A fascinating legacy from a bygone era

 

This report caught my imagination.

In northern India's Uttar Pradesh state, a team of workers is carefully restoring a centuries-old royal kitchen that once fed the rulers of the former princely state of Awadh.

Tucked within the sprawling complex of Chota Imambara - a mausoleum and congregation hall - this kitchen in Lucknow is a reminder of a different kind of royal legacy. Built in 1837 by former Awadh ruler Muhammad Ali Shah, the site once served not just the elite, but the public too.

At its peak, the meals here were prepared for both the royal household and ordinary people, especially during religious gatherings and special occasions.

. . .

According to historians, in 1839, Muhammad Ali Shah gave 3.6m rupees - considered a vast sum in those days - to the East India Company, then a British trading enterprise, on the condition that it would be responsible for maintaining the monuments built by the Awadh nawabs, while the kitchen would continue to run on the interest earned from the fund.

After India became independent 1947, this money was transferred into a local bank.

Today, the kitchen is managed by the Hussainabad Trust - a state government-monitored body - which continues to use the interest to fund and manage the kitchen's operations.

That legacy lives on in the meals still served here, prepared to the same standards laid down generations ago.

. . .

Historian Roshan Taqui says the king was determined to ensure the kitchen kept running without interruption.

To handle the scale of cooking, he built two identical kitchens on either side of the Chota Imambara - a design that also reflects Awadhi architecture's heavy emphasis on symmetry, he adds.

The concept of twin kitchens is proving useful to this day.

"During this Ramadan, while restoration was underway in one of the kitchens, cooking continued in the other," Taqui says.

There's more at the link, including details of the ongoing restoration of the two-century-old kitchens using original materials and techniques.  There are several photographs of the process.

It's fascinating to think how different faiths such as Christianity and Islam could give rise to similar concepts of alms-giving on the part of the rich and powerful.  In Europe, knights and barons might endow a monastery or hospital or way-station for pilgrims, something that would be useful for generations to come, in the same way as Muhammad Ali Shah decreed that his palace kitchens would feed the poor as well as his household.  Both operated on the principle of "storing up treasure in heaven", where one's good deeds may help to offset the less good or downright sinful ones - a very common approach to faith in earlier times.

I could wish that some of our modern oligarchs and rulers might continue the practice . . .

Peter

A friend needs our help

 

Many of you have doubtless read articles in gun magazines and related publications by Kat Hel.  Lately she's written under her married name of Katherine Ainsworth Stevens.  She's a friend to most of us in the North Texas Troublemakers, and to my wife and I.  She visited our home just a week ago.

Kat has been diagnosed with breast cancer, and it's the nasty kind.  She's to undergo a double mastectomy within weeks, followed by reconstructive surgery and all the cancer-related treatments (chemotherapy, possibly radiation therapy, and so on).  She has to handle all this while coping with a four-year-old son and a husband who's himself undergoing treatment for a long-term condition, and is thus less able to help.  It's a hell of a load on her shoulders.  To make matters worse, Kat is a free-lance writer.  She doesn't have medical insurance, and has to pay for all the costs involved out of her (minuscule) savings - which are already exhausted.  The hospital is helping as best it can, but the specialists involved are demanding their pound of flesh (you should pardon the expression) in cash.

A friend of Kat's has launched a GiveSendGo fundraiser for her medical expenses.  Dorothy and I have already contributed separately, as have many of our friends.  She needs a lot of money, so I'm boosting the signal here.  If you're able to help Kat, she's good people and deserves our aid.  Please click over to her fundraiser and contribute whatever you can.  It'll be money well spent.

Thanks in advance, friends.

Peter

The Iran war and the global economy

 

The Iran war isn't (yet) having a major impact on the US economy.  Gas prices are up, but not out of control, and since we're self-sufficient in most sources of energy, we're in relatively good shape despite the interruption to oil supplies from the Persian Gulf.  However, many other countries are not so fortunate.  A few examples:

• Fishermen in Ireland are grounding their boats because they can’t afford diesel, thanks to rising prices.
• The Philippines has declared a national emergency over the supply of fuel.  Current estimates are that the country has only enough gasoline for the next 53.14 days; diesel, 45.82 days; kerosene, 97.93 days; jet fuel, 38.62 days; fuel oil, 61.49 days; and liquified petroleum gas, 23.51 days.
• Australian gas stations are running out of gasoline and/or diesel.  "As of mid-March, Australia held roughly 38 days' worth of petrol, 30 days of diesel and 30 days of jet fuel."

One might ask why America should be worried about other countries' fuel problems.  The reason is simple:  because their economies are inextricably tied in with ours.  If our trade partners experience serious economic problems, they'll inevitably affect us too in the long run.  CNBC points out:

Energy and commodities market expert John Kilduff of Again Capital ... said “the numbers are just too big ... This is a 10 to 12 million barrel per day deficit. … really just insurmountable. There’s no policy measure that can be taken. There’s no lever that can be pulled to offset this,” he said.

That is why he thinks the timeframe to be focused on is that post-April 1 date. “If there’s no resolution, if there’s no plan, if there’s no sort of even hopefulness that we can get the Strait reopened, with amassing troops or doing whatever the military has to do to do that,” that is when this becomes an energy crisis, Kilduff said. “By mid-year, you will see shortages in places like India, Japan, and South Korea. They will start to rein in industrial production. They’re going to have to conserve to keep the lights on, literally,” he said. If the military and government do not have good answers by April 1, “The crunch is coming.”

There's more at the link.

Speaking of death and dying, John Donne famously wrote:

Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

When the economic bell is tolling, as it is right now, we'll do well to remember that warning.  We, as individuals, can't do anything about the world situation, but we can do something about our own preparations for hard times and our own resources.  The old proverb says, "Look after the pennies, and the dollars will look after themselves."  In the same way, if we look after the practical preparations we can make from day to day, the longer term will tend to resolve itself, and we'll be better off when it does.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 305

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

Sunday morning music

 

Following reader interest in the video I posted last Friday, I thought some musical accompaniment would be appropriate.

Those of us who share our lives with are owned by cats will know exactly how true this is!

