temporary content for usaapay.com courtesy of thenotimes.com
WELCOME

spread the word
.


The No Times
comments, ephemera, speculation, etc.
(protected political speech and personal opinion)

- If this is your 1st visit to this page, please start at the bottom -


2020-


2020-09-15 d
THE COVID-CON - II

What does a case of Covid-19 really mean?

What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet,’ wrote the Bard. He was referring to a rose which is a rose, instantly recognised by its fragrance and its appearance. But a case of Covid-19 does not fit the metaphor, because it differs wherever you look.

In the course of our evidence gathering activities, we have gone through a few thousand papers reporting studies on all aspects of Covid-19 spread. We found that not very many defined a case of Covid, which is a sign of sloppiness when that is what you are looking for. Those that did, reported different definitions and ways of ascertaining what they meant by a ‘case’.

Now this may seem a pedantic academic remark, but in reality, it underlines the chaos which has crept into Covid-19 science and decision-making. After watching the briefing by the Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty on 9th September, where he described his worry about the increase in cases and compared the situation in the UK to other countries, we asked the question: what does a Covid 19 case mean and how do different nations define a case? (read more)

2020-09-15 c
THE COVID-CON - I

Judge strikes down Pennsylvania’s pandemic restrictions

A federal judge on Monday struck down Gov. Tom Wolf’s pandemic restrictions that required people to stay at home, placed size limits on gatherings and ordered “non-life-sustaining” businesses to shut down, calling them unconstitutional.

US District Judge William Stickman IV sided with plaintiffs that included hair salons, drive-in movie theaters, a farmer’s market vendor, a horse trainer and several Republican officeholders who sued as individuals.

Stickman, an appointee of President Donald Trump, wrote in his ruling that the Wolf administration’s pandemic policies have been overreaching, arbitrary and violated citizens’ constitutional rights.

The governor’s efforts to slow the spread of the coronavirus “were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency,” Stickman wrote. “But even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered.” (read more)

2020-09-15 b
The Secret Lives of Neanderthals

Is it possible that Neanderthals had a spiritual life?

Astonishing finds suggestive of shrine in a subterranean cave in the Aveyron continue to baffle anthropologists, says Rebecca Wragg Sykes

When I studied anthropology back in the early 1980s, Neanderthals were still largely the bulk-browed brutes of yore, grunting in smoky caves and loping across the tundra. Their vanishing from the fossil record some 40,000 years ago was a result of competition, along with a little interbreeding, with our own forebears. The story, as I received it then, retained something of the racially hierarchical views at large when the first fossilised bones were recovered in Germany, from near the Neander river, in 1856. Neanderthals were made extinct by an altogether smarter creature. It was inevitable — the clue was in the name: Homo sapiens.

Neanderthals have come a long way since. In the past few decades, there have been more finds in more caves, more bones and stone tools to measure, more middens to pick over, more articulations of skeletons to examine. Relativism has replaced hierarchy as the overall context for interpretation. But perhaps the most striking advance has been in the reach of analytical methods. Genetics, 3D imaging, the use of carbon-14 and strontium isotopes have all helped reveal intricate details of physiognomy and activity (how they sat, what they carried), as well as possible social structures. What it has also done is trigger a landslip of studies and academic papers which have buried any hope of popular understanding.

Deeply involved in these studies herself, Rebecca Wragg Sykes has performed something extraordinary in distilling them into a commanding and wonderfully readable account. Her success is in leaving us with glimpses of real scenes, of imagined individuals and groups going about their daily lives. We are in the realm of archaeo-ethnography rather than speculative fiction (this is not Jean M. Auel’s Clan of the Cave Bear or William Golding’s The Inheritors); her evocations emerge from behind extensive passages of science. But the effect is surprisingly moving. The only regret is that if progress in Neanderthal studies continues at the same pace, Kindred will, at least in detail, soon become outdated.

Deep in a cave in the Aveyron is a site that remains as baffling as the late Neolithic stone circles

What we now know of Neanderthals is this. They were concentrated in western Eurasia, with isolated sites in Siberia and clusters in southern France and Iberia. Their brains were slightly larger than ours (though with a smaller frontal cortex and cerebelli). Their eyes and nostrils were also bigger, and implicitly more effective. Over their 350,000 year existence (ten times that of our own species), they experienced large oscillations in climate, as well as sudden eco-shocks. At various periods they hunted and ate elephants and mammoths, aurochs, giant horses and rhinos, mussels, dolphins and any number of nuts, seeds and pulses.

Violence among them was rare, but accidental injury frequent. They built shelters from posts and rock, slept on mats, used coloured pigment for decorating shells. They understood the value of treating animal skins with oak tannins. They burnt bones as well as wood, and also coal. They were spectacularly good with stone tools, and their right-sided bias (as marked as highly trained cricketers or tennis players) arose from continuous specialist activities, vigorously scraping hides or knapping flints.

A little less certain — but suggested ever more strongly with each find and study — is that Neanderthals had language, and that they were capable of collective planning (lighting bush fires, for instance, to drive prey towards them). They probably buried their dead, with a degree of ritual, and they probably smiled and loved and grieved. They appear to have valued particular sites in the landscape, possibly as places of group memory and tradition. It is still not clear exactly how they disappeared but a little of them survives, in 2-3 per cent of our own genome.

Then about two-thirds of the way through the book, after measured chapters on diet and paleontology and lithics — whoosh! — a moment when everything changes. Three hundred metres into a cave in the Aveyron valley, south-west France, is a monument of deliberate and enigmatic purpose — ‘a place’, Wragg Sykes claims, ‘that goes beyond unique, into jaw-dropping’. Precise radiometric dating in 2013 places its construction at 174,000 years ago — early even by Neanderthal time, and long before the arrival of Homo sapiens. Two tonnes of stalagmites — more than 400 separate pieces — have been broken off, shaped and arranged in two circles. In some places the stones or ‘speleofacts’ have been upended as supports for small discs, which show evidence of having had fires lit on top of them. There is no apparent functional reason even for the site of the structure, which was too deep for habitation. It is as baffling, and as seductive for speculation, as the stone circles of the late Neolithic. It brings us closer to the Neanderthals as sentient beings than all the other studies combined. (read more)

2020-09-15 a

“The great masses of men, though theoretically free, are seen to submit supinely to oppression and exploitation of a hundred abhorrent sorts. Have they no means of resistance? Obviously they have. The worst tyrant, even under democratic plutocracy, has but one throat to slit. The moment the majority decided to overthrow him he would be overthrown. But the majority lacks the resolution; it cannot imagine taking the risks.”
H. L. Mencken, 1926

2020
-09-14 d
THE COVID-CON

'Rogue' Chinese Virologist Joins Twitter, Publishes "Smoking Gun" Evidence COVID-19 Created In Lab

On Saturday we reported that Dr. Li-Meng Yan - a Chinese virologist (MD, PhD) who fled the country, leaving her job at a prestigious Hong Kong university - appeared last week on British television where she claimed SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes COVID-19, was created by Chinese scientists in a lab.

On Sunday, Li-Meng joined Twitter - and on Monday, just hours ago, she tweeted a link to a paper she co-authored with three other Chinese scientists ...

Evidence presented in this part reveals that certain aspects of the SARS-CoV-2 genome are extremely difficult to reconcile to being a result of natural evolution. The alternative theory we suggest is that the virus may have been created by using ZC45/ZXC21 bat coronavirus(es) as the backbone and/or template. The Spike protein, especially the RBM within it, should have been artificially manipulated, upon which the virus has acquired the ability to bind hACE2 and infect humans. This is supported by the finding of a unique restriction enzyme digestion site at either end of the RBM. An unusual furin-cleavage site may have been introduced and inserted at the S1/S2 junction of the Spike protein, which contributes to the increased virulence and pathogenicity of the virus.

These transformations have then staged the SARS CoV-2 virus to eventually become a highly-transmissible, onset-hidden, lethal, sequelae-unclear, and massively disruptive pathogen.

Evidently, the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 could have been created through gain-of-function manipulations at the WIV is significant and should be investigated thoroughly and independently. (read more)

2020-09-14 c
Prurient Garbage on Netflix

Preteen Bada Bing

Despite its director’s claim that she is making a feminist statement, Cuties cannot disguise its attraction to barely pubescent bodies.

Cuties, the latest culture war bombshell to arrive on our overworked home screens, turns out to be anything but cute. Written and directed by the Senegalese-French first-timer Maïmouna Doucouré, Cuties—Mignonnes in French—won an award for direction in the World Cinema section at the Sundance Festival and was quickly picked up by Netflix. The public has not been as enthusiastic. Politicians took to Twitter to condemn the film, the hashtag #CancelNetflix trended on social media, and a Change.org petition called for taking the movie off the air. As I write, the petition has attracted almost a half-million signatures.

That’s quite an uproar for an indie foreign film by an auteur almost no one had heard of the week before last. No doubt some of the outrage is grandstanding and some of it pure political posturing, but that doesn’t mean that Cuties is an innocent bystander. The story of 11-year-old Amy Diop, a Senegalese immigrant girl living in a Paris project who takes up with a group of precocious classmates practicing routines for a local dance contest, is an eyeful. The girls skip around in skin-tight short shorts and faux leather jeans or bandage skirts no bigger than a scrunchie. Their midriffs are exposed and exercised so much that they are at risk of callouses. Aficionados of the Kardashians, rap music videos, and porn, the cuties hump the floor, spank their buttocks while looking coyly over their shoulders, rub their crotches, and suck suggestively on their fingers. These young Lolitas have enough moves for generous tips at Tony Soprano’s Bada Bing.

