Posted by Rob on Fri, 13 Apr 2007 17:39 | #

Much of this is due to the fact that the idea that aimed rifle fire has been deemphasized in recent decades in favor of field of fire type shooting.  My uncle spent quite a bit of time in Vietnam “hosing down the jungle”, as he put it (sort of along the lines of ,“I don’t know what the body count is, but we sure taught those trees a lesson!).  Rifles now have 20, 25 and 30 round magazines and most shots are fired to keep the other guy’s head down anyway.  Most mechanized, modern armies operate this way.  Is it good or bad?  I don’t know.  Maybe in another 10 or 20 years, things will swing back the other way in favor of aimed shots again.  But ammo manufacturers must be pretty pleased right now.

Posted by NEC Watch on Sat, 14 Apr 2007 16:10 | #

See here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/ap_on_hi_te/rebuilding_the_internet_8

A heavy NEC involvement in this “project” - presumably well designed to “reconstruct” the internet to outlaw “hate”; that is, ECs defending their interests from rapacious NECs.

Posted by Shev on Sat, 14 Apr 2007 18:35 | #

Sounds like typical anti-American propaganda to me. A quarter of a million bullets for each dead insurgent? I wonder which lying leftie cooked up that statistic. It’s not what I hear from those who have actually served there.

Posted by Boop on Sun, 15 Apr 2007 05:29 | #

Dead ragheads are dead ragheads.  What else matters aside from splitting those sand niggers apart with a spray of rifle fire?

Posted by Lurker on Sun, 15 Apr 2007 05:48 | #

That does seem a staggeringly high figure.

Sure it shouldnt be 25,000 or 2,500?

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 15 Apr 2007 09:10 | #

Well, maybe they’re actually buying all those bullets but not firing all of them.

What would the government be doing with a huge covert supply of bullets?

Posted by Maguire on Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:24 | #

>>What would the government be doing with a huge covert supply of bullets?<<

A lot more live fire training.  Building war reserve stockpiles of small arms ammunition to higher levels than have historically been maintained is another.

If people want to use a “Keystone Cops” propaganda motif to delegitimate the current Jewish wars, fine.  Just do yourself and your family a favor and don’t start believing and acting on it yourself.

These particular “Keystone Cops” can eradicate your entire town in an afternoon - every man, woman and child - without overexerting themselves.  If they don’t it’s because they’re playing ‘nice’ for reasons of higher policy, not because they ‘can’t’ physically.

Youtube has sufficient educational vids now for anyone needing further persuasion or gripped by fantasies of reviving Boer commando style horsy troops. 

Watch some clips.  You can see 2000 lb bombs with 10 meter accurate GPS or 1 meter accurate laser guidance sailing into concrete buildings.  Watch Apache helicopters blow away insurgents preparing an RPG-7 ambush in pitch dark from 4,000 meters away. Watch the USAF track an escaping mortar team speeding off in a van.  They follow them for miles until there’s sufficient distance not to inflict collateral damage.

This should cure all fantasies of reviving the 1980s “Order”.

What these particular “Keystone Cops” are not good at is being a colonial constabulary.  They’re not organized to do that directly.  They are designed to control subordinate colonial constabularies and chieftains with the credible threat of certain destruction.

Posted by James Bowery on Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:59 | #

You raise an important point:

Don’t underestimate your adversary.

However, we must remain cognizant of the historic failures of imperial troops to achieve their missions—which are symptoms of systemic weaknesses that can determine outcome.

To some extent this gets into the very nature of “the enemy” and the very ideology behind “the war”.  Specifically, I’m thinking of centralization and de facto theocracy imposing its moral particulars, such as enforcing heterosity (the theocracy’s so-called “diversity” enforced by “civil rights” laws like “fair housing”, “affirmative action”, removal of immigration controls that might be construed as “racist”, biased enforcement of “hate” laws and biased awards of “entitlements”), on unwilling people.

Such centralization of moral authority is concomitant with centralization of control of resources (whether by enormously wealthy private corporations or by highly centralized empires), and strongly drives infrastructure to “optimize” to what many are now identifying as general topological phenomena such as scale free networks.  If the goal of the war is to reclaim freedom for people to live their lives according to their strongly held beliefs, aka religion, the strategy must necessarily be to decentralize resource control and the obvious tactic is to disable the networks upon which Leviathan relies for its resource control.

