Tag Archives: Politics

I rarely get political on this site, and when I do, I usually add one of two other tags, “education” or “responsibility.” Most of the issues that politicians claim to be able to solve can be solved by educated people taking responsibility.

Evan Sayet on Modern Liberalism – OK Now What

2007: Evan Sayet – Regurgitating the Apple How Modern Liberals “Think”

Historical Context

The historical context I notice is that Evan Sayet presents himself as a New York Jew who would by his upbringing typically identify as a liberal, but due to events that were recent at the time of the speech – in 2007 – he identifies politically as a conservative Republican. He uses an analogous story – starting ~9:00 – to place himself and his own political conversion within the historical context of the points he drives home.

The Perceived Problem

Modern Liberals don’t think. Starting at ~9:30 Evan Sayet reasons out exactly why modern Liberals “don’t think.”

The Actual Problem

We are all considering issues nationally instead of locally. We are getting most of our information from impersonal national sources like television and the most popular participants on social media. We are imagining that our problems and their solutions come from national change.

Liberals usually think up change and drag conservatives kicking and screaming to a better place with national change while the conservatives filter the change with prudence. Now, Liberals are thinking up how to destroy what’s been created while both sides are distracted from important local problems with nationally-created mass media and consumer culture. Neither side will give up the comfort the system provides even while the system itself crumbles.

What the Mainstream Media Says

The mainstream media blasts entertaining political provocation like this at full-volume 24/7.

My Opinion

The idea that modern Liberals have arrived at a point where they can’t find anything to change is not new. I believe it is accurate. I believe the content of the video is a mostly-accurate description of what has happened to modern Liberalism. However, there are just a few words I would alter. Instead of saying modern liberals “don’t think,” he should have said, “liberals focus exclusively on how to make change nationally through government and mass media. In their fanaticism for change, near perfection has required them to consistently mess everything up.”

Solutions

The core of the solution is to address our problems that appear national at a local level. The only way Hollywood and other national entertainment will improve is to be abandoned and replaced locally. The only way the federal government will improve is to be less by being challenged by local governments.

Evan Sayet gives the solution at 24:10. “We have to take back universities, schools, media, the entertainment industry.” I agree. This is best done with participation in local government, local decision-making, and local entertainment. If we must educate our own children because the Liberal-influenced education administrators will not do it properly, how can we get it done? Fortunately our schools are funded locally, but we must participate in their governance. How can we entertain ourselves locally? Live minor league baseball, youth sports, adult sports leagues, golf, live local bands, symphonies, plays, and concerts are the answer. Unfortunately we face the challenge to eliminate what threatens these things with complacency: TV and air conditioning. We must turn off the TV, open the doors and windows, go outside and socialize.

At 43:22 Evan Sayet says modern Liberals question authority and attack the ability to distinguish right and wrong, but we have not replaced the authority and morality with anything. We need to replace this authority locally. A return to dressing decent in public would help. Once we turn off amoral TV, what do we do? We will only know once we do it. If a state were to refuse federal funding in order to maintain sovereignty, what would be the effect? How would we fund local projects and infrastructure? Are we prepared to really challenge the power of the federal government? How can we prepare? Are we educated voters on these issues?

I list five “bad” items on the Post-Industrial Time Blog that bring only comfort and complacency and should avoided to the max extent possible: TV, cars, air conditioning, sugar, pills. These five items are almost entirely new in our daily lives in the last century. They barely existed in 1900. Nationalism and the internet are equally as new as the “bad” five items, but they each have a good side. They bring more than just comfort and laziness. Nationalism keeps relative peace and the internet enables almost unlimited bi-directional communication. We must learn what these two things really mean in order to understand the solutions to the complete failure of national leadership. Nationalism is only effective if the large whole is made up of strong, healthy individual parts. We cannot outsource everything to the national specialization. Hollywood and Netflix cannot be our source of entertainment. The internet can enable local entertainment and I don’t mean friends on Facebook and YouTube. Blogging is a great way to experience the bi-directional internet. Blogging can be as simple as organizing your internet experience and sharing it with others in a positive way that you completely control. Pay attention to local events through the internet. The internet, unlike television and Netflix, is just as powerful locally as it is nationally.

The Washington Post Exposes a Bunch of Failure, Congratulations

A recent Washington Post article: At War With the Truth

U.S. officials constantly said they were making progress. They were not, and they knew it, an exclusive Post investigation found.

