Meryl Nass On Kevin Bass-No-No Eugenics Man - These Interwebs Are FOREVER!!!

merylnass  |  It seems he used to tweet about eugenics. He liked it.

 

And it seems he remains intrigued with it.

Meryl’s COVID Newsletter is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

But he was not impressed with the talks by me, Aseem Malhotra, Robert Malone, Sasha Latypova. Guess what? This was not a science conference in Stockholm. It was a conference about what has really been going on these past three years. He likes the straw man argument.

So who is this Kevin Bass, who some commenters to my last post described as a twitter troll regarding nutrition and low carb diets. Why is he apologizing for mistakes that the system made? Like, he admitted to LOTS of mistakes?

He had to explain to his followers that with the Newsweek piece he has reinvented himself. He has decided to stop being an attack dog and instead bring us sweetness and light. Oops. He forgot his new persona, however, when he attacked the Stockholm conference. Who will he be tomorrow?

Too Late Kevin Bass-Your Big Potatohead Needs To Get Curbstomped Too!!!

newsweek  |  Our emotional response and ingrained partisanship prevented us from seeing the full impact of our actions on the people we are supposed to serve. We systematically minimized the downsides of the interventions we imposed—imposed without the input, consent, and recognition of those forced to live with them. In so doing, we violated the autonomy of those who would be most negatively impacted by our policies: the poor, the working class, small business owners, Blacks and Latinos, and children. These populations were overlooked because they were made invisible to us by their systematic exclusion from the dominant, corporatized media machine that presumed omniscience.

Most of us did not speak up in support of alternative views, and many of us tried to suppress them. When strong scientific voices like world-renowned Stanford professors John Ioannidis, Jay Bhattacharya, and Scott Atlas, or University of California San Francisco professors Vinay Prasad and Monica Gandhi, sounded the alarm on behalf of vulnerable communities, they faced severe censure by relentless mobs of critics and detractors in the scientific community—often not on the basis of fact but solely on the basis of differences in scientific opinion.

When former President Trump pointed out the downsides of intervention, he was dismissed publicly as a buffoon. And when Dr. Antony Fauci opposed Trump and became the hero of the public health community, we gave him our support to do and say what he wanted, even when he was wrong.

Trump was not remotely perfect, nor were the academic critics of consensus policy. But the scorn that we laid on them was a disaster for public trust in the pandemic response. Our approach alienated large segments of the population from what should have been a national, collaborative project.

And we paid the price. The rage of the those marginalized by the expert class exploded onto and dominated social media. Lacking the scientific lexicon to express their disagreement, many dissidents turned to conspiracy theories and a cottage industry of scientific contortionists to make their case against the expert class consensus that dominated the pandemic mainstream. Labeling this speech "misinformation" and blaming it on "scientific illiteracy" and "ignorance," the government conspired with Big Tech to aggressively suppress it, erasing the valid political concerns of the government's opponents.

And this despite the fact that pandemic policy was created by a razor-thin sliver of American society who anointed themselves to preside over the working class—members of academia, government, medicine, journalism, tech, and public health, who are highly educated and privileged. From the comfort of their privilege, this elite prizes paternalism, as opposed to average Americans who laud self-reliance and whose daily lives routinely demand that they reckon with risk. That many of our leaders neglected to consider the lived experience of those across the class divide is unconscionable.

Incomprehensible to us due to this class divide, we severely judged lockdown critics as lazy, backwards, even evil. We dismissed as "grifters" those who represented their interests. We believed "misinformation" energized the ignorant, and we refused to accept that such people simply had a different, valid point of view.

We crafted policy for the people without consulting them. If our public health officials had led with less hubris, the course of the pandemic in the United States might have had a very different outcome, with far fewer lost lives.

Instead, we have witnessed a massive and ongoing loss of life in America due to distrust of vaccines and the healthcare system; a massive concentration in wealth by already wealthy elites; a rise in suicides and gun violence especially among the poor; a near-doubling of the rate of depression and anxiety disorders especially among the young; a catastrophic loss of educational attainment among already disadvantaged children; and among those most vulnerable, a massive loss of trust in healthcare, science, scientific authorities, and political leaders more broadly.

My motivation for writing this is simple: It's clear to me that for public trust to be restored in science, scientists should publicly discuss what went right and what went wrong during the pandemic, and where we could have done better.

It's OK to be wrong and admit where one was wrong and what one learned. That's a central part of the way science works. Yet I fear that many are too entrenched in groupthink—and too afraid to publicly take responsibility—to do this.

Solving these problems in the long term requires a greater commitment to pluralism and tolerance in our institutions, including the inclusion of critical if unpopular voices.

Intellectual elitism, credentialism, and classism must end. Restoring trust in public health—and our democracy—depends on it.

 

 

Mayor Jim Strickland YKYDFU Right? The SCORPION Buck Stops With YOU!

localmemphis  |  Davis was most recently police chief in Durham, North Carolina. She beat out several other candidates, including three from inside the Memphis Police Department and that has some wondering why someone already on the force wasn't chosen.

"I'm convinced the public and the officers are all going to want to be on her team," said Memphis Mayor Jim Strickland.

Strickland says he has no doubts C.J. Davis is the right woman to put in charge of the Memphis Police Department, but his pick hasn't gone without criticism. Some activists wanted more input from the public regarding who was chosen, others have questioned why one of the three internal candidates --who all have a long history with the department-- wasn't picked. 

"I was given eight finalists who were all really top quality. I just thought C. J. Davis was the best qualified. I didn't go into this thinking I want someone from out of town one gender or another one race or another. I just wanted to pick the best person," said Strickland.

Strickland says despite Davis' name was added into mix late in the game, "she went thru the exact same process as the other candidates did, the same background check, same interview panels."

Strickland says he has not, and will not, make suggestions for who she puts in command under her.