Supremacists of any stripe, be they “white” supremacists or the current vectorist supremacy will necessarily oppose the development of new methods of war-making that permanently dismantle the mechanisms of control.  As a result the alliances will not be what many expect. 

Moreover, the battle lines in such a situation are not obvious because empires with world-girdling reach preclude territorial boundaries.  That is their entire reason for existing—to make the world “transparent through standardization” (translation: more easily exploitable by economies of scale).  Finally, as you have pointed out, human organizational structures based on command hierarchies are specifically targeted by the military structures being deployed by these empires.

This is why I have advocated a radically different mode of warfare based not on command hierarchy but on synchronization.

Specifically, I have put forth the idea that synchronization should replace other forms of coordination.  For example, spreading this message:

4/15, 4/19, 12:00.0 Central Time

If you publicize this, don’t act.  If you act, act alone.

As today demonstrates, “April 15” may be inadequate.  Moreover, there should be some precise and objectively verifiable threshold of reach before the network triggers.

Posted by Maguire on Mon, 16 Apr 2007 00:24 | #

“Specifically, I’m thinking of centralization and de facto theocracy…concomitant with centralization of control of resources (whether by enormously wealthy private corporations or by highly centralized empires)”

Yes.  The Leviathan/ZOG/NWO entity visibly rests on a very few top-down pillars.  These pillars have been cross supporting. Some of these are crumbling around the edges.

1.  A unified pyramidal banking & currency system starting at the Bank of International Settlements and extending out through the Federal Reserve System, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank and the Bank of Japan.

2.  A centralized hierarchical mass media.  The existence of this for most of the 20th Century prevented widespread realization of other ongoing activities, such as the Jewish censorship being exerted over the holdings of local libraries and the offerings of bookstores on certain topics.  It took the internet to make even the current fraction of Americans realize their existing media was no more diverse than media in the former USSR.

3.  The Oil Monopoly.  I don’t mean just a few companies but the basic technological monopoly exerted by crude oil based fuel technologies.  Crude oil and natural gas are not the only source of liquid internal combustion engine fuels, fuel gasses or chemical feedstocks. 

An incomplete listing of viable alternates includes:

—- Coal & biomass gasification to diesel fuel via Fischer Tropsch synthesis.

—- Coal and & biomass gasification followed by methanol synthesis (same fuel used by NHRA Top Alcohol fuel dragsters and Indy 500 cars).

—-  Coal and biomass gasification to produce fuel gasses.  The European and later US city gas distribution networks ran on coal gasses for the first 150 years.  a/k/a “bluewater gas” or “water gas”.

—- Ablative Fast Pyrolysis of biomass to produce pyrolysis oils, char and fuel gasses.  Current state of the art is already producing oils suitable for stationary diesel engines.

—- Food crops to ethanol.  Corn, potatoes, sugar cane…  This can be done with anything edible.

—- Biodiesel made from soybeans, rapeseeds and other oil rich plants.

—- Rapid algae culture in power plant cooling water ponds to produce biodiesel.

4.  Naval and Air Power Imperium.  Not one oil tanker sails anywhere without the permission of the US & Royal Navies.  Or airliner.

Posted by Maguire on Mon, 16 Apr 2007 01:41 | #

>>the strategy must necessarily be to decentralize resource control<<

Yes. Absolutely.  I agree with these ideas and have agreed for years.  This concept applies even more to the economic struggle than it does to overt ‘political’ and extended ‘political-military’ struggles.

>>and the obvious tactic is to disable the networks upon which Leviathan relies for its resource control.<<

Or bypass and replace them in each functional area with viable alternate technologies and organizations.  The current Imperial model is best described as a pyramidal client-server network across the board.  What’s wanted is peer-to-peer networking.  To the extent client-peer networks are retained they have to be reduced in size and scope to the most local possible levels.

Each functional area needs specificities to implement the generalizations.  For instance, liquid fuels and true industrial capable energy independence implemented at the lowest possible level.

Posted by Maguire on Mon, 16 Apr 2007 03:04 | #

Fred Scrooby,

I read that this weekend.  I have no doubt the Jews would like to reestablish a far stricter censorship over the public discourse.

Personally I think the internet is inflicting its greatest damage to the Regime in the fields of true technology accessibility and propagation, with follow on effects in economics and peer to peer trading.

