Category Archives: history

“The USA originated Nazism, Nazi salutes, flag fetishism”


The USA originated Nazism, Nazi salutes, flag fetishism, robotic group-chanting to flags, and the modern swastika symbol, as shown in the research of the noted historian Dr. Rex Curry…

Boy scouts/girl scouts spread it.

Scouts also used the swastika as a symbol.  It acquired the alphabetic symbolism of “Scout Submission” and the concept of self-sacrifice (even the ultimate self-sacrifice) because it represented a cross.

Flag fellationism! (not work-safe)

Young girls in the USA, if they attend government schools
(socialist schools), are often led in verbally fellating flags
every day for 12 years of their lives. Pervert politicians and other
pledgeophiliacs want government’s schools to teach girls
to show love to their Fatherland (and for their leaders).

More on the theory of historical relativity

Just as it was difficult for a lot of people to accept the discovery that spacetime is curved, it is difficult for some people to accept the scientific report of my previous post. To assist in this regard, I will take questions.

Q: What about the legions of facts that substantiate al Qaeda’s culpability in the September 11 attacks? Haven’t numerous intelligence agencies inside and outside of the United States documented reams of evidence that all establish the conclusion that al Qaeda planned and organized the attacks beyond any reasonable doubt? Hasn’t Osama bin Laden himself on repeat occasion claimed responsibility for the attacks of that day? Are you telling me that these facts, too, can turn on or off depending on one’s position in spacetime?

A: Yes. That is the power–dare I say the majesty–of the theory. It traverses chains of factuality backwards into history as far as it needs to.

Q: According to that poll, 43% of Egyptians report that Israel was behind the September 11 attacks. Why on earth would Israel mastermind a plan to destroy American cities and murder thousands of Americans?  Doesn’t the United States supply Israel with billions of dollars in foreign aid, military technology, warm good will, etc?

A: The correct question is not “why on earth” but “where on earth”. 43% is very roughly half of Egypt. So in half of Egypt, let’s say north of Cairo, it may be a fact that the United States has been sending Israel billions of dollars in foreign aid, but south of Cairo, the United States has actually been sending them billions of forced subscriptions to magazines published by American Media, Inc.

Q: Did the Holocaust really happen?

A: Are you standing in or out of Tehran?

Q: Have we been able to map out the complete factuality patterns of any historical statements?

A: We have been able to determine that the statement “George W. Bush won the 2000 United States Presidential election” is a historical fact across most of the mainland, but is less likely to be a fact when you are in close proximity to either the east or west coast. The factuality pattern of this historical statement apparently has something to do with oceanic coastlines, although we are not sure why.

Q: I think you’re making all this up!

A: The factuality pattern of the statement “Den of Hydralisks made all this up” is as yet unknown.

Q: What practical applications of this science can we look forward to once we fully comprehend the laws governing it?

A: I’m planning on going some place where it is fact that I once ruled the entire world, personally. I’m curious to see how much damage I did.

Einstein’s general theory of historical relativity

Did you know that historical facts can actually change depending on where in the world you are? It’s true, and the phenomena is fascinating. It may be close to the kind of thing Richard Feynman was getting at with his concept of multiple histories.

Consider a Reuters global opinion poll in which respondents were asked who was responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States.

The survey of 16,063 people in 17 nations found majorities in only nine countries believe al Qaeda was behind the attacks on New York and Washington that killed about 3,000 people in 2001.

In Europe, al Qaeda was cited by 56 percent of Britons and Italians, 63 percent of French and 64 percent of Germans. The U.S. government was to blame, according to 23 percent of Germans and 15 percent of Italians.

Respondents in the Middle East were especially likely to name a perpetrator other than al Qaeda, the poll found.

Israel was behind the attacks, said 43 percent of people in Egypt, 31 percent in Jordan and 19 percent in the Palestinian Territories. The U.S. government was blamed by 36 percent of Turks and 27 percent of Palestinians.

In Mexico, 30 percent cited the U.S. government and 33 percent named al Qaeda.

Now we have known for a long time that facts can change depending on the observer’s state of motion. What we are beginning to learn is that motion seems to have little to do with it. Facts just seem to change depending on which patch of the earth you are standing on at the moment.

What is not fully understood is the mechanism by which this occurs. I have heard top physicists postulate the existence of some kind of dynamic and invisible field, not unlike the electromagnetic field, which toggles historical propositions on or off according to laws which are not yet evident to us. If this hypothesis turns out to be valid, it may begin to explain many strange anomalies that have baffled observers, such as the way in which basic facts about who started what war for what reason change completely according to one’s present geographic location.

For example, the proposition “North Korea fought a defensive war in response to the invasion by the United States and South Korea past the 38th parallel on June 25, 1950” becomes factually true when you are standing in the geographic region which lies between Russia and South Korea.

Much research needs to be done before we are able to crack the mystery conclusively, but one thing is clear — this is an exciting new area of scientific inquiry that everyone will want to pay attention to.

The greatest blog

The greatest blog ever to grace the internet can be found at It is titled simply “The American Dream”.

