Winter on Fire

'Winter on Fire, Ukraine's fight for Freedom', is the title of a documentary directed by Evgeny Afineevsky, an award winning film director, interestingly of Russian descent.
I watched this film a few days ago. It alludes to the 'Euromaidan', the 93 day uprising of the Ukrainians against the elected government's decision not to sign the agreement to join the EU.

Although it's only one side of the coin, it's a precious, detailed reference to that side.
It seems to me that there are two main observations that one can make, without going further into the subsequent conflict between pro Russian separatists, and pro EU Ukrainians, about which the film doesn't go into.

The first observation is that had the police not been authorised to use such extreme brutality, perhaps the demonstrations could have led to constructive negotiations, and consequently Yanukovych could still be the President of Ukraine. The consequences of the 'Euromaidan' are tragic. All more so because they are not particularly constructive.
The second observation is that throughout the demonstrations, immense patriotism was expressed. The national anthem was constantly sung, there was a great deal of waving the national flag. The clergy of divers religions joined together in support of the movement, and there was an enormous surge of national pride.

With regard to the first observation of police brutality, only a reckless fool would have authorised such a shameful, disproportionate and unjustified reaction. One therefore wonders if Yanukovych was betrayed by his own forces of security, or if he was really that desperate and irresponsible to authorise such a ruthless, and often murderous show of force.

Regarding the second observation, it seems to me to be cruelly ironic that whilst the young protestors long for 'European freedom' and reveal their patriotic zeal, the EU appears to be surreptitiously pushing for a nationless federation, using mass immigration of Muslims as an eventual catalyser to bring about what the club seems to believe will be a utopic, cultureless, conformity. And whilst this is being pushed, the freedom that the Ukrainians were ready to die for, is being trampled on by the summary arrest and imprisonment of an individual who dares to criticise what is indeed highly criticisable, and the media is summoned to be silent about it.

In short, whatever tyranny, real or imagined, that the Ukrainians wished to escape from, is apparently being fostered in the very Europe that they long to be a part of.


Text © Mirino. Image and title, with thanks to the author. June, 2018


Today, in a world where one aggressively tries to change natural laws to comply with ephemeral, incoherent ideology, a 'royal wedding' seems so refreshingly sane, and reassuringly comforting. Another moving, monumental, fairy tale in what often appears to be a mundane, unimaginative, over officious, sectarian world.
The French avidly follow such royal celebrations, maybe even more so than the Brits. Could it be a degree of secret compensation for having done away with their own monarchy and aristocracy? Yet ironically, but justifiably, the French are proud of the rich patrimony that the rejected, decapitated, politically incorrect monarchs and aristocrats left to posterity. If certain, partisan, 'history teachers' had their own way however, NapolĂ©on, for another politically incorrect example, would no longer figure in history books either. But Paris wouldn't be Paris without les Invalides, a master piece of French Baroque commissioned by Louis XIV (1643-1715) with its Church decorated with captured flags from the Napoleonic wars, and its military museum. Then there’s the VendĂ´me column of VendĂ´me square commemorating the victory of Austeritz. The bronze covering the column was the bronze of melted down, captured cannons from the same battle. Then of course the Arc
de Triomphe was a fine initiative of Napoléon. Its petit frère is the Arc du Carrousel, also built by Napoléon in 1806. For a period before Napoléon's defeat in 1815, this arch was embellished with the pillaged, Venetian quadriga.
In the early thirteenth century the Venitians claimed the quadriga, probably saving the fine antique Roman sculpture of four horses from being destroyed just for its bronze (or rather copper) during the sack of Constantinople in 1204. The quadriga was returned to la Piazza San Marco soon after Napoléon's defeat, and no doubt it's just as well.
L’Arc du Carrousel was originally the entrance of le Palais des Tuileries which was unfortunately destroyed during la Commune in 1871. La Place de la Concorde, with its colonnade de la Madeleine was also originally commissioned by NapolĂ©on. Another Napoleonic site is le Château de la Malmaison located towards the west of Paris. It was the home of Empress JosĂ©phine, the first wife of NapolĂ©on.
There are, of course, many fine châteaux in la Vallée de la Loire.
Perhaps the most famous, prestigious, and symbolique French Château is that of Versailles of Louis XIV. It was expanded in 1661 and finally completed in 1715.

Naturally most nations pride their monuments and great architecture that reflect so well their history. Compared to the 'old continent', American recorded history seems limited, although there is evidence of Norse or Viking incursions to North America, without considering the vast, elusive, spiritual history of tribal Indians.
European awareness of America began towards the end of the 15th century (1492), but it wasn't until the early seventeenth century that successful colonialism was established. From then on the history of North America is epic, with world wide influence.