Let’s take the key field of ‘alternate’ energy and fuels.  First there are the government supported and MSM discussed red herrings.  Through most of the 90s this space was occupied by a future Hydrogen Economy.  This was a policy wonk favorite supported by their understanding of ‘science’ as seen on Star Trek.  Wind and Solar functioned as smaller adjunct red herrings.

What the regime wants are not just ‘alternates’.  It wants alternates that can be controlled via the mechanisms of patents, centralization and scale-up requiring concentrated finance capital.

Neocon frontman R. James Woolsey, Changing World Technologies and “thermal depolymerization” are an example here.  It’s no accident CWT was able to get a puff piece in Discover Magazine.

I just listed an incomplete array of alternate fuels technologies.  Some closely parallel TDP but are not patent protected.  Several are very anti-scalar.  This includes “Ablative Fast Pyrolysis”, which can be implemented at very small scale and actually resists very large scale-up.  The biomass based technologies can be implemented anywhere plants occur.

I have trouble imagining a more anti-Semitic act than making individual counties and communities 100% independent for their fuels and electric power.

Maguire

ps It takes economic resource and space to support the raising of little white babies in mass quantities.  Obtaining this by using the leveraging the unbelievable quantity of information through the internet is most important.

9-11 Truth (whatever that ultimately is) may be a paradigm changing and worldview shattering experience.  But it takes more to organize the resulting chaotic mass of 9-11 Truth receipients.  This is done day to day via the mechanism of ‘economics’ and ‘work’.

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 16 Apr 2007 07:32 | #

I haven’t been able to get a good idea of the wholesale price and market elasticity of bio-oil (the primary output of fast pyrolysis) for doing a business plan.  Do you know of any good market studies for bio-oil?  The best guesses I’ve seen are around 50cents per gallon.  (There may be alternatives to bio-oil, such as HC output from water organic-matter redox reactions.)

Also, is ablative a particular kind of fast pyrolysis or is it more or less redundant to say “ablative fast pyrolysis”?

Posted by James Bowery on Mon, 16 Apr 2007 18:08 | #

I had said: >>and the obvious tactic is to disable the networks upon which Leviathan relies for its resource control.<<

To which Maguir replied: Or bypass and replace them in each functional area with viable alternate technologies and organizations.

I deleted my earlier response which was: “Can’t do.  Civil rights laws are enforced with all rigor and bias.  Leviathan will not leave us alone.  That much has been proven by the FBI, EEOC, etc. since the 1960s.”—so I can expand on my concerns with the invent-our-way-around-Leviathan approach—an approach that I am pursuing and indeed have been for some time.

First of all I have been a proponent of preferring the technological to the political since at least I had my day as Mr. Smith in Washington D.C. when I was attempting to reform Federal technology policy.  Note that I’m saying you can’t even participate in the political process to make technology development policy less political—which is what I tried.  Leviathan doesn’t work that way.  It simply absorbs your life-force and legitimizes its political machinery.

Second, I’m all for people working around Leviathan to the extent they can and am indeed doing so.  If you look at the yahoo group for oil from algae, you’ll see not only was I one of the earliest participants, I was the first participant to post a detailed “Lab Notes” of his experiments with a very low capitalization back yard algae growth.  I’ve stopped posting there since it has become overrun by posturing but my work is on-going.  This isn’t just for oil production, but for a protein feedstock using a small enough footprint that people with few economic options can possibly support families even when they are paying rent to an unforgiving landlord, earning minimum wage in competition with Mexican slaves and confront hostile members of minority groups who have seized control of the welfare agencies.

Third, I put together the first operational municipal wifi mesh system in the US directly as a result of my efforts to find more robust decentralized routing systems.

Fourth, I’ve been doing the P2P thing since my work as network architect for the VIEWTRON system in 1981 where my architectural manifesto (remember this is before D Reed and Co had laid down their “end-to-end arguments” position) was “The terminal is simply the host machine nearest the customer.”  A discipline that came into conflict with the deal-making of AT&T/Western Electric, Knight-Ridder and Tandem Computers Corporation (and others involved in NAPLPS)—hence was not pursued.

Fifth, despite all this, and despite the fact that my early work on prize awards for technology breakthroughs and other incentives for space development arguably broke ground for the X-Prize, which has spawned a number of launch service startups, I remain skeptical that we can reduce Leviathan’s ongoing rape of our people to a level of reasonable compromise through technological by-pass.