"I think Chief Davis needs to get here and get approved, talk to the men and women in leadership of the Memphis Police Department and make her own choice. This is the way I have done it with all my chiefs and directors. I don't really mandate their deputies or number two in their departments," said Strickland.

Durham is smaller than Memphis. Critics also have questions about her ability to lead such a large department in a city with so much crime. Strickland's thoughts about that?

"Let's not forget she spent approximately 25 years in Atlanta and Memphis is similar to Atlanta in the size, scope, and challenges, so I think she is well prepared," said Strickland. "I would expect her to bring some fresh eyes to old challenges we've had. Memphis has had a challenge with crime for decades, gun crime for decades, and it's gotten worse.

So why did Strickland choose her instead of the other candidates? "I think she has the right leadership skills, and I think that is what sets her apart to lead our city through these rough waters of trying to reduce violent crime and retain and recruit more officers."

When it comes to Friday's citizens' questions for Davis, Strickland says he has no input regarding what questions will or won't be asked to Davis. Strickland says the event is being moderated by the Memphis NAACP.

Karinne Jeane Pierre Once Again Haplessly Sacrificed On The Alter Of Expendable Token Ass-Clownery

NYPost |  White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Monday it was “not healthy” for Twitter owner Elon Musk to publish internal company files revealing Twitter’s censorship of The Post’s 2020 reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop.

“What is happening — it’s frankly, it’s not healthy. It won’t do anything to help a single American improve their lives. And so look, we see this as an interesting, you know, coincidence, and you know, it’s a distraction,” Jean-Pierre concluded during her Monday briefing, offering a lengthy denunciation of Musk’s Friday reveal of how Twitter execs decided to suppress The Post’s damning expose.

“We see this as an interesting, or a coincidence, if I may, that he would so haphazardly — Twitter would so haphazardly push this distraction that is full of old news, if you think about it,” Jean-Pierre said, brushing off the politically motivated denial of free speech protections raised by Musk’s document dump.

“And at the same time, Twitter is facing very real and very serious questions about the rising volume of anger, hate and anti-Semitism on their platform and how they’re letting it happen.”

The voice of the Biden administration did not note that the Musk-led Twitter booted rapper Kanye West last week for tweeting a swastika after making a series of anti-Semitic remarks — or that as of Monday, the nation’s most famous Jew-basher’s 18.4 million-follower account on Facebook-owned Instagram remains active.

Jean-Pierre’s denunciation of Musk’s moves toward transparency came in response to questions from Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich.

“On Twitter, because you guys said you’re keeping a close eye on Elon Musk’s ownership and this is the first time we’ve talked to you since he released the files a few days ago — is it the White House view that decisions at Twitter were made appropriately in terms of decisions to censor this reporting ahead of the election?” Heinrich asked.

 

 

He Was Exited Because His Explanation Was Unconvincing....,

jonathanturley |  In the aftermath of the release of the “Twitter Files,” the media and political establishment appear to be taking a lesson from Karl Marx who said, “history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”

The censoring of the Hunter Biden scandal before the 2020 election by Twitter and others was a tragedy for our democratic system. That tragedy was not in its potential impact on a close election, but the massive (and largely successful) effort to bury a story to protect the Biden campaign. It has now ended in farce as the same censorship apologists struggle to excuse the implications of this major story.

Was he asked to explain himself first?

— Sam Gab (@samgabnz) December 6, 2022

The Twitter Files confirmed that Twitter never had any evidence of a Russian disinformation campaign or hacking as the basis for its decision to censor the New York Post story. Indeed, some at Twitter expressed concern over preventing the sharing of the story. Former Twitter Vice President for Global Communications Brandon Borrman asked if the company could “truthfully claim that this is part of the policy” for barring posts and suspending users.

Those voices were few and quickly shouted down as the company barred the sharing of the story, including evidence of a multimillion-dollar influence peddling scheme by the Biden family. The back channel communications between Biden campaign and Democratic operatives show a willing use of the company to suppress political discussion of the scandal before the election. It was an all-hands-on-deck moment for the media and Twitter was eager to lend a hand.

Over a year ago, I discussed how the brilliance of the Biden campaign was to get the media to become invested in the suppression of the story. After two years, major media finally but reluctantly admitted that the laptop was authentic as well as the emails detailing massive transfers of money from foreign interests (including some with foreign intelligence links).

Many have responded by shrugging that influence peddling is not necessarily a crime, ignoring that it is still a massive corruption scandal with serious national security concerns. After all, as Heather Digby Parton argued in Salon on December 5, “There is nothing there other than a man making money by trading on his family name.”

After the release of the “Twitter Files,” many of these same figures have shifted to excuse the censorship done at the request of Biden campaign or Democratic operatives.

For some of us who come from long-standing liberal Democratic families, it has been chilling to see the Democratic Party embrace censorship and denounce free speech, including organizing foreign and corporate interests to prevent Musk from restoring free speech protections.

Beyond personally attacking Elon Musk and Matt Taibbi, many have resorted to two claims that are being widely repeated in the media to avoid discussing the coordinated censorship efforts between this company and Democratic operatives.

The Little Cokehead In Kiev Tried - And Epically Failed - To Trigger NATO Article 5

sonar21  |  I believe the evidence is overwhelming that Ukraine tried and failed to manufacture a “Russian” attack on Poland that would have justified NATO coming to Poland’s defense under Article 5 of the NATO Treaty and solved Kiev’s dilemma over how to replace the massive number of Ukrainian soldiers that were killed or wounded in combat during the past two months. It is a whopper of a number. And Ukraine is in desperate need of reinforcements that are not available if they rely on only drafting Ukrainians.

The S-300 was fired by Ukrainian forces located somewhere to the west of Kiev. It is highly likely that U.S. and Russian satellites recorded this launch. In other words, both sides know where the S-300 originated.