Peter

I think I've met some of these critters...

 

Some of these (heavily edited) clips from karate and Kung Fu movies made me laugh out loud.  I figured they'd be a good way to brighten up your Friday morning.

What's the Marine Corps motto again?  "Be polite, be professional, and have a plan to kill everyone you meet."  I think at least some of those cats were Marines!

Peter

Not an eschatological approach...

 

Stephan Pastis provides an answer to the materialist world.  Click the image to be taken to a larger view at the "Pearls Before Swine" Web page.

Reminds me of a man who told me, once upon a time, "Nothing succeeds like lack of success".  If you think about it, he's not wrong!

Peter

A very interesting analysis of the Iran war in a worldwide context

 

I'm obliged to Francis Turner for providing a link to an article titled "The Global System Rupture".  It's a very long article, far too long to summarize here;  to get the full impact, you'll have to click over to it and read it for yourself (which I do recommend).  I don't necessarily agree with all the author's points, but I don't think her overall thesis is far wrong.  Let me offer these paragraphs to whet your appetite.

We are not approaching a regional crisis that will be managed and absorbed. We are approaching a global system rupture, driven by cascading effects across every socio-economic network simultaneously: energy, food, water, finance, trade, governance, and security. And while the United States, China, and Russia each occupy a short-term winning position in this rupture, all three are generating the very conditions that could pull the entire system into an abyss from which none of them emerges structurally intact. The path away from that abyss requires something that none of them is currently willing to do alone. It requires coordination between the two rival blocs. And it requires it now.

. . .

The United States, China, and Russia are each winning in the short term. The US has demonstrably degraded Iran’s military infrastructure, eliminated its nuclear programme, and established a new precedent of deterrence in the region. Russia is extracting elevated energy revenues, geopolitical leverage on Ukraine, and a sanctions waiver. China is consolidating yuan settlement architecture, absorbing discounted Iranian crude, and widening its strategic position in the Pacific while the US is pinned in the Gulf. All three actors have short-term incentives that are being satisfied.

And all three are generating the conditions for a collapse that will devour those short-term gains.

Because what is accumulating in the background of each of those winning positions is the cascade: 8 mbpd of daily scarcity compounding into a fertiliser shock, a food security crisis across 15 to 20 vulnerable economies, a financial contagion running through sovereign debt and emerging market currencies, a desalination doctrine that threatens the civilisational baseline of the Arabian Peninsula, and a wave of political turmoil that will arrive on a 6 to 12-month lag and cannot be recalled once it begins. No actor wins in that world. Not even the actors who think they are winning now.

. . .

And [then] the question shifts from how to prevent the rupture to what can be reconstructed from the wreckage of a global system that three great powers allowed to break because none of them was willing to accept that their short-term winning position was being purchased at the cost of the system that makes winning meaningful.

There's much more at the link.

That's food for thought all right . . . possibly food for nightmares, if no progress is made.  The problem is, it's almost impossible to find anyone in Iran with whom to negotiate meaningfully.  Iran's fundamentalist Twelver leaders are more than willing to bring down the entire world with them, if they have to.  Some of them even believe that if they do, the Twelfth Imam will return - literally, be forced to return - to rule the nations and impose Shi'ite Islam upon them.  They are not acting logically or rationally, but theologically and ideologically.  We cannot find common ground with such people for a solution.  That's the fly in the above article's ointment.  I can see the author's opinions, and even agree with many of them - but if there is no rational discussion possible, how can her gloomy predictions be avoided?

If you know the answer to that conundrum, you're probably a better person than I . . . not to mention all the politicians and leaders on all sides that kicked the Iran can down the road until there was nowhere left for it to go!

Peter

Looks like more difficult times bearing down on us

 

I'm not panic-mongering and declaring that we're facing TEOTWAWKI, but the impact of the Iranian war on the world economy is steadily getting worse, and it's going to affect us in the USA as well.  We'll be far better off than most countries due to being a net energy exporter, but problems for our major trading partners inevitably end up being our problems as well.

Click on the following headlines to read more information about each point.

Economist who predicted 2008 crash warns something much worse could be coming

"We have returned to a period of risk, one rife with the sort of pressures that have led to major financial crises.

"This time, the risks are spread across industries, markets, and nations: artificial intelligence, the roughly $2 trillion private credit industry, stock markets, Taiwan, and now Iran."

While each of these issues are enough to cause chaos on their own, combined they suggest that another financial crash is inevitable and the ongoing war in Iran is seemingly at the heart of it all.

Russia Halts Ammonium Nitrate Exports As Global Fertilizer Crisis Set To Worsen

Export disruptions of the critical crop nutrient can hit import-dependent buyers hard, especially in markets such as Brazil, Canada, India, Peru, and Ukraine.

Russia's temporary export comes at the worst possible timing as the Northern Hemisphere planting season begins in some regions. 

The risk now is that, as the Middle East conflict enters its fourth week, a global energy shock is also spreading to fertlizer markets and may only suggest a delayed food price shock later this year. 

Hundreds Of Gas Stations Run Dry In Australia As Hormuz Shock Exposes Energy Security Failures

Australia's weird obsession with "green energy," compounded by a lack of urgency regarding proper energy security, has now collided with the worst energy crisis the world has ever seen.

A country heavily dependent on imported refined petroleum products, many of which transit the Strait of Hormuz, has reached the fourth week of the U.S.-Iran war, but with a full-blown fuel supply shock now underway, and hundreds of gas stations across the country running dry.

Energy Minister Chris Bowen ... warned that fuel supplies were at about 38 days for gasoline. He said only 30 days of diesel and jet fuel remained.

The Rapidly-Gathering Economic Storm

Karl Denninger looks at problems with AI, housing, energy, food, fraud and many other current issues.  He concludes:  "Is Iran the triggering event?  I have no idea.  It might be."  Go read his whole article.  It's food for thought.

Finally, a perspective from England that may be of interest to US preppers as well.

