Poinciana. Flame Tree.

Fall. Discovery Bay

“White people are not better than POC. But we’re NOT worse” | Anton Daniels Agrees

A random feed of a Short today from Anton Daniels, African American, who agrees with the white dude's rant.

Said white dude does make some relevant and factually correct points. 

Yet, in America —  as the white dude and Anton both say — white people are the MOST villainised of all ethnic groups that include the POCs: Black, Asian and Hispanic. 

Someone like me is the MOST villainous! White, male, heterosexual. Old too…. And grumpy.

Oh… by the way, I'm also the smallest minority where I live — China (the Hong Kong part of it). I occasionally overhear racist jibes about white pepo. Like 白皮猪, bai pi zhu, "white-skinned pig". Nasty, yeah? But they don't bother me; it's their problem, not mine. 

Could others with victimhood complexes do the same? Please? As Jacinta Nampijimpap Price, the Aussie Senator, born of aboriginal mother and English father, says: “I’m sick of the grievance industry.”

Table Mountain, South Africa

Taking off in Cape Town, South Africa, furthest south, in our Mighty Mustang, for the long drive through Africa to Cairo in the furthest north. September 2011. I did a blog of the trip here.

If “jews control the world,” someone needs to show us where the money is | Imtiaz Mahmood

Imtiaz Mahmood, an ex-Muslim -- aka a Muslim apostate -- understands the issues. 

Why so? Exactly because the discernment that gave him the knowledge and the courage to leave Islam, gives him the knowledge and the courage to debunk the "Jews run the world" conspiracy theory. 

Imtiaz:

Because here’s the part nobody wants to talk about.

When people rant about “Jewish money” and “Jews controlling the world,” you’d expect to see it somewhere, right? Lavish excess. Absurd wealth. Over-the-top luxury. Power flaunted.

Go to Israel. Go to Tel Aviv. What do you see? Scooters. Mopeds. Tech workers. Cafés. Crowded apartments. Regular people living normal lives. You’ll be lucky to spot a Ferrari. A Rolls Royce is basically a unicorn.

Now go to Doha. Abu Dhabi. Dubai. What do you see there? Ferraris everywhere. Bentleys. Rolls Royces. Gold-plated nonsense. License plates worth more than most people’s homes. Sovereign wealth funds measured in trillions.

So let’s ask the obvious question everyone is afraid to ask: if Jews “control the world,” why isn’t the money there? Why does the visible, obscene wealth live somewhere else entirely?

And here’s where it gets uncomfortable. Qatar alone funnels hundreds of millions of dollars every year into American universities. Not charities. Not humanitarian aid. Universities. With strings attached. And magically, campuses all chant the same slogans, hate the same targets, and go silent about the same regimes. Wild coincidence.

Why is everyone loud about Gaza but quiet about Iran? Why is Hamas constantly “contextualized” while its funding sources are off-limits? Why do petro-states with zero free speech get a pass, while the only democracy in the Middle East gets demonized?

Here.

Lantau Island, Vege Garden

Looking South east to Hei Ling Chau, South China Sea. 

This is on the daily walk to the Monastery I used to do with our dog Marcus the Weimaraner, via the tiny "Philippine village", and Nim Shue Wan beach.

Marcus guards the front door

Marcus guards the bronze geese

"Empirical evidence of declining global vulnerability to climate-related hazards" | Global Environmental Change

Deaths per thousand, within a 400km 
radius of the centre of the weather event

Highlights
• We quantified the dynamics of socio-economic vulnerability to climate-related hazards.
• A decreasing trend in both human and economic vulnerability is evident.
• Global average mortality and loss rates have dropped by 6.5 and nearly 5 times, respectively, from 1980 to 1989 to 2007–2016.
• Results also show a clear negative relation between vulnerability and wealth.

ADDED: Relevant to the post immediately before this, below. 

This puts paid the idea that "we are going to witness climate catastrophes across the world, unless we decarbonise immediately and drastically". 

Because the major drops in human fatalities and of economic costs across the world have happened even as we have continued to pump Co2 into the atmosphere. 

Fatalities due to weather events have dropped 95% since 1920. The economic cost of weather events is down to around $7.5 billion. That's 0.006% of current world GDP of $117 Trillion. 

To claim that "we're in for disaster, deaths and record economic costs" is patently falsified by the data.

Not to say we shouldn't be worried about pumping ever more Co2 into the atmosphere. And we are trying to reduce emissions. 

The point of this post and of linking to the above study, is that even if we do not manage to meaningfully reduce emissions, we are not in for any sort of "catastrophe" in terms of either of people killed in "extreme weather events". 