It is highly unlikely — hell, impossible — that this was an “errant” missile that Ukraine fired in a moment of desperation trying to take down an in bound Russian missile. Why? The Russian missiles are flying from the south to the north or from the east to the west. That means if Ukraine is firing an anti-missile defense system at those inbound missiles the Ukrainian missile would travel from west to east.

But that is not what happened here. The S-300 traveled east to west. Unless the Ukrainian operator who launched the S-300 was drunk on his ass, it is impossible to “accidentally” fire this air defense missile in the wrong direction.

But repeating a lie does not make it true. You may insist that the Sun rises in the West, but no matter how loud you shout or how many times you repeat that nonsense, it is not true. Same principle applies here. An anti-air defense missile fired at missiles coming from the east and the south does not magically travel in the opposite direction.

I believe this is another indicator of Zelensky’s growing desperation. Think about it for a moment. If Ukraine really had Russia on its heels, why fabricate an easily disproved claim that Russia attacked Poland with a missile? This was sloppy trade-craft. If Ukraine had used another Russian missile capable of flying the distance from current Russian lines to that farm in Poland, then the circumstantial evidence might have ignited the desired fire among the NATO members.

I think one of the reasons the US Department of Defense was so quick to agree with the Russians about the origin of the missile is that the technical data from the National Reconnaissance Office pin pointed the launch location. It the NRO knows then the Russians, who have similar capabilities, would know.

I also think that Ukraine and Poland cooked up this plan without telling Demented Joey Biden. The incident was timed to coincide with the G-20 meeting in Bali. Hence, my title — Epic Fail.

 

 

Who Now Speaks For The Poles?

johnhelmer |  No one in Poland is in any doubt now that Tuesday’s missile attack on Przewodów* village, eight kilometres west of the Ukrainian border, was caused by a Russian-made missile fired by the Ukrainian military acting on the orders of President Vladimir Zelensky in Kiev. Two  villagers were killed by the Ukrainian action. That Zelensky continues to deny this makes him a liar throughout Poland.

Polish President Andrzej Duda has made this official. “There is a high probability that it was a missile that was used for missile defense; that is, it was used by the Ukrainian defence forces”. Duda justified the action by telling Polish voters: “Ukraine defended itself – which is obvious and understandable – by firing missiles which were tasked with hitting Russian missiles.”

Duda was sharply and publicly corrected by the national party politician closest to the incident, Jaroslaw Pakula, the head of the Lublin City Council.  “ ‘Of course, it’s a Ukrainian rocket. Of course, this is a provocation on the part of the Ukrainian authorities…The rocket could not be fired 100 km in the opposite direction by mistake.’ The aim of the provocation was to scare the EU and gain civil society support to send even more weapons to Ukraine, Pakula added. Instead of saying ‘fairy tales’ about the missile, the Polish president should tell Ukrainian Vladimir Zelensky that Warsaw ‘will no longer put up with this behaviour’ by Kiev.”  

Pakula posted his commentary on his Facebook account.  “I urge you to rethink Poland’s position [looking] at this war in case the red line is crossed again!”  Pakula told Duda and the leadership of the Law and Justice Party (PiS) in Warsaw.

Zelensky told the Polish Government: “I have no doubt that this is not our missile. I believe that this was a Russian missile, based on our military reports.”  In a full text of his remarks republished from Ukrainian into Polish by the state Polish Press Agency (PAP), Zelensky added:  “It was not our rocket, not our missile strike…I am convinced that we should and will [take part in the Polish investigation]…I want us to be fair, and if it was the use of our air defense,  then I want that evidence. First the investigation, access, and the data you [Polish government] have.”  

The Polish news agency also reported the head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council as claiming: “we are ready to provide our [Polish] partners with the evidence of the Russian footprint that we have. We also expect information from the partners, on the basis of which the final conclusion was drawn [by the Poles] that it is a Ukrainian air defense missile.”

Former Polish senator for the opposition party Civic Platform (PO), Robert Smoktunowicz, commented: “Not only have we not yet received an apology and expressions of regret from the president. Zelensky for the explosion and death of two Polish citizens. What is worse, the Ukrainian side denies its responsibility and demands evidence from the Polish side. What went wrong after February 24?”  

Stanislas Balcerac, an independent political analyst based in Warsaw, acknowledges that the Ukrainian missile attack has struck at the rural heartland of eastern Poland which has voted solidly for the PiS party to win the provincial council and governorate (voivodeship) elections of October 2018;   and likewise the national parliament (Sejm) elections of October 2019  and the presidential election which Duda won narrowly in June 2020.

“The PiS has had to fight on three fronts,” Balcerac said “coronavirus, the war in Ukraine, and Brussels’ game of blocking European Union money for Poland. That’s quite a lot.”

He believes the PiS and its leaders – Duda, Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, and party leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski — must maintain a balancing act in public, but privately they are furious at Zelensky’s statements. In the context of the current war, adds Balcerac, “Poland has a specific history with both Germany and Russia.”

In Warsaw, that phrase “specific history” means much more than anyone can calculate in votes for the moment.

The moment won’t last, comments a veteran NATO military analyst. “It hasn’t gotten hard enough for the Poles or Ukrainians. Winter hasn’t sunk in yet. We’ll know better in a week or three.”

Forget Past Mistakes - Show Your Loyalty - INJECT!!!

amidwesterndoctor |  Recently an article began circulating stating that the pandemic pushers deserved amnesty for their actions over the last two years. This article was repeatedly shared in our community as a way of politely saying "How About No” to the author, and to illustrate that enough consequences from the vaccine are starting to emerge that the government has realized they may need to pivot to a new approach (which suggests additional issues from the vaccines will emerge in the future). From having thought this article over, my best guess is that this article was primarily targeted at assuaging the guilt of the left leaning voters who trusted their leaders on these vaccines and are not the most motivated to vote for them in the midterms (as the polling data presently indicates a landslide for the Republican party).

