Lex Anteinternet: State of American Men 2025

Lex Anteinternet: State of American Men 2025:   

State of American Men 2025

 State of American Men 2025

Well worth reading.

Lex Anteinternet: I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Rand to you.

Lex Anteinternet: I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Ra...: 

I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Rand to you.

I hope you don’t have friends who recommend Ayn Rand to you. The fiction of Ayn Rand is as low as you can get re fiction. I hope you picked it up off the floor of the subway and threw it in the nearest garbage pail. She makes Mickey Spillane look like Dostoevsky.

Flannery O'Connor

Lex Anteinternet: Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week...

Lex Anteinternet: Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week...: 

Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case

Extension denial leaves Wyoming ranch owner a week to convince SCOTUS to hear corner crossing case: Eshelman has until July 16 to state why the court should consider the corner-crossing conflict between public access to public land and private property rights.

Rancher owner?

Well, yes, he owns a ranch.  But a working owner he is not.  He's a pharmaceutical industry titan. 

In a more just society, frankly, he wouldn't own the ranch at all.  It'd be owned by those who actually derived a living from it.

Also of interest, Iron Bar Holdings, the petitioner, is represented by Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP of Denver, with Robert Reeves Anderson as counsel of record.  The respondent is represented by a local Wyoming firm.  I note this as there's no reason that the common attorney bullshit claim "I'm only doing my job" really ought to hold, for civil litigation.  If you run into a Colorado attorney in Wyoming, ask them who they work for.  if they work for this outfit, tell them to go home, we don't want them here.

For that matter, if you are a Colorado user of public lands, as they want to take part of what you own, there's no reason to accommodate them with a seat at the table, literally.  "Want a cup of coffee sir?  Drive to Texas. . . ."

At the trial court level, Iron Bar had been represented by Gregory Weisz, who is a Wyoming attorney.  He's left private practice and is with the AG now.  A lawyer with his firm took his place, but the case was well developed by then, and in the appeal stage, so they really had no choice.

So, what am I saying.  Well, I'm saying that people who don't derive their income principally form a ranch, ought not to own it.  And I'm saying that by representing carpetbaggers, you are a carpetbagger.  The old lawyer bromides about serving the system are BS.  Regular people, including other lawyers, don't have to excuse your choice of clients when you are taking on a plaintiff.  It's not like being assigned a defendant.

Lex Anteinternet: Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 96th edition. The Epstein Files.

Lex Anteinternet: Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 96th edition. The Eps...: 

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 96th edition. The Epstein Files.

“In brief, my lord, we both descried

(For then I stood by Henry’s side)

The Palmer mount, and outwards ride,

Upon the earl’s own favourite steed:

All sheathed he was in armour bright,

And much resembled that same knight,

Subdued by you in Cotswold fight:

Lord Angus wished him speed.”

The instant that Fitz-Eustace spoke,

A sudden light on Marmion broke:

“Ah! dastard fool, to reason lost!”

He muttered; “’Twas nor fay nor ghost

I met upon the moonlight wold,

But living man of earthly mould.

O dotage blind and gross!

Had I but fought as wont, one thrust

Had laid De Wilton in the dust,

My path no more to cross.

How stand we now?—he told his tale

To Douglas; and with some avail;

’Twas therefore gloomed his ruggéd brow.

Will Surrey dare to entertain,

’Gainst Marmion, charge disproved and vain?

Small risk of that, I trow.

Yet Clare’s sharp questions must I shun;

Must separate Constance from the nun—

Oh, what a tangled web we weave,

When first we practise to deceive!

A Palmer too!—no wonder why

I felt rebuked beneath his eye:

I might have known there was but one

Whose look could quell Lord Marmion.”

Marmion, Sir Walter Scott.

The reason that late procurer Jeffrey Epstein remains in the news is that the Republicans made the "Epstein files" a big deal.

That's the only reason.

I don't believe that Trump had Epstein murdered.  I don't believe the really bizarre conspiracy theory that the Clintons did either.  Even at the time that was asserted, however, I thought that it made a lot more sense that Trump would have offed Epstein than the Clintons, but I don't believe that either happened.  