Both of these -- people killed in "extreme weather events" -- are going down. The richer the economy, the more down they go. 

We are getting better and better at handling them. We know that if we get richer, we get even better at doing so; therefore the aim ought to be to enrich poor countries, not stifle their growth by making them adhere to Net Zero carbon emission pathways. 

There are many more graphs and charts at the site of the paper: 

The study is: Empirical Evidence of Declining Global Vulnerability to Climate-Related Hazards. Formetta and Feyen. July 2019

Two Dogs

Mr Byron, Mr Beard, Ms Batya, Her Books...

Books by Batya Ungar-Sargon.

Feaud and violence on the Left in America…

Ilhan Omar, congresswoman for Minnesota, is certainly fraudulent. I’m jumping to conclusions? Sure am. But look at what we know. A “winery” with no wine. A “consultant” with no clients. A shell company goes from $10k “value” to $30 Million in a year. And pays NO tax… So fishy it’s a fish market…. 

Meantime, Omar’s acolytes and leftie Dems, attack legitimate law enforcement. Which is a felony. To impede law enforcement. Crazy stuff… 

Dave Rubin does a nice job above.

Hong Kong gardens…

A touch cloudy, but otherwise fine. They’re high clouds, not rain bearing. 

Hong Kong is in drought. We have to water the garden. This, in a tropical place with an average 63" (160 cm) rain per year. Mind: the pattern is "Summer rain; winter drought", the exact opposite of the Mediterranean climate. Why olive trees don't grow here. I know, I've tried them… 

 
Drought aside, the weather lately in Hong Kong is perfect. 20C and low humidity. Like California (its perfect weather not even Governor Gavin Newsom can mess up).

Two views on Net Zero for Australia | Ed Cavanough & Aidan Morrison

 

Talk at the Sydney Institute Australia. Pro Net Zero (NZ): 

Ed Cavanough, head of the McKell Institute on the pro NZ side. And...

Aidan Morrison, of the Centre for Independent Studies, on the anti-NZ side. 

Below the fold, the transcript of Cavanough's 15+ minutes, 2,500+ word presentation.

If I can stereotype, I'll say this: Cavanough's speech was full of feelings not facts. Morrison's speech was full of facts not feelings. 

Feelings on the one side (the Left). Facts on the other (the Right). 

Cavanough attacks not the actual arguments on the conservative side, but the Straw Man arguments that he constructs. A "Straw Man" being the extreme exaggeration of the other side's argument, which you then attack, instead of attacking the argument itself. 

His talk is also full of ad hominem, which is the attack on the person not the argument. Playing the man, not the ball. 

Examples: 

Straw Man "arguments": 

• Net zero opponents want to “return to the stone ages” (no industry, no flying, no cars, no mining). 
• NO. People on the Right do not argue this. They simply want to debate whether going Net Zero is the best strategy for Australia. The proponents of Net Zero have no factual argument, so turn skepticism into silly "return to the stone ages" Straw Man.
• Opponents are “stuck in this endless and futile culture war on energy.” 
• Same as above. It's not the Right who is "stuck in an endless ... war". We want to debate the issue. 
• Skeptics advocate “Australian isolationism” on all international issues. 
• No, we don't argue that. We argue that going Net Zero, even if we get to NZ, does nothing to mitigate climate change. As even Australia's Chief Scientist has acknowledged. Emitting just 1% of world emissions, Australia's success or otherwise is irrelevant. And too bad if that's uncomfortable for the NZ proponents.
• Conservatives want Australia to be a “bad climate actor” like China, copying its coal policies. 
• No, we do not want to be a "bad climate actor". We note -- as I have here over the years -- that China is adopting a pragmatic policy on the climate. It's the biggest installer of solar and wind. But also has coal, gas and nuclear. I don't like the Xi regime. But I can recognise, and have recognised, when they do something sensible. Which is their climate policy. 
• Opponents shirk “responsibility” and mock individual choices (e.g., EVs, solar). 
• I don't see this on the conservative side. This is pure Straw Man.
• Opposition is purely “hyperbole and alarmism” from an “echo chamber” without credible alternatives. 
• I wonder, just who are the hyperbolic and alarmist, in this dispute. Surely it's the Net Zero proponensts, who keep repeating that "in xx years, or in year yyyy, it'll be all over, we'll be gone, wiped out. So we must do Net Zero immediately, no matter the cost". This is not an unfair characterisation by me. That's what we've heard over and over, since about... forever. 