All this to underline how regressive and ignorant it is to try to erase history by destroying edifices and monuments for ephemeral, ideological motives. This obviously includes the American commemorative monuments of the civil war.
The Taliban had nothing better to do than try to destroy the Buddhas of Bamiyan, 4th and 5th century monumental statues of Gautam Buddha carved into the side of a massive rock face in the Bamyan valley in central Afghanistan. Similarly ISIS destroyed, amongst other historic gems, priceless Etruscan base reliefs, as if history had no value, or as if it had to start over again, as decreed by regressive idiots.

Despite the wealth of historic evidence that supports the Israeli claim of authentic heritage, never have the Israelis dismissed the rights of the Palestinians. This was proved by the Jewish authorities acceptance of the UN proposals of 1947. Proposals that were categorically rejected, not by the Palestinians, but by the Arab League.
An intelligent Palestinian would know that one can contribute in forging history, and in commemorating historic events, simply by planting orchards of fruit trees, or by lovingly caring for one's garden. No one can forge history by trying to erase it, or by blundering about burning used tyres.

Text © Mirino. (Photo of the Quadriga by Irving GFM with thanks). May, 2018


J'ai fait allusion à cela avant, (Colour) et voilà qu'à nouveau il y a quelques jours ce mois ci on a eu une coupure assez importante d'électricité. Un peu plus de deux jours. Assez de temps lorsqu'il fait zéro degré dehors à 1200 m d'altitude dans les Alpes Maritimes, pour nous plonger rudement dans l'obscurité froide, et aussi on dirait, dans le Moyen-Age. On va à la cave chercher du bois et des pommes de pins avec la lampe de l'IPhone en espérant qu'il reste assez de charge de batterie. Et on patiente. On n'a pas de choix.

Mais encore une fois on se rend compte à quel point la vie d'aujourd'hui dépend totalement sur la fourniture d'électricité. On est quasi perdu sans courant. Je ne pouvais pas écrire ceci sur mon IPad. Il n'y a plus de communications avec le monde, plus d'informations vraies ou fausses, plus d'ordinateur, de WIFI, de Netflix, de FB, de TV, de radio, de frigo, de congélateur, de chaudière.

Si on a le gaz, on retrouve les vieux moyens pour faire le café matinal. Les toasts se font grâce au feu de la cheminée, et petit à petit, on arrive quand même à se débrouiller, à condition stricte qu'une telle situation pénible, ne dure pas trop longtemps.
Regardant dehors pendant la nuit, c'est bizarre de ne plus voir aucune lumière nulle part. On pense aux Yazidis, obligés de vivre ainsi dans des tentes depuis des lustres, malgré le dévouement humanitaire exemplaire de l'ONU, n'est ce pas.

Les habitudes chères sont brutalement interrompues, et on est confrontés avec soi même. Ce n'est pas une expérience négative, même si c'est facile d'être 'philosophe' si de tels inconvénients ne durent pas trop longtemps. On peut toujours se persuader que bien volontairement on met tout dans une perspective réelle ou essentiellement naturelle, comme les bien pensants écologistes, pourvu que la pénurie d'eau chaude, de la machine à laver, et du WIFI box, etc., etc., ne dépasse pas trois jours au maximum..

Text and images © Mirino. April, 2018


Equity, apart from its financial sense, means 'justice according to natural law or right, free from bias or favouritism'. As such it might have less politically negative connotations than ‘equality’ which, rejected by the laws of nature, belongs more to revolutionary dreams of Utopia.
'Wealth inequality' can therefore only be a socialist term. If everyone in the world were 'equally' poor, would there then be no problem? If everyone were equally rich, wealth would be as meaningless as it in fact is, without a constructive cause that furthers the general interests of mankind.

As Thatcher said, there is no freedom without economic freedom.
Today, economic reality is that those who from their own efforts create a prosperous enterprise, naturally create employment and wealth not only for a nation, but eventually for the whole world. Those who are encouraged to covet and destroy the results of other people's efforts, for example the South African anarchists who destroy the farms of 'whites' and evict them with impunity, only create a desert of misery and more poverty. Thus everyone would end up being equally poor. Marxism proved to be a failed ideology, because irrevocably it leads to economic stagnation and poverty, equal, conform, poverty.

Most of the above was a FB comment. I add it here, because it's pertinent to the point I hope to  elaborate on. Since no proof has come to light of Russian meddling in the last US Presidential elections (unlike the blatant, public meddling of Obama in the USA, the UK, and France) Soros and his lackeys are now trying to blame the social media. It would be like blaming the elements, or material things for destroying human life. Abortion destroys human life. What is the difference between killing a perfectly healthy, unborn child, and doing away with someone older by pointing a gun at him or her and pulling the trigger?

