The AMERIKA video was filmed in the ruins of the former chemical factory in Rüdersdorf near Berlin under the direction of Jörn Heitmann. It was the fourth video he directed for Rammstein. For two days, from 5 p.m. to 5 a.m., the band stood in front of the cameras. The spacesuits for the moon scenes were rented from Hollywood and 240 tons of ash were needed to create the moon landscape.

The Game Boy Advance was a groundbreaking portable, but in a fitting echo of its granddaddy, the original Game Boy, the hardware itself left a LOT to be desired. May seem strange to say it, but the GBA is probably the absolute worst way to play GBA games. Today, thankfully, there are several ways to play the GBA’s extensive 1500+ games library. I happen to own a lot of these different ways to play them. Let’s see which one is the best!

Originally posted on October 15, 2018:

It may be time for another post because there are a few things worth covering. People have been commenting and asking me for months now to organize the videos that I’ve posted featuring Andrei Fursov. Because of my translations of Fursov’s lectures, my channel has gained something of a dedicated following on YouTube. These videos, however, are not my most popular videos by far. My most popular videos are about music, cinema, and other things. People don’t usually use YouTube to search for educational content. And I think that the owners of YouTube would like to keep it this way. Still, since translating lectures has been a part of my hobby of making videos, I’ve been able to translate and post many such videos over the last several years. At first, I didn’t want to react to the requests about arranging the translations in order. It’s because I know what a problematic and controlled website YouTube is. Is it worth my time, for example? Because YouTube has become institutionalized already, it has gone from being a website that enables learning, creativity, and sharing to being a website that opposes these things. But, after thinking about this for a while, and after realizing that this process won’t take much time, I’ve finally decided to do this. I’ve created playlists on my YouTube channel so that Fursov’s lectures can be seen in order. This is an ongoing process, however. I haven’t organized all of the videos yet.

One person who has caught a little of my interest lately is Steve Bannon. I must admit that I found out about him only after the 2016 United States presidential election. It seems that Fursov mentioned Bannon in one of his interviews before the election, when he called Bannon one of the top analysts in the USA. Still, this didn’t compel me to begin researching Bannon. I should mention that I’m not a politician or a political analyst. American politics, and what’s going on in the USA generally, don’t interest me much. So, it took some time before I decided to look into who Bannon is, and this happened only recently. Apparently, Bannon’s advice is what helped get Donald Trump elected back in 2016. It seems that Bannon was the one who came up with the strategy and the catchphrases. And Bannon, like Trump, came under fire from the American media. A few things became clear to me after I watched several interviews featuring Bannon. In the last several weeks, Bannon has been interviewed by some media outlets, including popular ones, about the upcoming mid-term elections in the USA. He talks about why he thinks Trump was able to win the 2016 election. This is something that I already made a post about. According to Bannon, the Clinton campaign took a wrong turn when it introduced identity politics into the race. I guess I can agree with him. This factor played a part. At the same time, the Trump campaign was able to surf the wave of dissatisfaction in the USA. A large number of people in the USA now, largely young middle class people, are dissatisfied with the situation in the USA. This is mostly due to the depression and the shortage of jobs. But Bannon is not someone that I agree with or someone that I like. He’s probably not a monster like my so-called father, who’s a bigot and a bully, among other things. But he’s still a right-winger, a nationalist, a deceiver, and he says offensive things. He’s someone that people in the ruling class of Russia can agree with, but he’s not someone that I can agree with. The Russians, of course, didn’t hide that they preferred Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. In addition, Clinton was openly hostile toward Russia and Vladimir Putin during the race. It’s worth pointing out that modern Russia (the Russian Federation) is a right-wing, anti-democratic, and oligarchical state. And, since it’s oligarchical, it’s a state that is going nowhere, much like the USA. The regime in Russia supports right-wing parties and right-wing personalities abroad as well. This is something that Zbigniew Brzezinski joked about, when he said that during the Cold War the Russians supported the Left and that now they support the Right. But there are a few differences between the USA and the Russian Federation, though these differences mean little in the long run. The USA benefited from the end of the so-called Cold War by profiting from the collapse of the Soviet Union. In this way, American political domination of Western Civilization continued and got a boost for a few decades. When it comes to Russian Civilization, Soviet political domination came to an end in the second half of the 1980s and the union split up into what became known as the Russian Federation and some other, much smaller right-wing oligarchical states. The Soviet Union collapsed like the Ilkhanate, which appeared to be strong and stable to the people living in Iran only a decade before its collapse. In order to help justify their lame existence, the Russian Federation and these other post-Soviet states regularly put out anti-Soviet lies and propaganda. Anyway, though the Russians preferred Trump, they still didn’t interfere in the 2016 United States presidential election and help get Trump elected. They’re not capable of doing this. They’re not even capable of preventing an American-orchestrated coup d’etat in a neighbouring and culturally-identical state like Ukraine. This is how weak the Russian Federation is. The Russian interference story is something that Clinton and her team cooked up after her defeat in order to put the blame on someone else. And, since the Russians are the most demonized people in the West, Clinton knew that she’d be able to get away with this lie. Another thing that’s amusing is how Clinton and her supporters were called “the Left” during the race and afterwards. Some of Trump’s supporters took advantage of this. Well, I’ll begin by saying that there is no real Left in establishment American politics. The Left isn’t about identity politics or mostly about race relations and women’s rights. It’s about making life better for workers, about limiting and ending exploitation by capitalists, and even about social progress. There is nothing leftist about Hillary Clinton. She joked about the death of Muammar Gaddafi, who was the leader of Libya. I don’t think that something like this happened during the Cold War. Even Ronald Reagan, with all of his bigoted and deceitful talk, didn’t joke about the death of another country’s leader. She’s simply an operative for Wall Street, and her campaign was backed by oligarchs. This isn’t a secret. Still, the average person in the American middle class and working class doesn’t know such things. We have to keep in mind that the USA is a country (empire) where communism and real leftist politics are constantly demonized and lied about. In addition, people from the American middle class and working class are provided with a bad education, which keeps them uninformed, obedient, and capable of performing only the most basic tasks. It’s safe to say that these people haven’t read Das Kapital by Karl Marx or any other work by a leftist thinker. So, I guess that it’s not hard to fool such people into believing that a conservative establishment politician like Clinton actually represents the Left. A real leftist wouldn’t support Clinton, or Trump, for that matter. Therefore, a conclusion has to be made that the strategy of the Trump campaign in relation to the dissatisfied people worked. Among these dissatisfied people were bigots, conspiracy theorists, commie-haters, homophobes, racists, nationalists, xenophobes, the “awake”, and the unemployed. Because they don’t know better, they believed in Trump’s sham populism, and many of them still defend him like he’s Jesus Christ.