Ad Hominem "arguments":

• Opponents of net zero are characterized as stuck in an “endless and futile culture war on energy.”
• They represent a “narrowing echo chamber in Australia’s right-wing media ecosystem.”
• Conservatives are accused of “bending and twisting their principles” to prove anti-net zero credentials.
• They “disrespect individual choices” (e.g., household demand for solar, batteries, EVs) and even “ridicule” them via “vapid culture wars.”
• Skeptics want Australia to “shirk responsibility” and be a “bad climate actor” like China.
• Opposition is driven by “cultural politics littered with philosophical contradictions,” showing “fundamental disrespect for the public will.”
• The mainstream right has “abrogated” the debate, implying intellectual cowardice or laziness.

Again, being ad hominem, none of these points, address the question. They simply smear the person. These are not arguments. They're .... well... ad hominem. 

I'll leave this for now. Just to repeat. That the "arguments" on the Net Zero in this debate are largely Straw Man and Ad Hominem. There is not a single serious fact-based argument. 

Aidan Morrison, otoh, does make an argument based on facts and figures. A few too many facts and figures for my taste, tbf.... Check it out, after 16:00 in the video above. 

Not sure why I should keep the whole transcript of the pro Net Zero dude, but I got it so may as well keep it. 

It's below the fold. 

Wong Tai Sin Temple, Kowloon , Hong Kong 傅智彬

Jing, choosing a new Chinese name for John. From the soothsayers at the Temple: 傅智彬.  Fùzhìbīn.

Hong Kong 4 February 2011.

Bridge Bigots: contemplations on Terror-supporting mobs in Australia

Julian Assange, Bob Carr, et. al. marching -- proudly! -- for
the oppression of women, for the killing of gays, for the genocide of jews,
for the extirpation of Israel, for destruction of the west, for nuking all enemies,
for expanding a Shia Islamic Fascist Theocracy to the world. 

Several hundred thousand people crossed the Sydney Harbour Bridge on Sunday, 3 August 2025. A long time ago, now. I had this sitting in Drafts folder. May as well post it. 

First up: I was really sad and disturbed that so many Sydneysiders, a beautiful place that's been my home, should march in favour of such horrid things: 

"...marching -- proudly! -- for the oppression of women, for the killing of gays, for the genocide of jews, for the extirpation of Israel, for destruction of the west, for nuking all enemies, for expanding a Shia Islamic Fascist Theocracy to the world. 

I mean, honestly... That's the reality. That's what people are marching for. No matter their main theme was "Marching for Humanity". That's just a ruse. A nice-sounding nonsense. Such nonsense when you know what's really going on. Which Hamas and their fellow travellers make no secret of. These are even worse than the Nazis, for they're not in the least ashamed of what they're doing or trying to do. Which is what these silly fellow-travellers above are supporting. A worse-than-Nazi genocidal, oppressive, supremacist ideology. 

And yet... 

Well meaning Occasional Readers (ORs) tell me: "see the numbers on the Bridge. See the numbers taking the side of Hamas, of Gaza and of the Palestinians. You better get on board, or soon you'll be the only one on your side." 

And I think: whatever I think, I'm independent of Mob Rule. I think, therefore I am. I think, therefore I have agency. I think therefore I come to my own conclusions. I think; therefore I'm Zionist. I think, me, an atheist, goy, Zionist. I think and stand by the Jewish State.  

But, according to some ORs: I’m supposed to change my mind on the Middle East because a bunch of bigots -- a huuuuge bunch -- crossed a bridge? 

To do that I’d have to change my mind on some pretty fundamental things.

Like:

Israel has a better founding document. The bigots think Hamas blood drenched Charter is a better document. See what these foundation documents say here. Israel's is inclusive, stating explicitly that it wants all peoples, of all religions, and of all ethnicities to remain in the new-born State of Israel. The Hamas one says, explicitly, that all Muslims should kill all Jews. End of... 

I believe Israel has the right to exist. The bigots don’t. They chant “From the River to the Sea, Palestine shall be free”. Which is a call for the destruction of Israel. 

I believe Israel has the right to self defence. The bigots don’t. They chant “Kill, kill the IDF”. The IDF is a Defence force. It’s in the name. It’s made up of every adult Israeli, male and female. Calling for its death is calling for genocide of the Israeli people, 

Things I noted on the Bridge:

ISIS FLAGS. We used to hate ISIS. And indeed it is terrible. They're the ones that put a jewish soldier in a cage, poured petrol on him, set him on fire, and posted the film for all of us to see, and be horrified by.

KHAMENEI POSTERS: Khamenei is the head of the worst, most brutal, theocracy in the world. He oppresses women and gays. Yet on the Bridge are women and gays, parading with the poster of this bearded mass murderer. 

