Thursday, July 20, 2023

House Judiciary Subcommittee on Weaponization of the Federal Government


00:00:03

You? Yeah, I never received it the US. So. Ok. Oh, so

00:01:37

the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time. We welcome everyone to today's hearing. The chair now recognizes the gentle lady from Florida...

 Show Full Text
00:01:52

pledge elections to the flag, the street somewhere. What under so from? Yes,

00:02:08

I thank the lady for leading us without objection. Mr Roy will be permitted to participate in this hearing. The chair. Now recognize himself for an opening...

 Show Full Text
00:08:58

Thank you, Mr Chair and good morning to everyone. Just have some administrative matters first. I wanted to introduce him to the record page 50 fif 55...

 Show Full Text
00:21:30

back generally yields back. I've been asking him consent to enter into the record from page 29 of Miss Delos testimony from three days ago. Question,...

 Show Full Text
00:23:05

Thank the chairman, Robert F. Kennedy junior is the son of former Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy and the nephew of America's 35th president, John...

 Show Full Text
00:25:26

I thank the gentleman Mr Kennedy. We're glad you were here. We will now proceed with gold statement. But before I do, I want to introduce the guy...

 Show Full Text
00:26:04

Chairman, are you gonna in the witnesses?

00:26:10

You please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear our firm? Do you swear our firm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you're about to...

 Show Full Text
00:26:34

He goes to,

00:26:36

he's gonna go a

00:26:38

little longer, excuse me. Point of order. I know that witnesses usually have five minutes. I see 10 minutes on the board. Is it going to be 10 minutes?

00:26:46

Five minutes? But we're, we're pretty lax with this. Uh We'll let him go for,

00:26:51

I've seen him gavel down on quite a number

00:26:54

of witnesses, senators and former Democrat members of Congress and all kinds of people. I, I'm just saying in past history. Ok, we'll, we'll give...

 Show Full Text
00:27:04

time for all the witnesses

00:27:05

and if you want to cut him off and censor him some more, you're welcome to do

00:27:08

it. Oh, that's not my job. That's, that's your job. Why don't you threaten the witness so that they can do not want to be a witness is

00:27:15

recognized for his opening statement. We'll give him five minutes more or less and then we'll move to the next one, Mr Kennedy. Go right ahead.

00:27:26

Thank you, Mr Chairman, Mr Chairman. Maybe we could put five minutes on the clock then not 10.

00:27:32

Could we, could we put five on the clock and we'll start it running?

00:27:41

Thank you, Mr Chairman. And I, I wanna, I wanna start, I wanna put aside my written state and for a moment and address one of the points that was...

 Show Full Text
00:38:36

a motion or speech.

00:38:37

And I've made a motion to move into executive session because Mr Kennedy's testimony, Mr Chairman

00:38:45

gentleman from Kentucky has moved the table.

00:38:49

Mr Chairman, I asked for a roll call vote on the, on the motion

00:38:52

to table. Well, let me ask the question. The question is on the motion to table. The general lady has asked for a roll call vote. The clerk will have...

 Show Full Text
00:39:05

witnesses can sit in the chair sitting behind.

00:39:10

I'll leave that up to the clerks if the clerks are comfortable with that. Yeah. Why don't we do that? Maybe we can go right down here, Mr

00:39:20

Mr Mr Chairman Point of Order.

00:39:22

Gentleman from

00:39:23

Louisiana. Is it the custom of this committee to censor viewpoints that we disagree with from witness

00:39:28

chair? Not a point of order on the table.

00:39:31

There's a motion and the boat's moving

00:39:36

is

00:39:38

waiting for the clerk. Clerk will call the roll, Mr Jordan.

00:39:44

Mr Jordan votes. Yes, Mr Isa Mr Massey.

00:39:49

Yes to not censor

00:39:51

Mr Massey votes. Yes, Mr Stewart Mr Stewart votes. Yes, Mr Mr Votes. Yes, Mr Gates, Mr Johnson of Louisiana, Mr Johnson of Louisiana votes. Yes,...

 Show Full Text
00:40:17

Pasco. No, I want to follow the rules that the Republicans made at the beginning of this uh conference with these house rules. So no, Miss

00:40:27

Pasco votes. No, Mr Lynch, Mr Lynch votes. No, Miss Sanchez. No,

00:40:32

because it's violative of the rules

00:40:34

MS Sanchez votes. No, Miss Wasserman Schultz. No,

00:40:37

to allowing a witness to degrade, not violate the rules and not have his testimony and degradation and amplified rather than given an executive

00:40:48

session was votes. No Mr Connolly Mr Connolly votes. No Mr Gardi, Mr Gardi votes. No, Mr Allred MS Garcia. No MS Garcia votes. No Mr Goldman. No...

 Show Full Text
00:41:10

Mr Gates.

00:41:11

Yes, Mr Gates. Mr Gates votes. I clerk will report Mr Chairman. There are 10 eyes and eight nos.

00:41:29

Uh the motion to table is agreed to, we will now move to our second witness. Uh Miss Morris, you are recognized for five minutes.