In general, it’s somewhat interesting to listen to what Bannon says, though he acts like Trump can win again in the future. Does he know something that I don’t? After all, after Trump’s win in 2016, the opposition has been working on preventing such a thing from happening again. After everything that has happened since then, it would seem like there’s no way that Trump will be allowed to win again. Or has Trump gained more support in the American establishment since then? What’s interesting is that Trump didn’t really look pleased right after he won the election. In fact, he looked kind of worried. Maybe he didn’t expect to win. Or maybe, by then, after everything that had happened, he didn’t really want to win. OK. Moving on. Another thing that’s amusing is what happened to Alex Jones. Jones remains one of the most notable supporters of Trump, and Jones was recently purged by several popular internet platforms, apparently because he supported Trump and played a role in getting Trump elected. Jones has a large following, by internet standards. Interestingly, Roger Stone made frequent appearances on Jones’s show before the election. I think that Stone’s support for Trump shows that Trump has some serious backers in the American establishment. So, after Jeb Bush dropped out of the race, and after Trump decided to run as a populist, it seems that some important people decided to throw their weight behind Trump. This just shows that Trump wasn’t some lone, helpless man in the race. He had some serious support, though nowhere near as serious as the support that Clinton had. I must admit that I was a little surprised when Jones got purged. The thing about Jones is that he’s an offensive, right-wing propagandist for the establishment, who always throws his weight behind candidates from the Republican Party. Well, this time he threw his weight behind Trump, and, somewhat surprisingly, he got purged as a result by companies like Google, for example. His popularity on the internet wasn’t enough to prevent this. He wasn’t the only one who got purged, but he was the most famous one among the purged. I personally think that this was the work of Hillary Clinton. This was her revenge for her loss and for all of the criticism and lies that Jones put out about her. Like so many Hollywood celebrities, the people working at Google, for example, didn’t hide that they support Clinton. In one disturbing scene, one of the founders of Google, Sergey Brin, openly voiced his opposition to the Trump campaign.

История двух маленьких блокадниц в осажденном Ленинграде – 7-летней Настеньки и 5-летней Катеньки. Голод, холод, путешествия через вымерзший город к Неве с санками за водой, смерть матери, ранение – все это выпало на долю детей, перенесших наравне со взрослыми все тяготы войны.

In a remarkable feat of self-important delusion Hillary Clinton declared herself back in town and a, “part of the resistance.” This comment was made a week ago as she spoke to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour in New York City. During that same interview, she claimed to admit “absolute personal responsibility” for her loss to Donald Trump in the presidential election. However, she did go on to state that she “would have won” had it not been for the alleged Russian interference. She also blamed James Comey’s decision to reopen her email investigation after her wrong doings were made public by Wikileaks.