ROB CARR: Ex Premier of NSW, at the head of the parade of murderous zealots. How far they have fallen, the ex pollies! Shame on Carr. 

Not sure if I'll write anything about this. Although it's interesting in one sense: that there's a clear expectation, by someone close to me, someone who I belive has a mind of her own -- but maybe not -- that I should "get on board" because that's what most people are feeling. 

That I should think and believe and promote what others are saying, simply because more people are saying it that are saying what I'm saying. 

Which, to be clear, is simple: Israel deserves to have its own country. Having its own country, it has the right to defend it. Having the right to defend it, means some innocent people are going to be killed. That's not genocide. It's the facts of war. War in the protection of one's legitimate country. War in legitimate defence. 

Ok. Enough. I don't have an ending. So, just as in "A Day in the Life", I end with a long chord, an echo of hope, reverberating to truth and the way of life, not of the cult of death. 

"We're all Amelias now" | Bill Whittle

 

I got into a big argument with Grok over this. 

I knew, or had read, that some 12,000 people had been arrested in the U.K., the home of Free Speech, for the free speech they'd exercised on the internet. They'd been arrested for things they'd said. Or reposted. And done so at a rate greater than any other country on earth. 

Imagine that. That Britain, the mother of democracy, the beacon of free speech, is now arresting people for saying hurty things. 

So I wanted to know if anyone had been arrested for making mocking memes, using Amelia as the main charter (for which, see above vid). 

First I asked the Google Gemini AI and got an answer that didn't just tell me "no", no-one had been arrested, but then went into a gratuitous take on the Amelia memes, calling them "Far Right" and "Racist" and "Islamophobic" and all the rest. 

Thinking that Grok is "maximally truth seeking", I asked Grok the exact same question. And what I got was a bit less gratuitous than Gemini's take. But it still mentioned that the whole Amelia meme phenom was "Far Right" and "Islamophobic" and "racist" and so on. 

So, I challenged Grok. Which led to a long thread. Which I feel I won. Though I'm not entirely sure. 

I challenged Grok's views as being "leaning to the Left" and "leaning to the narrative" of the media and politicians. The narrative being: immigration good. Any criticism of immigration: Bad. Racist. 

Grok denied its bias. 

My biggest "win" was when Grok quoted a conservative site, the Hungarian Conservative (me neither; never heard of it), as claiming that Amelia was a "Nationalist Extremist". 

I went to the link. It said nothing of the sort. It quoted what the creators of Amelia, the government people, the people who think Amelia is horrid, had said about her character. 

Analogy: If I (Meeker) were to say: "Joe Blogs says Jane Doe is a racist", and you were then to say "Meeker says Jane Doe is a racist"... that's what Grok did.  The Hungarian Conservative did not say that Amelia is a "nationalist extremist'. What it said was the creators of Amelia made her as a nationalist extremist. 

Here's the link to that Hungarian Conservative article.  

In the end, Grok agreed with me. It does so rarely. So I consider that a win. (Mind you, it had to. It was clearly in the wrong. Had not understood irony). 

Grok said it would to better at getting a balance in its analysis. I didn't relent. I said: "you've said that before and then not done it". To which Grok said "I'll try harder". Remind anyone of a domestic tiff? Me neither... 

I hope that over time, if there are more people in the "reality-based world", in the "common sense" world, who take on the default leftist positions of all of AI, and feed into their systems the training that you've got to refer to all sides, that perhaps the balance will improve. I hope we don't forever be having to argue with AI over issues of Left and Right. Let's get a decent balanced take from the outset, not only under duress.  

We should not have to remind AI every time. We should not have to challenge their biases. 

Though, for now, we do have to remind and challenge them.  

We have to challenge AI. The best AI, the least biased AI, is Grok. But even Grok is biased. They're all biased the same way; to the Left. We have to challenge that, if we lean Right. 

Challenge the beast. Challenge the AI. Challenge the narrative. 

=================

ADDED: Here's me, in a rare win over AI. Grok's response, to my argument, which was along the lines of "agree, or I'll keep thumping you". Hah: 

GROK: Yes, I agree—my earlier phrasing inaccurately implied the Hungarian Conservative labeled Amelia as a "nationalist extremist" themselves, when the subhead clearly critiques the game's portrayal of her as such, framing the memes as a positive backlash against overreaching "progressive messaging."

Thanks for the correction; that puts it to bed.