00:41:47

Thank you. Thanks so much for inviting me. Um My name is Emma Joe Morris, uh politics editor at Breitbart. Um I'm here today because I published a...

 Show Full Text
00:47:23

Thank you, Miss Morris Mr Sourer. You were recognized for five minutes.

00:47:29

Thank you, Mr Chairman and members of the subcommittee on July 4th 2023 Independence Day. Judge Terry, a doughty of the US district court for the western...

 Show Full Text
00:52:47

Thank you, Mr Sour MS Wiley. You recognize me,

00:52:56

microphone,

00:53:01

I'm usually quite loud, but thank you for pointing that out. Chair Jordan ranking member Plaskett members of the subcommittee. I want to thank you for...

 Show Full Text
00:58:47

General Lady Yields back. We now turn to a five minute question. The chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr Bishop for five minutes...

 Show Full Text
00:58:59

Mr Chairman. I'm going to focus on the testimony the chairman made reference to and that the ranking member was so concerned with damage control that she...

 Show Full Text
01:02:40

Um Yeah, I know we know that the FBI knew that it was real. Uh They knew it was real since not just December 2019. When um is which is when the subpoena...

 Show Full Text
01:04:08

well taken M Morris and my time has expired. But what we have always understood in all likelihood, it was true yet, we now have yet one more piece...

 Show Full Text
01:04:31

gentleman is back, don't recognize the ranking member for five minutes and I think we'll do a ranking member and one more and then we'll have to...

 Show Full Text
01:04:38

Thank you, Mr Chairman. Um I know that we talked earlier about a post that Mr Kennedy had at the beginning of the Biden administration. I just want the...

 Show Full Text
01:11:11

time of the gentle lady, time the gentle lady has expired. Gent lady yields back. The gentleman from North Dakota is recognized. Thank you Mr...

 Show Full Text
01:11:20

Massey. I thank the gentleman from North Dakota. Wow. The irony and cognitive dissonance from the other side of the aisle, it's deafening. You could cut...

 Show Full Text
01:13:56

You belongs

01:13:56

to the gentle belongs to the gentleman.

01:14:00

I denounce that theory. It is racist and I have never endorsed it or had any association with it. Our film on a medical Bill Buxton who is the Black...

 Show Full Text
01:14:50

the witness's time.

01:14:51

Do not censor

01:14:52

the witness. I'm not the, I'm not. It

01:14:56

is. It's my time and I've given it to the witness. Do not censor him if the views that you and others have applied to me, I've attributed to me if...

 Show Full Text
01:17:00

You. Gentleman yields back to

01:17:02

chairman of a unanimous consent motion before we head to see from

01:17:05

the gentleman from New York.

01:17:06

Uh I would like to introduce uh, page two of the transcript of Laura Dem where, uh specifically she says if someone, she's asked if someone were to leave...

 Show Full Text
01:17:47

objection. I think that's already been introduced, but without objection, we'll do it again. Stand in recess, we stand in recess for approximately 40...

 Show Full Text
01:18:03

Well, uh I'm not sure I've seen Council. What? Yeah, I get it here. Put on. Ok, I, as we the I, I'll see you later. Right. Thank...

 Show Full Text
01:58:39

Maybe we will come to order the the chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.

01:58:42

Mr Chairman. I have a point of order, Mr Chairman, I have a point of order

01:58:47

gently considered a point of order.

01:58:49

Thank you, Mr Chairman Mr chairman, I just missed two votes on the house floor because we were not given them. We did not recess on time. I think many...

 Show Full Text
01:58:58

probably properly state a point of order

01:59:02

is what is the intent of the chair in the future recesses to avoid the censorship of the voice of my constituents because I was not able to their...

 Show Full Text
01:59:17

actually the chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts for his five minutes.

01:59:22

Mr Chairman, may I introduce um some ask unanimous consent introduced uh an article from we are June 8th, 2021 discussing the film, medical racism...

 Show Full Text
01:59:46

without objection. Uh uh We'll be entering the record of the chairman as the gentleman from Massachusetts for his five minutes.

01:59:51

Thank you, Mr Chairman Mr Chair. One of the saddest parts of this fabricated circus of outrage is the drumbeat of attacks that I have seen against the...

 Show Full Text
02:04:09

ok. Unfortunately, unfortunately, Congressman, there's more than one impact, one impact. That's very clear and obvious. Sadly, for far too many is that...

 Show Full Text
02:05:39

gentleman from Massachusetts, the chair, recognized gentleman from Florida. Mr Gates. You and Mr Roy Roy is recognized for, I thank

02:05:45

the gentleman from Florida. I think the chairman Mr Kennedy. First of all, your father served as the Attorney General of the United States. I'm a former...

 Show Full Text
02:06:09

Bye. Make sure your microphone, your

02:06:13

microphone. That is exactly the function that the United States Constitution is signed to the people of to the members of Congress. And you know,...

 Show Full Text
02:11:55

Time. And the gentlemen, you back time and gentlemen inspire the gentle from California is recognized for five

02:11:59

minutes. Thank you, Chairman and ranking member Plaskett. During the height of COVID-19, the COVID-19 pandemic anti Asian hate and violence skyrocketed...