Historical Context

The current US war in Afghanistan is now the longest single military conflict in the history of the United States. It has been going on so long that it hardly requires justification to the American public anymore. We are accustomed to it. I was in high school when we first invaded.

The British fought in Afghanistan three times, for 1-3 years each time.

The Soviets fought in Afghanistan for 9 years from 1979-1989. It was a Cold War proxy war against forces backed by the United States.

The Perceived Problem

The article above claims that falsified reports by military generals are a major factor that keep us in Afghanistan. The article goes so far as to say the reports have been deliberately falsified over the years to justify remaining at war.

The Actual Problem

We as a country continue to fight a nearly 20 year conflict in Afghanistan. The Washington Post article above will be soon forgotten.

We fail see how wrong some decisions are ironically because they are so wrong on such a large scale that we simply can’t comprehend it. The magnitude is so much bigger than us we assume we must be mistaken somehow.

The main-stream media controls the majority of information people receive. They sling mud at each other for entertainment. An article like the one above catches peoples’ interest because it implies evil treachery by a select group, in this case military generals.

What the Main-Stream Media is Saying

The article appears anti-war. However, notice the article does not actually say we should leave Afghanistan now. It provides no suggestion for how we should cut our losses and depart. It also does not reference the historical failures in Afghanistan of the British and the Soviets.

The article criticizes former President Obama. Did The Washington Post criticize President Obama from 2009 – 2017, when he could actually make decisions? I will be honest, I am not going to go search Washington Post articles for an 8-year period, but let’s all be honest, Obama is a Democrat and The Post let him go while he was in office.

My Opinion

The Washington Post article describes one small portion / symptom of the military industrial complex as though it is a new thing. Really it is a very old phenomenon. It was well-known in 1935.

The article focuses on one select group of people, military generals. I believe that the scope of people responsible for our military industrial complex – which includes fighting a 2 decade war in Afghanistan – is so wide that pointing at one set of actions by one group is ridiculous. Generals operate near the political level. When the overall political climate wants to remain at war, it selects generals who will fight war.

Why is the Washington Post so excited to report the evil treachery of the military generals right now? I do now know but I will speculate. I heard recently noted that military generals are enjoying more political success now than ever before here in the US. Maybe this article is designed to curb that trend.

The Solution

We need to acknowledge all the factors that go into the United States fighting wars. This includes military generals who want to fight wars of course. However, it also includes our consumer culture that gobbles up resources made cheap by war and perpetuated by our two-party democracy that gives us only two choices, selected by the dollars of the MIC, both war-fighting.

We need to educate ourselves about ourselves and it starts by not consuming any information owned by large corporations close to Washington DC. The main-stream media is so ubiquitous that forcing oneself to learn is insufficient. We must first cut the propaganda from our busy lives and free our minds.

The gap between our nation as a whole and the wars we fight with 2% of the population needs to close. Is this possible? I really do not know.

John Oliver, Archetype of the Cancer that is the Media

The News Story:

Bill Nye (of “The Science Guy” fame) recently sold out and went on John Oliver’s late night show:

Notes

Full bias disclosure: while I believe that John Oliver and for example, Donald Trump, are near equals in the damage that they do by being entertaining idiots / bullies in the media (both are both, if you can’t see that, then you are stuck firmly on one side), when they face off, I personally would enjoy watching Trump name-call John Oliver instead of the reverse. This is probably very simply because Oliver seems like a little weeny to me.

The subject of this post, whose name I am finished using so that you and I can successfully forget it as soon as possible, does not himself warrant a post. However, he so acutely represents a form of the cancer that is the mainstream media that his name gets to appear in my title here on the Rage and Frenzy Blog, the most prestigious place it will probably ever be written.

I am going to use the stupid media term “global warming” here, rather than the more accurate and effective term, “global carbon transfer,” because we are talking about media bias, not the actual phenomenon.

The Perceived Problem

The perceived problem, judging by Bill Nye’s calling somebody “you f***ing idiots” (we don’t swear here at NathanRuffing.com, but in this case, it is a direct quote), is that global warming is caused, or at least allowed to continue, by some portion of the population who isn’t smart enough to understand global warming. I assume the idea is that this idiot portion of the population is voting for selfish policies that exacerbate the problem, and also probably spreading conspiracy theories that discredit the basic science behind global warming. I personally believe that these things have some truth to them, but what follows is the actual problem.

The Actual Problem

The actual problem is that we – and I do mean we human beings, all of us, especially those of us living in industrialized nations – are logistically supported by the energy that comes largely from transferring carbon from the ground into the atmosphere. Keep in mind, I did not say that we are the problem, I am saying that our source of energy can cause problems that we did not foresee when we started using it.