When I read through this article, I realize the author highlighted a very common problem I observe in human interactions (which I will admit I have also been guilty of). The author is demanding to receive forgiveness for their conduct, but in their apology, is refusing to admit they did anything wrong. In order to accomplish this, they utilized a variety of manipulative rhetorical constructs that are relatively simple and frequently utilized.

Because it is so common to encounter propaganda pieces like this, I thought there might be some value in illustrating my thought process as I read this article. I tried to not make this be too sophisticated so that it accurately portrayed what jumped out at me when I first read the article. Additionally, there are a few pieces of information I consider to be quite important to know in my commentary and many more in the comments.

In reading this analysis, it is important to remember that many people make their decisions based on what their peers or the media tells them to do (which is likely the audience this article was written for) rather than being self directed and using critical thinking to discern which decision makes the most sense to them. As a result, we almost certainly interpreted this article dramatically differently from its intended audience which is receptive to this style of persuasion.

Thinking about this article more, I believe the fundamental logical error in this article is that leaders should be absolved of their responsibility for making incorrect decisions if there was a degree of uncertainty with the information at hand. This is not the standard we have held our leaders to, as their job is always to make the best decision they can with the information that is available, and in most eras, if the decision was correct they were praised for their leadership, whereas if the decision was incorrect they were blamed for their mistakes. The “but I couldn’t have known!” excuse has never been deemed an acceptable way for leaders to justify their mistakes.

In the past, leaders have successfully navigated much greater degrees of uncertainty. In the case of COVID-19, Ron DeSantis, who had no previous training in public health or medicine, was able to look at the data himself and correct discern what policy needed to be followed. Although DeSantis deserves praise for his leadership, the fact that he was able to successfully figure this out without a scientific background demonstrates that the degree of “uncertainty” here was clearly manageable.

As this post shows, it can credibly be argued much of this article was intentionally deceptive. What I am more surprised by is the degree of a lack of insight the author shows into the mistakes that were made. I should note that this is very common behavior you will observe from those who have been influenced by cults or cult like groups. As one reader remarked, it is astounding how much the quality of journalism has declined over the last few years and that an article of that quality made it to publication:

 

 

Who Was Protecting Nancy Pelosi's Ice Cream Collection?!?!?!

kunstler.com |  It’s been several days since San Francisco police interrupted a hammer fight between Paul Pelosi — husband of House Speaker Nancy — and his “friend… David,” in the Pelosis’ Pacific Heights home, and apparently the cops have not asked David DePape why he was there in the first place. Odd, a little bit. Is it possible that a whole chain of authorities from the SFPD clear up into the top of the US government and its Democratic Party sidekicks don’t want you to know what actually happened?

So far, not much in this cockamamie story adds up. Quite a bit is known now about the attacker, David DePape. He was a colorful character on the scene in radical Berkeley across the bay, a “nudist activist” and BLM supporter. He’d lived there and had a child with one Oxane “Gypsy” Taub, a fellow nude activist and whack-job, who has spent time in prison for child abduction. That partnership ended seven years ago and DePape has been homeless on and off since then. Acquaintances and Berkeley neighbors describe him as not mentally healthy, saying he exhibits psychotic delusions and is sometimes incoherent.

pic.twitter.com/9eqgr6dOIE

— Just call me daddy (retired) (@meprogrammerguy) October 29, 2022

So far, police have not disclosed how DePape journeyed from Berkeley to Pacific Heights at 2:00 o’clock in the morning, about fourteen miles. Did he walk from Berkeley across the Bay Bridge and then halfway across town? Mr. DePape is apparently also known to the police as a gay hustler, that is, a person who sells sex for money. Unless I’m mistaken, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) has a detective department — experienced men and women who go around the city seeking clues, evidence, and testimony in order to make sense of perplexing crimes — and then solve them! Shall we assume they are on-the-job?

Now, Paul Pelosi, 82, who made a $300-million fortune running a car service (also shrewd investments in real estate and the stock market), has been in quite a bit of trouble this year. On May 28, 2022, he was arrested for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) in Napa (near a vineyard estate he owns with Nancy) when his 2021 Porsche crashed into a 2014 Jeep driven by one “John Doe” (as the police identified him). KGO-TV, ABC’s affiliate in the San Francisco area, said that there was a second person in the Porsche with Pelosi at the time of the accident. He has never been identified.

In August, Mr. Pelosi was sentenced to five days in jail, a fine of roughly $7,000, a three-month drinking-and-driving course, eight hours of public service, and having an “interlock” device installed on his car that would require him to blow into an alcohol sensor before the engine can ignite. By any chance, were the Napa Police or the County Court contacted in the matter at some point by the US Capitol Police or the FBI? We may never know.

If David DePape didn’t walk fourteen miles from Berkeley to Pacific Heights, or take a cab (expensive), how did he get there? Here’s a theory: he rode the BART subway from Berkeley to the Church Street and Mission station in the city, a five-minute walk to the Castro, San Francisco’s fabled gay district. Sometime before 2:00 a.m. closing time, he met up in a bar there with Paul Pelosi, who drove DePape to the Pelosi house in a car not equipped with an interlock device. That is to say, David DePape was let into the house by Mr. Pelosi.

The police and the news media have theorized that DePape broke into the place by smashing a glass door in back. Uh-huh…. Ask yourself: would there not be an alarm system at least on all the ground floor windows and doors in the house? Would there not be security cameras on the back side of the house — the side that burglars might prefer, if they could get over the wall? Would the Speaker of the House, with a discretionary budget on top of a $300-million fortune, and in a time of epic political rancor, not have a team of security guards in place at her private home?

Initial news media chatter had both DePape and Paul Pelosi dressed in their underwear, struggling over a hammer which turned out to belong to Mr. Pelosi. Not until the police entered the house did DePape wrest the hammer from Mr. Pelosi and commence to brain him with it. What does the arrest report actually say about the two men’s state-of-dress? It is not public information. How and why were the police just watching until DePape assaulted Mr. Pelosi — who was hospitalized afterward and had surgery on his cracked skull? (Uh, how did a blow that literally broke his skull not kill the elderly Mr. Pelosi?)