 Show Full Text
02:17:39

Mr Chairman, the Democrat beforehand got an extra minute, her

02:17:42

sentence trying to

02:17:43

be generous and her sentence generous. Even when the response is that the government determines the truth. I

02:17:48

would like for her to be able to finish her sentence, Mr Chairman, then I will yield

02:17:52

back. Ok, Miss Wiley, you can finish your sentence.

02:17:54

Thank you. I'm not sure I remember the sentence but thank you. I just think the point was it

02:17:58

was you were saying the government should be the arbiter, not

02:18:01

put words into the mouth of the witness and let her respond

02:18:04

it now from New York, the general lady from California. I

02:18:08

love how you follow the rules. Mr Chairman. It's really indicative of a decision by the chair. It's censorship by the chair.

02:18:18

Thank you, Mr

02:18:19

Chairman. Thank you, Mr Chairman MS Morris. Isn't it true that your October 2020 Hunter Biden laptop from hell story has proven to be 100% factually accurate....

 Show Full Text
02:20:55

Yeah, I, I think, I think democracy is dependent on the free flow of information. And if we, if that information is distorted, if the public is lied...

 Show Full Text
02:21:24

And Mr Kennedy, I want to ask you specifically about the Hunter Biden laptop story. The total blackout on all social media outlets as well as telecom....

 Show Full Text
02:21:46

I don't know enough about it. I know that uh there was censorship on that story and other stories that, uh, you know, presumably could have changed people's...

 Show Full Text
02:22:01

And we know the polling demonstrates that now people have said they would have changed their vote, had they been made aware of the Hunter Biden laptop...

 Show Full Text
02:22:10

aware of that, but I'm not surprised.

02:22:12

Um Mr Sauer, uh I want to turn to you. Um, you II I want your reflection on this form of government censorship specifically in the 2020 election as...

 Show Full Text
02:22:36

I strongly agree with your characterization of that form of censorship as election interference. The evidence in our case strongly supports that it strongly...

 Show Full Text
02:23:34

Mr Chairman.

02:23:35

I have a unanimous consent request.

02:23:38

Young lady from California is recognized for her name's consent.

02:23:41

My majority counterparts have repeatedly cited a district court opinion from Louisiana and I would like to introduce for the record. The Fifth Circuit...

 Show Full Text
02:23:51

issued objection. The chair now recognizes the gentle lady for a point of order. Mr Chairman, gentleman from New York is

02:23:56

recognized, the distinguished gentle lady from New York mentioned a poll. Um I would just ask that she identify what poll that is and if we could enter...

 Show Full Text
02:24:13

it. Uh, the chair now recognizes that lady from Florida M Washer.

02:24:17

Thank you, Mr Chairman Mr Chairman. We respectfully requested that you rescind Mr Kennedy's invitation to appear here due to his repeated and very recent...

 Show Full Text
02:26:24

seconds

02:26:26

entering me correctly dishonest myself. I'd like 15 seconds back. We will be happy to give you that. Thank you so much. You did not cite any study...

 Show Full Text
02:29:58

Gentleman from Kentucky is recognized for UC, I

02:30:00

ask unanimous consent to introduce into the record to study that Mr Kennedy just referenced new insights into genetic susceptibility of COVID-19. Uh...

 Show Full Text
02:31:04

the gentleman from Utah

02:31:09

and Fair, Azi Jews and Chinese people. That is,

02:31:13

thank you, claiming my time, Mr Kennedy. You've had uh some accusations uh thrown at you today. I'm gonna ask my questions briefly and give you a chance...

 Show Full Text
02:36:56

on

02:36:57

Mr Chairman. I have a unanimous consent request. Lady from New York recognized. I'd like to submit for the record tip insight to New Jersey based Institute...

 Show Full Text
02:37:24

for the record. That objection. Thank you. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized for five minutes.

02:37:29

Thank you, Mr Chairman. I've been in this congress 15 years and I never thought we'd descend to this level of Orwellian dystopia.

02:37:44

This is the

02:37:46

suddenly the tools of the trade are not to get at the truth, but to distract, distort, deflect and dissemble. To disagree is censorship to try to correct...

 Show Full Text
02:42:18

Uh Thank you. Thank you, the distinguished gentleman from Virginia. We don't have uh a lot of time to dig into questions. Um But I would just note...

 Show Full Text
02:42:50

gentleman yields back the chair now recognizes Mr Johnson from Louisiana. I'm so

02:42:54

grateful for that segue from Mr Golden because we're about to talk about hard evidence here. It's really ironic. This hearing is covering the left censorship...

 Show Full Text
02:48:05

gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes Mr Allred from Texas for his five minutes. Thank you, Mr Chairman. I yield my time

02:48:13

to MS Blaske and I thank the gentleman from Texas. Mr Kennedy and others here are claiming that they've been censored, but they actually have a...

 Show Full Text
02:52:21

and I, uh, yield remain of the

02:52:23

lady yields back. Um, I now recognize Mr Stuy from, uh Florida for his five minutes,

02:52:30

Mr Kennedy. Do you want to respond to that? Can you do that quickly? Yeah, I've

02:52:33

never heard of Mr Balls and I've never heard of that super pac. This is typical of the accusations against me at this hearing. They are baseless. Every...