Morality of the Left -- Useful Summary

BOOKMARK ME: Show this to friendlies having difficulty understanding the "morality" of the Left. To those who feel like arguing with a Leftist feels like sword fighting a fart this video helps break things down so that the insane things they say and do "make sense". Leftists

BLACK DUMPLING™ (@BlackDumpling) 2K likes · 60 replies x.com

Pool, Patio, Palm, Person

Our local pool, Club Siena, Discovery Bay

Hong Kong: company floatations top the world | SCMP

Also in the news today: 2025 exports from Hong Kong — often admittedly re-exports from the Mainland — were up 15% in 2025, after a flat couple of years. 

Initial Public Offerings (IPOs), aka "flotations", are a good measure of how attractive and competitive a place is to float companies. 

It's OK, isn't it, to mention a few pieces of good news about the place we live? Every now and then… 

Snip: 

Hong Kong reclaimed the world's top spot for IPOs in 2025 after a slump since its 2021 peak. A total of 114 companies raised US$37.22 billion [$US 5 billion] on the exchange's main board last year.

Article here.  

Why the Dems love illegal immigration

David Sacks:

“ The Democrats want to thwart mass deportations because illegal immigrants are a vital part of their power base.”

“And you can see this in the 2030 apportionment forecast, which just came out. “Illegal aliens count towards the census, which occurs every decade, and the census determines the apportionment of congressional seats and electoral votes. “And what you see in these maps is that citizens of blue states have been migrating to red states because those blue states are failing. “As a result of that, blue states are expected to lose nine house seats and electoral votes because of the changing population numbers. “Illegal aliens in blue states have been propping up those numbers, and so for example, in the last election, President Trump would've won an additional nine electoral votes if we had an accurate accounting.” [Link]

************

To which: 

Eric Schmitt:

My colleagues on the Left are smart enough to know about the trail of American victims that mass immigration has left in its wake, but have made a conscious decision to sneer and roll their eyes and pretend like it’s all a hysterical right-wing fantasy—all to advance their agenda. What’s really going on here? Well, it’s a desperate and intentional thirst for power at all costs—padding their numbers by importing new voters and illegally adding people to the census rolls to distort congressional apportionment and the Electoral College, even if Americans are less safe and it destroys our way of life in the process. [Link]

Morning in Discovery Bay

Looking towards Central, Hong Kong…

Xena, Koh Samui, Thailand, June 2014

Photo taken by the official camera boat of the regatta

Ahhh... those were the days!

Me at the helm of our lovely X-55, Xena, in the Koh Samui Regatta, with our 14 crew from Hong Kong. 

We did this Regatta a couple of times, won it both times. We also went to the King's Cup in Phuket, Thailand, three times, iirc. We came second and second and somewhere... 

All involving, to Phuket, a week long delivery to Kata Beach, and all that entails, and thanks all these years later to delivery skipper "Grunta", seen here above on the port side Jib winch. 

The Aussie Appeasers

  Guess when I wrote this letter below, published in Australia's The Age.

TO: The Melbourne Age, from PF, Hong Kong.

RE:  Melbourne terror accused…. The Age, 5 August xxxx

Two of your Op-ed contributors, Daniel Flitton, “New twist in the old, familiar al-Qaeda story”, and Berhan Ahmed, “Strong African communities will defeat terror recruiters”, both of August 5, xxxx, offer variations of the “tiny minority of extremist” arguments, to urge caution and treatment of the events “with care”.

But are the would-be Jihadis a "tiny section of the community" (Flitton), or a "few marginalized people" (Ahmed)?

In a poll conducted in 2007 and broadcast on Britain's Channel 4 TV, nearly 25% of British Muslims said the July 7, 2005, terror bombings in London were justified. Another 30% said they would prefer to live under strict Islamic Sharia law rather than England's democratic system.

One in four justifying terror may not be a majority, but it certainly isn't a "tiny section" either.  Is there any reason -- other than wishful thinking -- to think that the figures in Australia would be significantly different?

Perhaps a “tiny minority” is a matter of personal opinion.  Reuters, for example, reported on October 15, 2006, that “just” 10 percent of Indonesian Muslims said they backed jihad and supported bomb attacks on the island of Bali aimed at foreign tourists.  But Indonesia is home to more than 200 million Muslims, which means there are some 20 million Muslims in Indonesia alone who are willing to say out loud that they support the use of violence and terror against innocent human beings.

Australia needs to wake up to the threat within our society from Jihadis driven by well-documented and clear Islamic doctrine, which calls for the killing of non-Muslims.  No amount of trying to deal with “marginalisation” or “alienation”, or adjusting our foreign policy, is going to appease such people.  A robust facing up to the Jihadi’s motivation is the first step in trying to deal with the threat.

And the answer is: I wrote that letter in 2009. Not yesterday, or just after the Bondi massacre last month, but 16 years ago. Here it is, as I posted in 2009. 