Epstein and Trump knew each other, and that association (I don't know if Trump has any actual friends at all, I somewhat doubt it) was more than casual.  Epstein claimed to know that Trump liked to screw the wives of Trump's "friends" and that he first had carnal knowledge of Melania aboard the Lolita Express.  At least based on what is out there, Epstein never claimed that Trump dabbled with the underaged.  Trump did claim that Epstein like women "on the younger side", which can mean a variety of things.  Author Michael Wolff  claimed that Epstein claimed he had photos of Trump with topless "young women" sitting on his lap, which again doesn't mean they were underaged.

There have been, however, some accusations, and that's what they are, accusations, that went beyond that.  "Katie Johnson" claimed that she was raped by Trump in association with Epstein.  Was she?  How would we know, the suits were never advanced, and the allegations are so extreme that there's plenty of reason to question them.

And other women claimed they were abused by Trump, while teenagers, on Epstein's island.

But still, all of this may just prove what we already know.  Trump can be proven to be a creep, but that doesn't mean he's a pedophile, if the women's claims are disregarded (which generally, we tend not to do with accusatrices).

Having said that, there's the smoke and fire matter.  People related rumors about the Hefner mansion for years before the full truth of its horrors were told after his death.  Hefner was a rapist, under the current definition, based on what one of his female house guests related to have witnesses in terms of compelled sex.  James Brown was violent towards women there.  Bill Cosby, who turned out to be a rapist, frequented it.

Can you really have an island dedicated to sexual trafficking and not descend into rape?  Can you really circluate underaged girls and not have them compelled into sex? 

During Biden's administration, the populist far right, which got ahead of Trump in its conspiracy theories, whipped itself into a frenzy with the belief that Democrats were a secret cabal of pedophiles, and that the Epstein Files would reveal a vast number of important Democrats who were involved .  As soon as the files were released, we were told, the lid was going to be off this horrific discovery.  Trumpite figures adopted releasing the Epstein files as one of the things they were going to do.

After the election, Pam Bondi did in fact release part of the FBI files on Epstein, which is seemingly now forgotten even by Bondi.  She claimed she had an Epstein client list on her desk that she was reviewing, with the information set to be released.

Now the list is lost, or maybe never existed.

Hmmm. . . 

Well, if a list existed, it's being hidden, and given the way the Trumpites approached this, there's real reason to wonder why.  They cried for the information, it didn't get released if there was a list, and it should be.  Is it lost?

If it is, how did that happen?

We're also told a list never existed, and it might not have.  That would have been smart for Epstein, and Epstein was no dummy.  How much of a list would he have needed?

Well, maybe some sort of list.  Knowing the high rollers being supplied with teenage girls would, I suppose, perhaps be easy enough, but you'd think you'd write this stuff down for self protection if nothing else.

All of which fuels more conspiracy theories.

Chances are there was no client list.  Epstein probably packed a list of perverts around in his head.  Probably most of the girls he supplied were young, but not underaged, probably. 

But now, we'll never really know.

What we do know is that somebody was lying.  Bondi, for example, either had a list and "lost" it, or she never had one.  Others who suggested there was all sorts of smoking gun material that would come to light, if they didn't lie, were in the neighborhood of lies.

But then, Trump has lied so often that people have become numb to it.

Gary Hart had to drop out of the 1988 Presidential election when an affair he engaged in, involving a boat called Monkey Business, came to light.

My, how our standards have fallen.

Last edition.

Cliffnotes of the Zeitgeist, 95th edition. Making us a more barbaric society.

Labels: Barbarians, Crime, Immigration, mehr Mensch sein, Modernity Is Barbarism, Sudan, The Second Trump Administration, Zeitgeist

Lex Anteinternet: A 2025 Independence Day reflection.

Lex Anteinternet: A 2025 Independence Day reflection.: 

A 2025 Independence Day reflection.

I wasn't going to post a July 4th item this year, as I frankly feel pretty pessimistic about the state of the country.  But after reading some, I thought I ought to.

Independence Day marks, of course, the day 249 years ago when the Continental Congress declared the United States to be independent of the United Kingdom, which had founded the colonies.  It took over a year of pitched combat for Congress to reach that point.  What's really important about it, however, is not so much that the United Colonies declared independence from the mother country, but that it did it democratically and formed a democratic republic immediately.  Indeed, the country was acting as a democratic republic before it actually formed one officially.