I laughed at bulk-buyers during Covid, but this time I think the preppers are right

I am not what you’d call a natural prepper. Even during the Covid lockdowns, when others piled supermarket trolleys high with giant packs of loo roll, I felt the UK’s shoppers were losing their collective grey matter. But as the war with Iran continues and the Strait of Hormuz remains closed to the ships of the US, Israel and their Western allies, I find myself changing tack.

This time round, I’m with the doomsters. You don’t have to be Nostradamus to foresee that we will all feel the impact from the global supply chain of crude oil, liquefied natural gas, fertilisers, sulphur and helium being suddenly, severely restricted.

Today’s Bright Young Things may soon wake to their very own Great Slump. Before sitting down to write, I saw an American professor of medicine post the following message on X, highlighting just one little-discussed aspect of the problem: “I hope no one needs an MRI this year. The world’s largest producer of liquefied helium is in Qatar and is shut off.” He had just been told that his own institution’s yearly supply will be halved, at best.

That last paragraph is a wake-up call.  How many MRI's are performed every day in the USA?  What would those needing them (and the doctors who call for them) do if half of them could not be performed?  Could this be a life-or-death situation for the patients needing them?  I suspect it might.

As I said above, I'm not one to cry "Wolf!", and I don't want to spread alarm and despondency:  but forewarned is forearmed.  If we need something that may soon be in short supply, now might be a very good time to get it, and beat the rush.

Peter

I did not know that

 

I'm sure most of us know of the poem "Desiderata", published by Max Ehrmann in 1927.  Its original text may be found here, if you're interested.  It was originally little known, but became very popular during the 1960's and 1970's, probably spurred on by the "Hippie" era.  A well-known musical audio recording of the poem was published by Les Crane in 1971.  It became well-known for its chorus:

You are a child of the universe
No less than the trees and the stars;
You have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you,
No doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

What I didn't know until yesterday was that in 1972, a musical response to the poem was published, titled "Deteriorata".  Wikipedia reports:

The parody was written by Tony Hendra for National Lampoon magazine, and was recorded for the album Radio Dinner. Narrator Norman Rose read the parody poem and Melissa Manchester was the background vocalist, both closely tracking the format of Crane's original. Christopher Guest wrote the music.

The original musical version may be found here, and an annotated text version here.  The chorus shows, shall we say, a rather less reverent approach to life than the original!

You are a fluke of the universe
You have no right to be here
And whether you can hear it or not
The universe is laughing behind your back

As a man of faith, I naturally hew more to the original version than the follow-up.  However, as a human being, I have to giggle at the snark factor of "Deteriorata".  I suppose, in due time, we'll all find out which is the most accurate!

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 304

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

Sunday morning music

 

A reader sent me an e-mail asking about early/original earworms on the Internet:  tunes or themes designed to "stick" in one's mind, so much so that it's hard to forget them or shake them off.  I don't know whether it's a good idea or not to revive memories of such things, but here we go!  If you don't like earworms, don't play these videos!

First, one of the earliest earworms I can recall.

This one's for the steak-lovers among us . . . or should that be vegetarians?

From big animals to small ones:

And finally, a telephone ring tone that morphed into one of the most annoying songs on the Web.

I know there are many others out there, but I don't want to make this music post too long.  Readers, please contribute your own earworm suggestions in Comments, with a link if possible.  Thanks!

Peter

Busy, busy, busy...

 

Early appointments, deliveries to make, trips to take . . . I haven't had time to write my usual morning blog post.  Sorry about that, but sometimes life gets in the way!

If I can find time later today, I'll post something;  otherwise, I'll post on Sunday morning as usual.

Peter

"What If the U.S. Navy Isn’t in a Hurry to Reopen the Strait of Hormuz?"

 

That's the intriguing question posed by John Konrad in a lengthy article yesterday.

The Strait of Hormuz is twenty-one miles wide. Two shipping channels, each two miles across, separated by a two-mile buffer. There is no alternative. Saudi Arabia’s East-West Pipeline to Yanbu and the UAE’s pipeline to Fujairah can handle maybe five million barrels combined. The math doesn’t work. The bottleneck is not political. It is geological and hydrographic.

Every TV analyst in America is talking about minesweepers and carrier strike groups. They are asking the wrong questions. The binding constraint on Hormuz was never a minefield or insurance. It is the US Navy’s willingness and ability to reopen it.

Every talking point suggests the White House and Navy are working hard to reopen the strait but progress is slow. A new posts on Truth Social suggests we may have to considet a new hypothesis.

“I wonder what would happen if we “finished off” what’s left of the Iranian Terror State, and let the Countries that use it, we don’t, be responsible for the so called Strait?” wrote President Trump in a psot this morning. “That would get some of our non-responsive “Allies” in gear, and fast!!!”

. . .

The United States now controls the on/off switch for the Strait of Hormuz. Not through naval firepower. Through insurance.

Read the latest MARAD advisory carefully: U.S.-flagged, owned, or crewed commercial vessels operating in these areas should maintain a minimum standoff of 30 nautical miles from U.S. military vessels.

And read this part of the DFC announcement again… “coordinated with US Central Command.”

They cannot pass without the Navy permission.

The green light has not appeared.

. . .

Now connect the dots.

Strike Iran, and Europe either bends or goes dark in an energy crisis.

The European shipping community and political establishment spent the past year dismissing, undermining, and mocking every Trump maritime initiative. They scoffed at the USTR tariffs. They laughed at the SHIPS Act. They blocked the IMO exemptions. They refused to take American maritime policy seriously.

Now their energy supply runs through an insurance facility controlled by Washington.

“Let their navies figure it out.” Except everyone knows they cannot. European naval forces are too small, too slow, and too poorly equipped for sustained convoy escort operations through a contested strait. All the European navies combined could not send more than three ships at a time to defend the Red Sea. An entire German task force sailed around Africa to avoid it.

Eventually Europe will have to capitulate to get the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. insurance backstop, to fully reopen the Strait.

What does “capitulate” look like? The IMO carbon tax. Greenland. Tariff concessions. The SHIPS Act. Every maritime policy priority that Europe and China have been blocking for the past year.

. . .

Look at what the Navy is doing. Or rather, not doing.

