Reminder: New Home

Just a reminder that meaning in history has a new home (with initial caps)--this is where new content will appear. This link will take you directly to the archive of all posts. I wish it could be broken down by year/month, but:

https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/archive?utm_source=menu-dropdown

As you'll see if you go back a bit in the archive, while all prior posts were imported, 1) not all embedded content appears as in the original, and 2) comments were not imported.

If you subscribe to this substack--which you can do for free--new posts will be emailed directly to you as they appear. That may prove more convenient. I have no plans to try to monetize this.

Alternatively, there is an RSS feed available if you use a feed reader:

https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/feed

For me that required a restart of the application to get it working correctly.

 

NEW UPDATE: RSS Feed For Meaning In History

Don't ask me why Substack hides this, but for those--like me--who use RSS readers, this is what you want:

https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/feed

UPDATE: I spoke too soon. While that address will fetch the titles of items, 

1) I can't mark them as read, and 

2) the items don't appear to link to anything--i.e., if I double click on them they don't open in a browser tab/window.

Frustrating.

NEW UPDATE: I just tried the substack feed in my RSS reader (Akregator) this morning and it's working perfectly now. As far as I can tell the restart did the trick.

Comments at Substack

Still learning. At Substack I have to manually enable free commenting on a per-post basis. All the archived posts from here that were imported are default pay-to-comment except for "You're not a dog, Ya'll!" which I just now manually changed to test it. I'll check for an alternative setting, but that's what I'm stuck with for now.

The result is I'll need to get to editing some of the recent posts. A pain. Going forward I can do that as part of writing and publishing a post. 

Later.

My New Home

Regular readers will be aware that I've been looking for a place to write where I won't be unreasonably unpublished with no real recourse. Blogger has been a good home and there are lots of things I like about it. Because it's relatively simple, it has allowed me to just let it run on its own without much managing.

You may have noticed that I only did one brief post today. Besides it's being a slow news day, I've been setting up a new home--with major help from MC:

https://meaninginhistory.substack.com/

My plan for now is to try to do my new writing there. The setup is all new to me, and I don't really understand it fully. It seems that if you subscribe you may get new posts sent by email--or is it just a notification? Not sure.

I'm not planning on trying to monetize anything, so that part stays the same.

One thing that may change--comments. Comments are enabled. As most of you know, I've managed all comments here--meaning, I've enabled all comments individually and in a relatively small number of cases have declined to enable comments. The benefit in that for me has been that it has kept me close to readers who care to comment, since I've read every single comment that has appeared. I'd like to continue in that mode, but right now I don't see how to do that. 

Thanks to MC I've been able to import all the posts here--incredibly, to me, the number is approaching 2800. Unfortunately, as I said above, the archive section at Substack isn't at all user friendly, and for now I don't see any way to change that. Two additional things about the imported posts:

1. We couldn't import comments. So we'll be starting from scratch.

2. Substack has a method for embeds that's different than Blogger's. As a result, if you look at an old post that has a video or a tweet or image embedded, there will be a link, but not embed. You can follow the link, or come over here and look up the original.

Some of you understand Substack better than I do. If you want to make suggestions, feel free--I'll appreciate any help I can get. This will be a work in progress for some time.

Thanks for your support here. I hope to see you at the new place.

 

You're Not A Dog, Ya'll!

Start the day with a laugh:

I took some dog pain killer the other day. The human version. But dogs take it too. It's pretty much the same. But theirs is savory and chewable. Wrong end of the stick? pic.twitter.com/Ywv8NVBI6O

— Alexandros Marinos (@alexandrosM) September 2, 2021

Totally unrelated, but also gave me a good laugh. This knucklehead thought he was gonna change the world by leaking DIOG? He was obviously living in a complete fantasy world. Thought leaking DIOG would lead to a new Church Commission? As if the Church Commission didn't enable the modern Deep (National Security) State as we know it--the one that took out Trump--by establishing the partnership between the Legislative Branch and the Intel agencies:

‘I Helped Destroy People’

Another Sign That The Narrative Is Breaking Down

Today the NYT ran an article, the significance of which is not so much what is said, but the fact that the article appeared in such an ueber-MSM outlet. The article is a call to America to ask the "hard Covid-19 questions." The point is that, two years on, we have yet to really face up to those questions:

The Hard Covid-19 Questions We’re Not Asking

The authors, two public health professors, focus on the issue of how to deal with children's health concerns. Nevertheless, the manner in which the entire article is framed basically throws the doors wide open to discuss just what we've been doing and to re-examine what we should be doing. Make no mistake about it--the authors are not anti-vaxxers, However, one position they stake themselves to is that Zero Covid is not a realistic goal. But that, tacitly, has been the goal up until know, and to that extent this article is a frontal assault on the official narrative--the Covid Regime as we have known it. The editors at the NYT certainly understood that.

An open discussion that accepts that Zero Covid is not a realistic policy goal necessarily opens the door to any number of ideas that, until the Israeli study blew the doors open, were considered heretical. That dynamic is changing day by day, and this article could be a significant marker of progress toward questioning everything that's been going on.

Excerpts:

What Is Kevin McCarthy Talking About?

A number of commenters have questioned the efficacy of GOP pushback against the Dem House's request for  telecom records that probably targets GOP representatives in the context of the January 6 Event "insurrection" witchhunt that Pelosi hopes will save her House. Initial reports characterized these requests as congressional subpoenas, but it now appears that they are simply request letters issued by the Dem House. Commenters questioning the efficacy of any GOP pushback assume that the telecom companies will simply and joyfully turn over all records to the Dems, ignoring McCarthy's threats of payback if or when the GOP retakes the House.

Commenter aNanyMouse cites a sentence from The Hill's generally good account, which questions McCarthy's assertion that it's illegal for the telecom companies to comply with these request letters:

"McCarthy did not cite which law prohibits telecommunications companies from complying with the committee’s request."

To understand what's in play here, we need to review some basic matters of criminal and national security investigations.