This blog began and ended on July 3, 2005. It has only one post, and it only needs one. The writing achieves an elegance the Den has sometimes striven for. The author is clearly an astute student of history. His ideas are profound and original. He draws on a wide knowledge of literature to support them by citing verses from history’s great poets such as Kurt Cobain. His artful use of all-caps could be considered poetic in itself.

No excerpt can do the piece justice, but below is a short one.

Here we are in the Twenty-first Century helplessly watching yet another Human Culture is “Oppressed” by a “White Suppremest Imperialistic Power”. Who’s country is the opposite of independent and who’s Rich illustrious lifestyle is nothing more than the “Spoils of War” A Nation that FORCES its POLITICAL GOALS upon another society through MILITARY POWER is called an Empire. And when its POLITICAL GOALS are RACIALY and FINANCIALLY motivated its called a “HATE CRIME” or WAR CRIME/CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY

(:sniffle: I always need a Kleenex when I get to that part)

“Read the whole thing” are words I do not use lightly, but if ever they applied…! I am certain you will be as impressed as I was, and perhaps it will change the way you think about the world, and about life. Perhaps you will even wish to add this superior link to your blogroll, as I am now considering.

All I really needed to know I learned from playing Starcraft

Michael Shermer wrote that “ever since Skeptic magazine published an investigative article on the 9/11 ‘Truth Movement’ and analyzed their claims, which were found wanting, I have been hounded by the so-called 9/11 ‘truthers’ because I am the editor of the magazine and therefore am suppose to be a ‘skeptic’ of the official explanation for 9/11.” Thereafter, it became difficult for Shermer to give a lecture anywhere on any subject without a truther present in the audience to stand up and press him with uncomfortable questions. When he reported this at his website, truthers emerged from the four corners of the Internet to argue in the skeptics’ home court.

Truthers come out forcefully in large numbers in the least expected places, as you can witness for yourself by browsing the comments on any Youtube video remotely related to the topic. Their efforts have not been entirely unsuccessful. A poll indicated that over a third of Americans believe it likely that the government either allowed to happen or carried out themselves the attacks of 9/11. (Naturally, the number goes up when you leave the States; a majority in India do not believe that al Qaeda was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Bin laden is very furious about this)

I admire the tactics of truthers. They are the same tactics which countless hours playing the Starcraft Zerg–hours which I would not trade for all the ice cream in the world–have burned into my warfaring soul.

What the Truth Movement, the Zerg race, the ancient Persians, Carl von Clausewitz, the commanders on both sides of the Battle of Stalingrad, and Eric Shinseki have all understood is that victory on the battlefield–as well as truth and right–is decided not by quality but by quantity of attack. The greater the number of troops, the more annoying, the faster you can produce them, the better. Also, I believe Clausewitz included in his famous treatise a chapter on the importance of spawning enough Overlords <- Yes, do click that.

Archbishop is a Grinch

The Archbishop of Canterbury said yesterday that the Christmas story of the Three Wise Men was nothing but a ‘legend’.

Dr Rowan Williams has claimed there was little evidence that the Magi even existed and there was certainly nothing to prove there were three of them or that they were kings.

He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew’s gospel and the details were very vague.

The Archbishop went on to dispel other details of the Christmas story, adding that there were probably no asses or oxen in the stable.

He argued that Christmas cards which showed the Virgin Mary cradling the baby Jesus, flanked by shepherds and wise men, were misleading. As for the scenes that depicted snow falling in Bethlehem, the Archbishop said the chance of this was “very unlikely”.

First they tell me that Santa Claus isn’t real and now this? What am I gonna hear next? That Rudolph the Reindeer was ‘nothing but a legend’? That there is ‘nothing to prove’ that Jesus was born Bethlehem? That there is ‘little evidence’ of a star appearing in the sky uniquely on that day? That the details about choirs of angels singing praises to God on high were ‘very vague’? That such as thing as a virgin birth is ‘very unlikely’?

My friends, as the world becomes more secular and liberal and evil and rational you will hear all these things and more. I urge you to guard yourself against terrible men like this Archbishop of Canterbury preaching seductive non-fundamentalist doctrines like these.


Braveheart blows

The first time I saw Braveheart I was for the three hour span, like everyone else, mostly entranced by Mel Gibson’s legs. Recently, when I watched the movie again my attention was allowed to wander enough to grasp the message it was trying to send. Shame on you, Mel, for producing this piece of propagandistic putridity.

The story begins with the English King Edwards the Longshanks restoring a much-needed peace between the English and the Scots. A short while later, when he instituted the ‘Prima Nocta’ (English lords may party down with Scottish brides) I thought, “Finally, somebody who gets free love!” We may never know if this daring policy would have been but one in a series of enlightened reforms that would have led the country peacefully out of the Dark Ages and into the warm progressive light of progress because William Wallace (Gibson) bull-headedly used a single murder as an excuse to preemptively launch a campaign of organized murder that would claim countless lives throughout its duration.