The U.S. Navy is in no rush to solve this problem. They are methodically, deliberately, taking their time ... Someone at the top told them to take their time. That signal has to be coming from the White House.

Every day, approximately 1,000 trapped vessels are not available for charter. Every day, European energy dependence deepens. Every day, the DFC reinsurance facility becomes more central to the global shipping system. Every day, the case for concessions on tariffs, the IMO, Greenland, and the SHIPS Act becomes harder for Europe to refuse.

And what does the Navy get for playing along? Support for battleships and stronger allies willing to spend money building their own destroyers when it becomes clear to the world how weak their navies have become.

. . .

I am not arguing that Trump planned this from the beginning ... What I am arguing is that the administration has, whether by design or adaptation, assembled the tools to exploit this moment.

There's much more at the link.  Highly recommended reading.

It's a fascinating thesis, and on the surface it looks entirely rational as a way to solve a whole bunch of problems in one fell swoop.  I agree with the last sentence cited above.  I'm sure President Trump did not intend his actions in Iran to produce this conundrum . . . but it would deal with an awful lot of Gordian knots all at once, wouldn't it?

Peter

Not false advertising - just different transatlantic meanings

 

I enjoyed a BBC article on the various ways and means British workers had used to wake up in time for their jobs.  Here's how it begins.

During Britain's industrial revolution, new factories faced a need for strict timekeeping – including far more specific start times for workers.

A worker arriving even five minutes late could hold up an entire assembly line, losing their employers' profit. They needed a means to wake up on time, especially in the darker winter months, and while early alarm clocks existed at this time, they were far too expensive for a typical worker.

Factories tried using whistles and bells to wake and summon workers, but they often proved unreliable. Instead, an entire profession dedicated to awakening people sprouted up: knocker uppers.

These human alarm clocks would work their way down streets and sometimes whole neighbourhoods knocking or tapping on windows, or shooting peas at them, says Arunima Datta, associate professor of history at the University of North Texas. "They would stand there until they got a response from their clients, they wouldn't move."

In fact, jobs akin to knocker uppers have been used in many other societies around the world, says Datta, especially in Muslim communities during the holy month of Ramadan, when people needed to wake up early to pray and have their first meal before dawn.

Throughout history, people have had plenty of other inventive ways of waking up, from simply keeping roosters to clever candle clocks that dropped needles into metal trays every hour. 

Learning how these past societies slept and woke up could even help us improve our own sleep – and awakenings – today.

There's more at the link.

I had to smile at the mention of "knocker upper".  In England, that expression meant a job that woke up workers so they could get to their jobs on time.  In the USA, however, to "knock someone up" means to make them pregnant.

My mother always used to smile broadly when she heard the expression.  During World War II, she was in England "keeping the home fires burning" for my father, who was fighting the war overseas.  She acted as a "knocker upper" for her colleagues from time to time:  they took turns at waking each other up to be on time for their jobs.

When the first American troops arrived in Britain in 1942, they were enthralled to learn that there were actually job openings for "knocker-uppers".  In fact, some of them tried to apply for part-time employment as such at the Labor Exchange, thinking the expression meant in Britain what it did in the USA.  You can imagine their disappointment when they learned it had nothing to do with sex!  The British thought the Yank servicemen were weird, but funny, and used to joke with them about it.  "Yes, I'm a knocker-up, mate, but not that kind of knocker-up!"

I'm still amused by the thought.

Peter

Facing reality over Iran

 

I'm getting more and more fed up with politicians, commentators, journalists and so-called "experts" all saying that President Trump's decision to strike Iran was misguided, wrong-headed and stupid.  The same goes for all the European and other nations refusing to provide support, military or otherwise, for the joint US-Israeli campaign in that country.

The blunt fact of the matter is that for almost half a century, the West has wrung its hands, expressed dismay and shock, and uttered pious platitudes every time Iran did something evil.  Whether it was murdering tens of thousands of their own citizens, or exporting terrorism to many parts of the world, or bombing Israel, nothing Iran did elicited a suitably strong response from the West.  All they did was talk.  They did not act.  With every incident, they kicked the can further down the road, for future politicians and leaders to do something about it - but they never did.

President Trump and his leadership team recognized that the can could not be kicked any further.  The time had come to act, to stop Iran potentially wreaking havoc all over the world.  The key moment of decision probably came during negotiations in Switzerland in late February.

Iranian officials told their US counterparts during crunch talks last month that the Islamic Republic possessed enough enriched fuel to build 11 nuclear bombs, President Trump’s special envoy claimed Monday night.

“Both the Iranian negotiators said to us directly with, you know, no shame, that they controlled 460 kilograms of 60% [enriched uranium],” Steve Witkoff told Fox News host Sean Hannity, “and they’re aware that that could make 11 nuclear bombs, and that was the beginning of their negotiating stance.”

Witkoff and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner engaged in three rounds of indirect talks beginning in Oman Feb. 6 and concluding in Geneva, Switzerland Feb. 26 in what turned out to be a last-ditch effort to prevent US military action against Iran.

“Jared and I opened up with the Iranian negotiators telling us they had the inalienable right to enrich all their nuclear fuel that they possessed. That’s how they opened up,” Witkoff recounted.

“We, of course, responded that the president feels we have the inalienable right to stop you dead in your tracks,” he continued.

“They then went on to say that beyond the inalienable right to enrich, that that was going to be their starting point. And Jared and I just sort of looked at ourselves flummoxed and said, ‘Well, we’re really in for it now.'”

Witkoff, 68, made worldwide headlines ahead of the Geneva talks when he claimed Iran was “probably a week away from having industrial-grade bomb-making material.”

The special envoy expanded on those remarks Monday: “I know this: They have 10,000, roughly, kilograms of fissionable material. That’s broken up into roughly 460 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium, another 1,000 kilograms of 20% enriched uranium …They manufacture their own centrifuges to enrich this material. So, there’s almost no stopping them. They have an endless supply of it.

“The 60% material ... can be brought to 90%, that’s weapons-grade, in roughly one week, maybe 10 days at the outside. The 20% can be brought to weapons-grade inside of three to four weeks.”