One problem is if we rely on development of inherently small-scale technologies that don’t scale up well, such as ablative fast pyrolysis for example, that doesn’t mean those technologies will remain competitive against other technologies that have inherent economies of scale.

But another problem is that Leviathan can reasonably be treated as being conscious, not of a lot of things, but of one thing in particular:

We are the guys who built its infrastructure so it “knows” that it cannot let us escape—and it has a few simple-minded techniques it uses to make sure slave masters are in power over us—one of which is the “civil rights movement” with all the facets I previously listed, and more.

Note, I’m not saying Leviathan is sufficiently conscious to realize that it may be enslaving us in such a way as to destroy us, anymore than I’m saying that the way Leviathan’s economies of scale operate take into account the diseconomies of unsustainability.

Posted by Maguire on Tue, 17 Apr 2007 00:52 | #

To James Bowery,

“is ablative a particular kind of fast pyrolysis”

Yes.  The “Ablative Fast” refers to the specific process of rapidly heating small bits (approx 0.5 mm to 1mm) of ‘biomass’ in a cone shaped cyclone “reactor” by blowing the bits through it.  Optimum wall temperature is generally stated to be around 450 C.  The particle’s carbonizing surface continuously ‘ablates’ or erodes in contact with the reactor walls.  This is the key to maximizing volatile liquid yield.

Temperature, particle size and residence time are key to the process yields.  The small particle sizes and optimum vapor residence time (<= 0.2 s) are why this doesn’t scale up to Exxon size very well.  ‘Scaling’ is relative since you can put reactors in parallel in the process flow.

There are other forms of biomass pyrolysis, some also ‘fast’, such as fluidized fixed bed gasifiers pyrolyzing particles suspended in air.  Whereas AFP requires an inert atmosphere.

>>wholesale price and market elasticity of bio-oil<<

I’m willing to discuss in depth for general benefit.  But it really deserves its own topic.  In short, AFP yields one energy and three fuels.

Energy: excess heat generated by exothermic carbonization.

Fuel Products.

1.  Fuel gasses, primarily carbon monoxide and hydrogen, but also some methane and propane.

2.  Solid fuel in the form of char.

3.  Pyroligneous liquids, or ‘bio-crude’.  This is what the process seeks to maximize.

How you handle each of these is one part of the equation.  The next part is what your feedstock sources are.  Bits of waste wood, sawdust, ag waste, hammer milled tires, animal guts and manure have all been successfully used. 

And your system configuration relative to the feedstock.  Is it fully mobile going to the feedstock, i.e. collecting and processing ag waste in a field or remaining forestry slash?  Is it portable,  for instance mounted on a semi-trailer rig to go where a feedstock supplies exist?  Or is it a fixed installation requiring feedstock to be concentrated?

>>Do you know of any good market studies for bio-oil?<<

No.  Other than the ones I and a couple of engineers are making.  For reasons above, generalized statements are difficult to make in the absence of system specifics. 

I can say basic charcoal briquettes aren’t too attractive with Powder River coal at $11/ton.  Activated charcoal and metallurgical grade char briquettes are much more interesting.

>>The best guesses I’ve seen are around 50cents per gallon.<<

1/2 the price of crude oil is a safe working estimate.  Bio-crude from AFP averages 50% of the btu value of crude oil.  Corporatists are looking into AFP as a substitute feedstock for existing refineries.  This model has concentration and second handling problems imo.

Value rises fast to the extent you can homogenize the output for direct use, or use with minimal post-processing.  For instance, up to something suitable for mixing 50-50 with DF-1/DF-2. 

Maguire

Posted by Maguire on Tue, 17 Apr 2007 01:14 | #

To James Bowery,

“Second, I’m all for people working around Leviathan to the extent they can and am indeed doing so.”

I think we’re pretty much in agreement.  My main point is that “Majority Rights” or pro-white activism has lacked any economic dimension, let alone one consciously designed to benefit whites.  Imo this is a fatal handicap for any political or philosophical movement with ambitions to graduating into political influence.  And particularly fatal for a movement faced with an enemy accustomed to instinctively use economic sanctions against its oppoents.

I would never say a political dimension is not necessary or vital to our struggle.  I just don’t believe the necessary political traction and power can be generated until more basic problems are addressed. 

And we have to be about addressing white people’s real problems.

Maguire