 Show Full Text
02:53:14

uh to further the disinformation going on. Uh M Wiley. In response to a question, you stated that the decision in Missouri V. Biden was vacated by...

 Show Full Text
02:53:26

I did and I want to correct that because Mr so is right, the appropriate word is stayed,

02:53:30

administratively stayed. So it hasn't been vacated or dismissed like Mrs Sanchez stayed,

02:53:34

which means it cannot be implemented right now. Ok.

02:53:37

Because you know, I didn't want us to censor your disinformation that you stated as a factual assertion earlier. So I did

02:53:43

misspeak and I

02:53:44

apologize. Thank you for clarifying that for us and to talk about more evidence about. I think it's interesting, there's a lot in this opinion and I just,...

 Show Full Text
02:56:50

It's very telling that the judicial findings are quite specific on the specific threats. So there's several ways you can violate the first amendment if...

 Show Full Text
02:57:56

I'm the gentleman that's expired

02:57:58

chairman of unanimous consent requests. Gentleman from Louisiana. There's a lot of talk about this uh preliminary injunction. So I'd like to enter...

 Show Full Text
02:58:21

back uh with, without objection,

02:58:23

Mr Chair, I'd like the unanimous consent to enter into the record an article um that says pro Frfk Junior Super PAC has deep ties to Marjorie Taylor...

 Show Full Text
02:58:50

objection. Uh The, the chair now recognizes the uh general Lady from Texas, I believe. Is, is that the Thank

02:58:56

you, thank you Mr Chairman and um I live in Houston but I was born and raised in rural South Texas, uh, and shamefully rural South Texas, uh, and...

 Show Full Text
03:04:16

The gentle lady has expired the chair now recognizes the gentle lady from Wyoming M ha.

03:04:21

I got a death threat after the last here

03:04:24

I belong to the G A from Wyoming.

03:04:27

I want to thank you, Mr Sauer, MS Morris and Mr Kennedy for your courage for your willingness to be the tip of the spear to protect all of our first...

 Show Full Text
03:09:46

General Lady back. The gentleman from you a good one. Uh The chair now recognizes the gentle lady from uh Florida. Miss kick

03:10:09

my microphone is broken.

03:10:11

Tell you my phone broke. Um This maybe you over.

03:10:14

Yeah, sorry. The microphone is broken. Wait, that might work. OK. All right. Sorry. This microphone is broken. Want to thank all our witnesses for being...

 Show Full Text
03:10:53

Oh, I, I, I believe that there is a distinction between uh any conversation about a government versus a group of people.

03:11:06

So do you believe that each of my Democratic colleagues should publicly denounce her comments, not continue to give her a platform to make statements like...

 Show Full Text
03:15:19

It's, it's just this, I can't even believe this is a conversation like this is not controversial or taboo. We live in the United States of America and...

 Show Full Text
03:15:32

Mr Kennedy, a government that can censor its critics as licensed for every atrocity. It is the beginning of totalitarianism. There's never been a time...

 Show Full Text
03:16:04

and I know my time has expired. But Mr Sara, you said earlier, censorship is about power. Censorship is about control and the entire progressive leftist...

 Show Full Text
03:16:20

yields back. Gentleman from New York is recognized,

03:16:22

Mr Before that I have um a document I'd like to enter into the record or Washington Post article of July 23rd, which lists the misstates misstatements...

 Show Full Text
03:16:39

about for what, what

03:16:41

I said, the Washington Post,

03:16:43

that gentleman from New York. Thank you,

03:16:46

Mr Chairman Mr Sower. Welcome back to the committee. It's great to see you again. You're becoming a mainstay on the committee. And I do hope that you...

 Show Full Text
03:17:12

COVID-19 is targeted to attack uh Caucasians and, and uh and uh black people, the people who have most here are asking Jews and uh and Chinese

03:17:29

Mr Kennedy, I have a simple question for you as a early victim of COVID. I actually got it uh March 10th 2020. And, and my question to you is whether...

 Show Full Text
03:17:49

No, not at all. And that statement that you saw there is a truncated version of a larger state.

03:17:58

I understand you you issued

03:18:01

it would

03:18:02

hold on. I just, I got now going on reclaiming my time because what I really want to talk about here is evidence, evidence, evidence, evidence Mr...

 Show Full Text
03:22:16

back. Gentleman yields back the chair and not recognize himself hard evidence. Mr Johnson said that we're not only witnesses to censorship, we were...

 Show Full Text
03:22:50

I remember when the ac lu represented Nazis who they, who they were appalled

03:22:58

by, appalled, disgusted by and yet they would defend the crazy things they said, right? That that's how much the first amendment meant to him. Right....

 Show Full Text
03:25:56

Oh, well, you know what I would say is that the, the, the founders of our, and the framers of our constitution knew that democracy was a very inefficient...