The director and her advocates insist that all this is to illustrate the exploitative, hypersexualized culture girls swim in today. Netflix called Cuties a “social commentary against the sexualization of young children,” while Doucouré describes it as a “deeply feminist film with an activist message.” I could almost believe them, except that the camera zooms in on pre-pubescent arching and lingers on twerking buttocks with all the subtlety of a Pornhub video. (read more)

2020-09-14 b
New York Times - All the Fake News Fit to Print

Exhaustive Pentagon Review Finds No Evidence For NYTimes' "Russian Bounties" Story

There's been huge efforts to validate The New York Times "bombshell" that wasn't — concerning its summer reporting that Russia secretly offered bounties to the Taliban to kill US troops in Afghanistan.

Two months ago the Pentagon vowed to get to the bottom of it, launching a review of all intelligence and sources which might provide corroboration. And now at the end of that investigation Gen. Frank McKenzie, commander of the U.S. Central Command overseeing the war in Afghanistan, says the detailed investigation found no corroboration of the story.

Recall that from the start the whole thing smelled like a dramatic and desperate last ditch effort to revive the failed Russiagate narrative but in a different form. Multiple intelligence agency heads voiced their immediate skepticism in the wake of the claims linked to unnamed intelligence sources in the CIA. (read more)

2020-09-14 a

“The slavery of fear had made men afraid to think.”
Thomas Paine

2020
-09-13 d
The Hoax of Systemic Racism

Princeton prof challenges university's 'systemic racism' narrative

•Princeton’s president wrote a letter to the community regarding plans to “combat systemic racism at Princeton and beyond.”
•The letter was in response to a July 4 letter from faculty demanding he take anti-racist action.
•Now, a mathematics professor at the university has responded, saying, “Princeton is not in the least racist.”

A mathematics professor at Princeton University is now calling out the Ivy League institution's president, Christopher Eisgruber, after he released a letter to the community regarding his plans to “combat systemic racism” at Princeton. The president’s statement was in response to an open letter from more than 350 faculty members on July 4 demanding that he take anti-racist action.

In an op-ed for Newsweek, Professor Sergiu Klainerman wrote, “By yielding to the manifest falsehood that Princeton is a racist institution, he makes it impossible for him to defend Princeton's values.”

“Princeton is not in the least racist,” Klainerman continued. “Most people know this. Certainly the president does, and I suspect most of the signatories of the July 4th letter do as well.”

Klainerman found fault with the president’s letter for failing to acknowledge the “truly remarkable” modern story of redemption by Princeton and many other American universities. He went on to point out that, in the 1930s, Princeton led the nation by welcoming Jewish and other refugee scientists from Nazi Europe. Klainerman also highlighted that Asian Americans now make up a fourth of the student body.

Klainerman said that “to promote excellence in research and teaching, major American universities have to develop policies that are blind to considerations of race, ethnicity, religion, sex, socio-economic class and any other factor not relevant to intellectual achievement.” (read more)

2020-09-13 c
9/11, THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF THREE BUILDINGS, OUR FREEDOMS, AND OUR NATION

9/11 in Focus: information, opinion and research

Why 9/11 still matters

On 9/11 2001 three steel-framed high-rise buildings collapsed completely at near free-fall speed allegedly due to fires – which, if true, makes them the only steel-framed high-rises in construction history to have ever done this. Only two of these buildings had been struck by planes.

The official explanation for this event is that Moslem terrorists somehow confounded all the usual security procedures and ‘attacked America’ because they ‘hated our freedoms.’

This version of the meaning behind 9/11 was the catalyst for the perpetual war currently being waged, the ultimate fail-safe irrefutable argument to silence criticism of the Patriot Act, Guantanamo and the creeping emergence of fascism in the Western world.

A narrative as crucial as that needs to be closely examined, but the mainstream media has not only failed to perform this function, it has successfully persuaded many intelligent people that it doesn’t need to be done, and that only lunatics would bother subjecting the official story to any examination.

Twenty years ago the idea of large scale false flags or government deceptions seemed absurd to all of us. But the unravelling of so many official narratives in recent years; the lies over WMDs, the lies over Ghouta, the lies over Libya and Ukraine, the repeat evidence for wholesale manipulation, if not fabrication, of events to promote war, means it ought to be impossible for any thinking person to simply take the events of 9/11 on trust any more.

How can any of us continue to question everything 9/11 has brought us, but not question 9/11 itself?

So, we’re using this section to pose a couple of very basic questions:
• Has the government sufficiently explained its version of events?
• Does this version fit the observed facts better than any other?

The fact this is considered by so many intelligent people to be an “out there” thing to do speaks volumes about how much even the most savvy of us are currently brainwashed.

The phrase “conspiracy theorist” is an empty meme invented to deter enquiry. We don’t think this is a good thing and we don’t intend to be controlled by it. We believe facts really should be sacred – however unpopular they may be and whatever label someone may have attached to them. (read more)
...
WEBSITES

JOURNAL OF 9/11 STUDIES: academic papers and letters on many aspects of the events and aftermath of 9/11.

ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH: organisation for architects, engineers and other professionals who question aspects of the official account of 9/11.

CONSENSUS 9/11, THE BEST EVIDENCE PANEL: The 23-member 9/11 Consensus Panel is building a body of evidence-based research into the events of September 11, 2001. This evidence — derived from a standard scientific reviewing process — is available to any investigation that may be undertaken by the public, the media, academia, or any other investigative body or institution

CORBETT REPORT: James Corbett has put together a truly excellent collection of videos, podcasts and articles, going into great detail about many aspects of 9/11, from witness testimony to geo-political fallout. His new series of videos focuses on whistleblowers.

DIG WITHIN: Personal website of Kevin Ryan, 9/11 whistleblower, editor of Journal of 9/11 Studies

2020-09-13 b
THE COVID CON

How the (UK) Government is wading into the swamp of despotism – one muzzle at a time

The Government has no legal right to impose the severe and miserable restrictions on our lives with which it has wrecked the economy, brought needless grief to the bereaved and the lonely and destroyed our personal liberty.

This is the verdict of one of the most distinguished lawyers in the country, the retired Supreme Court Judge Lord Sumption.

He said last week in a podcast interview: ‘I don’t myself believe that the Act confers on the Government the powers that it has purported to exercise.’

He was referring to the Public Health Act of 1984, the basis for almost all the sheaves of increasingly hysterical decrees against normal life which the Health Secretary Matt Hancock has issued since March. I promise you that it is not usual for a retired senior judge to use such language in public.

This 1984 Act was drawn up mainly to give local magistrates the power to quarantine the sick.

Nothing in it remotely justifies these astonishing moves – house arrest, travel restrictions, harsh limits on visiting family members, interference with funerals and weddings, closure of churches, compulsory muzzles, bans on assembly and protest. (read more)

2020-09-13 a

"How can any of us continue to question everything 9/11 has brought us, but not question 9/11 itself?"
(source)

2020
-09-11 g
9/11, THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF THREE BUILDINGS, OUR FREEDOMS, AND OUR NATION - VI

9/11 Contradictions

An Open Letter to Congress and the Press

Preface

The title of this book, 9/11 Contradictions, refers entirely to internal contradictions within the public story about 9/11. The book deals, in other words, with issues on which one person, agency, institution, or official body that has helped articulate the public story about 9/11 has contradicted another such person, agency, institution, or official body. In some cases, the contradiction is a self-contradiction, in which people contradict what they had said at an earlier time.

To give a few examples: In Chapter 1, we see that the White House has told two radically different stories about President Bush’s behavior in the classroom in Florida. The second and third chapters show that Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta’s testimony about Vice President Cheney’s whereabouts that morning contradicts the account given by the 9/11 Commission. In Chapter 7, the contradiction is between Richard Clarke, on the one hand, and Donald Rumsfeld and the 9/11 Commission, on the other. In Chapters 8 and 17, we see that two of the government’s claims—about Barbara Olson’s calls to Ted Olson and about evidence of Osama bin Laden’s responsibility for 9/11—are contradicted by one of its own agencies, the FBI. Chapters 12 and 13 show that the 9/11 Commission’s main claims about United Flight 93, made in 2004, are contradicted by statements made in previous years by many US military officers. In Chapters 21 and 22, we see that statements made by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which was given the task of explaining the destruction of the World Trade Center, are contradicted by numerous statements made by members of the Fire Department of New York.

In several chapters, the contradictions involve the mainstream media. (These contradictions are considered “internal” because the mainstream media, while perhaps challenging this or that detail of the story told by government officials, have supported all this story’s main elements.) Chapter 16, for example, shows that stories about cell phone calls from the flights, which have appeared in the media from the beginning, were contradicted by the FBI’s report on phone calls from the four flights, which was presented at the Moussaoui trial in 2006.

As its subtitle indicates, this book is addressed to Congress and the press. It is especially suitable for them for two reasons.

In the first place, most reporters and members of Congress are busy people, with little time to study complex issues. This book, besides being easy to read, requires no technical expertise in order to form a judgment about the issues involved.

Most other books about 9/11 revolve around various matters—such as FAA and military procedures, the conditions needed to cause steel-frame buildings to collapse, and the kind of damage that would be caused by an airliner striking the Pentagon—about which most people do not feel equipped to make a judgment.

In the present book, by contrast, no judgments requiring expertise are required, because each chapter revolves around a simple contradiction, which anyone can recognize. If Jones says “P” and Smith says “not P,” we can all recognize that something must be wrong, because both statements cannot be true.

In the second place, many members of Congress and the press have been reluctant to look into any possible difficulties about the public story for fear of being labeled “conspiracy theorists.” Although this may be unfortunate, it is understandable, because the most important asset of both journalists and politicians is their credibility. If they lose that, they lose their effectiveness, even their jobs. We can understand, therefore, that they are unwilling to risk being saddled with the dreaded “conspiracy theorist” label—one of the surest ways to lose credibility—by showing sympathy with people questioning the official account of what happened on 9/11.