The news media initially suggested that somebody — a third person on the scene — opened the door to let the police in. Now they are saying no such person was there. Was the front door unlocked? (Weird, considering the general threat level for a public figure of Nancy P’s stature.) Or, did police break the glass door in the rear of the house to get in? (However, photos of the door show the glass being broken from the inside and shards spread over the outside.) Odd, also, that such a wealthy and powerful couple would not have hard-to-smash security glass on such a door. (It’s easy to buy.) Odd, too, that there was not one human security guard on the premises. The house had security cameras all over the exterior and interior. No mention in the news media or from the SFPD of what might have been recorded by these cameras at the time of the incident.

My assessment of this bizarre episode as follows: Paul Pelosi was out drinking late the night of the incident. He hooked up with David DePape, a hustler he might have been previously acquainted with, and took him back to the house in Pacific Heights. Something went wrong with the transaction. Considering that DePape exhibited psychotic behavior at times, it might have taken little to set him off. All the authorities involved are playing it coy, but failing to construct a narrative that adds up.

The Democratic Party has attempted to convert the sordid incident into a political talking point, painting DePape as a MAGA crazy. That spin apparently failed almost instantly. Their next effort will be to shove the story down the memory hole — the news media will just not report on any developments. Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi put out a statement that her family is “heartbroken” over the incident. Yes, of course. I’m sure. Nobody knew about Paul Pelosi’s peccadillos. Boo-hoo. Cry me a river, you degenerate jade. Don’t suppose the truth about this will be successfully suppressed, like Hunter B’s laptop. And so, the career of Nancy Pelosi comes to an ignominious end in the November 8 election, with a cherry-on-top of personal humiliation. She deserves every bit of it. Fist tap Dale.

 

Now That Elon OwnsTwitter These Interwebs Are Becoming Entertaining Once Again!!!

them |  In an early warning sign for the future of Twitter, billionaire Elon Musk shared a homophobic conspiracy theory about the attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband only two days after acquiring the social media site.

And Elon just tweeted it. pic.twitter.com/GnZkxPd4VL

— Ben Collins (@oneunderscore__) October 30, 2022

Los Angeles Times story about David DePape, the man who allegedly broke into House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s home and attacked her husband, Paul Pelosi. The article detailed that DePape had shared far-right conspiracy theories on social media. However, Musk wrote there is a “tiny possibility” that there is more to the story, and shared a link to a story from a publication called the Santa Monica Observer titled “The Awful Truth: Paul Pelosi Was Drunk Again, And In a Dispute With a Male Prostitute Early Friday Morning.” The Los Angeles Times has called the Observer “notorious for publishing false news,” including claims that Hilary Clinton died and was replaced by a body double, that Donald Trump appointed Kanye West to the Interior Department, and that Bill Gates was responsible for a polio epidemic.

The Observer’s Pelosi story, of course, is no different. It insinuates that Paul Pelosi is gay and that DePape is a “Castro nudist,” which is supposedly a subculture of “really radical gay male prostitutes that parade around naked with c--k rings.” The post only attributes this information to “Twitter” and “a source.” Essentially, the Observer claims that Pelosi was not attacked, but that he was caught with DePape when the cops were summoned to the residence for a wellness check. The outlet has since updated its story with a note that says that the San Francisco Police Department confirmed that DePape and Pelosi did not know each other before the attack, and that it was indeed a break-in, but the story still remains up and is actively circulating among right-wing social media users.

Although Musk deleted the link by early Sunday afternoon, per NBC News, the tweet had accrued more than 24,000 retweets and more than 86,000 likes by Sunday morning. Ironically, the incident is the perfect example of why Musk’s laissez-faire approach to content moderation on Twitter is a terrible idea. It’s already been reported that Facebook was guilty of failing to act on similar misinformation related to the 2020 election due to a lack of adequate content moderation. Experts have suggested that Musk’s takeover of Twitter, and his seeming lack of discernment when it comes to fake news, could have a worrying impact on the upcoming midterm elections.

The billionaire’s acquisition of the platform has especially worrying repercussions for trans people, too. The SpaceX founder has previously tweeted that “pronouns suck” and said that they’re an “esthetic [sic] nightmare.” Right-wingers have widely adopted him as a deity of “free speech.” Especially considering that Twitter accounts like Libs of TikTok are eager to stoke the flames of anti-LGBTQ+ extremism, the future of the platform under Elon Musk seems to already be off to a grim start.

 

Who Was The Gay Male Hustler Witness To Paul Pelosi's Memorial Day Porsche Crash?

NYTimes | Speaker Nancy Pelosi had just urged Brown University graduates to stay resilient and summon their “better angels” on Memorial Day weekend when she was forced to turn her attention to a less uplifting situation: her husband’s arrest in California.

The details emerging from the incident were not especially flattering.

The night before, May 28, Paul Pelosi, 82, had been in Oakville, among the country’s most exclusive enclaves, leaving a small dinner at the hedgerow-lined estate of Alexander Mehran, a longtime friend and Democratic donor.

Mr. Pelosi got behind the wheel of his black 2021 Porsche 911 to drive the six miles to the Pelosis’ Napa Valley country house. It was around 10 p.m., according to a police report and eyewitnesses.

He went a little more than half a mile and was trying to cross State Route 29 and make a left. But a Jeep was coming down the highway and hit Mr. Pelosi’s car as he made the turn.

The police who responded arrested him on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol and suspicion of driving with a .08 blood alcohol content or higher. He is due back in court on Aug. 3. If criminal charges are filed, he will be arraigned then. (The driver of the Jeep was not arrested.)

It may not have been only alcohol that hindered Mr. Pelosi’s driving. 