The current population of the world is 7 billion +. That is seven times the population of just 200 years ago, and ~25x the population of about 1,000 years ago. That is a significant increase. On top of that, we use a lot more energy per person now than we did 1,000 years ago. This is great, and I am happy to be a beneficiary of this energy wealth, but we should recognize that we should conserve the resources that produce it.

The Mainstream Media

What does the mainstream media say?

One side of the media says that global warming is not happening at all. This side actually will go so far as to say that it is impossible to the point of ridiculous to even suggest that mankind could affect the entire atmosphere and the climate. The main evidence that I have heard cited for this idea is that some scientists faked data, and that there are large global climate cycles. Both are almost certainly true, neither is evidence one way or the other.

The other side says that global warming is definitely happening, and does things like have a “Science Guy” put safety glasses on, string swear words together, and take a torch to a globe while a laugh-track rolls. Very constructive, subject of this post, you little weeny. I agree with your science, but you are the ring leader of a half-political laugh-track circus whose carbon footprint is the size of most third-world countries. Your team of writers puts its energy toward corrupting Bill Nye The Science Guy into insulting half the country because it is more entertaining to call somebody stupid than to say something smart. Are you even the leader? I find it hard to believe. Who writes your teleprompter? Who tells that person what to write and not to write? Who pays that person?

My Opinion

I think I editorialized this post enough that you know my opinion.

The Solution

The solution is for us to identify things that we do that use a lot of energy, especially energy that transfers carbon into the atmosphere, and stop doing those things. The first thing that comes to my mind is the military-industrial complex. If you don’t know what the military industrial complex is, you should. Click the link for the Wikipedia article.

The military industrial complex is not a new concept. One of the greatest warfighters in our history recognized the military industrial complex and preached about it in 1935. Click for the PDF: War is a Racket, by Major General Smedley Butler, USMC

Stopping doing many things that transfer carbon into the atmosphere will be difficult. For example, if we fight fewer wars, trade routes will close, and prices may go up. This may include the price we pay for gas at the pump. This would be difficult. We would have to coordinate with each other and carpool to work for example. We might even have to live closer to work and bike there.

Solved All the World’s Problems in One Sitting

Politics and Religion

I have discussed these things so many times on so many random occasions with so many different people that I can’t remember. It’s time to sit down and record it all. This also happens to be my 200th post, so what better time than now?

Politics

The Environment

“Global warming” / “global climate change,” – we should call this thing we all talk about “Global Carbon Transfer.” That’s what it is and always has been. This is directly measurable. It is completely accurate to what we are actually doing. We know that we are transferring carbon. The name Global Carbon Transfer also allows for consideration of other unknown effects that we have yet to identify that nobody even talks about. We are transferring a lot of carbon from the ground to the atmosphere. This is an indisputable fact.

I personally believe we are affecting the climate as well. When you start consistently transferring one substance within an equilibrium, which Earth is, and which we did with carbon starting in the mid-19th century, there will be change. The burden of proof should be on those saying that there won’t be change. Tell me how we can make a globally significant change in the composition of the atmosphere and it doesn’t have unintended consequences. How?

We should do something about Global Carbon Transfer, and saving the environment is not even the most important reason:

  • We (the United States now) fight expensive wars for energy resources. We should slow or stop this. We should challenge our consumer culture to save before we fight wars to waste energy on luxury comforts. Challenges are good for people and for countries. This challenge is worth confronting.
  • Heavy reliance on energy makes us weak from a national defense standpoint.
  • The most effective way to change our habits / culture / technology is to allow the price of energy to increase to a level where people have to make reasonable sacrifices to save energy. Yes, I am saying $10-$15 a gallon for gas. Yes, this might “crush our economy” in the short term. The media would say there’s a “crisis.” I am saying it is worth it. Solar panels would naturally reach grid-parity. Carpool. Produce and buy local. Vacation local. Fix goods instead of trashing them and buying new stuff. Choose a fuel-efficient car. Turn off the air conditioner.
  • Countries, like Germany especially, are way ahead of the US in implementing renewable energy sources. Any excuses for why this is the case are just excuses. We can win at this too.

Trump’s policy of “bringing us back to the old days” by continuing as world police and opening the energy flood gates to keep prices down is the policy of his with which I disagree most strongly. I wrote this in December of 2016.