Why is this—that anyone questioning the official story is almost automatically labeled a conspiracy theorist? It is because in most critical treatments of 9/11, the official account is rejected in favor of an alternative theory, which usually involves the idea that the 9/11 attacks resulted from a conspiracy within our own government.

The present book, however, contains no theory about what really happened. It provides simply an exposition of various facts. If Mineta said “P,” that is a fact. If the 9/11 Commission said “not P,” that is a fact. And it is a fact that “P” and “not P” cannot both be true.

Here, then, is the point of this book: 9/11 has clearly been the most important event in recent history. The accepted story about 9/11 has been used to increase military spending, justify wars, restrict civil liberties, and exalt the executive branch of the government. And yet there are serious contradictions within this accepted story: this book documents 25 of them. The existence of so many contradictions within such an important story is intolerable. Congress and the press are the two principal institutions with the power and the responsibility for looking into such matters.

This book is intended as a tool to help them fulfill this responsibility.

In doing the research for this book, I relied most heavily on the Complete 911 Timeline produced by Cooperative Research. This timeline, drawn entirely from stories in the mainstream press, aspires to identify and, when possible, provide links to all reports dealing with events related to the attacks of 9/11. This timeline, which is surely one of the greatest journalistic feats of all time, is an indispensable resource for serious discussions of 9/11. Many of the chapters in this book would have been simply impossible without it.

I also relied heavily on the help of three wonderfully unselfish people: Matthew Everett of England, who is one of the managers of the Complete 9/11 Timeline; Elizabeth Woodworth of British Columbia, a writer and former research librarian; and Tod Fletcher of California, who would regularly spot problems the rest of us had overlooked. These three individuals, besides improving this book immensely with their good advice and proofreading skills, alerted me to the existence of dozens of reports I would have otherwise missed. Insofar as this book is easy to read and its references are useful to other researchers by virtue of being complete and up to date, gratitude should be directed primarily toward them.

Enormous additional thanks go to Elizabeth: after serving as my virtual assistant in the production of this book, she did most of the work for the preparation of the index.

I also wish to thank Hilary Plum of Interlink Books, for excellent work in editing this book, and my wife, Ann Jaqua, making it possible, in so many ways, for me to engage in the research and writing required for this book. (read the html book)

2020-09-11 f
9/11, THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF THREE BUILDINGS, OUR FREEDOMS, AND OUR NATION - V

Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11

by Bill Christison. He is a former senior official of the CIA. He was a National Intelligence Officer and the Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis
...
Let’s address the real issues here. Why is it important that we not let the so-called conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 be drowned out? After spending the better part of the last five years treating these theories with utmost skepticism, I have devoted serious time to actually studying them in recent months, and have also carefully watched several videos that are available on the subject. I have come to believe that significant parts of the 9/11 theories are true, and that therefore significant parts of the “official story” put out by the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are false. I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. The items below highlight the major questions surrounding 9/11 but do not constitute a detailed recounting of the evidence available. 

ONE: An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. Hard physical evidence supports this conclusion; among other things, the hole in the Pentagon was considerably smaller than an airliner would create. The building was thus presumably hit by something smaller, possibly a missile, or a drone or, less possibly, a smaller manned aircraft. Absolutely no information is available on what happened to the original aircraft (American Airlines Flight 77), the crew, the “hijackers,” and the passengers. The “official story,” as it appeared in The 9/11 Commission Report simply says, “At 9:37:46, American Airlines Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, traveling at approximately 530 miles per hour. All on board, as well as many civilians and military personnel in the building, were killed.” This allows readers to assume that pieces of the aircraft and some bodies of passengers were found in the rubble of the crash, but information so far released by the government does not show that such evidence was in fact found. The story put out by the Pentagon is that the plane and its passengers were incinerated; yet video footage of offices in the Pentagon situated at the edge of the hole clearly shows office furniture undamaged. The size of the hole in the Pentagon wall still remains as valid evidence and so far seems irrefutable.

TWO: The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them.  A plane did not hit Building 7 of the Center, which also collapsed.  All three were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11. A substantial volume of evidence shows that typical residues and byproducts from such demolition charges were present in the three buildings after they collapsed. The quality of the research done on this subject is quite impressive. 

If the judgments made on Points ONE and TWO above are correct, they raise many “Who done it” questions and strongly suggest that some unnamed persons or groups either inside or with ties to the government were actively creating a “Pearl Harbor” event, most likely to gain public support for the aggressive foreign policies that followed -- policies that would, first, “transform” the entire Middle East, and second, expand U.S. global domination. 

These first two points provide the strongest evidence available that the “official story” of 9/11 is not true. If the government could prove this evidence false, and its own story on these points correct, all the other data and speculation supporting the conspiracy theories would be undermined. It has provided no such proof and no answers to growing questions.

Other, less important points supporting the theories include the following.

THREE: For at least one hour and 45 minutes after the hijacking of the first aircraft was known, U.S. air defense authorities failed to take meaningful action. This strikes some “conspiracy theorists” as valid evidence that the U.S. Air Force was deliberately restrained from acting. Maybe so, but my own skepticism tells me that the inefficiency of U.S. defense forces is likely to be just as plausible an explanation.

FOUR: Some of the theorists believe that the 19 named hijackers were not actually the hijackers. One claim is that the names of the hijackers were not on the manifests of any of the four aircraft. 

FIVE: None of the 19 hijackers’ bodies were ever autopsied (since they were allegedly totally destroyed in the crashes, including even the people in the Pennsylvania crash).

SIX: At least five of the alleged hijackers (or persons with identical names) have since turned up alive in the Middle East. Nonetheless, the FBI has never bothered to re-investigate or revise the list of hijackers. Does this suggest that the FBI knows that no one in the administration is interested in reopening any further investigations?

SEVEN: Numerous pilots have allegedly told the theorists that none of the 19 hijackers could have flown the airliners well enough to hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon with as much accuracy as was displayed.  The debate on this issue simply raises more doubt about the government’s charge that the people it has named as hijackers are the real hijackers.

EIGHT: No one, except possibly government investigators who are not talking, has seen the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. Some of the conspiracy theorists suggest that it was deliberately destroyed before it hit the ground; others suggest that the plane actually landed in Cleveland and that passengers then were whisked away to some unknown destination. What happened to them at that point is simply a large question mark that makes it more difficult to believe this particular scenario.

NINE: Machinations in the U.S. stock market in the days before 9/11 suggest that some inside players in the market knew or suspected that United and American Airlines stock would soon drop. Two of the four of the aircraft involved in 9/11 were, or course, United planes and the other two were American Airlines planes. 

It should be reemphasized that these items do not make up a complete list of all the charges made by the theorists, but they are a good sample. (read more)

2020-09-11 e
9/11, THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF THREE BUILDINGS, OUR FREEDOMS, AND OUR NATION - 1V

9/11 Was an Israeli Job

How America was neoconned into World War IV

Technical impossibilities

Thanks to courageous investigators, many anomalies in the official explanation of the events of 9/11 were posted on the Internet in the following months, providing evidence that this was a false flag operation, and that Osama bin Laden was innocent, as he repeatedly declared in the Afghan and Pakistani press and on Al Jazeera. The proofs of this appalling fraud have been accumulating ever since, and are now accessible to anyone willing to spend a few hours of research on the Web. (Although, while preparing this article, I noticed that Google is now making access to that research more difficult than it was five years ago, artificially prioritizing anti-conspiracy sites.)

For example, members of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have demonstrated that it was impossible for plane crashes and jet fuel fires to trigger the collapse of the Twin Towers. Even Donald Trump understood this. In fact, speaking of “collapse” is perhaps misleading: the towers literally exploded, pulverizing concrete and projecting pieces of steel beams weighing several hundred tons hundreds of meters laterally at high speeds. The pyroclastic dust that immediately flooded through the streets, not unlike the dust from a volcano, indicates a high temperature mixture of hot gasses and relatively dense solid particles, an impossible phenomenon in a simple collapse. It is also impossible that WTC7, another skyscraper (47 stories), which had not been hit by a plane, collapsed into its own footprint at near free-fall speed, unless by “controlled demolition.”

Testimonies of firefighters recorded shortly after the events describe sequences of explosions just before the “collapse”, well below the plane impact. The presence of molten metal in the wreckage up to three weeks after the attack is inexplicable except by the presence of incompletely burned explosives. Firefighter Philip Ruvolo testified before Étienne Sauret’s camera for his film Collateral Damages (2011): “You’d get down below and you’d see molten steel—molten steel running down the channelways, like you were in a foundry—like lava.”

Aviation professionals have also reported impossibilities in the behavior of the planes. The charted speeds of the two aircraft hitting the Twin Towers, 443 mph and 542 mph, exclude these aircraft being Boeing 767s, because these speeds are virtually impossible near ground level. In the unlikely event such speeds could be attained without the aircraft falling apart, flying them accurately into the towers was mission impossible, especially by the amateur pilots blamed for the hijacking. Hosni Mubarak, a former pilot, said he could never do it. (He is not the only head of state to have voiced his doubts: Chavez and Ahmadinejad are among them.) Recall that neither of the black boxes of the jetliners was ever found, an incomprehensible situation.

And of course, there are the obvious anomalies of Shanksville and Pentagon crash sites: no plane or credible plane debris can be seen on any of the numerous photos easily available.

Inside Job or Mossad Job?