A person who witnessed the accident said both cars were totaled, and that Mr. Pelosi simply sat in the car, seemingly frozen, for several minutes, until the sheriff and members of the Fire Department arrived moments later.

Neither Mr. Pelosi nor the driver of the Jeep was injured.

Some friends felt that Mr. Pelosi’s full night in custody at the Napa County Jail after the accident was excessive. Others were puzzled why their friend hadn’t pre-empted the whole ordeal by simply taking a car service home.

And some local residents suggested that, in an earlier era in Napa, driving after drinking was met with understanding, rather than criminal charges.

“I feel just awful about what’s happened because there was a time when if a thing like this happened, the cops would take you home,” said the society doyenne Diane Wilsey, better known as Dede.

Ms. Wilsey, who is Mr. Pelosi’s fellow trustee at the San Francisco War Memorial and Performing Arts Center, is a Republican, but she has donated to several of the speaker’s political campaigns, and sees the couple socially in California.

“I don’t agree with Nancy on everything, but I cannot think of anyone nicer than Nancy or Paul,” she said.

 

U.S. Just Lost The Electricity War In Ukraine

johnhelmer  |   “War is war, whether you want to use terms like hybrid war or proxy war. It means destroying the enemy’s capacity to make war.  Shutting off the power in the rump Ukrainian state will do just that to the Ukrainians. If they then start to flee for refuge to Poland and Germany, this will be a disaster unparalleled in recent European history. Just the attendant collapse in telecommunications will make the place a madhouse. You can well imagine the rest. Already there are queues for water in Nikolaev, and who knows where else. How does  queueing for water, if there is any, in temperatures of minus-20C to minus-40C sound?  This won’t be like the blackouts from US sanctions and attacks in Cuba or Venezuela – there they didn’t  have to worry about freezing to death, the pipes bursting, or irreparable damage being done to billions of dollars’ worth of pumping, electrical,  and other equipment due to freezing.”

“How many people realize that a sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) circuit breaker,  commonly used in electrical substations, requires an electric heating blanket to be functional in sub-zero weather? Most westerners don’t. They are common in high voltage substations which ultimately feed the grid lines with power. In the Ukrainian case, I suspect  there is a mixture of those and older style oil circuit breakers (OCB), along with oil-filled large power transformers (LPT),  which are essential to electrical distribution. And guess where most of the oil comes from to fill these devices?”

“I suspect that most of Zelensky’s officials and officials in the supporting EU governments have persuaded themselves with their own propaganda. They aren’t daring to think through these questions, any more than they care to understand that the housing of the pumps delivering their water and treating their sewage will freeze and split apart if they are not heated via electrical means. Even if the gas is on — and it won’t be — electricity is needed to ignite, then control, furnaces. How many of these officials understand the long lead times, compounded by manufacturing shutdowns due to high energy costs, which you must have to replace and restore everything?”

“Who then will ‘stand with Ukraine’ when the gas and electricity rationing and unpayable consumer bills  roll over the Ukrainian border and into Poland, Germany, France, and the UK, as they are already doing?”

“The Russians have been hitting the Ukrainian electrical distribution system for months now. As we know, they started with the rail traction power yards which are largely branches of the wider electric grid. Now they have moved to the substations and so-called ‘thermal power’  plants, hitting them in what seems to be pellmell fashion. I expect that the Russians are gathering intelligence now on repair times, re-equipment availability, deliveries, repair crew composition and coordination.”

“So let’s imagine this. Winter arrives. The power is cut in Kharkov, Dniepropetrovsk, Pavlovsk, Nikolaev etc. and due to the unavailability of spares, repair crews, respite from attack, or all three, the outlook for the power outage is indefinite. What do people do? They migrate to where there is power, running water, heat etc… For millions this means west. So off they go. And when enough of them get there, bam! the power goes off there too.”

Reading the grid maps of the Ukraine,  the source says “it is obvious that the real vulnerability, in my estimation, lies in the approximately 88 substations for 330 kV distribution and 33 substations for 220 kV distribution. Note the nodes or junctions. Those are substations connecting the distribution lines which crisscross the Ukraine. These substations contain large power transformers, switchgear, DCS equipment [Distributed Control System] and other power quality and control equipment, spares etc. Widespread coordinated strikes on these substations will quickly overwhelm the Ukrainian ability to effect repairs and re-balance the loads on the generation stations. This will create a cascade effect whereby overloaded power plants, and distribution gear will ‘trip out’ over wide swathes of the country – if the protection between the Ukrainian and EU grids does not operate in time, or there is wild voltage/frequency oscillations there could be large interruptions in the EU countries being fed from Ukrainian sources.”

“Any repair efforts will also be severely hampered, if not crippled, if utility yards where spare cables and other gear, as well as vehicles (bucket and line trucks, cranes etc.) are stored and parked are struck. Personnel losses among the finite number of utility crew members due to follow-up attacks and the inevitable mishaps that come with interacting with damaged or compromised high voltage electrical equipment, will quickly mount. If the attacks are launched during the hard winter months, the impact will be exponential, increasingly unmanageable and catastrophic as the hours go by.”

 

General S.V. Surovikin: “For The Enemies Of Russia, The Morning Does Not Start With Coffee!”

"Appointed as the new commander of the SMO, Surovikin received carte blanche for everything: the use of any means other than nuclear weapons; defeat of any targets, including infrastructure ones, without restrictions and regard for collateral losses; use of the mobilized resource in any available quantities."

Phase Three has begun. It started with peaceful acceptance of 4 regions into RF. It continues with responding to any attacks on RF territory against RF citizens in a more overtly retaliatory, punitive and preventative fashion. It will end with elimination of Ukrainian State. Hopefully there will be no Phase Four (wider war). Time will tell.