We should create jobs and encourage education that has a future. Energy efficiency is the future, we have to transition, and we will be best at it if we have to consider our energy usage.

Terrorism

Using the label of “Muslim” to help identify terrorists is wrong and we have better ways of identifying terrorists than this unfair and dangerously broad label that includes many many good people. Most terrorists have called themselves “Muslim.” That does not mean that all Muslims are terrorists. What everybody missed while babbling on and on over the “Muslim” issue is that Saudi Arabia was not on Trump’s banned country list. Fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, and yet they are still essentially treated as an ally somehow, and have been for decades. The media doesn’t talk about this.

Terrorism can be best fought by a reduced reliance on foreign oil, both because:

  1. Our involvement globally is lessened, and
  2. Because less demand in the US lowers the global oil price, which reduces terrorism funding.

Notice that using less oil / energy goes to the root of each of the first two subjects in this post: the environment, and terrorism.

Race

Americans are Americans first. Labels, poles, categories in the “news” media that separate by skin color or any race / nationality label are divisive and wrong.

Slavery was very very bad. Its long-term effects are worse than we typically allow for. An entire group of people was violently separated from their heritage and stripped of their culture. This takes generations to heal. This country fought its most deadly and costly war mostly over this issue, and the right side won in 1865. Blacks and whites fought together. Segregation continued after slavery ended, and that was wrong too, but that legally ended in the 1960s. We should celebrate our progress regardless of how far we think we still have to go.

On affirmative action, I agree completely with Justice Clarence Thomas when he ruled on Adarand Constructors v. Peña. Affirmative action is wrong.

Both sides of the media stoke and worsen any race problems that we may have. Denzel Washington, Will Smith, Grant Hill, Chris Rock, Spike Lee, Jay-Z, Kanye West, Floyd Mayweather Jr., and Ben Carson hire a bunch of white people and start their own media company to include a news channel. Label it something non-racial, just like the existing media conglomerates are labeled, and cover all news as they see it just like the existing media does. What would that look like? Compare that to what we have. It would be better.

Immigration

Mexico is a country. People from Mexico are Americans once they are citizens, just like every other American.

We have allowed many Mexicans – mainly because of Mexico’s  proximity, and its poverty and violence – to enter illegally for a long time. That was wrong. We should not have allowed that and we should stop allowing it.

However, to all-of-a-sudden now hunt down illegals and send them out would be wrong also. It is not that simple. I’ve heard some interviews and it sounds like the law vs. the policy vs. the actual enforcement situation are each entirely different things especially in this case. Ask a border patrol agent about this. Only they really know the situation there. The rest of us are just arm-chair quarterbacks. Will we care about what’s happening there in 2 years when Trump and the media have moved on to who knows what other subject?

There should be a process to document all people living in the US and either humanely send them out or get them paying taxes. Leaving them in limbo is bad for everybody.

US Manufacturing

This is the issue on which I most agree with Trump.

We should make the tariffs at least fair so that we have a balanced society. Massively favoring foreign workers to the exclusion of our own is wrong. We know it caused the “rust belt” in the mid-west and somehow fixing it gets labeled as an insane  anti-global-economy trade war. How? The tariffs should have some semblance of equality. They haven’t been even close since the mid-1990s. Almost my whole life, I have used goods that say MADE IN CHINA. We know we don’t make anything anymore and we know why. The rest of the world may be unhappy when we fix the situation, (are they even unhappy, or is that a media illusion?) but we should make the deals fair.

On this issue, I’m not even saying that it was wrong to make the deals originally. I’m saying that the current extreme situation calls for some action, some change.

To go further, I believe that the lack of manufacturing jobs contributes to the current opioid epidemic because of the large groups of people with nothing to do. We have entire regions full of abandoned towns.

US Debt

We are in a lot of debt, both as a group of consumers, and our federal government. The Chinese and other creditors have a lot of cash. This puts us at a disadvantage economically. They are beating us at our own game. They own our dollar.

How does this connect with leveling the tariff playing field, or with interest rates? I don’t know that answer, but considering that economists say exactly opposite things from each other, it appears economists don’t know either, so I will just say:

Big debt is a big disadvantage.

I don’t even know which side is better on this. They each blame the other and they each run huge budget deficits.

Entitlements

Government handouts make dependent groups of people and entitlements don’t fix problems. Obamacare was the issue with which I disagreed most with Obama. How he thought that a 1,000+ page confusing medical care handout to a country – that’s us, the United States – full of people who can’t even stop eating to improve their health is baffling.