Among the growing number of Americans who disbelieve the official version of the 9/11 attacks, two basic theories are in competition: I called them “inside job” and “Mossad job”. The first one is the dominant thesis within the so-called 9/11 Truth movement, and blames the American government, or a faction within the American Deep State. The second one claims that the masterminds were members of a powerful Israeli network deeply infiltrated in all spheres of power within the US, including media, government, military and secret services.

This “Mossad job” thesis has been gaining ground since Alan Sabrosky, a professor at the U.S. Army War College and the U.S. Military Academy, published in July 2012 an article entitled “Demystifying 9/11: Israel and the Tactics of Mistake”, where he voiced his conviction that September 11th was “a classic Mossad-orchestrated operation.”

We can notice from the outset that incriminating Israelis or Arabs are both “outside job” theories (in fact, they are mirror images of each other, which is understandable in light of what Gilad Atzmon explains about Jewish “projected guilt”).[2]Gilad Atzmon, Being in Time: a Post-Political Manifesto, Interlink Publishing, 2017 , p. 142. Before even looking at the evidence, “outside job” sounds more credible that “inside job”. There is something monstrous in the idea that a government can deceive and terrorize its own citizens by killing thousands of them, just for starting a series of wars that are not even in the nation’s interest. By comparison, a foreign power attacking the U.S. under the false flag of a third power almost seems like fair play. Indeed suspicion of Israel’s role should be natural to anyone aware of the reputation of the Mossad as: “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act,” in the words of a report of the U.S. Army School for Advanced Military Studies quoted by the Washington Times, September 10th, 2001 — the day before the attacks.

This is an important point, because it raises the question of how and why the 9/11 Truth movement has been led to endorse massively the outrageous “inside job” thesis without even considering the more likely thesis of an attack by a foreign power acting under an Islamic false flag—and what foreign power but Israel would do that? (read more)

2020-09-11 d
9/11, THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF THREE BUILDINGS, OUR FREEDOMS, AND OUR NATION - 1II

Our American Pravda

The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
...
Credibility is a capital asset, which may take years to accumulate but can be squandered in an instant; and the events of the last dozen years should have bankrupted any faith we have in our government or media. Once we acknowledge this, we should begin to accept the possible reality of important, well-documented events even if they are not announced on the front pages of our major newspapers. When several huge scandals have erupted into the headlines after years or decades of total media silence, we must wonder what other massive stories may currently be ignored by our media elites. I think I can provide a few possibilities.

Consider the almost forgotten anthrax mailing attacks in the weeks after 9/11, which terrified our dominant East Coast elites and spurred passage of the unprecedented Patriot Act, thereby eliminating many traditional civil-libertarian protections. (read more)

2020-09-11 c
9/11, THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF THREE BUILDINGS, OUR FREEDOMS, AND OUR NATION - 1I

American Pravda: How the CIA Invented "Conspiracy Theories"

A year or two ago, I saw the much-touted science fiction film Interstellar, and although the plot wasn’t any good, one early scene was quite amusing. For various reasons, the American government of the future claimed that our Moon Landings of the late 1960s had been faked, a trick aimed at winning the Cold War by bankrupting Russia into fruitless space efforts of its own. This inversion of historical reality was accepted as true by nearly everyone, and those few people who claimed that Neil Armstrong had indeed set foot on the Moon were universally ridiculed as “crazy conspiracy theorists.” This seems a realistic portrayal of human nature to me.

Obviously, a large fraction of everything described by our government leaders or presented in the pages of our most respectable newspapers—from the 9/11 attacks to the most insignificant local case of petty urban corruption—could objectively be categorized as a “conspiracy theory” but such words are never applied. Instead, use of that highly loaded phrase is reserved for those theories, whether plausible or fanciful, that do not possess the endorsement stamp of establishmentarian approval.

Put another way, there are good “conspiracy theories” and bad “conspiracy theories,” with the former being the ones promoted by pundits on mainstream television shows and hence never described as such. I’ve sometimes joked with people that if ownership and control of our television stations and other major media outlets suddenly changed, the new information regime would require only a few weeks of concerted effort to totally invert all of our most famous “conspiracy theories” in the minds of the gullible American public. The notion that nineteen Arabs armed with box-cutters hijacked several jetliners, easily evaded our NORAD air defenses, and reduced several landmark buildings to rubble would soon be universally ridiculed as the most preposterous “conspiracy theory” ever to have gone straight from the comic books into the minds of the mentally ill, easily surpassing the absurd “lone gunman” theory of the JFK assassination.

Even without such changes in media control, huge shifts in American public beliefs have frequently occurred in the recent past, merely on the basis of implied association. In the initial weeks and months following the 2001 attacks, every American media organ was enlisted to denounce and vilify Osama Bin Laden, the purported Islamicist master-mind, as our greatest national enemy, with his bearded visage endlessly appearing on television and in print, soon becoming one of the most recognizable faces in the world. But as the Bush Administration and its key media allies prepared a war against Iraq, the images of the Burning Towers were instead regularly juxtaposed with mustachioed photos of dictator Saddam Hussein, Bin Laden’s arch-enemy. As a consequence, by the time we attacked Iraq in 2003, polls revealed that some 70% of the American public believed that Saddam was personally involved in the destruction of our World Trade Center. By that date I don’t doubt that many millions of patriotic but low-information Americans would have angrily denounced and vilified as a “crazy conspiracy theorist” anyone with the temerity to suggest that Saddam had not been behind 9/11, despite almost no one in authority having ever explicitly made such a fallacious claim. (read more)

2020-09-11 b
9/11, THE CONTROLLED DEMOLITION OF THREE BUILDINGS, OUR FREEDOMS, AND OUR NATION - 1

From 9/11 to the Great Reset

9/11 was the foundation stone of the new millennium – ever as much indecipherable as the Mysteries of Eleusis. A year ago, on Asia Times, once again I raised a number of questions that still find no answer.

A lightning speed breakdown of the slings and arrows of outrageous (mis)fortune trespassing these two decades will certainly include the following. The end of history. The short unipolar moment. The Pentagon’s Long War. Homeland Security. The Patriot Act. Shock and Awe. The tragedy/debacle in Iraq. The 2008 financial crisis. The Arab Spring. Color revolutions. “Leading from behind”. Humanitarian imperialism. Syria as the ultimate proxy war. The ISIS/Daesh farce. The JCPOA. Maidan. The Age of Psyops. The Age of the Algorithm. The Age of the 0.0001%.

Once again, we’re deep in Yeats territory: “the best lack all conviction/ while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

All along, the “War on Terror” – the actual decantation of the Long War – proceeded unabated, killing Muslim multitudes and displacing at least 37 million people.

WWII-derived geopolitics is over. Cold War 2.0 is in effect. It started as US against Russia, morphed into US against China and now, fully spelled out in the US National Security Strategy, and with bipartisan support, it’s the US against both. The ultimate Mackinder-Brzezinski nightmare is at hand: the much dread “peer competitor” in Eurasia slouched towards the Beltway to be born in the form of the Russia-China strategic partnership.

Something’s gotta give. And then, out of the blue, it did.

A drive by design towards ironclad concentration of power and geoconomic diktats was first conceptualized – under the deceptive cover of “sustainable development” – already in 2015 at the UN (here it is, in detail).

Now, this new operating system – or technocratic digital dystopia – is finally being codified, packaged and “sold” since mid summer via a lavish, concerted propaganda campaign.

Watch your mindspace

The whole Planet Lockdown hysteria that elevated Covid-19 to post-modern Black Plague proportions has been consistently debunked, for instance here and here, drawing from the highly respected, original Cambridge source.

The de facto controlled demolition of large swathes of the global economy allowed corporate and vulture capitalism, world wide, to rake untold profits out of the destruction of collapsed businesses.

And all that proceeded with widespread public acceptance – an astonishing process of voluntary servitude.

None of it is accidental. As an example, over then years ago, even before setting up a – privatized – Behavioral Insights Team, the British government was very much interested in “influencing” behavior, in collaboration with the London School of Economics and Imperial College.

The end result was the MINDSPACE report. That was all about behavioral science influencing policymaking and most of all, imposing neo-Orwellian population control.

MINDSPACE, crucially, featured close collaboration between Imperial College and the Santa Monica-based RAND corporation. Translation: the authors of the absurdly flawed computer models that fed the Planet Lockdown paranoia working in conjunction with the top Pentagon-linked think tank.

In MINDSPACE, we find that, “behavioral approaches embody a line of thinking that moves from the idea of an autonomous individual, making rational decisions, to a ‘situated’ decision-maker, much of whose behavior is automatic and influenced by their ‘choice environment’”.

So the key question is who decides what is the “choice environment’. As it stands, our whole environment is conditioned by Covid-19. Let’s call it “the disease”. And that is more than enough to beautifully set up “the cure”: The Great Reset.

The beating heart

The Great Reset was officially launched in early June by the World Economic Forum (WEF) – the natural habitat of Davos Man. Its conceptual base is something the WEF describes as Strategic Intelligence Platform: “a dynamic system of contextual intelligence that enables users to trace relationships and interdependencies between issues, supporting more informed decision-making”.

It’s this platform that promotes the complex crossover and interpenetration of Covid-19 and the Fourth Industrial Revolution – conceptualized back in December 2015 and the WEF’s choice futuristic scenario. One cannot exist without the other. That is meant to imprint in the collective unconscious – at least in the West – that only the WEF-sanctioned “stakeholder” approach is capable of solving the Covid-19 challenge.

The Great Reset is immensely ambitious, spanning over 50 fields of knowledge and practice. It interconnects everything from economy recovery recommendations to “sustainable business models”, from restoration of the environment to the redesign of social contracts.