Maybe March madness should therefore include the 'March for Our Lives'. The young protesters are convinced that if worthy and responsible Americans hand in their guns, the USA will be a safer place to live in. Without considering the 2nd amendment of the US constitution, logic, reality, and recorded examples would prove them to be naively wrong.
The hypocrisy of blaming things instead of criminals, is highlighted when the 'March for Our Lives' doesn't include the murder of unborn human life.
According to the politically correct agenda, that young people today seem to be conditioned to fully adhere to, even late term abortion is a woman's 'right'. But this radically cancels out the notion of 'equality', and obviously life itself.
If the majority of these young protesters had been equally subject to late term abortion, for example, had they been dissected with surgical instruments, and their organs sold, wouldn't protesting against private gun ownership be a far more pointless consideration?

In view of this, (for part of the 'agenda' is the absurd belief that unborn babies don't qualify to benefit from 'equal rights'. According to some they have no rights whatsoever) the 'March for Our Lives' is more a politically motivated demonstration, than a thoughtful solution to save lives and reduce or deter homicidal crime in the USA.
If it were judged that firearms had no effect in reducing or deterring crime, then the police themselves should also be disarmed. Then why not disarm the military on the false assumption that it would generally prevent war? This would give absolute free rein to criminals and international terrorists to do as they please, and in whatever way, wherever and whenever. In fact we have seen how often Islamic radicals have used lorries and smaller vehicles to crush innocent people to death. The death toll (85) in Nice, France, for example, could have been greatly reduced had someone been armed and able to shoot the rabid, truck driving maniac. It also goes without saying that death and destruction caused by suicide bombing can be far greater and certainly immediate, than that caused by automatic firearms. And finally why insist on disarming innocent, responsible civilians, when criminals can always procure whatever arm they consider suitable for whatever crime they wish to carry out, in any case?

The agenda, however is a growing, poisonous mushroom. The confiscation of firearms, and late term abortion are only two aspects of what certain sectarians are trying to impose in the USA and elsewhere. Denaturing gender is another aspect. The younger generations already seem to be brainwashed into believing that gender is just as much, if not more, a choice than it is a natural condition. Words such as 'transsexual', would never be used fifty years ago. But today the program insists on the idea that there is no longer any exceptions to the rule. Everything and anything goes. One can be what one wants. It’s ‘normal'. Surgery takes care of the rest, if deemed necessary.
The argument that babies adopted by two loving fathers is just as acceptable as babies adopted by a normal loving couple, has been validated, even though logic would decree that if parents establish the norm, then history is likely to repeat itself in the former case.

The agenda is such that homosexuals who, having benefitted from normal, parental love and acceptance, are against the adoption of children by homosexual couples, are never given the opportunity to express their valuable opinions by the msm. They would be crossing the agenda's red line of political correctness.

Russophobia is also politically correct. Any nation that rejects the agenda can only be an enemy of ‘progress,’ including the long term program of which ‘cultureless identity' also seems to be the objective. In contrast, Islamophobia is a heinously criminal, offensive, totally unjustifiable attitude, because mass Muslim immigration is believed to be the essential catalyser that will eventually bring about ‘cultureless identity’ in Terra nullius.

The banker divinities' fatal miscalculation that Utopia, a peaceful, harmoniously conform, international society can only be the result of such long, concerted, extravagant efforts, when natural reality overrules the irresponsible whims of burnt out multibillionaires. Progress is obviously cancelled out by bellicose regression. In Dystopia one can never reach the stars.

Text © Mirino. (Image by Todd Heisler/The New York Times, with thanks).
March, 2018  

Sunshine and snow

Yesterday morning walking Cayden, there were indeed flakes of snow lit by sunlight as they danced about in the gusts of cold wind. This made me ponder yet again, on the pretentiousness, hypocrisy and charlatanism of those trying to exploit 'climate change'. The term 'climate change' has sneakily substituted that of 'global warming', because 'climate change' is naturally indisputable, whereas 'global warming' is far less evident, certainly at this present time, even in the south of Europe. A parallel could be the changing of the term- 'refugees' to 'migrants'. The waves of young invaders to Europe are indisputably migrants, whereas it's far less evident that they are refugees.

In its epic, climatic history of 4,543 billion years, the Earth has been subject to five major ice ages (the Huronian, Cryogenian, Andean-Saharan, and the actual Quaternary glaciation). Apart from these ages of which we are in an 'interglacial period', (the Holocene, of the ice-age which began 2.6 million years ago) studies reveal that the Earth had been free of ice, even at high altitudes.

In contrast, one of the warmest of the geologic periods is known as the Neoproterozoic. This occurred between 600,000,000 and 800,000,000 years ago. Another 'hot age' is one geologists call the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, which came about approximately 56 million years ago.

However, such 'heatwave ages' were nothing compared to the early 'Hadean' (like Hades, or Hell) periods when the solar system was unsettled. Intense heat was caused by the Earth colliding with other huge meteorites and even small planets as large as Mars. Such a phenomenon is thought to have caused the creation of the Moon. It is estimated that the Earth's temperature following the birth of the moon was as high as 2,300 Kelvin or 2,027 Centigrade.