The level for being a “disabled veteran” is so low that a guy who bicycled from Columbus to Cleveland and Cincinnati and back for fun got labeled “disabled” for some lower-back and neck pain. It’s a disgrace to those who are actually disabled. That guy is me. I told the truth on my exit exam. I don’t take the money, but I’ll take the medical benefits because who knows what they would cost me considering I would have to pay government prices for them and my once-per-year medical check-up doesn’t drain the system anyway.

Guns

The First Amendment gives us the right to peaceable assembly. Boring!

The Second Amendment says,

… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Not boring! Guns!

The Second Amendment is about guns, right? Yes, that is half of it. What gets lost in this debate is that the real power behind it is the right to assemble in a firearms club – a militia. The first part says,

A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, …

I believe the Second Amendment gives the right for individuals to own guns. I believe it is important for people to understand guns and be able to responsibly use them. I own guns and I know how to use them.

Guns today are so much more effective now than they were when the Second Amendment was written that regulatory laws should delineate among different types of guns and regulate accordingly. A semi-automatic rifle, even a .22 caliber, enables one person to kill many unsuspecting people, even hundreds of people. I am for some gun control.

So:

For you “gun collecting, de-regulate machine guns” nuts out there: if the scenario you are preparing for happens, you are going to run out of ammo. You will run out even faster with a stupid machine gun. Go to the local shooting club, be normal, make some friends, and talk guns. Those relationships will be worth thousands and thousands of rounds when the revolution goes down that you so love preparing for.

For you “no guns equals peace love and harmony” kumbaya hippie liberals out there: I have news for you. Guns exist. People do violent things sometimes. Guns are indeed more powerful now than before. They are also so easy to make now that you cannot eliminate all of them. So, if you can’t stomach taking on the responsibility yourself, or can’t stomach going to a shooting club to learn about a fact of life, then appreciate your law enforcement who walk the street everyday wearing a uniform that says, especially to criminals with guns and no uniform, “I have a gun, and I am here to use it if you fuck with me or anybody who is following the law.”

I thought seriously about applying to be a cop one time. For those few minutes of consideration, as I thought about what that would really mean for me, I gained a lot of respect for the police.

Religion

People should have a reason to get dressed up and go somewhere on Sunday morning. We should shut down the main streets on Sunday like they do in South America.

If you’re atheist, get dressed up and walk around in a park for no reason.

If you are from one of those Saturday religions who thinks the rest of us are pagan sun worshipers, OK Saturday is fine too.

Marriage: get married when you’re ready. Have a wedding. Throw a party and let your family and friends celebrate your relationship. Weddings are awesome.

Funerals: who is going to organize the ceremony when you die? If you don’t care, or you don’t want a ceremony, it doesn’t matter, the ceremony isn’t for you anyway asshole. You’re dead.

Catholicism has the best music and the best ceremonies. The Catholic Church takes a clear stand on various issues. I go to Catholic church on Sunday and I’m going to keep going for the rest of my life.

Picking your Friends in Computer Software

1. Why the club:

Click here for the CATC About page.

 

2. Why this subject first:

  • Your computer software largely determines your experience with the computer.
  • I have helped people with their software to keep their computer working fast.
  • The people who make your software know what your experience looks like. It is those people and their motivations that determine your experience in the long run.

3. Vocabulary for Software

4. Discussion Structure

  • We are going to discuss software by its function first.
    • I want to offer a solution only if there is a problem.
    • Define the problem! (software often offers bells and whistles that do things we don’t really want to do).
    • This is a comprehensive list. A key to this idea is that all other software should be uninstalled and add-on software should be carefully selected.
  • We will categorize software by “open source vs. closed source” and “free vs. costs money.”
  • A dollar sign ($) by the software mean the software company is for profit. An ‘ad’ symbol (ad) means that mining and selling user data is a major revenue source for the company.
  • Last, we’ll meet the people and companies and discuss their motives.

5. Software Functions List

  • Operating System
  • Word processor (includes many office functions)
  • Web browser
  • E-mail / contacts / calendar
  • Internet search
  • Media player
  • Video chat [or use your phone]
  • PDF Reader
  • Printer and scanner
  • Video editing
  • Gaming

Operating System

Word Processor

Web Browser

E-Mail / Calendar / Contacts

Web Search

  • DuckDuckGo is a good search engine that maintains user privacy.

Media Player

Video Chat

 

PDF Reader

Printer and Scanner

  • How much does an ink cartridge cost?
    • Can a printer physically continue to print in black and white if the color runs out?
  • How much does a printer actually cost?