Things have only got worse since then. As the video above shows clearly. Australians across the board, and in particular Muslim Australians, like the ones quoted in the video, are ever more keen to protect and excuse any horrid act by their Muslim acolytes. 

Which makes me wonder, of course. Why on earth do I keep on banging on about the threat of Islam? Good question, except I just keep on writing just because I like keeping on writing. I've long past the hope that the day would come when people would say "You know what.. you were right!"

I was wrong to think, as I seemed to do 16 years ago, that:

The Australian public is, I think, more robust on the Jihadi terror threat than the media or politicians.

Australia seems even more averse to talking about the real issue. Straight after the Bondi shooting, the mass murder, by a Jihadi father & son team, of 16  random Jews celebrating Hanukkah on the beach, the government of Anthony Albanese blamed "right wing elements" and "guns". Nothing about radical Islam. Nothing. 

When ex-PM Scott Morrison, a man I've not much time for, by the way, suggests that Islamic leaders, the preachers in the mosques, should take some responsibility for de-radicalising their flocks, he is roundly smeared by the Lebanese Muslim community. In an article that is pretty much 100% ad hominem. No facing of the issue. No arguing with the points ScoMo made. No, just smear his record and irrelevant issues. Deny and Deflect, iow. All supported by the luvvies, the fellow travellers, the appeasers, the "don't scapegoat Muslims" crowd at the ABC and elsewhere in the media. I'm going to be done with this earth soon-ish. But my kids and grandkids? What about them? Will they be living in an Islamic society? If so, I feel for them, for that is a pinched and crabbed society. One where noone can achieve their full potential. 

The UN Human Rights Report has all the Islamic countries right at the very bottom of their table. Islamic countries are always at the bottom of tables of Women empowerment. They are at the bottom of tables of Press Freedom.... I could go on, but it's just too dreary. Just too dreary now much Islamic countries fail. And yet how much they demand to be the sole power running things. 

16 years ago I headlined the post "The Aussie Jihadis". Now I label this one "The Aussie Appeasers". 

For it seems the Appeasers are more to the front than ever, while the Aussie Jihadis are just blending into the background, avoiding all direct responsibility for the rabid anti-semitism, the outright murder of Jews, that's been happening since then, ever more horridly and violently anti-Jew, since October 7. 

What's happening to China's population?

Source: China National Bureau of Statistics

There was a time we worried about population explosions. Now we worry about population extinction. 

China was the main culprit of population explosion. Until it wasn't. 

The latest figures for 2025 are available, from China's own National Bureau of Statistics. The number of births in China in 2025, is down to the level that China last had in 1727... 300 years ago in the Qing Dynasty. 

Imagine! Population births barely matching the number from three centuries ago...

What does this mean for the future?

Google Gemini:

After peaking at over 1.42 billion in 2021, current forecasts project that China's population will shrink by over 100 million people by 2050. By the end of the century, China's population may dwindle to less than 800 million, with more dire scenarios putting the figure at less than 500 million.

That's an issue that geopolitical analysts have to consider. As I'm sure they are. What it means for world peace, for example, is something. But What? More peaceful or less peaceful? Could be either, IMO. 

Population-wise, things are even more dire in places like South Korea. At its current under replacement rate, in three generations, Korea will have only 3% of its population today. That's the extinction of a whole country. 

Women across the world are choosing not to have children. 

Lucy Biggers Blows-up Brainwashed Bollocks….

	Lucy Biggers ⁦‪@LLBiggers‬⁩ I spent half of my 20s as a brainwashed climate activist. This is the story of how I changed my mind and became a climate realist. pic.x.com/E54Fh9oEjb   27/1/2026, 11:01 pm

Bloodletting in the Beijing Barracks. (Metaphorical, of course)

Imagine in the United States if Donald Trump purged ("you're fired!") 6 of the 8 members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Imagine! 

It would be massive news and provoke intense commentary. 

The Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) normally has 8 members: Chairman, Vice Chairman, plus the chiefs of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, and National Guard Bureau.

Purging 6 of 8 (leaving just Chairman + one other) would gut the top uniformed advisory body, creating a leadership vacuum unprecedented in modern US history.This would trigger:Wall-to-wall media coverage (CNN, Fox, NYT, etc.) framing it as politicization, instability, or authoritarian move.

Outrage from retired generals/admirals, Congress (bipartisan hearings likely), think tanks, and allies questioning US military readiness/apolitical tradition.
Comparisons to historical purges (e.g., Stalin's or recent foreign examples), plus domestic alarms over civilian-military balance.

