquid at the same time 30 years ago. It’s also way denser than ordinary water ice because it forms only under extreme heat and pressure, such as those found inside giant planets. During the superionic phase, the hydrogen and oxygen within water molecules behave bizarrely; hydrogen ions move like a liquid, inside of a solid crystal lattice of oxygen. [The Surprisingly Strange Physics of Water]

Making the ice was complicated. First, the team compressed water into an ultrastrong cubic crystalline ice, in a different crystal form than what you see in ordinary ice cubes. To do that, the researchers used diamond anvil cells to apply 360,000 pounds per square inch (2.5 gigapascals (GPa) of pressure; that’s about 25,000 times the atmospheric pressure on Earth). Next, the researchers heated and compressed the cells even further, using laser-driven shocks. Each crystal ice structure received up to six laser beams of more than 100 times that high pressure.

“Because we pre-compressed the water, there is less shock-heating than if we shock-compressed ambient liquid water,” Millot said. The new method lets researchers “access much colder states at high pressure than in previous shock-compression studies.”

Once the superionic ice was ready, the team moved quickly to analyze its optical and thermodynamic properties. They had only 10 to 20 nanoseconds to perform the work, before pressure waves released the compression, and the water dissolved. And the results were bizarre. They found that the ice melts at an extraordinary 8,540 degrees Fahrenheit (4,725 degrees Celsius ) at 29 million pounds per square inch (200 GPa) of pressure. That pressure is about 2 million times the atmospheric pressure on Earth.

“It’s … mind-boggling that frozen water ice is present at thousands of degrees inside these planets, but that’s what the experiments show,” Raymond Jeanloz, a co-author of the study and planetary physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, said in the same statement.

The new findings could provide a peek inside the interiors of planets such as Uranus and Neptune. Planetary scientists suggest these worlds’ innards are composed of up to 65 percent water by mass, plus some ammonia and methane.

Superionic2

Previous work suggested these planets would have “fully fluid” heat-transferring interiors, but the addition of superionic ice changes the picture. The new research instead proposes “a relatively thin layer of fluid and a large ‘mantle’ of superionic ice,” the researchers said in the

statement.

 

That picture of the mini-giant planets’ interiors would confirm a computer simulation performed a decade ago that tried to explain the weird magnetic fields at Uranus and Neptune. Uranus’ magnetic field is tilted 59 degrees away from the planet’s axis. Neptune’s magnetic poles have a roughly 47-degree tilt. This is extreme compared with Earth, which has only an 11-degree tilt. Their magnetic fields also may behave differently; for example, Uranus’ field may turn on and off like a strobe.

  [gallery ids="8837,8838,8832,8833" type="square" columns="2"]

More detailed study of these planets will have to wait until a spacecraft is available. Fortunately, NASA is proposing a Uranus and/or Neptune spacecraft that would zoom out to these planets sometime in the next few decades. Meanwhile, the experimenters plan to push their compression further to simulate conditions inside of even larger giant planets, such as Jupiter or Saturn.

 

A study based on the research was published in February in the journal Nature Physics.

 

Original article on Live Science.

  [simple-payment id=”522″] [contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Comment” type=”textarea” required=”1″ /][/contact-form]]]>

SYRIAN AIR STRIKES – REACTION & ANALYSIS

NEVER MIND THE EMOTIONAL STUFF. THIS IS THE STRATEGIC REALITY OF THE SYRIAN ATTACKS

NO RUSSIAN BASES THREATENED.

THE SINISTER DEEP STATE ARE A GLOBAL ORGANIZATION WITH THEIR OWN MILITARY. THEY ARE THE REAL ENEMY. US STRIKES TARGETED THEIR ASSETS.

BP EARTH WATCH EXPLAINS

[gallery ids="5139,5140,5141,5142,5143,5144,5145,5146,5147"]

Why The US Really Attacked Syria. FULL ANALYSIS FROM BPEARTHWATCH

BPEarthWatch  Published on Apr 14, 2018 [wpvideo ksA0HrjQ]

US COALITION LAUNCH MISSILE STRIKES ON SYRIA

Syria Missile Strikes.jpg

How did Russia response to the airstrikes in Syria?

CBS News Published on Apr 14, 2018 The United States, along with the U.K. and France, attacked Syrian targets in retaliation for the Assad regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons last week in Douma. Markos Kounalakis, a foreign affairs columnist for McClatchy News and visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, joins CBSN to discuss Russia’s response to the airstrikes – and more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC_2e8W5qho

INFO WARS IN WASHINGTON DC

Emergency Alert Russians Warn Nuclear War Is Hours Away!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRXxXNIGpaM Published on Apr 15, 2018

From RT Footage as the missiles hit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oI_GMZXB8Y

From the Daily Mail:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsJAwVjL5hU

From Paul Joseph Watson:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-WuPFlMThw

From Stefan Molyneux:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvveAGviJqo
 ]]>

The Ugly Truth About Diversity

 | Katie Hopkins and Stefan Molyneux https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byB3a0eMhE0

“Murder is not just a case of killing and going away. It involves 3 hours of torture with weapons and tools used in horrifying ways.”

  [contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”1″ /][contact-field label=”Comment” type=”textarea” required=”1″ /][/contact-form] [simple-payment id=”741″]]]>