From the very onset, the United States was a democracy.  I'll occasionally hear somebody who doesn't grasp that or understand it say "we're not a democracy, we're a republic".  That statements, which indeed was made by our serving Congress woman, shows a lack of understanding on what a democracy and a republic are.  We most definitely are a democracy, and always have been.

The initial structure of the country that was arrived upon by the founders of the country featured a very strong congress and a phenomenally weak president.  The US Constitution, it should be noted, is the country's second, not first, constitution.  The first one that featured that structure was the Articles of Confederation  It was John Hanson, not George Washington, who fulfilled the role of President at first.

The Articles didn't work well, but notable in them is that right from the onset the country was that, a country.  Some people will also occasionally claim that at first we were thirteen countries. That's nonsense.  We were, in fact, a putative country even before the Declaration of Independence, with the initial hope being that the country would be a union of fourteen, not thirteen, colonies.  The reluctance of the Quebecois to throw in with the virulently protestant colonies to their sound quashed that dream, with it setting the continuing tone that Canada wants nothing to do with being in the United States of America.  Nothing.

The Constitution of the US set us on an ongoing path which gives real concern to conservatives such as myself.  Right from the debate on the document there was a struggle between those who wanted to retain a weak national government and strong state governments.  States were, in fact, amazingly unrestrained in their powers early on.  In contrast, there were those who wanted a strong federal government and weak state governments.  The Federalist position, which was the more practical and realistic, ultimately won out, and it would have no matter what.  Even those who opposed Federalism found that they used its powers by necessity when they were in power.

That created, however, a structure in which the country converted the President of the Congress into the President of the United States.  Lacking a king, but remembering the model, the President occupied a position that vaguely recalled the monarch, in contrast to the British example in which the chief executive of the nation was and is a member of Parliament.  This worked well for a very long time, but it did put the US in a situation in which there existed a real possibility of a slow transfer of power to an executive divorced of the legislature.  

Indeed, expansion of executive power occurred nearly immediately.  It took a big jump during the Civil War, again by necessity, and it jumped again in the 20th Century.  Theodore Roosevelt expanded it as it suited his vigorous mindset.  Woodrow Wilson expanded it due to the Great War.  Franklin Roosevelt expanded it due to the emergency of the Great Depression and then World War Two.  Following World War Two the powers already expanded were thought normal, and again the Cold War seemed to make their retention necessary.  A President commited the country to a largescale war for the first time in the nation's history without a declaration of war when Truman sent forces into Korea.  This repeated itself when Johnson did the same with Vietnam.

Indeed, the disaster of the Vietnam War and the legacy of the Korean War caused Congress to attempt to claw back power with the War Powers Act.  The corruption of Richard Nixon resulted in Congress asserting its power as well.  But by the late 1960s the Democratic Party has also accommodated itself to revision of the national organic document, the Constitution, by a Supreme Court that simply made stuff up.  That accomodation started the development of the Democratic Party simply sitting on its hands and letting the courts rule to a large degree.  The Court became sort of an odd co chief executive, with the most egregious example being the absurd decision of Roe v. Wade, at least up until its progeny, Obergefell v. Hodges.

Abuses in the law, with Obergefell being the final example, and a Congress that simply accommodated itself to not really doing anything gave rise to the angered muddled populist far right, and the angry intellectual National Conservatives, the latter of which realised that the former was a plow mule that it could do its work with.  National Conservatives basically abandoned the concept of an expansive democracy in favor of a much more limited culturally correct one and took advantage of, and are taking advantage of, a chief executive whose mind is mush but whose ego is titanic.  They see him, effectively, as a "Red Caesar".

In the meantime, Mitch McConnell's Supreme Court began to hurl back to Congress the powers that it had dumped on the courts like city people dumping kittens on farms.  A Congress used to yapping but not doing anything was not prepared to exercise power once again, and very obviously still is not.  Much of what the Roberts Supreme Court has done in recent years really isn't radical at all, but its suddenly getting there, making decisions which are difficult not to view as seeking to empower the chief executive.

We can't tell where this will end up, and hence the pessimism. We may very well be in an era in which, when we look back a decade more hence, we will see a revived Congress that resumed its proper role, and a diminished Presidency, that's returned to its, even if that looks like something from, perhaps, the 1960s or 1970s.  Or we may seen an ineffective Congress and a nation ruled by a successor Red Ceasar who has more in common with Victor Orban than George Washington.