 Show Full Text
03:27:18

example. Exactly. I couldn't have said it better. I recognize the gentleman from uh

03:27:23

Mr Chairman. I have a unanimous consent request. Gentlemen said a request uh as for unanimous consent to entered the record, an article by the New...

 Show Full Text
03:27:40

consent without objection. Uh Some, some things amaze me. Uh the gentleman from Kentucky is recognized and this is uh this will be our, our, our last...

 Show Full Text
03:27:51

immutable and undeniable, uh tenets of immunology is natural immunity, but for two years, it was denied, it wasn't even just denied. It was censored....

 Show Full Text
03:28:26

Yes, that kind of censorship was going on and there were direct communications between the platforms and federal officials about natural immunity specifically...

 Show Full Text
03:28:36

thanks to the Twitter files, we found out that the former FDA director who was on the board of pfizer is Doctor Scott Gottlieb wrote on August 27th,...

 Show Full Text
03:33:54

comments from the time the gentleman has expired. I, I may I have, I have 11 other question I can ask, but I, I would first give you a chance...

 Show Full Text
03:34:14

I wasn't prepared for that. So I

03:34:17

thought, I thought I was gonna get 15 seconds for Mr Massey, but we aren't able to do that.

03:34:21

Thank you, sir. Um I did want to ask Miss Wiley regarding we had a discussion and it was brought up by one of the witnesses um related to the website...

 Show Full Text
03:35:47

Thank you. Actually, I'm gonna let Mr Johnson have our, our one minute here, but I think he wants to wait for Mr Kennedy to, well,

03:35:55

I can be asking to Mr Sour. Um I'm sorry that Mr Goldman left because we talked a lot about evidence. Isn't it true in your litigation? Missouri...

 Show Full Text
03:37:03

gentlemen, yields back. Um, I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. We appreciate the work you're doing to, to defend the First Amendment....

 Show Full Text
03:37:31

not want Mr Chair.

03:37:35

I don't, I haven't adjourned the hearing and I don't think you're the chair, Mr

03:37:39

Chair, I

03:37:42

chairman's discretion.

03:37:45

He has had so much additional time. Well, I think why, why, why are you doing that specifically for him? Because

03:37:55

I'm sure there was Super Pac. I be as short as he possibly

03:38:00

can. Are you going to allow our witness to just give another

03:38:04

piece? No, let him address the comment that was made about him. That's untrue

03:38:08

was not defamatory. That is a legal definition that was not met. I want

03:38:14

information about the Super Pac that you mentioned. Go ahead. I've just been told that that Super Pac is connected to somebody that we have a connection...

 Show Full Text
03:38:33

Thank the gentleman uh for uh that statement and I thank you for your testimony. The committee is now adjourned.

03:39:12

Has to. Exactly. So a life, you know. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, we, you guys right to come. Thank you much. Thank you. OK. I'm just...

 Show Full Text

Recommended Viewing Before You See Hollywood's Oppenheimer Treatment

In this video the author describes the "Un-American Activities" trial where Oppenheimer lost his Q clearance. On the first day of the trial, Oppenheimer is extremely dismayed when he discovers that the Chairman of the trial is none other than Gordon Gray, one of the original Majestic Twelve. Parts of the trial are highly classified, and the attorney-client privilege between Oppenheimer and his lawyers is comprised via wiretap. Later in life, Oppenheimer always said "There's a story within a story" regarding revocation of his security clearance.

Really insightful viewing coming on the heels of Schumer's revelation that the Atomic Energy Act 1954 is being used to improperly keep UFO data permanently classified.

Here are some highlights timestamped:

Attorney-client privilege tapped: 35:00

Canadian UFO scientist Wilbert Smith & Robert Sarbacher: 38:30

Oil industry destroyed if new technology revealed: 50:50

Gordon Gray MJ-12: 52:29

Gray's papers on Oppenheimer in Eisenhower Library "never to be released": 56:30

General Leslie Groves no longer trusted Oppenheimer (why?): 59:45

Oppenheimer states "a great deal happened between 1945-49" (i.e. Roswell etc.)

John von Neumann testified about "a new Buck Rogers reality" (remembering that when he was in hospital dying of aggressive cancer, an armed military guard on watch 24/7 in case von Neumann revealed any "secrets") : 1:06

Oppenheimer states "There's a story within the story" : 1:10:35

Propulsion systems: 1:13:40

Executive Orders create the secrets, not the Congress: 1:15:30

I Was Unaware That JFK Had Ordered The CIA To Share All Its UFO Secrets With NASA

popularmechanics  | President Joe Biden has announced that he has completed his “final certification” of files to be released regarding John F. Kennedy’s assassination, even though 4,684 documents are still kept secret in whole or in part.

The National Archives has already released thousands of confidential documents related to the November 1963 assassination of then-president Kennedy. The documents include information from the CIA, FBI, State Department, and other agencies on topics such as assassin Lee Harvey Oswald’s contacts with Soviet and Cuban officials, anonymous tips and threats, and investigations into the shooting itself.