Far from her claims, she lost the election because of the unethical and undemocratic manner in which she carried out her campaign. It is now known that she orchestrated the banishment of the more popular candidate Bernie Sanders from the leadership of the Democratic Party. This is exposed all the more by the legal filings of the Democratic National Committee and former DNC head Debbie Wasserman Schultz, in response to a lawsuit filed by Bernie Sander supporters. According to a motion to dismiss, the DNC claims that it has the right to “go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way.” They also claimed that the lawsuit is based upon an “internal rule” which can’t be enforced, and that the term “impartial” can’t be defined.

Clinton also lost due to her relationship with the financial aristocracy of Wall Street. The Clinton family, (as is every former president,) is heavily connected to and funded by large banks and financial institutions. This is really nothing new in American politics. But, the family’s very close association with the banks made many voters distrust her. By contrast, Donald Trump (falsely) claimed dissociation from them and railed against their greed and corruption. While Trump lied about his relationship with Wall Street, people still believed him. Clinton, by contrast, was a known close associate of it. Popular anger towards the financial aristocracy and her connections to it seriously harmed her credibility and popularity.

The recent interview she gave was nothing more than a massive distortion of the truth. While the information exposed by Guccifer 2.0 and Wikileaks certainly hurt her campaign, they were only exposing what she had done that was unethical which the public opposed. She has absolutely denied this. Instead, she has claimed that she would have won had it not been for the alleged Russian interference and James Comey’s decision investigate her wrongdoings. She cannot claim she is taking responsibility when she is directly placing blame on others. She was wholly dishonest in her interview where she tried to portray herself as a victim. The truth is that she has victimised Bernie Sanders by preventing him from becoming the head of the Democratic Party.

Despite all of this, she has still declared herself to be a member of the resistance to Donald Trump’s presidency. It was reported by Politico last Friday that she is in the process of building an organisation dedicated to opposing Trump and the Republican Party.

“The former secretary of state is building a new political group to fund organizations working on the resistance to President Donald Trump’s agenda, spending recent weeks in Washington, New York City, and Chappaqua, N.Y., meeting with donors and potential groups to invest in, and recruiting individuals for the group’s board of directors,” the media outlet said.

In the wake of her disastrous presidential election, she has attempted to rebrand herself as a public “resistance” figure. It is clear that there is a great deal of popular sentiment against Donald Trump and his presidency. In Clinton’s eyes, she sees herself as able to take advantage of this sentiment and use it to promote herself and force her way back into the mainstream under a new image. She is beginning to pose herself as someone who is opposed to everything Trump stands for: Wall Street lackey, racist, misogynist, and most importantly, warmonger. Using money collected from interests among the capitalist class opposed to Donald Trump’s presidential agenda, she will try and form a political block against him.

Right now there is no such thing. The Democratic Party has been left in ruins after the failure of the Clinton campaign. A fractured Party is attempting to oppose Republican rule but is having very little effect. There is no real leader of the Party at this moment. Bernie Sanders has been relegated to career backbencher after it was made clear to him by the Party that he is never going to be in a leadership position. Tulsi Gabbard has risen as a rival for Clinton in very much the same populist style as Sanders. It’s mostly made up of anti-Trump, anti-war, pro-single payer health care rhetoric. Her recent gain in popularity is no doubt what has spurred Clinton to make a rebranded comeback so soon.

Right now a rebellious “radical” image is needed to oppose the Trump administration. The rebellious image Trump gave during his campaign has completely collapsed, and has been acknowledged by all but the most hardcore of his supporters. Clinton is attempting to rebrand herself as that rebellious radical. Gabbard has very much the same rhetoric that Bernie Sanders that made him popular. If Clinton doesn’t return to politics soon, she’ll be beaten out by the rising star of Gabbard.

It seems as though there may end up being a power struggle in the party between the two women. Both are jockeying for a position of leadership with similar images in what appears to be a kind of power vacuum in the Democratic Party. Gabbard is attempting to take Clinton’s place as leader, while Clinton is organising to keep it. In all likelihood, Clinton will beat out Gabbard because she will get the funding necessary to carry out the coming political war between the two. Sections of Wall Street have already chosen her as their candidate, and are prepared to give her all the money necessary.

To see Clinton as an outsider, a “part of the resistance” to use her own words, is nothing short of facetious. Clinton has been a Washington insider for decades and has already been the Secretary of State. She simply couldn’t be any more a member of the establishment. This stands in stark contrast to why Trump defeated her in the presidential election, he appeared to be the opposite. Attempting to rebrand herself as opposed to the current order will fail. She is the established order. She is a great companion of Wall Street, she supports a violent imperialist foreign policy and seeks to maintain the status quo.

It seems very unlikely that she will be able to brand herself as Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama originally did. She is too well established within the system as a Wall Street hawk to ever appear otherwise.