Man came on the terrestrial scene approximately 200,000 years ago, at a more accommodating period. In relation to the age of planet Earth, this period represents the following fraction :  1/22,715,000.

Although there is no feasible explanation regarding the origin of mankind, it took him (and certainly her) some time, but only an instant in terms of universal time, to evolve to the point of being able to reason, sometimes quite positively. This drive to enlightenment pushed him (or her) to begin to record annual temperatures in limited locations, let's say, for example, in Rotherham or Sutton Coldfield, UK. This began as long ago as 1836. This means that such annual temperature and climate records pertaining to such limited locations have been kept for a staggering duration of 182 years.

If man (or woman) assumes that this is enough time to reach an unequivocable conclusion that man is responsible for whatever climate change, or climate 'abnormalities', or 'global warming', etc., then one can only surmise that man (or woman) still needs a fair amount of time to continue his and her evolution, also in order to develop more positively his/her/its faculties of reasoning.

 If one were less pretentious, or less eager to exploit the gullible, the polluters, (those who can't afford an electric car, or who don't live in area where such a car can be easily recharged) one might limit one's affirmations regarding climate change simply to their existence, and not to any ridiculous assertion that man, women and transgender nondescript minorities are responsible, taxable, ignoble, polluting, climate criminals.

Indeed, climates change constantly. Tomorrow will not be exactly like today in any region or square mile. Every day is unique, another pattern of the eternal, cosmic kaleidoscope.

Climates change, and it's just as well. Universal law sees to that. We could try to revive faith in Almighty Power. We might try to appreciate our insignificance in relation to the magnificent universal order of things. People who exercise such sincere faith and humility are more often rewarded for their efforts. They are far more conscious of reality, simply because they are nearer to the Earth, unlike others who take themselves for Gods, with their sanctimonious heads in the clouds.

Those endowed with modesty and common sense also know that nature, or Almighty Power, always has the last word. And there's absolutely nothing humanity, including the multibillionaire, self-proclaimed divinities, can do about it.

Text and images © Mirino. (Information from various sources, with thanks). February, 2018


Angela Dorothea Kasner was born in Hamburg in July, 1954.
She was the eldest of Horst and Herlind Kasner's three children. Their father was a Lutheran Pastor who, having received his Pastorate in Perleberg, moved the family there in East Germany, long before the reunification of 1990.
After qualifying in quantum chemistry in 1986, and working as a research scientist until 1989, Angela Merkel ('Merkel' from her first marriage) became increasingly taken by politics following the 1989 revolutions. Evidently she succeeded brilliantly in this field.
The religious and geopolitical background could explain reasonably enough her concern for the plight of 'refugees'. Nevertheless one is always free to query her motives.

Since the July, 2016 article of the Independent, levels of contention regarding immigration in Germany have gradually risen. In updated 11/9/2017, deportations of migrants, opposed by the 'greens', are, at least to some extent, reported to have begun.
The Bild, however, reported that the German authorities ‘lost track’ of 30,000 rejected, asylum seekers. In November, 2017 the newspaper stressed that it had received more than 20,000 responses demanding immediate deportation of all rejected, asylum seekers.

Quora puts the question to Germans. Those who think it’s a redeemingly noble cause, seem totally oblivious of certain realities.
No one refers to the plight of the neglected and persecuted Yazidis, Kurds, Christians and Copts. No one raises the question of why preference is given to Muslims, the majority of which are young, healthy males, many with smart phones, who look as though they are coming on an all expenses paid, European vacation. Too many of them can never qualify as refugees in any case.
The majority of the German population seem to be unaware of the fact that the Koranic decrees of Medina literally grant licence to ‘devout’ Muslims to intimidate 'infidels' and perpetrate evil, for the sake of the Islamic cause. The objective would be to gradually, generally impose Islam.

In December, 2016, Merkel admitted that ‘multiculturalism’ is a sham. Yet she wants to believe that communities can live happily, side by side. The large Turkish community in Germany (allegedly more than four million) might prove that this is indeed possible. But then why are the Turkish 
authorities, if not the majority of the nation's Muslim population, unwilling to accept the presence of other cultures in Turkey? Why do the Turks seem obsessed with waging war on them wherever they can find them?

What would appear to be a German illusion that being generous and kind to the crocodile will eventually change its nature for the better, is a fallacy that only naive fools would believe. To continue to allow naive fools to govern a nation, if not lead Europe, would be far too irresponsible and risky. But as Angela Merkel is an intelligent person, and certainly not a naive fool, surely there must be other reasons that will eventually, no doubt, come to light.


Text and image © Mirino. February, 2018