One of the newly released documents revealed the name of the CIA official who intercepted Oswald’s mail in the months before JFK’s killing: Reuben Efron. It turns out Efron had a UFO encounter in 1955 when he was on a train journey through the Soviet Union with Senator Richard Russell, Democrat of Georgia, and an Army colonel. They all saw what a CIA report called two “flying saucers,” though skeptics later argued that they were Soviet aircraft. Russell was among the Warren Commission members who interviewed Marina Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald’s wife, in 1964.

Some conspiracy theorists see a connection between Efron and the Kennedy assassination and wonder if he knew more than he let on. They also hope that a bipartisan bill to declassify UFO records will reveal more about the government’s knowledge and involvement in unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs).

“People say there’s nothing significant in these files?” Jefferson Morley, the editor of the blog JFK Facts, told The New York Times. “Bingo! Here’s the guy who was reading Oswald’s mail, a detail they failed to share until now. You don’t have to be a conspiracy theorist to think it’s suspicious.”

 Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is backing a bipartisan bill that would unveil government records on so-called UFOs and unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAPs). The bill would amend the National Defense Authorization Act and require the federal government to compile all records on UAPs and share them with the public, unless a review board justifies keeping them secret.

Adm. Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter Wanted Full Investigation Of UFO's

Wednesday, July 19, 2023

Click "Read More" To Understand Just How Far Atomic Energy Act Secrecy Extended...,

Schumer: "Legislation is necessary because credible evidence and testimony indicate that US GOV UAP records exist that have not been declassified or subject to Atomic Energy Act of 1954". Dulles to JFK in 1961: "Can't tell you about MJ-12 because of Atomic Energy Act 1954". Some Majestic docs = real
by u/Harry_is_white_hot in UFOB

UFO Secrecy And The Fall of J. Robert Oppenheimer

The ultra slow motion X-Ray footage of the object taken out by Bluegill Triple Prime high altitude nuclear explosion appears to show it executing a high-speed turn and flight recovery manoeuvre
by u/Harry_is_white_hot in UFOB

amazon  |   How was it possible that J. Robert Oppenheimer - national hero, director of the Manhattan Project, brilliant physicist, sometimes impatient and abrasive personality - summarily lost his security clearance in 1954? How could this anything-but-secret leftist have been trusted by his government with the celebrated "Q-clearance" for more than a decade, from 1942 to 1954, granting him access to the highest levels of top secret information regarding nuclear weapons, then have his clearance summarily stripped from him because his loyalty came suddenly into doubt?

The traditional historical explanation is too facile to be believed. It holds that, first, the fact that Oppenheimer was a leftist student at Berkeley in the Thirties was not seen as particularly important in 1942 when he was hired to become (as he later did) "Father of the Atomic Bomb." After all, who hadn't been a leftist intellectual during those years? Then we are required to believe that in 1954 the government, armed now with insights acquired from Joe McCarthy and others, could see clearly the danger to the Republic these former college kids represented. No matter that Oppenheimer actually led - and successfully protected - arguably one of the greatest secrets of the Twentieth Century. Oppenheimer (as he was called) had to be humiliated. He had been a leftist in the Thirties!

Here's why that explanation doesn't hold: It is an undisputed fact that Oppenheimer had been called back into government service many times after 1945, and continued to enjoy the the access provided by his Top Secret clearance. The reasons for his having been called may still be shrouded in official government secrecy, but we know he was called often during the years 1945 to 1954. Therefore the questions about his loyalty didn't evolve with changing American sensibilities; they came suddenly, and without warning.

In UFO Secrecy and the Fall of J. Robert Oppenheimer, Dr. Burleson constructs and defends a surprising hypothesis to explain Oppenheimer's fall from grace. It boils down to two parts: First, that he was involved in more than one UFO retrieval effort between 1947 and 1954; then, that in 1954 he was in fact being punished by others in the select circle of those with access to classified information about UFOs.

Burleson makes an effective case to link and then support the two parts of his hypothesis. In order to do this, however, he must first work a kind of magic: He needs to put Oppenheimer conclusively on the scene of at least one government-sponsored UFO retrieval project. It doesn't matter if you're a UFO skeptic or not; that's a tall order! The government, after all, has picked up lots of debris, but denies to this day the existence of any retrievals still classified as UFOs. So how does Burleson prove the government is not being truthful?

I really don't want to tell you because I don't want to risk detracting from Dr. Burleson's detailed recital of the facts. But all right. Suffice it to say Burleson does not benefit from anyone's betrayal of government secrecy, nor does he make any tenuous inferential claims. His information comes directly from a Canadian source pertaining to a specific 1947 crash and retrieval effort - information shared at the time by both governments. The memorandum in question was declassified by the Canadian government in 1978 (for shame!) and has been in the public domain since that time. In short, Burleson makes the essential connection by relying on a skill that is sadly wanting among historians and journalists today: Pure scholarship.

Burleson is able to lay out all the subsequent known facts into a far more compelling historical narrative than any of the conventional accounts we have seen to date. He details the historical record of people now known to be connected to Oppenheimer through their connections to the event. This leads in turn to a far more plausible historical account of events leading up to Oppenheimer's clearance hearing in 1954. It puts Oppenheimer in touch, unfortunately, with people well known for their skill at backbiting, bureaucratic infighting, and the shallow envy of those who were simply not in in a league with Oppenheimer.