Southfront |  On October 10, the explosions thundered in almost all Ukrainian regions. First attacks were confirmed by authorities in Kiev, and later in other regions. All major cities of Ukraine were hit by the strikes. The escalation followed the explosion on the Crimean Bridge. The day before, Russian President Vladimir Putin confirmed that the attack on the bridge which claimed lives of three Russian citizens was “a terrorist attack aimed at destroying the critical civilian infrastructure of the Russian Federation and its authors, performers, customers are the special services of Ukraine.”

The Russian military launched strikes using X-101 and Kalibr cruise missiles, as well as Geranium-2 suicude drones. Victims were reported.

So far, explosions were reported in Kiev, Rovno, Lvov, Ternopol, Ivano-Frankovsk, Khmelnitsky, Zhitomir, Kremenchug, Kropivnitsky, Krivoy-Rog, Odessa, Zaporozhie, Dnieper, Poltava, Kharkov and other smaller towns of Ukraine.

According to the Ukrainian side, the numbers of the strikes are the following:

• 60  in Kiev region;
• 20 in Kharkov region;
• 47 in Nikolaev region;
• 15 in Lvov region;
• 27 in Vinnytsia region;
• 15 in Odessa region.

The main targets of the strikes:

• SBU Headquarters in Kiev;
• CHP-5 in Kiev;
• CHP-6 in Kiev;
•  Lviv TPP;
• Burshtyn TPP in Ivano-Frankivsk region;
• EU Advisory Mission in Kiev;
• Department of Law Enforcement Agencies in Kiev.

11 important infrastructure facilities were damaged in eight regions of Ukraine and Kiev, some areas were de-energized, Prime Minister Denis Shmygal said.

Strategic infrastructure facilities were damaged in almost all regions of Ukraine. There is no electricity, water and Internet in several large cities. Eastern Ukraine was most affected by the attacks as these regions were already using backup energy lines after the main lines were hit earlier. Western Ukraine has also suffered critical infrastructure damage, but continues to operate on backup lines from Poland. Thermal power plants and main enterprises of many cities are damaged, the Ukrainian air defense system is overloaded.

There are no electricity in Lvov, Zhytomyr, Sumy, Kharkov, Khmelnitsky, Poltava, Ternopol, Lutsk, Rovno, Ivano-Frankovsk.

Ukrainian railways reported damage to the contact network, which may cause delays of western trains. The country’s railway stations operate normally.

Russian Ministry of Defense: Today, a massive strike was carried out with high-precision long-range weapons “on the objects of the military control, communications and energy systems of Ukraine.” The goal of the strike has been achieved, all designated facilities have been hit, the agency said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin: “The Kiev regime has put itself on a par with international terrorist organizations. Leaving this unanswered is impossible. At the suggestion of the Ministry of Defense, a massive blow was inflicted on energy, military support and communications facilities.”

In the capital of Ukraine, Russian strikes hit several districts of the city. Mayor Vitali Klitschko confirmed several explosions in the Shevchenko district in the city center. One of the rockets hit Vladimirskaya Street, where the headquarters of the Security Service of Ukraine is located. The office of Vladimir Zelensky is located nearby.

It is reported that one of the strikes hit Hrushevsky Street where the governmental quarter is located. The reports are yet to be confirmed. Ex-deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Ilya Kiva claimed that one of the strikes hit the base and headquarters of the Nazi regiment Azov in Kiev. Another targets are the “Klitschko Bridge” and 101 Tower Business Center. Another strike damaged a thermal power plant in the Ukrainian capital. Damage was also reported to the Kiev railway station.

According to the head of the regional administration Alexey Kuleba, “strikes on energy infrastructure facilities” were reported in at least three districts of the Kiev region.

Residents of the city were asked to go to shelters, the central streets are blocked by law enforcement officers. Residents of the region were asked not to come to the capital without urgent need. The metro is stopped and is used as a shelter.

 

80 Year Old Pretending To Run NASA Says "China Will Take Over The Moon!"

thesun.co.uk  |  NASA'S boss has warned that China could try to seize control of the Moon as the space race heats up.

The secretive nation is going to build a research station on the lunar surface as part of huge space plans in the next few years.

And the US appears to be getting nervous about it.

Nasa Administrator Bill Nelson has said we should be cautious about China's ambitions.

Speaking to German paper Bild, he said: "We must be very concerned that China is landing on the Moon and saying: 'It’s ours now and you stay out.'"

China hit back, accusing the Nasa boss of lying "through his teeth".

Escalating tensions come after China has already managed the difficult feat of landing on the far side of the Moon.

The country has also sped up work on a lunar research base by eight years - in collaboration with Russia.

But experts have warned that there's no reason to panic about China's intentions.

Professors Svetla Ben-Itzhak and R. Lincoln Hines say it's unlikely that any country would be able to simply takeover the Moon in the near future.

 

Space Force 2024: All Suited Up But With No Place Left To Go...,

MoA  |  Russia to withdraw from International Space Station after 2024

Russia has said it will withdraw from the International Space Station (ISS) after 2024 to focus on building its own orbital outpost.

Yuri Borisov, who was appointed to lead the state-controlled space corporation Roscosmos earlier this month, said during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin that Russia would fulfil its obligations to other partners before it leaves the project.

Mr Borisov said "the decision to leave the station after 2024 has been made."

The U.S. had planned to operate the station until 2031:

Earlier this year NASA published plans for the ISS which could see the 444,615kg structure taken out of orbit in January 2031 and crashed into a "spacecraft cemetery".

It said the laboratory would continue operating until 2030 but its long-term future is unsustainable.

The end date will now likely be earlier than NASA had planned. As an earlier report explained:

Russia provides the propellant and thrusters needed to periodically reboost the station, a critical capability NASA cannot currently replace. Maneuvering is provided by thrusters built into the Russian Zarya and Zvezda modules and aboard visiting Progress supply ships.

A Northrop Grumman Cygnus cargo ship that arrived earlier this week is the first U.S. vehicle after the space shuttle to be capable of reboost, but it cannot on its own replace the Russian capability.
...
NASA astronauts are not trained to operate Russian systems and vice versa for the cosmonauts. Neither side can safely operate the lab on its own.