The beating heart of this matrix is – what else – the Strategic Intelligence Platform, encompassing, literally, everything: “sustainable development”, “global governance”, capital markets, climate change, biodiversity, human rights, gender parity, LGBTI, systemic racism, international trade and investment, the – wobbly – future of the travel and tourism industries, food, air pollution, digital identity, blockchain, 5G, robotics, artificial intelligence (AI).

In the end, only an all-in-one Plan A applies for making these systems interact seamlessly: the Great Reset – shorthand for a New World Order that has always been glowingly evoked, but never implemented. There is no Plan B.

The Covid-19 “legacy”

The two main actors behind the Great Reset are Klaus Schwab, the WEF’s founder and executive chairman, and IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva. Georgieva is adamant that “the digital economy is the big winner of this crisis”. She believes the Great Reset must imperatively start in 2021.

The House of Windsor and the UN are prime executive co-producers. Top sponsors include BP, Mastercard and Microsoft. It goes without saying that everyone who knows how complex geopolitical and geoeconomic decisions are taken is aware that these two main actors are just reciting a script. Call the authors “the globalist elite”. Or, in praise of Tom Wolfe, the Masters of the Universe.

Schwab, predictably, wrote the Great Reset’s mini-manifesto. Over a month later, he expanded on the absolutely key connection: the “legacy” of Covid-19. (read more)

2020-09-11 a

“This is an age of mass production. In the mass production of materials a broad technique has been developed and applied to their distribution. In this age, too, there must be a technique for the mass distribution of ideas.”
Edward Bernays, 1928

2020
-09-10 e
Is this the end of, "Thou shalt not kill unless you are wearing a government costume and badge?"

Virginia House of Delegates Passes Bill to Eliminate Qualified Immunity for Police

Will the state become lawless?

The Virginia House of Delegates passed a bill that would eliminate qualified immunity for police officers in the commonwealth in a narrow vote on Tuesday, setting up Virginia to become the first state in the union in which police officers could be sued for a wide variety of conduct standard to legal law enforcement work.

The bill passed when it was voted upon for the second time, after a provision that would’ve held police departments accountable for behavior of off-duty police officers was stripped from the legislation.

Chesterfield, Virginia Police Chief Jeffrey Katz criticized the legislation, stating that it would lead to a climate in which Virginia police officers decline to respond to public emergencies, criminal acts and threats to public safety out of fears that they’ll face years of costly litigation, potentially from criminals who have demonstrably committed crimes. (read more)

2020-09-10 d
THE COVID-CON III

Lockdown forever

We cannot allow our freedoms to wither away.

So here we are, almost six months since lockdown began and how many people you have round your house is still a police matter.

The announcement from prime minister Boris Johnson yesterday, that the legal limit on social gatherings would be reduced from 30 people to six, was at once depressing and mundane.

Such an infringement on our most basic freedoms would have been unthinkable this time last year, but it almost seems generous by recent standards. At least the pubs are still open – for now.

But for the first time in weeks we are going in the opposite direction, and the bleakness of it all is hard to overstate. A short-term sacrifice to blunt the pandemic has become an indefinite, draining burden.

Students are starting freshers confined to small social bubbles. Christmas could well be cancelled. Planning any sort of gathering more than a few days in advance has become fraught with legal uncertainty.

Meanwhile, the justification for all this remains highly contested.

Debate still rages about whether the original hard lockdown was necessary. According to experts, infections were falling before lockdown came in, seemingly due to voluntary public action. (read more)

2020-09-10 c
THE COVID-CON II

House Freedom Caucus Leader: It’s Time to ‘Unmask’ and Reject ‘Oppressive’ COVID-19 Mandates

Andy Biggs has had enough of lockdown insanity.

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) is telling the people of Arizona that it is time to “unmask” and reject “oppressive” shutdown mandates related to COVID-19 mass hysteria.

He made the declaration on Wednesday in a series of Twitter posts (read more)

2020-09-10 b
THE COVID-CON I


We’re vindicated, say Swedes after coronavirus cases hit new low

Sweden has registered its lowest rate of positive coronavirus tests yet even after its testing regime was expanded to record levels in what one health official said was a vindication of its relatively non-intrusive Covid-19 strategy.

Over the past week the country carried out more than 120,000 tests, of which only 1.3 per cent identified the disease. At the height of the pandemic the proportion was 19 per cent.

Johan Carlson, an epidemiologist and director of the public health agency, said that Swedes seemed to be benefiting from widespread immunity because of the decision not to order the population to stay at home during the first wave.

“Our strategy was consistent and sustainable,” Professor Carlson said. “We probably have a lower risk of [the virus] spreading than other countries.”…

Some scientists predicted that as many as 180,000 people could die in a country of 10.2 million. Those estimates proved to be drastically overblown: up to now there have been 5,838 COVID-19 deaths. In per capita terms this is the fifth highest death rate in Europe, behind only Belgium, the UK, Spain and Italy, but it has also fallen substantially since the summer. Only seven people died with the disease in the past week. (read more)

2020-09-10 a

"To hold a pen is to be at war."
Francois Marie Arouet, a.k.a. Voltaire

2020
-09-09 d
THE COVID-CON II

1000s Of Cases But Zero Hospitalizations In Colleges: Good News But States Force Draconian Lockdowns

Remember the goal of flattening the curve?

Ensuring that hospitals weren’t overrun? Well, what do you call a scenario where thousands of cases result in zero hospitalizations? I’d call it the ultimate flat curve – or downright flat line.

Yet rather than recognizing the detection of mild cases among college students as portents of good news, universities continue to sow panic for no good reason.

If we had in place the strict eligibility threshold for COVID-19 testing that we had in March when tests were scarce, we quite literally would not know the “epidemic” of mild and asymptomatic cases on college campus even exists. After being open for weeks, college campuses have no reported deaths or even hospitalizations that I can find. You might say that’s because they’ve done such an amazing job preventing cases. Nope: They have tons of reported cases. Dr. Andrew Bostom, a cardiovascular and epidemiology researcher, posted a spreadsheet on twitter of all the cases in 17 state university systems as of September 4:

There is not a single hospitalization among them. How is this an emergency situation? If anything, the fact that there are so many cases is a blessing, because, with such a young population, these cases are a de facto vaccine, creating herd immunity without danger. (read more)

2020-09-09 c
THE COVID-CON I

Halloween Canceled: LA County Bans Door-to-Door Trick-Or-Treating

…the one day people actually want to wear masks…

Los Angeles County has announced it’s cancelling Halloween.

The county health commission released ghastly new guidelines Tuesday eliminating many of the activities traditionally celebrated during the yearly fall holiday.

One activity labeled “not permitted”: Halloween parties.

“Halloween gatherings, events or parties with non-household members are not permitted even if they are conducted outdoors,” the guidance mandates, adding that “gatherings and events are not currently allowed under the health Officer Order).”

Haunted house attractions are also inexplicably eliminated.

In another section, the county advises parents against allowing children to go trick-or-treating, claiming it poses a health risk.

“Door to door trick or treating is not recommended because it can be very difficult to maintain proper social distancing on porches and at front doors, ensure that everyone answering or coming to the door is appropriately masked to prevent disease spread, and because sharing food is risky.” (read more)

2020-09-09 b
"
Trump supporters are getting taken for a ride"

This Investigation is a Sham’: Judicial Watch President Slams John Durham for Going Easy on the Deep State

Durham is dropping the ball.

Trump supporters are waiting with bated breath for U.S. Attorney John Durham to come out with his explosive findings in regards to his investigation into the origins of the Russian collusion probe against President Trump.

According to Judicial Watch founder Tom Fitton, Trump supporters are getting taken for a ride. Fitton said during a recent appearance on Fox Business’ “Lou Dobbs Tonight” that Barr and Durham are making no progress on investigating what very well may be the worst criminal conspiracy in U.S. history.

“You know, my concern is it’s been, what, sixteen-plus months since Durham was appointed and only now is he questioning Mr. Brennan,” Fitton said.

Fitton said that he is inclined to believe disgraced former CIA Director John Brennan when he says that he is not a person of interest in Durham’s investigation.

“I don’t see grand juries operating. I don’t see a bunch of witnesses coming in. I don’t see lawyers complaining about their clients being brought in before Durham,” Fitton said.

He said that the Mueller investigation was run much more thoroughly than Durham’s so-called investigation, the goal of which appears to be protecting the deep state.

“You know when the government is being pressure on witnesses and subjects and that is not evident here,” Fitton said, adding that it is his opinion that Durham is “not doing the work” needed to bring deep state criminals to justice.

Fitton did not object to Dobbs’ characterization that he is calling the Durham a “sham.”