“They were proud of it,” Witkoff went on. “They were proud that they had evaded all sorts of oversight protocols to get to a place where they could deliver 11 nuclear bombs.”

Witkoff also claimed that he and Kushner, on behalf of the US, offered to provide Iran nuclear fuel for the next decade on the condition it was not used for any weapons program.

“They rejected that, which told us at that very moment that they had no — no notion of doing anything other than retaining enrichment for the purpose of weaponizing.”

With the US-Israeli war against Iran entering a fourth day, Witkoff described Tehran’s negotiating position as “silly,” but added: “They thought they could strong-arm us.”

There's more at the link.

Of course the Iranian leadership thought they could strong-arm President Trump!  They'd been doing it to Western nations, jointly and severally, for decades - why should this time be any different?  And so they presented the President with the one threat that he could not, dared not, leave unaddressed.  How do you kick the reality of nuclear weapons down the road?  You daren't . . . otherwise that reality might blow up in your face.

Think how easily Iran could smuggle a couple of nuclear warheads across our borders, perhaps concealed in container shipments from China, or carried by members of its diplomatic corps and/or terrorist groups that are already active in South America.  What would a US president do if he tried to rein in Iran in future, only to be told that unless he backed down, two or three US cities would be vaporized?  Can you imagine what a left-wing progressive President would do under those circumstances?  If you think Obama or Biden or another of their ilk would have stood up to that threat, I have this bridge in New York City I'd like to sell you.  Cash only, please, and in small bills.

No.  There are many reasons why the US and Israel might have refrained from acting as they did . . . but every one of them is trumped (you should pardon the expression) by the overriding threat of nuclear geopolitical terrorism.

As soon as Iran took that stance in Switzerland, it kicked the can right off the road and made its own destruction inevitable.  That's the bottom line.

I think that one day, the rest of the world might be very, very grateful to President Trump for taking the stance he did.

Peter

Back from the hospital

 

The caudal injection seems to have gone OK, apart from a fair amount of pain during the procedure.  The doctor informed me that the mass of scar tissue in the area - the cumulative result of a bullet wound many years ago, followed by two spine surgeries after my disabling injury in 2004 - made it difficult to pass between the lumps to get at the caudal cavity, and resisted the needle, hence causing added pain.  However, once he got in there, it went well.

I'm back home now with a numb butt and vague feelings of posterior resentment.  This, too, shall pass.  Thanks for all the prayers and good wishes!

Peter

Another day at the hospital...

 

By the time this post auto-publishes, I'll be on the road to a local hospital for a procedure known as a caudal epidural injection.  It's designed to inject medication to control nerve pain into the caudal space, a hollow channel running up through the base of the spine.  It's an interim treatment for severe back pain and associated limitations on mobility.  If it works, it'll buy me time to prepare for the major back surgery that I'm going to need relatively shortly.  If it doesn't work, well, I won't be any worse off (apart from a punctured coccyx and a sore butt!  The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune have nothing on the scalpels and needles of sadistic surgeons . . . )

I'm not looking forward to the procedure, but I don't have any alternative to it right now, so here's hoping.  Prayers for medical success would be appreciated.  I'm not sure who's the patron saint of injections through the butt into the spine, but if there is one, I'll gladly invoke their intercession!  (Saint Sebastian was shot through by arrows:  do you think he might qualify?)

Peter

The challenge to writers and content creators

 

Ted Gioia points out the real challenge to making an impact in the writing and publishing world - not just authors, but journalists, essayists and thinkers in general.

As journalists lose their jobs, more publicists get hired. The result is that there are now seven times as many publicists as journalists. The rise of AI agents will only make this worse, much worse.

The entire media ecosystem is breaking down. Around three-quarters of journalists now block publicists who are (they believe) spamming them. I get so many pitches from PR people that I can’t even begin to deal with them.

I’m fortunate that I’ve found other ways of getting access to useful information—but that’s more a workaround rather than a real solution. In the meantime, all the noise coming from the publicity world isn’t good for anyone. As a result, many deserving musicians, authors and other creatives can’t get any attention, no matter how talented they are.

There are many causes, but the single biggest one is the decline in paid jobs for journalists. And the underlying reason for that is obvious: Google and Facebook stole all the ad revenues that previously supported journalism. Fix that and so many other problems go away End of story.

. . .

[Timothy Chalamet] grasps the reality that culture is now evaluated on cash flow, not creativity. He’s no fool. He works in Hollywood, where you always pay as you go.

Yesterday the New York Times inadvertently called attention to this same hypocrisy.

Times publisher AG Sulzberger bragged that the newspaper now employs 2,300 journalists—twice as many as a decade ago.

That sounds like good news. But I’m left wondering how the numbers of writers can double while the Times’ coverage of opera, ballet, jazz, books, etc. has collapsed during that same period.

Once you dig into the numbers, you see that the Times also scorns these idioms. In their world, ballet and opera have been superseded by word games and cookie recipes.

There's more at the link.  Mr. Gioia goes on to link those issues to the parlous state of fiction writing today:  you can read about that at the link, if you're a writer.

I find it hard to argue against his points.  So much of the writing we read today in news and social media is half-educated, poorly expressed, and reliant upon slang and profanity to convince readers, rather than make well-informed points and persuade them.  I suppose that may be why "shock jocks" like Nick Fuentes or Keith Olbermann have so many followers:  they entertain rather than inform, and try to rouse emotions rather than discuss issues rationally.

Trouble is, I don't see any solution on the horizon when I look at the state of American education today.  We're turning out semi-educated half-wits for the most part.  They've never been taught how to think - only what to think;  and the news outlets that publish them are telling people to shut up and do as they're told, and not think for themselves.  The results are clearly to be seen in our younger politicians.

Not a happy thought.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 303

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

What is artificial intelligence? Here are some answers.

 

Following several recent articles about artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on our jobs, our society and our future, a number of readers have contacted me asking for more information on a very basic level.  For example, what is AI?  Is it, in fact, intelligence - or just a computer program acting as if it were intelligent?  Does AI mean that we're living in something like the Matrix's simulated reality?