Without the Russians thruster modules the station will continuously slow down and sink towards earth until it breaks up and burns in the atmosphere.

For the U.S. to build its own thruster modules would very likely take more than two years. They would probably arrive too late to rescue the station.

Russia has plans to build a new space station. An alternative for it may be to hook up with the Chinese space station which was launched last year. Yesterday it received its second large module, a laboratory. A third large module will be added later this year.

China build its own space station because the U.S. had excluded it from participating in the ISS:

China has been barred from the ISS since 2011, when Congress passed a law prohibiting official American contact with the Chinese space program due to concerns about national security. “National security,” of course, is the lingua franca excuse for any country to do anything it jolly well wants to do even if it has nothing to do with, you know, the security of the nation. But never mind.

Just 11 years after the ban China has launched and operates its own space station.

It is likely that from 2025 on there will again be only one international space station. But it will be operated by China and probably Russia while the U.S. and its allies will likely be excluded from it.

This is the consequence of the U.S. hostile behavior which excludes and sanctions others for unserious reason.

Tucker Carlson Wandered Off The Reservation And Put Big Pharma On Blast

nationalreview |  I approach science news cautiously. I was blessed to have, in my own college-level science class, a professor who enjoyed showing us examples of how labs and the scientific press conspired together to keep federal and private funding going on research they viewed as important.

But I’m sort of astonished that in the last month or so the medical field seems to be abandoning the regnant theories of depression and Alzheimer’s.

The first is the publication in Molecular Psychology of a paper reviewing and ultimately dismissing the serotonin theory of depression. The conclusion is stunning:

Our comprehensive review of the major strands of research on serotonin shows there is no convincing evidence that depression is associated with, or caused by, lower serotonin concentrations or activity. Most studies found no evidence of reduced serotonin activity in people with depression compared to people without, and methods to reduce serotonin availability using tryptophan depletion do not consistently lower mood in volunteers. High quality, well-powered genetic studies effectively exclude an association between genotypes related to the serotonin system and depression, including a proposed interaction with stress. Weak evidence from some studies of serotonin 5-HT_1A receptors and levels of SERT points towards a possible association between increased serotonin activity and depression. However, these results are likely to be influenced by prior use of antidepressants and its effects on the serotonin system [30, 31]. The effects of tryptophan depletion in some cross-over studies involving people with depression may also be mediated by antidepressants, although these are not consistently found [63].

The chemical imbalance theory of depression is still put forward by professionals [17], and the serotonin theory, in particular, has formed the basis of a considerable research effort over the last few decades [14]. The general public widely believes that depression has been convincingly demonstrated to be the result of serotonin or other chemical abnormalities [15, 16], and this belief shapes how people understand their moods, leading to a pessimistic outlook on the outcome of depression and negative expectancies about the possibility of self-regulation of mood [64,65,66]. The idea that depression is the result of a chemical imbalance also influences decisions about whether to take or continue antidepressant medication and may discourage people from discontinuing treatment, potentially leading to lifelong dependence on these drugs [67, 68].

This follows on another study in PLOS ONE saying that treatment of depression with SSRIs does not improve quality of life.

An astonishing percentage of Americans have been prescribed SSRIs and are on them for long-term use. A survey in 2015–18 showed that 13 percent of Americans over age 18 took anti-depressant drugs in any given month. Millions of people, even very young people, are on SSRIs for depression.

 

The American Dilemma

consortiumnews |  The West has been inhabiting a fanciful world that could exist only in our imaginations. Many remain stranded in that self-deluded mirage. The more that we have invested in that fantasy world, the harder we find it to exit and to make the adjustment — intellectual, emotional, behavioral. 

An assessment of where we are, where we might go and the implications over time of the reactions of other parties is a singularly complex undertaking. For it requires not just specification of time frames, but also the varying definitions of national interest and strategic objective that government leaders might use as reference marks.  

The number of permutations created by the array of players involved, and the low confidence margins associated with forecasts of how each will act at key decision points down the road, exacerbate the already daunting challenge. Before one even contemplates embarking on such a task, there are a few crucial considerations to bear in mind. 

Those in Charge

First, the people who count at the head of governments are not pure thinking machines. Far from it. They are too often persons of narrow intelligence, of limited experience in high stakes games of power politics, who navigate by simplistic, outdated and parochial cognitive maps of the world. Their perspectives approximate montages composed of bits of ideology, bits of visceral emotion, bits of remembered but inappropriate precedents, bits of massaged public opinion data, and odds-and-ends plucked from New York Times op-ed pieces.

In addition, let’s remind ourselves that policy-formation and decision-making are group processes — especially in Washington and Brussels — encumbered by their own collective dynamics.  Finally, in Western capitals, governments operate in dual currencies: policy effectiveness and electoral politics.  

Consequently, there are two powerful, in-built tendencies that inflect the choices made: 1) inertial extension of existing attitudes and approaches; and 2) avoidance wherever possible of endangering a hard-won, often tenuous, consensus on a lowest common denominator basis.  

One thing we know with certainty: no fundamental change in thinking or action can occur without determination and decisiveness at the top. 

Necessity is the mother of invention — or so it is said. However, grasping what is “necessary” can be a very slippery business. An actual recasting of how one views a problematic situation normally is a last resort. Experience and history tell us that, as do behavioral experiments.

The psychology of perceived necessity is complex. Adversity or threat in and of itself does not trigger improvisation. Even the survival instinct does not always spark innovation. Denial, then avoidance, are normally the first, sequential reactions when facing adversity in trying to reach an objective or to satisfy a recognized interest. A strong bias favors the reiteration of a standard repertoire of responses.

True innovation tends to occur only in extremis; and even then, behavioral change is more likely to begin with minor adjustments of established thinking and behavior at the margins rather than modification of core beliefs and patterns of action.