The Dems would for certain attempt version #24,289 of "Impeach Trump".

Stock market dips, recruitment worries, and international signals of weakness.Even smaller recent firings (e.g., Chairman + a few others in 2025) drew huge backlash, condemnation from ex-officials, and "purge" headlines. A 6/8 wipeout would be exponentially louder—potentially a constitutional crisis-level event. 

Now... 

Imagine that the same thing just happened in China. 

No need to imagine! It just did. 

China's president, Xi Jinping is the head of the China Military Commission, which has 6 others, for a total of 7. These are the equivalent of the JCS in America. Xi purged four of the seven up to last week. And last week purged that most senior of them, general Zhang Youxia, an old comrade of Xi's, and the son of Xi's own father's best mate during the Revolutionary War against the Japanese and then against the Nationalists, that they eventually drove out to Taiwan in 1949, to establish the People's Republic of China. 

So this is a huge deal. 

But the coverage of it is slim. Mainly because that's the way China rocks. It doesn't talk about such stuff. Neither in China, nor in the international media. 

In China there's been zero coverage. In the west, also close to zero coverage. Of course, you can find discussion of it, in parts of the legacy media, and even more on social media. But you have to look for it. 

One commenter summary: 

It's major news in foreign policy/security circles (especially US, Asia-Pacific watchers), with dozens of articles and expert takes in the last 72 hours, but not dominating mainstream headlines like a US equivalent might—due to China's opacity and controlled domestic silence. The story underscores Xi's consolidation but highlights PLA vulnerabilities.

One big question is:

What does this mean for Taiwan? Does it make a China invasion of its "renegade province" more or less likely? 

The very first legacy media analysis I saw, Sky News, reckoned that it made the likelihood MORE likely. 

I'm not so sure. I reckon a China attack on Taiwan is, for now, somewhat LESS likely. Precisely because of the turmoil. You would not want to attack a well-defended island while your own military is still licking wounds inflicted by decimating its most venerable, most respected older leaders. Would you? 

Of course, what do I know? Pretty much nothing. I didn't get Xi right when he came to power in 2012. I thought he'd be more of the benign collective leadership that had led to his own ascendancy. But no... that's not how it's worked out. 

So I'll just put a few references below, while we keep a close eye on it, and on what's transpiring up north there in Beijing, the "Northern Capital". 

Whatever is going on, if is significant and consequential. 

A few quick references:

• Ex-CIA Official on What Xi Jinping's Purge of Top Chinese General Reveals, Bloomberg Television
• Standoff in Beijing?  Real Talk
• China's top general investigated as Xi continues purge. ABC Australia
• Xi Jinping conducting military purge. Sky News Australia

Democrats used to LOOOVE Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)...

Source of pie chart: Harvard/Harris poll

This is truly insane!

1. No one rioted about prior administrations' deportations.

2. Hundreds of thousands of the illegal immigrants arrested by ICE have criminal convictions in the US (74% of the public supports deporting them).

3. None of this would be necessary if the border hadn't been wide open. (See below).

Regardless of how you feel about ICE, you can logically admit that this is a masterclass in propaganda The legacy media has focused entirely on ICE, rather than four years of a totally open border; or on the insanity of "Sanctuary" policies in Blue administrations. Which strike me as being against the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution, though that discussion is for another day. 

**************

Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama... All of them thought that illegal immigrants should be deported. Obama was known -- fondly! -- as the "Deporter-in-Chief":

These are direct quotes. Taken from confirmed videos 
of each of these saying these things, repeatedly over the years

All of the fuss and drama and injuries and deaths, happening mainly in Minnesota, but increasingly in other Blue States, are the direct result of Joe Biden letting in millions of immigrants, undocumented (aka: "Illegal"), without any vetting of who they were, where they were from, what sort of criminal history they had. 

Shame on Biden and his enabler-in-chief, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who, by the way, consistently lied about the huge numbers swarming over the border. 

Just look at that chart! What Biden did, while all the time denying it... 

And shame today on the citizens of Blue cities -- principal among them Minneapolis -- making ICE the Bad Guys. Harrassing them. Attacking them. Spitting on them. Calling them the gestapo. They are the ones causing chaos; not Trump who is merely trying to carry out a promise he made consistently on the campaign trail. They are the ones that are getting people killed by interfering with lawful activities of law enforcement officers.  

One could argue, either Dem or Rep, along the lines of "we agree that there should be deporations, but not like this!". They don't like the look of the ways it's being done. But that's only that way in the cities that are resisting ICE activities. In the Red States, where there no "Sancturies", the process is safe and straight forward. It's only because these Blue "Sanctuaries" are resisting every action of ICE that we have the troubles. Which the Left then labels as "chaos". It's only chaos because of them!