The most heartbreaking scene in the movie occurs before the big Battle of Stirling. Wallace had recruited from the poorest percent of the population a herd of mindless sheeple to bleed and die for him in the senseless slaughter soon to come–a kind of ‘troop surge’ to pointlessly prolong the conflict. But two of these men turned out to be true heroes. Stepping forth from personal puddles of urine they courageously refused to participate in the carnage, and even attempted to persuade their fellows to tuck their tails between their legs with them! As they told the military establishment to f*** off I stood and applauded. This was true bravery. But it was all for naught. Wallace turned his propaganda machine on full throttle to silence the protesters and the killing commenced as scheduled.

Wallace next laid plans for a unilateral invasion of the sovereign nation of England. As his army moved onto English soil without a timetable for withdrawal it was like watching the next victim open the basement door in a slasher flick. It may be true that Edward the Longshanks had done some bad things in the past, but he was getting old and wasn’t a threat to anybody! Every move on the part of the King towards peace and reconciliation was shot down and spat on by the Scots, making it increasingly clear that Wallace had wanted to go to war all along. Perhaps he harbored a ulterior motive? A desire perhaps to finish what his father, who appeared in the movie’s opening scenes, had started?

Of course the official casus belli was for ‘freedom’. The accursed word cropped up over and over in the film. Every time I heard it I winced not unlike a Knight who says Ni at the sound of the word ‘it’. How much blood has been shed throughout history in the service of that demon!

But the climax revealed that it was Gibson’s intent to glorify the lie. The arrest of the infamous war criminal at last brought an end to the tragic cycle of violence. While his sentence was carried out he bellowed that word at the top of his lungs, instantly killing all Knights who say Ni within an 80-mile radius. Thankfully, I was able to hold onto my wits long enough to stumble close to the VCR and pop in a Michael Moore tape before I passed out.

Jimmy Carter, American hero

If you’ve paid a modicum of attention to American history since the 1970’s you, like most Americans old enough and mature enough to operate a vending machine to buy a can of Sprite unsupervised, have probably been under the false yet popular impression that Jimmy Carter was not a great, great man. This might make you reassess.

Paul Johnson on colonialism

Paul Johnson, Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Eighties.

“Hitherto, colonial empires had been approached in an empirical spirit. Colonies were judged on their merits. Colonial powers were benevolent or exploitative or a mixture of both. The process was seen as having advantages and drawbacks for all the parties concerned, and above all as complicated and changing. Now it was all reduced to slogans made simple in both economic and moral terms, and certified everywhere and always as intrinsically evil. The process whereby this crude and implausible theory became the conventional wisdom of most of the world over the half-century which followed the Versailles Treaty is one of the central developments of modern times, second only in importance to the spread of political violence. The actual historical and economic reality did not fit any of the theories…”


“Seen from maps colonialism appeared to have changed the world. Seen on the ground it appeared a more meretricious phenomenon which could and did change little. It came easily. It went easily. Few died either to make it or break it. It both accelerated and retarded, though marginally in both cases, the emergence of a world economic system, which would have come into existence at approximately the same speed if the Europeans had never annexed a single hector of Asia or Africa. Colonialism covered such a varied multiplicity of human arrangements that it is doubtful whether it describes anything specific at all. Colonialism was important not for what it was but for what it was not. It bred grandiose illusions, and unjustified grievances. The first had a major impact on events up to 1945. The second, thereafter.”

Do you agree or disagree with Johnson? Is he right on or is he exaggerating?

In a more perfect world…

Those “jobs Americans won’t do” that illegals keep entering the country to take would include border security.

Pretty-looking people would always have pretty personalities. Ugly-looking people would always have… no, there would be no ugly-looking people.

In winter 1942, both Hitler and Stalin, pistol in hand, travel to Stalingrad to settle the dispute in person. Neither lives to tell the tale.

We are able to raise James Madison from the dead and ask him what such-and-such a clause in the Bill of Rights really means.

While he’s up and about, Madison re-earths some old buddies. John Adams announces he’ll be taking Ted Kennedy’s place on the Senate, George Washington announces he’ll be taking W’s place as Commander-in-Chief, Jefferson announces that maybe holding slaves was bad after all, and Ben Franklin entertains us all by playing his glass harmonica for a few minutes before going back to sleep. (all provided they haven’t decomposed too badly)

Spiders have six legs, not eight. Six legs I think I could deal with.

Esperanto is a neat idea which catches on with everyone.

The Jews find the lost Ark of the Covenant and whaddaya know, the thingie still works. It still shoots the flashy lethal rays of Divine and indiscriminate justice. They start putting it to use in the Mideast beginning with, oh, maybe Damascus and moving on through Baghdad, etc.

Gun control works in the way Leftists have in mind. (as opposed to the way psychopathic dictators have in mind)

Marxism works in the way Leftists have in mind. (as opposed to the way psychopathic dictators have in mind)

Religion works in the way God had in mind. (as opposed to the way, say, L. Ron Hubbard had in mind)

Failing that, God comes down to tell us once and for all that he doesn’t exist so that we can all get over it. I’d be cool with that too.