Perhaps we should be encouraged by the fact that the country has weathered previous existential threads to its democratic nature.  The War of 1812 presented one when a large portion of the country wanted nothing to do with the declared war and thought about leaving the infant nation.  The Mexican War saw something similar, and the Civil War, in which half the territory of the country attempted to leave in order to keep a large percentage of its population in chains.  World War One sparked further crises when it became unclear what the President's powers were in regard to a foreign war, and following the war the country acted wholly illegally towards those on the radical left.  During the Depression a right wing threat to the nation caused a putative coup to develop, the news of which was then suppressed.  Deep Communist penetration of the government in the 1930s and 1940s, was covered up in the 1950s and the reputation of the Congressman exposing it forever trashed, something his lack of restraint aided in.  The disaster of the Vietnam War and the following horror of Watergate caused many to feel that democracy in the US was dying.

Of course, we've never had a figure like Trump  before make it into the Oval Office.  The closest we've ever had to that was Jefferson Davis, in the Confederate White House, who at least was more genteel.  Huey Long was much like Trump, but of course he did not replace Franklin Roosevelt.

Still, there is reason for optimism.  Trump is not a popular figure.  He's wrecking conservatism which conservatives will have a hard time overcoming in the remainder of my lifetime, but there are signs that his bolt is now shot, in spite of his budget bill.  So much political capital was spent on that that it will bring the Democrats into power in Congress in 2026. They'll have to act like a Congress at that time.  Repairing the damage will take time, but perhaps not as much time as might be feared.  The populists may have done the country a favor by peeling back the lazy ineffectiveness of the pre 2016 Congress, and the National Conservatives may be doing the country a favor by restoring some of the basic elements of conservatism. They're both damaging the country enormously by being inhumane.

When the reign of the Red Ceasar ends, and I think that will be by this time next year, maybe  Congress will go back to its proper role and the gutless cowards of the GOP who have allowed this to occur will be retired in disgrace.  The country got over the Civil War.  There's hope it can get over this.

Lex Anteinternet: Tuesday, July 3, 1945. Don't use the Bomb.

Lex Anteinternet: Tuesday, July 3, 1945. Don't use the Bomb.: 

Tuesday, July 3, 1945. Don't use the Bomb.

The first draft of a letter by Manhattan Project scientists urging that the Atomic Bomb not be used was circulated.  Hungarian physicist and biologist Leo Szilard was the scrivener.

This version was not sent, as a new one was worked on in order to secure additional signatures.

This is the second such example of such a letter, the other one from Robert Oppenheimer, that I've posted in recent days.  Clearly something was really going on inside the Manhattan Project itself at this time, and what that was, was a debate on whether to use the bomb or not.

Frankly, the views expressed above comport with my own.  Using the bomb was 1) a huge mistake, and 2) deeply immoral in how it was targeted.

It's interesting, however, that this debate broke out at this point.

That the atom could be split and that it could be done in such away that the massive release of energy would result in a huge blast had been known, albeit theoretically, for some time.  The knowledge did not come about during the war itself, but before it.

The war, however, created an enormous imperative to work the physical problems of constructing a bomb out, in large part out of the fear the Axis would get there first.

The Western Allies, the Germans, and the Japanese all had atomic weaponry programs, although its typically forgotten that the Japanese were working on this as well. The German program was enormously feared.

The German program was also enormously hampered by Nazi racism, as it had the impact of causing Jewish scientists, such as the Hungarian Leo Szilard to flee for their lives.  They weren't alone in this, however, as generally the highly educated class of men that were in the field of physics weren't really keen on fascism overall.  Germany had some top flight scientists, of course, but many of the best minds in science in Europe had left or put themselves out of serious research work if they remained. Some of those who remained in Europe and were subject to the Germans somewhat doddled in their efforts in order to retard the advancement of the efforts.

Japan had a program, as noted, and it had some excellent physicists. Their problem here, however, was much like that of the Japanese war effort in chief.  Japan was so isolated that it had nobody else to draw from.

In contrast, the US effort was nearly global in extent, as the US drew in all the great minds, in one way or another, who were not working for the Germans or Japanese, which was most of the great minds in the field.