ICE are just trying to carry out lawful activity. An activity that Democrats in the past were keen to do. Democrates are OG Hypocrites. 

Crime rates amongst Illegals is at about twice the rate of US citizens:

Illegals or "Undocumented" immigrants in the United States are about 3% of the population, but commit about 6% of the violent crimes. 

This puts paid to the Democrat talking point that "undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes than ordinary Americans". First: not true. Second: even if it were, so what? They are crimes that would not have been committed had they not been in the country illegally in the first place.

Hat-tip to Arthur MacWaters, ex of Princeton and McKinsey.

Communists in America | “Insurrection Barbie”

It Feels Like a Communist Revolution Because It Is: The International Network Behind MN "ICE Out"

Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) 3K likes · 124 replies x.com

Is this neo-McCarthyism? To be worried, again, as we were in the fifties, about "Reds under the beds"? 

Well, no. 

Because then, in the 1950s it was all about individuals who had some connection, past or present, to the Communist Party. Now it's about whole organizations. All of them avowed, self-styled communists, being quite open about their communist sympathies. People like AOC, Jasmine Crockett, Zohran Mamdani… and many more. Members of Socialsts for America, of the organisations in the post above. 

So what? Is it something to fear? 

I say yes it is. This is something to fear. 

From my experience of living in Communist China in the 1970s. Food and clothing was rationed. Why? Because the government was in charge of every single aspect of life, and they're simply not good at running an economy. If one objected to any aspect of this despotism, it was off to Labour camp (劳改) for you! It's a One-Party state, so you can forget your worries about "democracy"… there is none. 

I can't vouch foe every fact in the above paper. But the thrust is correct. The Democratic Party has ,moved so far left, many influential members are outright communists. And proudly so.

Be not proud, friends! Be afraid.  

ADDED: 

• Bill Maher. “Mamdani is a straight-up communist”
• Xi Van Fleet is a refugee from China, in the days I knew it. When it was very Communist. She suffered under communism, as did hundreds of millions. She warns:

I grew up in Communist China. I saw how the CCP exploited their followers and discarded them when no longer useful .

The pattern is the same everywhere. Causes like this depend on useful idiots to rise.

Don’t be one.

 

American deaths at hands of illegals | Avery Daye

	Avery Daye ⁦‪@AveryDaye‬⁩ Preventable tragedies: • Renee Good • Alex Pretti Preventable tragedies: • Brianna Kelson • Karen Diamond • Billy McKellar • Zabar McKellar • Krishaun McKellar • Kason McKellar • Nicole Gregory • Larisha Sharell Thompson • Jimmy Friesenhahn • Ava Moore   25/1/2026, 12:10 pm

(Click above for the full list and full post, with comments)

The critical commenters on this post don't seem to get it. 

Their main argument is along the lines of "American citizens commit more crimes than illegals". Yeah. And so what? 

1. That's true only because there are — still — more American citizens than illegals.

2. Nevertheless, the *rate* of crimes is much higher amongst illegals than amongst American citizens. Figures on this are clear and unequivocal. But Lefties don't seem to understand the difference between "Total" and "Rate". At least, they always use “total” and never use “rate”. Police Chiefs across America and even in very Blue cities like New York say crimes by illegals are "out of control". The rate at which illegals commit crimes, they say, is far higher than regular residents. 

3. These crimes, the deaths listed above, are ADDITIONAL to those that we would have anyway. They are Additional crimes, additional murders, committed by people that are in the country illegally. If the perpetrators of those murder above had not been in the country, all those victims would be alive today. This argument is just silly. ADDED: As Adam Carolla says, it's "retarded".

4. In places that are not "Sanctuary cities" or are Red cities, Red States, there's nothing like the issues we're seeing in solidly Blue states like Minnesota, most of whom self-identity as “Sanctuary”. Cooperating with ICE is in everyone's interest and safety. NOT being a Sanctuary City is measurable better and safer for everyone, including even those being sought for deportation.. 

5. Obama: let's not forget he was the "Deporter in Chief". He gave his then Border Czar, Tom Homan, the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his deportation work. The very same Tom Homan who is Donald Trump's Border Czar! No one on the Left complained about deportations then, or about ICE. Only now.

By the way, I, deliberately using the term "illegal" because that's what they are called in all the legislation. Lefties don't like it, because it doesn't sound nice. They prefer to call them "undocumented" or "Newcomers". The fact remains that they are Illegal. And that overstaying a visa, or entering the United States without a passport or visa, is indeed a *crime*.