Let me offer two relatively easy-to-understand avenues for further reading.  First, Fox News has a category called Artificial Intelligence.  It contains current and recent news articles dealing with the subject, plus a sidebar of basic information about what AI is, how it works, its history and its dangers.

Second, Wikipedia has a more academic article about AI.  It's not as easy to read or understand, but it repays careful attention.  Of particular value are the links it provides to articles and Web sites that further explain aspects of AI.  I don't trust Wikipedia as a sole-source authority, but I think it's a great start for further reading.

I recommend both links for further reading.  Hope this helps.

Peter

The look I'm getting right now...

 

... from Kili, our elderly owner of the house pet.  (The photo isn't Kili, but the expression on her face is identical!  A tip o' the hat to Midwest Chick for the image.)

In my case, the look isn't because I'm offering her salad:  it's because I pulled the wrong container out of the fridge.  She expects a dollop of milk and/or half-and-half and/or sour cream now and again, and I didn't produce any of them!

Who's in charge around here, anyway?  She knows - it's just that her dumb human servants keep getting it wrong!

Peter

Will the Iran conflict draw in other nations? It's beginning to look likely...

 

We've heard rumors that Kurds in other Middle Eastern nations - Iraq, Syria and even possibly Turkey - may support Iranian Kurds if they stage an uprising to make their enclave independent of Iran.  Some fear that's a pipe dream that will never materialize (see, for example, this article from the Daily Telegraph).  Others think there's more to it.  In particular, Larry Lambert (who blogs at Virtual Mirage) has been to Iraqi Kurdistan recently, and is an adviser to its leaders (see his detailed background article for more information).  In a comment to a recent article by Lawdog, he had this to say.

I've been to Kurdistan, spoken with the Barzanis within the year, and worked there, so there is credibility to the extent that my observations are valid. I didn't travel to Iran to meet with the Iranian Kurds. As you point out, all of the Kurdish regions in Syria, Turkey, Barzani and Talibani in Iraq, and the Kurds in Iran have different political bents and different tribal affiliations. Some are hardcore opium growers and marketers, some have more oil, and in all cases, they are "Assyrians" culturally, which separates them from Arabs and Persians. Israel gets along with the Kurds more than just in an enemy of my enemy framework.

I'm certain that the Trump Administration promised the Kurds their "freedom" in exchange for "boots on the ground." Having run with them recently, that is the promise that would turn the trick. The US forces recently withdrawn from Syria were redeployed to Erbil to backfill for the Peshmerga who had deployed. The huge base in Erbil rarely makes the news, but it is significant, and the just-opened US Consulate in Erbil is the largest in the world.

. . .

... an open US recognition of a Kurdish state as free and independent will drop a turd in the punch.

There's more at the link.

So, it appears to be more than a remote possibility that Iranian Kurds, probably supported to a certain extent by Kurds from across the Middle East, may indeed rise up against the Iranian government.  What makes this even more likely are developments in Azerbaijan, on Iran's northern border.  The BBC reports:

Azerbaijan has said it is pulling its diplomatic staff out of Iran after it accused Iran of launching four drones across the border into the Azerbaijani exclave of Nakhchivan ... Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev condemned the "act of terror", demanding an explanation and apology from Tehran.

On Friday he went further, announcing the withdrawal of staff from Azerbaijan's embassy in Tehran and consulate in Tabriz "for their own safety", and state media said the military had been placed on maximum combat readiness.

Aliyev also touched on Iran's ethnic Azerbaijani population on Thursday - a sensitive subject for Tehran ... his anger went beyond words, saying that "independent Azerbaijan is a place of hope for Azerbaijanis living in Iran".

Baku has long avoided this line because of how sensitive it is for Tehran.

Iran is home to an estimated 20-25 million ethnic Azeris, who make up its largest minority group and are concentrated in the north-west along the Azerbaijan border.

The Islamic Republic has consistently regarded their identity and political affiliations as issues of utmost sensitivity. Tehran views any notion of Azerbaijani identity extending beyond its borders as a potential challenge to internal unity.

Aliyev has rarely spoken about Iranian Azeris in such explicitly aspirational terms and doing so now appears to be a calculated move.

. . .

[Iranian Azeris] are also a politically significant community. This week the exiled crown prince, Reza Pahlavi, has been urging Iranian Azerbaijanis, among other ethnic minorities, to rise up against the regime.

. . .

Despite their shared Shia Muslim identity, Iran and Azerbaijan have grown apart politically, and tensions worsened after Azerbaijan's military victories in the 2020 and 2023 Karabakh wars, which were helped by Turkish and Israeli-made weapons.

Iran views Baku's close defence partnership with Israel as a serious threat.

Iranian officials and media have repeatedly accused Azerbaijan of helping Israeli intelligence operate along Iran's northern frontier - claims Azerbaijan denies.

Azerbaijan's ties with Israel extend beyond security. Israel relies heavily on Azerbaijani oil, and the two countries maintain close political and intelligence co-operation.

For Tehran, this collaboration is at the centre of its suspicion.

Azerbaijan, for its part, has long resented Iran's political and military support for neighbouring Armenia, seeing it as direct interference in a conflict central to its own security.

That history of mistrust is an important backdrop to Thursday's escalation, shaping how Baku interprets every move coming from Tehran.

. . .

Aliyev's decision to talk openly of Azerbaijan being a "place of hope" for Iranian Azeris introduces a new and potentially unpredictable element.

Aliyev has pointed out to Tehran that he was the sole foreign leader to visit any Iranian embassy to express condolences following the killing of Khamenei, and that he personally responded to a request to help evacuate Iranian embassy staff from Lebanon.

Now, he says, Iran has repaid those gestures with drone strikes on Azerbaijani territory, something he views as a deep betrayal.

Again, more at the link.

The Associated Press added more details.

President Ilham Aliyev accused Iran of carrying out “a groundless act of terror and aggression,” and said his military has been told to prepare and implement retaliatory measures. The Caspian Sea nation halted truck traffic across the nearly 700-kilometer (over 400-mile) border with Iran.

. . .