“I’ll have to tell you. I’m a little concerned that the FBI is no longer an investigative agency because if this is the way they operate, it’s going to take them decades to deal with anything of real complexity,” Dobbs said. (read more)

2020-09-09 a

“Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government.”
Edward Bernays, 1928

2020-09-07 and 08

Labor Day rest

2020-09-06 d
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN A TIME OF INTOLERANCE - III

"the role of genetics in intelligence among different human populations was still an open question"

My run-in with the New York Times

t’s never a good sign when you’re watching a scene of street terror in yet another gut-churning YouTube video and you find yourself thinking: ‘Hang on a minute, that’s around the corner from my apartment!’ But there’s a now infamous video from last week where a mob of enraged millennials with their fists pumped in the air surrounded a lone young woman sitting outside a Washington restaurant where I often eat. Like a scene from the Cultural Revolution, the crowd demanded she shout certain slogans and raise her clenched fist in solidarity — or be damned as a racist. Most of her fellow diners took the path of least resistance. She wouldn’t. The chants grew louder: ‘White silence is violence!’ They started screaming in her face. She wouldn’t cave. Wokeness, in case you hadn’t noticed, has entered a more intense phase. Not so long ago, you were cancelled for something you did or said or wrote. Now you’re cancelled just for saying absolutely nothing at all.

had a much milder experience of this during the past week when the New York Times decided to run a profile of me. The hook was that I was forced to leave New York magazine last month because, according to the NYT, I had not publicly recanted editing an issue of the New Republic published… in 1994. The issue was a symposium on The Bell Curve, a book by Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein that explored the connection between IQ, class, social mobility and race. My crime was to arrange a symposium around an extract, with 13 often stinging critiques published alongside it. The fact I had not recanted that decision did not, mind you, prevent Time, the Atlantic, Newsweek, the NYT, and New York magazine from publishing me in the following years. But suddenly, a decision I made a quarter of a century ago required my being cancelled. The NYT reporter generously gave me a chance to apologise and recant, and when I replied that I thought the role of genetics in intelligence among different human populations was still an open question, he had his headline: ‘I won’t stop reading Andrew Sullivan, but I can’t defend him.’ In other words, the media reporter in America’s paper of record said he could not defend a writer because I refused to say something I don’t believe. He said this while arguing that I was ‘one of the most influential journalists of the last three decades’. To be fair to him, he would have had no future at the NYT if he had not called me an indefensible racist. His silence on that would have been as unacceptable to his woke bosses as my refusal to recant. But this is where we now are. A reporter is in fear of being cancelled if he doesn’t cancel someone else. This is America returning to its roots. As in Salem. (read more)

2020-09-06 c
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN A TIME OF INTOLERANCE - II

Wokeness is a cult of purity

They believe cultures cannot mix and that good people must be punished for the most minor transgressions.

It’s a sign that normality has returned in earnest: the trivial transgression of cultural appropriation is back in the news headlines. No doubt you will have seen the story. The singer Adele has been accused of this outrageous violation after appearing in a virtual Notting Hill Carnival photograph sporting a bikini top emblazoned with the Jamaican flag and with her hair in Bantu knots, a hairstyle mostly associated with African women or women of African descent.

We are back on familiar ground, back to the notion that any form of intercultural interaction, especially undertaken by white people, is inherently racist and offensive. Some did defend Adele on the grounds that being a native of Britain’s multiracial capital city, she knew exactly what she was doing, and was less engaging in appropriation and more appreciation. Yet the affair reveals how tenacious remains the notion of ‘cultural appropriation’.

This popular conceit is profoundly ignorant and illiterate. All cultures are cross-breeds to some degree. I write these very words in a language that is a mash-up of Anglo-Saxon and Old French. English combines the language of the oppressed and oppressor. I punch up and down merely by typing these words.

Yet the resilient belief that cultures are sacred and incorruptible is significant. It is a symptom of a new morality of purity, a culture of cleansing and of new boundaries.
...
This purity cult seeks to expunge society of those who fail to obey woke diktats, to cancel, ‘call out’, shame, intimidate, harass or punish the undesirables. Liberal humanism is derided as insufficient. It is not enough to tolerate people we disagree with. They must conform or be expelled.
...
It is often remarked that people are far more intolerant these days, and seek recourse to censorship so freely. It derives from this new morality, which can’t abide impurity and cannot tolerate difference or dissent. (read more)

2020-09-06 b
FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN A TIME OF INTOLERANCE - I

People must have the right to mock Muhammad

Charlie Hebdo is right to republish the cartoons that caused such barbarism in 2015.

Charlie Hebdo is at it again. Once again the famously fuck-you French magazine has published caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. And not any old caricatures. It has published the ones that made it a target for radical Islamist fury and mass murder in January 2015, when two al-Qaeda-inspired gunmen stormed into its offices and massacred 10 of its cartoonists and writers for the ‘crime’ of blasphemy, for the ‘sin’ of mocking the Prophet. Have Charlie Hebdo’s new editors gone mad? What are they thinking republishing the Muhammad-mocking cartoons that led to that act of deranged slaughter just five years ago?

They’re thinking, it seems, about freedom, and in particular freedom of speech, and about the importance of upholding this central value of civilised societies even in the face of threats from violent religious extremists. Charlie Hebdo is right to republish the cartoons. It has, predictably, received a lot of flak. The radical Islamist corners of the World Wide Web will be full of rage and splutter. Leaders in Muslim-majority countries will hotly denounce the heretical French satirists. Indeed, Pakistan has already condemned Charlie Hebdo. Its foreign ministry declared on Twitter that this ‘deliberate act to offend the sentiments of billions of Muslims cannot be justified as an exercise in press freedom or freedom of expression. Such actions undermine the global aspirations for peaceful coexistence.’

Actually, the republication of the cartoons can absolutely be justified in terms of freedom of expression. This is unquestionably a free-speech issue. The right to doubt, question and even mock all gods, prophets, ideologies and fads is essential to a free society. (read more)

2020-09-06 a

“In our country the lie has become not just a moral category but a pillar of the State.”.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

2020
-09-05 a
Critical Race Theory (Anti-White) Indoctrination Banned

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
FROM: Russell Vought, Director
SUBJECT: Training in the Federal Government

It has come to the President’s attention that Executive Branch agencies have spent millions of taxpayer dollars to date “training” government workers to believe divisive, antiAmerican propaganda.

For example, according to press reports, employees across the Executive Branch have been required to attend trainings where they are told that “virtually all White people contribute to racism” or where they are required to say that they “benefit from racism.” According to press reports, in some cases these training have further claimed that there is racism embedded in the belief that America is the land of opportunity or the belief that the most qualified person should receive a job.

These types of “trainings” not only run counter to the fundamental beliefs for which our Nation has stood since its inception, but they also engender division and resentment within the Federal workforce. We can be proud that as an employer, the Federal government has employees of all races, ethnicities, and religions. We can be proud that Americans from all over the country seek to join our workforce and dedicate themselves to public service. We can be proud of our continued efforts to welcome all individuals who seek to serve their fellow Americans as Federal employees. However, we cannot accept our employees receiving training that seeks to undercut our core values as Americans and drive division within our workforce.

The President has directed me to ensure that Federal agencies cease and desist from using taxpayer dollars to fund these divisive, un-American propaganda training sessions. Accordingly, to that end, the Office of Management and Budget will shortly issue more detailed guidance on implementing the President’s directive. In the meantime, all agencies are directed to begin to identify all contracts or other agency spending related to any training on “critical race theory / “white privilege,” or any other training or propaganda effort that teaches or suggests either (1) that the United States is an inherently racist or evil country or (2) that any race or ethnicity is inherently racist or evil. In addition, all agencies should begin to identify all available avenues within the law to cancel any such contracts and/or to divert Federal dollars away from these unAmerican propaganda training sessions. (read more)

2020
-09-04 f
Is Biden Mentally Fit to Be President?

"End Of Quote": Biden Goes Full Ron Burgundy, Accidentally Reads Teleprompter Cues

Joe Biden engaged in a giant softball game with the press today - perhaps best described by Newsbusters' Curtis Houck as not "even putting the ball on the tee," rather "This is hitting the ball over the stands and letting Biden run the bases."

But before we get the choreographed Q&A, you should know that Biden went full Ron Burgundy today - reading "end of quote" off the teleprompter. (read more)

2020-09-04 e
Cui Bono?

Novichok, Navalny, Nordstream, Nonsense

Once Navalny was in Berlin it was only a matter of time before it was declared that he was poisoned with Novichok. The Russophobes are delighted. This of course eliminates all vestiges of doubt about what happened to the Skripals, and proves that Russia must be isolated and sanctioned to death and we must spend untold billions on weapons and security services. We must also increase domestic surveillance, crack down on dissenting online opinion. It also proves that Donald Trump is a Russian puppet and Brexit is a Russian plot.

I am going to prove beyond all doubt that I am a Russian troll by asking the question Cui Bono?, brilliantly identified by the Integrity Initiative’s Ben Nimmo as a sure sign of Russian influence.

I should state that I have no difficulty at all with the notion that a powerful oligarch or an organ of the Russian state may have tried to assassinate Navalny. He is a minor irritant, rather more famous here than in Russia, but not being a major threat does not protect you against political assassination in Russia.

What I do have difficulty with is the notion that if Putin, or other very powerful Russian actors, wanted Navalny dead, and had attacked him while he was in Siberia, he would not be alive in Germany today. If Putin wanted him dead, he would be dead.

Let us first take the weapon of attack. One thing we know about a “Novichok” for sure is that it appears not to be very good at assassination. Poor Dawn Sturgess is the only person ever to have allegedly died from “Novichok”, accidentally according to the official narrative. “Novichok” did not kill the Skripals, the actual target. If Putin wanted Navalny dead, he would try something that works. Like a bullet to the head, or an actually deadly poison.

“Novichok” is not a specific chemical. It is a class of chemical weapon designed to be improvised in the field from common domestic or industrial precursors. It makes some sense to use on foreign soil as you are not carrying around the actual nerve agent, and may be able to buy the ingredients locally. But it makes no sense at all in your own country, where the FSB or GRU can swan around with any deadly weapon they wish, to be making homemade nerve agents in the sink. Why would you do that? (read more)

2020-09-04 d
UK and US War on Journalism

WATCH: The War on Journalism: The Case of Julian Assange
A new documentary by Juan Passarelli can be seen here on Consortium News, followed by a panel discussion with Passarelli, director Ken Loach and filmmaker Suzie Gilbert.

ASSANGE EXTRADITION: War on Journalism Resumes on Monday
Assange’s case is a testimony to the deepening crisis of Western liberal democracy, writes Nozomi Hiyase. What has been revealed is a widespread breakdown of systems of accountability and a dangerous trend toward authoritarianism.