Video Editing

6. My Start Menu

7. Settings

  • When you set up a computer, your question should be, “what is this computer doing that I need it to stop doing?”

8. Bloatware

  • When I buy a computer, I don’t install software, I spend most of my time un-installing software.
  • Your computer manufacturer may include software pre-installed. You probably want to un-install it.
  • I include “anti-virus” software under bloatware.
  • Desktop weather display is another example.

Click here to see which software I use and recommend in each category.

I made this presentation for the Columbus Area Technology Club. Click the logo for the CATC website:

What to Watch 14: Fusion Energy, 16 Minutes

1. Fusion Explained in a Nutshell by Kurzgesagt

2. JET, Joint European Torus, largest magnetic confinement fusion reactor.

  • JET is the current record holder for controlled fusion energy production by most measures. The record was set in 1997. See video.
  • Located in Oxfordshire, UK.
  • Annual budget 2014-2018 = 145.6 million euros ~ $175 million per year. Source.
  • Video is from 2014.

3. National Ignition Facility, was the largest effort at inertial based fusion.

  • The fusion ignition effort ended in April 2014, but is still one HUGE laser. Do not point this laser at your eye.
  • Located in California, USA.
  • NIF total cost was ~$3.5 billion. Source.
  • Video is from 2009.

4. More References

 

Click here for the historical context of fusion, fusion in the Cold War.

Click here to search fusion on this site.

What to Watch 13: Cryptocurrency 2, the Blockchain in Society and Pop Culture, 22 Minutes

The Blockchain in Society, We’ve Stopped Trusting Institutions and Started Trusting Strangers, Rachel Botsman on TED, June 2016

Blockchain in Pop Culture, Lovesong for Satoshi Nakamoto Whitepaper by “Bitcoin Girl” Naomi Brockwell, November 2015

Of Note

My Personal Conclusion on Cryptocurrency (For Now)

The idea behind Bitcoin is that you do not have to trust banking institutions. The transactions are verified by the technology / other users. I researched signing up for Bitcoin, and decided not to. The problem I found was in order to access the blockchain and “own” Bitcoin, you need a computer program to do it. The computer program is written by a coder and I am not going to take the time to understand the code. Therefore, instead of trusting an institution, I am trusting the coder who is the middleman who wrote the code. I actually trust both the banks and the coders (with a little research), but I do not have a reason to switch. The only advantage I see is that there is no tax trail, but I am not paying taxes on these transactions anyway. I don’t need a brand new currency in my life. Sticking with PayPal, Venmo, TransferWise, and dollars, for now!

What to Watch Must Watch: Amazon HQ2

Must Watch! Rob Morris, More Freedom Foundation, Amazon HQ2 Is A Scam, Feb 2018

Also: Beware the Tech Utopians

Click here for The Big Five, my post comparing the sizes of Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook to size the size of the US government.
  • $142.57 billion = Amazon’s annual revenue, ~ 2.7x the annual revenue of the city of New York.
  • $53.0 billion = city of New York’s annual tax revenue. (from NYC.gov)

Amazon’s latest post regarding the “competition.”

All Nate TV, click here.

What to Watch 10: Reflection and Rob Morris’ More Freedom Foundation

Nielsen Survey, Reflection on Television
The Ultimate Commuter Bike
To Blog or not to Blog

Rob Morris’ More Freedom Foundation, selected videos

3 Reasons Saudi Arabia Is More Dangerous Than Iran, Oct 2017

How the Reformation Started the Modern World, Jun 2017

9/11: The Shocking Truth, Apr 2017

3 More Reasons Putin Will Never Touch Estonia, Mar 2017

 

What to Watch 3: 60 Hours of 26/11 Mumbai Terror Attack

60 Hours of 26/11 Mumbai Terror Attack, Fareed Zakaria (from 2008)

Interrogation and cell phone conversations:
  • First 3:50 is interrogation.
  • 5:00 – 5:20
  • 10:10 – 10:20
  • 11:20 – 11:50
  • 21:50 – 22:40
  • 22:50 – 23:30
  • 29:30 – 30:00
  • 31:10 – 31:30
  • 33:30 – 34:00
  • 34:30 – 34:50
  • 35:30 – 35:50
  • 37:10 – 37:50
  • 41:30 – 43:30
  • 44:10 – 48:00 terrorists’ final minutes.
  • 49:30 – End is more interrogation.
All Nate TV episodes, click here.