[Aliyev] said Azerbaijan’s military has been instructed “to prepare and implement retaliatory measures.”

The Defense Ministry vowed that Iran’s “attacks will not go unanswered,” adding it was preparing the “necessary response” to protect “the territorial integrity and sovereignty of our country, ensure the safety of civilians and civilian infrastructure.” It didn’t elaborate.

Aliyev stressed that Azerbaijan “is not participating in operations against Iran -– neither previously nor this time -– and will not do so.”

He added: “We have neither interest in conducting any operations against neighboring countries, nor does our policy allow it.”

More at the link.

I need hardly point out that "not participating in operations against Iran" doesn't exactly square with the Azerbaijani military's being "instructed to prepare and implement retaliatory measures".  Cognitive dissonance, much?

Furthermore, if Iranian Kurds rise up against the government, consider what Iranian Azeris might do.  After all, many of their ethnic leaders have been oppressed by the Iranian government, including imprisonment, harassment, censorship and other measures.  Regardless of what the Azerbaijan government does, perhaps some Iranian Azeris might be inspired by a Kurdish uprising to launch one of their own;  and if they do, can Azerbaijan - which regards itself as the homeland and leader of all Azeris - stand idly by and do nothing, thereby potentially threatening its self-proclaimed ethnic leadership?

Finally, note that US Vice-President Vance is currently visiting both Armenia and Azerbaijan, two nations that recently fought a war with each other and are still at daggers drawn.  If the threat of renewed hostilities between them can be negotiated away, or at least reduced, that will allow Azerbaijan to focus its attention - and its military - elsewhere . . . towards Iran, perhaps?  Might Vice-President Vance be discussing that matter in suitably diplomatic language?

So, the US appears to be encouraging an uprising by Iran's Kurds, and Azerbaijan is making nice with Israel and the USA - both allied with each other against Iran - in the face of Iranian terrorism and suppression of its large Azeri population.  If both subsets of Iran's people were to rise up and support each other, probably - almost certainly - with military support from the USA and Israel, what would this mean to Iran?  It would become a three-sided onslaught against that nation.  Could the current regime there survive that?

I'm speculating, of course:  but if one looks at the news articles and commentary above, and reads between the lines, and puts two and two together, the picture that emerges is one that should make the Iranian government very worried indeed.  At least, that's the way I see it.

Peter

A very useful cost-saver that works for everyone

 

For all the doom-and-gloom prophecies about what artificial intelligence (AI) will do to the job market and the business sector, AI does have some very useful applications for the average American.  Here's one.

Last summer, a man’s brother-in-law suffered a fatal heart attack. The hospital bill for four hours of emergency care: $195,628.

The man’s sister-in-law was ready to pay it. He asked her to wait. He requested an itemized bill with CPT codes, the universal billing codes hospitals use, and fed the whole thing into Claude, an AI chatbot.

Within minutes, Claude found duplicate charges, services billed as "inpatient" even though the patient was never admitted, supply costs inflated by 500% to 2,300% above Medicare rates and charges for procedures that never happened. He cross-checked with ChatGPT. Both AIs agreed. He wrote a six-page letter citing every violation by name.

The hospital dropped the bill to $33,000. An 83% reduction. Zero medical training. A $20 app.

There's more at the link.  Highly recommended reading for anyone expecting or receiving big medical bills.

I've used this myself over the past year or so.  As regular readers will know, I've been dealing with multiple medical issues for some time, including the removal of a kidney and forthcoming major spinal surgery for which extensive (and intensive) preliminary examinations and tests have been required.  I've had to spend over $30,000 in doing so.  However, once I started analyzing what I was being charged by using online AI tools, I was able to secure some dramatic reductions in the billing.  I reckon I've saved five figures worth of money already, and expect to save a lot more by doing the same thing in future.

I recommend that any reader expecting (or paying) large medical bills should read the whole article referenced above, then try its recommendations for yourself.  You may be very pleasantly surprised by how much you save.

Peter

Very useful information on long-term emergency food storage

 

Commander Zero, whom we've met in these pages on several occasions, recently wrote an article asking his readers for feedback on cold weather food storage.  His exact question was:  "If you were going to store foods in a location that was going to be subject to freeze/thaw cycles, what foods would be best choices?"

Many of his readers responded - 44 of them, as I write these words.  They've provided a great deal of information that's useful for anyone considering food storage, even if not in a cold-weather environment.  I highly recommend clicking over to his place to read his question and explanation, and their responses.

Peter

A potential terrorist threat from Iran

 

I'm sure that by now, most of the readers of this blog are aware that Iran has been sending coded signals to unknown persons.

Iran sent out a possible “operational trigger” to activate “sleeper assets” abroad after the war with America and Israel began, according to an encrypted message intercepted by the US.

The coded signal was sent out following the death of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Feb. 28, with the message appearing to hold instructions for “covert operatives or sleeper assets,” ABC News reported, citing a federal alert sent to law enforcement agencies.

The message could “be intended to activate or provide instructions to prepositioned sleeper assets operating outside the originating country,” the alert warned.

. . .

“If ever there’s going to be a Hezbollah cell or a Hamas cell act in the United States in a violent way, it’s now,” Chris Swecker, a former assistant FBI director, told Fox News after the war began.

There's more at the link.

Anybody with any knowledge of international terrorism has been aware of the security risk posed by allowing millions of illegal aliens to cross our borders during the previous administration, with minimal or no security and background checks.  I shall be highly surprised if several hundred - possibly several thousand - terrorists and their supporters did not take advantage of that opportunity.  It was a gilt-edged invitation to set up terrorist, espionage and sabotage cells within the US in a virtually untraceable, unidentifiable fashion, and I'm sure our enemies did precisely that.  Individual terrorists would have done likewise.