Whether you come to the book as a believer in UFOs with extraterrestrial origins or not, you will have to concede that Dr. Burleson defends his Oppenheimer-UFO hypothesis with outstanding success. He cuts into the shell of secrecy by providing by far the best and most plausible explanation for a set of facts that themselves are not seriously in dispute. Consider Burleson's Oppenheimer-UFO hypothesis, therefore, confirmed.

Tuesday, July 18, 2023

UNIDENTIFIED ANOMALOUS PHENOMENA DISCLOSURE ACT OF 2023

democrats.senate.gov |  Eminent Domain over any and all recovered technology:

SEC. 10. DISCLOSURE OF RECOVERED TECHNOLOGIES OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN AND BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE OF NON-HUMAN INTELLIGENCE.

(a) EXERCISE OF EMINENT DOMAIN

The Federal Government shall exercise eminent domain over any and all recovered technologies of unknown origin and biological evidence of non-human intelligence that may be controlled by private persons or entities in the interests of the public good.

Number 4): Legislation is necessary because credible evidence and testimony indicates that Federal Government unidentified anomalous phenomena records exist that have not been declassified or subject to mandatory classification review as set forth in Executive Order 13526 due in part to exemptions under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as well as an overbroad interpretation of "transclassified foreign nuclear information", which is also exempt from mandatory declassification, thereby preventing public disclosure under existing provisions of law.

1954 is the year Oppenheimer was relieved of his Q clearance. I don't want to overstep the possibilities here, but this is huge.

Legislation is necessary to create an enforceable, independent, and accountable process for the disclosure of such records. Legislation is necessary because credible evidence and testimony indicates that Federal Government Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena records exist that have not been declassified or subject to mandatory classification review as set forth in executive order 13526 due in part to exemptions under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as well as an over broad interpretation of "trans classified foreign nuclear information", which is also exempt from mandatory classification, thereby preventing public disclosure under existing provisions of law.

This bill states that there's credible evidence and testimony (note: *not* simply testimony) that the government has been hiding stuff they're mandated to disclose by claiming it's exempt under the "Atomic Energy Act of 1954" or is exempt due to an overly-broad interpretation of "transclassified foreign nuclear information."

And later on page 12, look who we find is mentioned in a list of entities who have had anomalous materials that was created or made available for use by, obtained by, or otherwise came into the possession of
The Department of Energy and its pro-genitors, the Manhattan Project, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Energy Research and Development Administration;


 

Chuck Schumer Knows Something...,

On topic after about 7 minutes of writers strike chatter. A very good discussion about the newest series of events, notably including the Schumer Amendment.

Couple of things I think merit some extra discussion:

Zabel muses that the new apparent urgency strikes him as occurring because there may be some amount of "bad news" coming soon. Coulthart responds carefully, saying he generally knows what the government knows, and there does exist some specific reason(s) for the time constraint. Frankly, I'm not sure what to make of this. Leslie Keane has made similar remarks, but just a few weeks ago Coulthart was relatively pessimistic about the disclosure process at all. I'm not sure how those things jibe, exactly. Did something change in those few weeks?

Coulthart mentions Grusch is prepared to go into detail about the alleged murders in furtherance of the cover up, at the congressional hearing. That has all kinds of potential to be a breakthrough issue if he can back it up.

Coulthart says he's not hearing anything about the "strike team" rumors that would lead him to believe it.

Lastly, Coulthart mentions the now-infamous "big boi" craft that's too large to move, saying he can't reveal the location because of US and Australian national security (hint hint), but that he released the info as a challenge to the executives in charge of this facility and others to behave in good faith because he - and congress - already are aware of these places/programs, and are watching.

Anyway, worth the time to hear their comments in full context, as I'm guessing there will be sound bites and micro-quotes out there soon.

Monday, July 17, 2023

The Phenomenon: It's Not A Question Of Belief

guardian |  The government program and its known records have rendered the question “do you believe in UFOs?” obsolete, according to the Times’ investigators – “their existence, or nonexistence, is not a matter of belief”. UFO means, simply, that we don’t know what these incidents are – not necessarily alien, but a matter of government record, as fact. “It’s not a question of belief, it’s not a question of whether this is happening,” said Mellon. “Our government and our defense department have publicly acknowledged that this is real and that this is happening.” The observations released by the military seem to suggest advanced military technology, enough to have concerned the Department of Defense – which announced a new taskforce into the matter this August – as well as the Office of Naval Intelligence and members of two Senate committees. “The challenge now is to figure out where they’re coming from, how they’re made, and what the intent is,” said Mellon.

Both Fox and Mellon acknowledged the difficulty in entertaining the idea of confirmed UFOs, and some of The Phenomenon’s more fantastical claims, without skepticism. Indeed, the idea suggested by the film that governments from the US to Russia to Australia have systematically suppressed coverage, research or speculation of UFO sightings seems dubious, if not outright dangerous, given the very real threats rampant conspiracy theories, which often invoke the military and/or space, pose to American democracy in the Trump era. Mellon agreed that “there is a problem with disinformation in this area, and unfortunately there’s a lot of junk and hoaxes as well as just information from people seeing something they’re not understanding, that has an explanation based in science or a classified program”.