ASSANGE EXTRADITION: Substantive Hearing Begins Monday
the media trial of the century

ASSANGE EXTRADITION: After Cheering Assange’s Abuse, Journalists Have Paved Path to US Gulag
Eight years of misdirection by the corporate media has laid the ground for the current public indifference to Assange’s extradition and widespread ignorance of its horrendous implications, writes Jonathan Cook.

2020-09-04 c
Color Revolution in Washington?

Transition Integrity Project: Is this Soros Linked Group Plotting a “Color Revolution” Against President Trump?

previous report on Never Trump State Department official George Kent
https://www.revolver.news/2020/08/george-kent-never-trump-state-department/

In our previous report on Never Trump State Department official George Kent, Revolver News drew attention to the ominous similarities between the strategies and tactics the United States government employs in so-called “Color Revolutions” and the coordinated efforts of government bureaucrats, NGOs, and the media to oust President Trump.

This follow-up report will focus specifically on how the “contested election scenario” we are hearing so much about plays into the Color Revolution framework — indeed, sowing doubt about the democratic legitimacy of the target and coupling it with calls for massive “mostly peaceful” demonstrations comes straight out of the Color Revolution playbook. And this is precisely the messaging we’ve seen from by those same key players in media, government, and the Democrat Party machine, most prominently from a shadowy George Soros-linked group known as the Transition Integrity Project — more about them soon. (read more)

2020-09-04 b
THE COVID-CON

Just How Deep Is Your COVID-19 Religion?

“I wanted to stay put in Colombia to build a better future for my daughter, but we have to go back.” Those are the words of Nelson Torrelles to Wall Street Journal reporter John Otis. As Otis reported in the August 31 edition of the Journal, the “haggard and hungry” Torrelles along with his wife and 5-year old daughter are walking back to Venezuela on a Colombian highway.

They’d initially moved to Colombia to escape Venezuela’s socialist hellhole, only for Torrelles to get a job as a waiter at a barbecue restaurant in Bogota. But when Colombia joined much of the rest of the alarmed world in shutting down its economy in March in response to the coronavirus, Torrelles lost his job and soon enough the family apartment that he couldn’t make rent on. Hard as it may be to imagine for those of us lucky enough to live in the United States, the hungry Torrelles and his family are moving back to Venezuela.

Please stop and think about this for a minute. Please stop and imagine the pain Torrelles is in. It surely extends well beyond hunger. Imagine not being able to adequately provide for your family, including a daughter too young to understand that your failures are largely beyond your control. Words don’t begin to describe what Torrelles must be going through, nor can someone lucky enough to be in the United States understand just how awful things must be for Torrelles and his family.

About the coronavirus shutdowns, this column will stress yet again what it always has: the greater the presumed lethality of any virus, the less of any kind of need for shutdowns or government intervention.

Practicality is behind this simple assertion.

For one, economic growth has long been the biggest enemy of virus and disease precisely because economic growth produces the surplus resources that can be mobilized in pursuit of cures for what ails us. If something threatens us with sickness or even death, no reasonable person would respond with forced economic contraction.

Second, the greater the presumed lethality of any virus, the more that any laws or rules meant to limit its spread are superfluous. Really, what about the high possibility of sickness or even death requires a law? People don’t need to be told to not hurt or kill themselves. No reasonable person would seek to expand government power over human action during the spread of a virus precisely because wise people would govern themselves.

To which some who absolutely revel in being told what to do will respond that not everyone is rational when it comes to protecting themselves. So true.

All of which speaks to the third reason any kind of governmental response to a virus is impractical. It is because accepted wisdom rarely ages well. (read more)

2020-09-04 a

"The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.”
Albert Camus

2020
-09-03 f
Either Insiders Expect the Durham Probe Will Produce Indictments Tomorrow, 4 September,
OR, the Latest Magic Money Fueled Market Bubble Has Popped

Dow ends more than 800 points lower as tech plunge gives stocks worst day since June

Technology and other high-flying stock sectors suffered steep losses Thursday as investors appetite waned following an extraordinary rally in the past month, dragging the rest of the stock market lower.

How did stock-market benchmarks perform?

The Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -2.77% DJIA, -2.77% ended with a loss of 807.77 points, or 2.8%, at 28,292.73, after dropping more than 1,000 points at its session low. The S&P 500 SPX, -3.51% closed 125.78 points lower, down 3.5%, at 3,455.06. The Nasdaq Composite COMP, -4.96% tumbled 598.34 points, or 5%, to end at 11,458.10. The declines marked the biggest one-day drops for all three indexes since June.

The fall came a day after the S&P 500 claimed its 22nd record close of the year, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite arrived at its 43rd such all-time high and the Dow topped the 29,000 level for the first time since February. Thursday’s fall snapped a four-day win streak for the Nasdaq and a 10-day run of gains for the S&P 500’s tech sector. (read more)

2020-09-03 e
Crazed Billionaires Hate Our Freedoms

There is a George Soros, Bill Gates, #CCP-linked organization wargaming on how Joe Biden can seize the election

There is a George Soros, Bill Gates,
#CCP-linked organization wargaming on how
@JoeBiden can seize the election #WarRoomPandemic


2020-09-03 d
Too Little, Too Late

NYC Restaurants Sue Cuomo For $2BN For Refusing To Allow Return Of Indoor Dining

After slamming President Trump for acting "like a king", NY Gov Andrew Cuomo has mercifully allowed more businesses in the Empire State to finally reopen, even though COVID-19 cases haven't seen anything approaching the kind of resurgences that officials have warned about.

Unlike pretty much every other state at this point (even neighboring New Jersey finally caved), New York hasn't allowed the return of indoor dining. The issue is prompting an outpouring of rage directed at Cuomo and NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio, who have allowed protesters to gather night after night, while crushing the city's small businesses. Adding insult to injury, de Blasio caved to the teachers union and spared more than 20,000 city employees who had been set for layoffs.

Gyms finally reopened in NYC Wednesday after city officials forced businesses to get cleared by the health department. Gyms around the state were allowed to reopen Aug. 24, but the delay until Sept. 2 was unique to New York City. (read more)

2020-09-03 c
Looks Like the Spooks Are the Crooks

The Real Threat To US Elections Doesn't Come From Beijing Or Moscow

It’s our own national security bureaucracy...

This month, U.S. intelligence reported that Russia wants Donald Trump to win reelection, while China and Iran seek to help Joe Biden.

Both sides of the political aisle have cited the report, claiming that one adversary or another would be happy if the other party takes power in January.

It shouldn’t surprise us that foreign countries have preferences about American electoral outcomes. Why wouldn’t they, given U.S. influence in the world? According to political scientist Lindsey O'Rourke, during the Cold War, the United States engaged in 64 attempts at covert regime change. More recently, we have overthrown and ultimately helped kill leaders in Iraq and Libya, while aiming to replace governments in Syria and Venezuela. Hillary Clinton believes that Vladimir Putin’s grudge against her goes back to comments she made about the 2011 parliamentary elections in Russia, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently urged the Chinese people to overthrow their government.

Given the American propensity for regime change overseas, it makes sense that other nations would seek, in turn, to interfere in American politics—for reasons of self-defense, if nothing else. What’s less understandable is the moral indignation that American leaders express about what are relatively minor incursions, compared with U.S. violations of some of the most fundamental rules of international law.

Nearly two decades ago, Vladimir Putin and the Chinese Communists warned the United States against invading Iraq. Those who opposed the war at home were criticized as unpatriotic and apologists for Saddam Hussein. Therefore, was the Iraq War a good idea because Saddam, the Chinese, and the Russians were all against it?

As the Iraq War should remind us, the world is usually not zero-sum. China, Iran, and Russia do not want conflict with the U.S. For self-interested reasons alone, they would prefer a world with less war, a lower likelihood of major pandemics like Covid-19, and a stronger global economy. To spite our rivals, should we, therefore, be in favor of disease, war, and depression?

Of course, it’s possible that China or Russia wants a certain side to win in November because it sees an opportunity to take advantage of Americans or engage in foreign aggression. Nonetheless, simply knowing which candidate Xi or Putin favors tells us nothing about which way Americans should vote.

Right now, Americans are extremely pessimistic about their institutions and the direction of the country. Yet, as liberal journalist Ezra Klein argues in his recent Why We’re Polarized, the system may be broken from the perspective of what’s good for the country, but it still works fairly well from the perspective of those in power. Government contractors still get paid, lobbyists make major profits, and top government officials can still leverage their time in power into lucrative private-sector work. Coming from the other side of the political spectrum, Charles Murray’s Coming Apart documented how the Washington, D.C. metro area has become home to the nation’s wealthiest counties in recent decades.

It’s from this perspective that we should understand stories about election interference. While it is the job of intelligence agencies to counter foreign intrusion, knowing whom Iran or Russia wants to win in November provides no valuable information to American voters. Such reports actually increase hostility toward foreign countries and make it easier to sell policies that will ultimately benefit those who produce intelligence reports and leak national security stories. Hostility to foreign governments has generally translated into more money and power going to the national security bureaucracy and the corporations that benefit from it. Once in office, a president may find it difficult to calm relations with the foreign country that “wanted him to win.”

If American leaders were really interested in protecting our democracy, they would forgo regime change overseas and remove incentives for election interference at home. As long as American presidential elections' outcomes carry such high stakes internationally, foreign governments will do whatever they can to put their thumbs on the scale. (read more)

2020-09-03 b
"the novel coronavirus provides a pretext and justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians"

Video: Covid-Gate, The Political Virus

The national economies of 193 countries, member states of the United Nations were ordered to close down on March 11, 2020. The order came from above, from Wall Street, the World Economic Forum, the billionaire foundations. And corrupt politicians throughout the world have enforced these so-called guidelines with a view to resolving a public health crisis.