We don't know how many such cells or individuals did that, but we've already seen examples of illegal aliens committing such crimes.  I would expect increased acts of terrorism in the short term, and possibly one or two attempts to commit some really big atrocity such as the World Trade Center attacks of 2001.  I'm sure law enforcement and security agencies and staff have already been briefed about that, and are on a higher state of alert to spot and prevent them.  However, most individual Americans are not security-conscious at all, and most are not armed and ready to defend themselves and others.  That would apply particularly to "blue" states, where anti-gun and anti-self-defense messages dominate, but it's not restricted to them.  Even here in Texas, generally regarded as a very pro-Second-Amendment state, there are urban pockets where liberal/progressive ideas and policies dominate.  (Plano, I'm looking at you.)

I can only suggest that readers arm themselves to the extent legally possible, and be prepared to defend themselves and their loved ones if necessary.  I'd also suggest remembering and applying John Farnam's sage advice:

The best way to handle any potentially injurious encounter is: Don’t be there. Arrange to be somewhere else. Don’t go to stupid places. Don’t associate with stupid people. Don’t do stupid things.

Sometimes we can't avoid having to be in or near such places or people.  If so, plan to get out of there as quickly as possible, and keep your head on a swivel while you're there.  Forewarned is forearmed.

Peter

EDITED TO ADD:  It's started, at least among sympathizers.  See this link for more.

Is the AI threat to jobs also a threat to pensions, IRA's and 401(k)'s?

 

Last week we looked at how artificial intelligence (AI) was affecting the job market.  I've been trying to read more widely on the subject, in an effort to understand its implications for all of us over the next few years.  Jonathan Turley, well-known lawyer and legal scholar, offers these thoughts.

We are looking at one of the greatest job losses in history.

In a free-market system, such technological changes tend to offset losses with new jobs in emerging industries. And there will be such growth with the AI and robotic revolutions. But it is also likely that we are looking at a static class of unemployed and practically unemployable citizens as this new revolution unfolds.

. . .

The impact of AI is not confined to factory workers and truck drivers.

The danger is that politicians will react predictably and try to subsidize jobs that are no longer viable and industries that are being dramatically downsized. At the same time, they are likely to expand model programs in Democratic cities for universal basic or guaranteed income.

Democrats have moved forward with more than 60 bills creating such programs, and this week, Cook County, Ill. (the second-largest county in the U.S.) made permanent the universal basic income program it had originally launched with federal COVID-19 relief funds.

The problem is the creation of what I call a “kept citizenship” in a republic designed for people who are economically and politically independent from the government. That system is seriously undermined by a large percentage of citizens living off the government dole.

The solution cannot be an “arts-and-crafts” population kept entertained by government programs to learn glassblowing and pottery-making. A different type of citizen would emerge that is unlikely to be sufficiently free of the government to counter its excesses or failures.

. . .

All governments will face this existential crisis in the 21st Century. It will create growing instability globally. Although AI and robotics will make goods cheaper and more widely available, they are also likely to have a dramatic effect on populations. For example, as production costs drop with the new technology, there will be less advantage to moving factories to other countries with cheaper labor forces, such as China and Mexico.

Companies may choose to build near consumer markets to save on transportation costs while utilizing higher-skilled worker populations to maintain robotic and AI systems. That could produce massive unemployment in certain countries with low-educated, low-income populations. That in turn could destabilize governments and increase the chances of war in countries with large populations of unemployed young men.

There's more at the link.  Recommended reading.

Mr. Turley outlines a very real constitutional issue for the United States.  Our federal government is specifically restricted by the constitution in what, and how much, it can do - even if much of those provisions are today observed more in the breach than in the observance.  Nevertheless, I think it's a valid argument that our system of government, and how we vote for it, are designed for citizens who are not dependent on that government.  They are able to vote as free men and women because they are not dependents.  The moment they cease being free - the moment they become financially dependent on the same government they're helping to elect - the greater becomes the danger that they will vote for their own financial advantage, rather than the good of the country.  As the Roman poet Juvenal satirically pointed out almost two millennia ago, people will vote for "bread and circuses" rather than what their country needs to remain viable.  The fall of Rome not too long afterwards tends to bear out his point.

So . . . if AI leads to increased unemployment (as appears likely at present), what will the newly unemployed do?  Can they, on their own initiative, figure out new ways to make a living and rebuild their society?  Or will they listen to the siren song of politicians who promise them all sorts of freebies and benefits in return for their vote?  (For that matter, any politician who promises to set up government programs to do the hard work for people, so that they don't have to think and work for themselves, is almost guaranteed electoral success.  See the universal basic income (UBI) scheme being pioneered by Chicago, and look for something similar in New York and other "blue" cities.)

The biggest threat posed by AI job replacement is one that Mr. Turley has not mentioned at all.  It's simply this:  if government is to provide a basic guaranteed income to every citizen, it can argue that private pension schemes, IRA's and 401(k)'s are now obsolete and unnecessary.  After all, if the state will provide our needs, why do we need to make provision for them ourselves?  That leads directly to the next and larger problem:  what if the state decides it can confiscate or "nationalize" our pensions, because with UBI we no longer need them?  There are many trillions of dollars saved by Americans in such pension systems, and a left-wing government will be frothing at the mouth over the temptation to seize them all.  It would wipe out a huge chunk of our national deficit (at least until such governments spend it all again!), and can be "sold" to the underfunded portion of the electorate as a "tax on the rich" who want to "hold on to money they don't need any more".  The massive population of "blue" cities and states can be expected to vote for it en masse, overwhelming the more conservative vote of those who've worked for their future income and want to keep it for themselves.

That will, in turn, beget a whole new series of arguments and confrontations over how much UBI should be, and whether "richer" people whose private pension funds were "nationalized" are entitled to a higher UBI payment as compensation, and a whole range of related issues.  What if housing were folded into the UBI arrangement, so that anyone receiving UBI was also guaranteed a place to live?  What quality of place?  In what sort of suburb?  Will everyone be forced into Cabrini-Green style housing, or will there be any freedom of choice?

I have no idea what may emerge from the current state of affairs, but I can foresee far more problems for society than are presently being discussed.  In days past, laissez-faire economists used to claim that "What's good for the banks is good for the country".  Well, AI may be good for business, but it may very well be "double-plus-ungood" for our jobs and for our society.  Right now, we just don't know . . . and that uncertainty is dangerous in itself.

Your thoughts, dear readers?

Peter