At any rate, moral qualms about using the bomb didn't really start to emerge until very late in the war, and not really until after Germany had surrendered.  Nearly everyone working on the Manhattan Project imagined it as producing a bomb to be used against Germany.  Japan wasn't really considered.

And there's good reasons for that. For one thing, it was feared that Germany, not Japan, would produce a nuclear weapon and there was no doubt that Germany would use it if they did.  Given that, producing a bomb, and using it first, had a certain element of logic to it.  Destroy them, the logic was, before they can do that to us.

Working into that, it should be noted, was the decay in the resistance to the destructiveness of war that had started to set in during World War One.  The US had gone to war, in part, over a moral reaction to the Germans sinking civilian ships.  By World War Two there was no moral aversion to that at all and unrestricted submarine warfare was just considered part of war.

The Germans had also introduced terror bombing of cities during the Great War, engaging in it with Zeppelins.  Long range artillery had shelled Paris in the same fashion.  Between the wars it was largely assumed that cities would be targeted simply because they were cities, which turned out to be correct.  The Germans had already engaged in this during the Spanish Civil War and would turn to during the Blitz, which the British would very rapidly reply with.  By 1945 the US was firebombing Japanese cities with the logic it drove workers out of their homes, and crippled Japanese industry, which was correct, but deeply immoral.

By July 1945 there were really no more industrial targets left to bomb in Japan, although the bombing was ongoing.  The only point of dropping an atomic bomb was to destroy cities, and the people within them.

That was obvious to the atomic scientists, but that had been obvious about using the bomb on Germany as well. Targeting would have largely been the same, and for the same purpose.  Allied strategic bombing of Germany has actually halted before the German surrender, as there was no longer any point to it, although the concept the Allies had in mind would really have been to use the bomb earlier than the Spring of 1945.  Indeed, had the bomb been available in very early 1945, there's real reason to doubt that the Allies would have used it on Germany, as Allied troops were on the ground and they were advancing.

Still, with all that in mind, there was a certain sense all along that Germany uniquely deserved to be subject to atomic bombs.  Japan in this context was almost an after thought.

Everyone working on the bomb in the US was European culturally.  To those of European culture the Germans were uniquely horrific, and to this day Nazi Germany is regarded as uniquely horrific.  Many of those working on the Manhattan Project, moreover, were direct victims of the Nazis, with quite a few being both European and Jewish refugees.  Contrary to what is sometimes claimed, by late 1944 people were well aware of what was going on in Nazi Germany and that the Germans were systematically murdering Jews.

The Japanese also were incredibly inhumane and horrific in their treatment of the populations they'd overrun, as well as of Allied prisoners of war. But the nature and extent of their barbarity really wasn't very well known.  Indeed, much of it would not be until after the Second World War, at which time the information was suppressed for post war political reasons.  At any rate, in July 1945, the scientists working on the Manhattan Project did not know of Japanese systematic horrors in China.  Very few people did.

And the Japanese were scene, basically, as victims of their own culture, which was somewhat true.  Japan had not been colonized by Europeans at all, making them the only nation in Asia to have that status.  Therefore, European culture, and standards, had really not penetrated very much.  Japan had adopted Western technology, but Western concepts of morality in war had not come in with it very much. To the extent that it did, it seemed to evaporate with the introduction of increasing authoritarianism in Japan after World War One.

But that wasn't really known to the scientific community.

It was, however, to the military community, which had been fighting the Japanese on the ground.

We'll discuss that in the context of the bomb in a later thread.  

The point here is that by this time, many in the non military community, and some within it, who were aware that the Allies were about to produce an atomic bomb were now against using it.

And, indeed, it should never have been used.

Moscow radio announced that the body of Joseph Goebbels had been discovered in the courtyard of the Chancellery in Berlin.

Also in Berlin, the first U.S. troops arrived for occupation duty.

James F. Byrnes became United States Secretary of State.

The first civilian passenger car made in the United States in three years rolled off the assembly line of the Ford Motor Company in Detroit.  The car was a 1946 Super DeLuxe Tudor sedan and was destined for Harry Truman.

Last edition:

Monday, July 2, 1945. Advances on Balikpapen.

Labels: 1940s, 1945, 1945 Sheikh Bashir Rebellion, 1950s, 1955, Australian Army, Battle of Balikpapan, British Empire, Crime, Italy, Japan (Tokyo), Malaya, Okinawa, Operation Zipper, Somalia, Somaliland, Tokyo Japan, World War Two

War and moral decay. Was originally Lex Anteinternet: Monday, July 2, 1945. Advances on Balikpapen.