Millions of people have lost their jobs, and their lifelong savings. In developing countries, poverty and despair prevail. We are told the it is V the Virus which is responsible for the wave of bankruptcies and unemployment.

The unspoken truth is that the novel coronavirus provides a pretext and justification to powerful financial interests and corrupt politicians to precipitate the entire World into a spiral of  mass unemployment, bankruptcy and extreme poverty.

And then Joe Biden tells us that the US economy must remain in a lockdown to save lives. What utter nonsense. Has he analysed the underlying causality? I am sure he has! He’s lying on behalf of Big Money. (see more)

2020-09-03 a

“The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.”
Albert Einstein

2020
-09-01 d
Black LIES Matter

To Destroy America

As its Marxist pedigree makes clear, Black Lives Matter is committed to overthrowing our entire system.

The protests that sprang up in the wake of George Floyd’s killing in Minneapolis seemed like spontaneous outpourings of grief and anger. They weren’t entirely. Though many who joined their ranks may have been moved by outrage at the images of Floyd’s death, those operating behind the scenes have prepared for this moment for a long time.

Indeed, the leaders of the Black Lives Matter organizations fueling this summer’s disturbances were trained by self-described Marxist revolutionaries who have long used the plight of black Americans as justification for overthrowing America’s constitutional order. They frankly admit that such “organizing” is the key to their goal of world revolution. Our political leaders owe it to themselves and to their fellow Americans to understand this blueprint before rhetorically embracing, let alone implementing, the radical changes that the protesters and rioters are demanding.

The goal of upending the American system is, moreover, also evident among the consultants now conducting “anti-racism training” within major corporations and foundations. These facilitators of anti-white struggle sessions disdain the capitalist system and seek its replacement—and the mainstream media cheers them on. In a July New York Times article on the BLM movement, Douglas McAdams, professor emeritus at Stanford, wrote: “It looks, for all the world, like these protests are achieving what very few do: setting in motion a period of significant, sustained, and widespread social, political change. We appear to be experiencing a social change tipping point—that is as rare in society as it is potentially consequential.”

But who initiated this demand for change? After the initial protests following Floyd’s death, public outrage was channeled—by trained activists working from a playbook—into manifestations that often grew riotous. The Black Lives Matters Global Network and Movement for Black Lives organizations have been the nerve center of the protests. They have been laying the groundwork for years, carefully cultivating a network of groups that could organize protests when the moment came and amplify the message through social media.

Consider the BLM Global Network. The three women who thought up the BLM name in 2013, and then added the hashtag, later founded the global network. They remain in charge. As the New York Times Magazine explained, “while much of the nation’s attention drifted away from Black Lives Matter, organizers and activists weren’t dormant.” One of the three founders, Alicia Garza, said that “the movement’s first generation of organizers has been working steadily to become savvier and even more strategic over the past seven years, and have been joined by motivated younger leaders.”

As the Times report elaborates, “One of the reasons there have been protests in so many places in the United States is the backing of organizations like Black Lives Matter. While the group isn’t necessarily directing each protest, it provides materials, guidance and a framework for new activists.” Deva Woodly, a professor at the New School, told a Times reporter that, “those activists are taking to social media to quickly share protest details to a wide audience. . . . These figures would make the recent protests the largest movement in the country’s history.”

Melina Abdullah, of BLM’s Los Angeles chapter, told an interviewer that the demonstrations in that city had been strategically planned: “We built kind of an organizing strategy that said, build black community [to] disrupt white supremacy.” Their targets, she said, were the neighborhoods where “white affluent folks” lived. “That’s one of the reasons the marches and the protests were in Beverly Hills.”

A Los Angeles Times story emphasizes the central role that the BLM organization played, saying: “The unprecedented size and scope of recent rallies speaks to how Black Lives Matter has transformed from a small but passionate movement into a cultural and political phenomenon.” Weeks after Floyd was killed, BLM members were “continuing to channel their outrage and grief over his killing into a sustained mass campaign for profound social change. The group has political sway that would have seemed unimaginable just a few months ago.”

In a 2015 interview, Patrice Cullors, another of the three founders, said that she and Garza were “trained Marxists.” Abdullah, of the Los Angeles BLM chapter, was born a red-diaper baby—“Raised in the 70s, in the picket lines of Oakland, by activist parents,” as the interviewer put it. Her paternal grandfather was Gunter Reimann, a member of the German Communist Party. Garza cut her organizing teeth as director of People Organized to Win Employment Rights (POWER), founded by Marxists Garth Ferguson, Patty Snitzler, Regina Douglas, Brian Russell, and Steve Williams. To Williams we owe the concept of “transformative organizing,” which insists “that effective organizing for social change cannot simply be based on an apolitical and highly specific analysis of what is possible in the short term.”

Cullors trained for a decade as a radical organizer in the Labor/Community Strategy Center, established and run by Eric Mann, a former member of the Weather Underground, the 1960s radical faction identified by the FBI as a domestic terrorist group. The “Weathermen” explained in their 1969 foundational statement that they were dedicated to “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of classless world: world communism.” The ties between the BLM Global Network and the Weathermen run deep. National Review’s Andrew McCarthy revealed in a recent exposé that Weather Underground supporter Susan Rosenberg, whose 1984 sentence of 58 years in prison for possession “of 740 pounds of explosives, an Uzi submachine gun, an M-14 rifle, another rifle with a telescopic sight, a sawed-off shotgun, three 9-millimeter handguns in purses and boxes of ammunition” was commuted by President Bill Clinton, serves as vice chair of the board of directors of Thousand Currents—the radical, grantmaking institution that until July sponsored the BLM Global Network. Rosenberg was also sought on federal charges that she aided the 1979 prison escape of Joanne Chesimard, a Communist now living in Cuba, and whom Cullors quotes approvingly in her book When They Call You a Terrorist. (Since July, the Global Center has become “a project” of the Tides Center, another donor and supporter of the hard Left and its ideas).

Mann, who served 18 months in prison for assault and battery and disturbing the peace, remains committed to overthrowing the American system and achieving world revolution through organizing. He calls his Strategy Center the “Harvard of Revolutionary graduate schools,” or “the University of Caracas Revolutionary Graduate School.” The Center’s purpose, he told a seminar at the University of California, San Diego in 2008, is “to build an anti-racist, anti-imperialist, anti-fascist united front.” (read more)

2020-09-01 c
Black VOTES Matter

New National Poll: Trump Surges to 28% Support Amongst Black Americans

Stunning number suggests BLM riots have backfired.

The results of a new national poll reveal that a stunning 28 per cent of black Americans plan on voting for President Donald Trump.

The Atlas Intel poll finds that Biden leads Trump nationally by just three points.

But the real story lies in the percentage of Hispanic and black voters who told the pollsters that they will vote for Trump.

According to the survey, 28 per cent of African-Americans say they plan to vote for Trump, a stunning figure. (read more)

2020-09-01 b
Some Black LIVES Don't Matter

55 Shot in Chicago As “Black Men in Big Cities” Face Relentless Violence Committed With Guns

There is blood on the Democrat Mayor’s hands.

10 shot dead, another 45 left wounded – including 2 police officers.

That’s how many people were shot in Chicago from 5 PM Friday to 5 AM Monday — a mere 50 hours to be exact.

Unfortunately, these types of “bloody weekends” are now the norm in Chicago.

In fact, according to data published by the Chicago Tribune, 497 people have been killed in Chicago as of August 30 — 145 more than all of 2019.

And of those 497 victims of homicide, the majority of them are young, black men.

But it’s not just Chicago where black homicide is skyrocketing.

It’s also taking place in several other Democrat-run cities across the country.
...
Given the staggering, and ever-increasing number of black homicides in places like Chicago and New York City, along with the fact that 1,000 African Americans were murdered last year as a result of violent crime in just four Democrat-run cities, shouldn’t the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement be demanding new leadership in these places at the local level?

Of course they should.

But it wouldn’t advance their left-wing, Marxist agenda. (read more)

2020-09-01 a

"The purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
Theodore Dalrymple (a pseudonym)

______________________

Permission is hereby granted to any and all to copy and paste any entry on this page and convey it electronically along with its URL, http://www.usaapay.com/comm.html

______________________

2020 - August 16 - 31
 ARCHIVE

2020 - August 1 - 15
 ARCHIVE

2020 - July 16 - 31
 ARCHIVE

2020
- JULY 1 - 15
 ARCHIVE

2020
-
JUNE 16 - 30
 ARCHIVE

2020
- JUNE 1 - 15
 ARCHIVE

2020 - MAY 16 - 31
 ARCHIVE

2020
- MAY 1 - 15
 ARCHIVE

2020
- APRIL 16 - 30
 ARCHIVE

2020 - APRIL 1 - 15
 ARCHIVE


2020 - MARCH
 ARCHIVE


2020 - FEBRUARY
 ARCHIVE

2020 - JANUARY

 ARCHIVE


...
 News and facts for those sick and tired of the National Propaganda Radio version of reality.


- Unlike all the legacy media, our editorial offices are not in Langley, Virginia.


- You won't catch us fiddling while Western Civilization burns.


-
Close the windows so you don't hear the mockingbird outside, grab a beer, and see what the hell is going on as we witness the controlled demolition of our society.


- The truth usually comes from one source. It comes quietly, with no heralds. Untruths come from multiple sources, in unison, and incessantly.


- The loudest partisans belong to the smallest parties. The media exaggerate their size and influence.


THE ARCHIVE PAGE
.

No Thanks
If you let them redefine words, they will control language.
If you let them control language, they will control thoughts.
If you let them control thoughts, they will control you. They will own you.

© 2020 - thenotimes.com - All Rights Reserved