Lex Anteinternet: Monday, July 2, 1945. Advances on Balikpapen.: 

Monday, July 2, 1945. Advances on Balikpapen.

Maria Michi in Rome, Open City.  She also played the role of the welcoming Italian turned prostitute in Paisan.  Both films were directed by Roberto Rossellini and filmed immediately after World War Two.  Why am I featuring her? See below.

Tokyo's population was down to 200,000 people due to evacuations from the bombed city.

Australian troops took Balikpapan's oil facilities.

American operations conclude on the Ryukyus.

The submarine USS Barb fired rockets on Kaihyo Island near Sakhalin,the first instance of a submarine firing such weapons.

Mountbatten is ordered to launch Operation Zipper, the liberation of Malaya, in August.

The 1945 Sheikh Bashir Rebellion broke out in Burao and Erigavo in British Somaliland against the British.

"The American Farmer" was the cover story in Newsweek.

Louis Till, father of Emmett Till who is remembered for being lynched at age 14 in 1955, was executed by the U.S. Army at Aversa, Italy for two counts of rape and murder.  

The elder Till had married the younger Till's mother when they were 18, over the objections of her parents. The marriage was not a happy one and she divorced him after he physically attacked her.  A conviction from that resulted in his joining the U.S. Army in order to avoid a prison sentence.

While Tills' conviction and execution are debated, the circumstances of the crime, which involved a home invasion and rape, are vile, and it seems that the trial was well conducted.

What's this have to do with the younger Till's lynching?  Absolutely nothing.  The junior Till never knew his father as the relationship had disintegrated when he was a mere infant.

There may be something, however, to take away about the horrors of the postwar world.  Armies are made up of all kinds of people, particularly conscripted armies.  Putting somebody in uniform so they wouldn't go to jail was fairly common.  There was a guy in boot camp with me who was there for that very reason, and I know a very successful person who essentially had the same thing occur to him.

And wars are a huge violation of the moral order.  Invading armies have always been associated with crime, with rape being a particularly common one.  Occupying armies, and even garrison armies, have a fair amount of moral depredation they bring on as well.

This certainly doesn't apply to everyone in uniform in these conditions, and not even the majority of those in uniform, in most modern armies, but it's frankly the case that World War Two created a vast amount of prostitution in Europe, some of it of a massively desperate type as portrayed in Rossellini's Paisan, and discussed in Atkinson's The Day of Battle.  Italy was quite frankly particularly hard hit as its infrastructure was far less developed than that of France or Germany, and it's population lived much more primitively and much closer to the poverty line.  Indeed, the vast bulk of the Italian population even before the war lived in what Americans of the same period would have regarded as poverty.

In these conditions, Italian women became targets.  Many prostituted themselves.  Some entered what might be regarded as a species of concubinage.  A biography of Bill Mauldin notes, for example, that for a period of time both Mauldin and another Stars and Stripes reporter kept girls in their mid teens, something that would have been regarded as a crime in the U.S. given the girls' very young age.  Paisan, as noted, depicts a middle class Italian girl descending into poverty, and then trying to grasp a straw out of it that nearly appears.  The classic The Man In The Grey Flannel Suit depicts a middle class American businessman who was an officer during the war engaging in a secret affair that produces a child while a soldier in Italy.

Concubinage is one thing.  Rape quite another, but murder is beyond the pale even for most whose morals decay in wartime.  But not for everyone.  And of course, we haven't touched on the Red Army, for whom wholescale rape, and then murder, of the women of the countries they overran was routine.  The percentage of Soviet soldiers that went home as rapist likely isn't known, but it was appreciable, and appreciated apparently by Soviet women, which lead to that generations domestic lives being notoriously turbulent.

War changes everything, and most of what it changes, isn't for the better.

Last edition:

Sunday, July 1, 1945. Battle of Balikpapan. The Post War German Map. Blondie.

Labels: 1940s, 1945, Australian Army, Automobiles, Battle of Balikpapan, Borneo, Dutch Army, Germany, Growing up in the 1970s, Music, New Wave Music, Personalities, Post WWII Occupation of Germany, Rock Music, World War Two