But he noted that “all of the serious people involved in this issue want to take a hard-nosed scientific approach to this topic – we need more and better data” based on “trustworthy” and “authentic” reports released by government departments — “it’s information that the government is surfacing from our own military”.

The Phenomenon, like the many extraterrestrial documentaries before it, ultimately can’t stake a claim on certainty; instead, it concludes with a call for consideration. “I’m not screaming from the hilltops ‘ET is here!’” said Fox. “I’m just saying, ‘Hey, look, there’s a serious situation going on, and this demands not only government transparency, but further investigation.’”

With A Twinkle In His Eye Lt. Col Robert J. Friend Acknowledged The Truth

HuffPost  | A retired Air Force official in charge of one of its most famous UFO research efforts said before his death last year that the effort may have been scuttled not because it was fruitless, but just the opposite.

In a clip from the new documentary “The Phenomenon,” Lt. Col. Robert Friend pointed to the sudden closure of Project Blue Book in 1969. 

“Which would suggest what?” he asked before answering his own question: “That they knew what it was.”

James Fox, the film’s director added: “Or didn’t know what it was.”

But Friend, who led Project Blue Book from 1958-1963, persisted.

“Also the other way,” Friend replied with a telling grin. “That they did know what it was.”

Officially, the project was shuttered despite some 700 open cases because it “no longer can be justified either on the ground of national security or in the interest of science.”

But Friend, who died last year at the age of 99, suggested in his last interview that the shutdown could have been for another reason:

Friend, who was one of the Tuskegee Airmen during WWII and the only Black leader of Project Blue Book, heading it during the civil rights movement, was originally skeptical of claims that aliens had ever made the long trip to Earth.

“Do I believe that we have been visited? No, I don’t believe that,” he told HuffPost in 2012. “And the reason I don’t believe it is because I can’t conceive of any of the ways in which we could overcome some of these things: How much food would you have to take with you on a trip for 22 years through space? How much fuel would you need? How much oxygen or other things to sustain life do you have to have?”

However, Friend also called for more study and said he believes there could be life elsewhere.

“I think that anytime there’s a possibility of scientific pay dirt from studying these phenomena, that yes, it would be much better if the government or some other agency was to take on these things and to pursue the scientific aspects of it,” he said.

More recent revelations indicate that the U.S. government’s interest in UFOs didn’t end with Project Blue Book but have continued in other forms, much of which is detailed in “The Phenomenon.”

Former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in the film that the federal government has been covering up UFOs and that most of the evidence “hasn’t seen the light of day.”

 

The Atomic Energy Commission And The CIA - UFO Thought Police

wikipedia  |  The Robertson Panel first met formally on January 14, 1953 under the direction of Howard P. Robertson. He was a physicist, a CIA consultant, and the director of the Defense Department Weapons Evaluation Group. He was instructed by OSI to assemble a group of prominent scientists to review the Air Force's UFO files. In preparation for this, Robertson first personally reviewed Air Force files and procedures. The Air Force had recently commissioned the Battelle Memorial Institute to scientifically study all of the UFO reports collected by Project Sign, Project Grudge and Project Blue Book. Robertson hoped to draw on their statistical results, but Battelle insisted that they needed much more time to conduct a proper study. Other panel members were respected scientists who had worked on other classified military projects or studies. All were then skeptical of UFO reports, though to varying degrees. Apart from Robertson, the panel included:

Most of what is known about the actual proceedings of the meetings comes from notes kept by Durant which were later submitted as a memo to the NSC and commonly referred to as the Durant Report.[2] In addition, various participants would later comment on what transpired from their perspective. Captain (later Major) Edward Ruppelt, then head of Project Blue Book, first revealed the existence of the secret panel in his 1956 book,[4] but without revealing names of panel members. 

As early as August 15 CIA analysts, despite their overall skeptical conclusions had noted, "Sightings of UFOs reported at Los Alamos and Oak Ridge, at a time when the background radiation count had risen inexplicably. Here we run out of even "blue yonder" explanations that might be tenable, and, we still are left with numbers of incredible reports from credible observers."[11] On December 2, 1952 CIA Assistant Director Chadwell noted, "Recent reports reaching CIA indicated that further action was desirable and another briefing by the cognizant A-2 and ATIC personnel was held on 25 November. At this time, the reports of incidents convince us that there is something going on that must have immediate attention. The details of some of these incidents have been discussed by AD/SI with DDCI. Sightings of unexplained objects at great altitudes and traveling at high speeds in the vicinity of major U.S. defense installations are of such nature that they are not attributable to natural phenomena or known types of aerial vehicles".[12]

Chadwell's 2 December memorandum contained the draft of recommendations for the NSC, which were:

1. The Director of Central Intelligence shall formulate and carry out a program of intelligence and research activities as required to solve the problem of instant positive identification of unidentified flying objects.

2. Upon call of the Director of Central Intelligence, Government departments and agencies shall provide assistance in this program of intelligence and research to the extent of their capacity provided, however, that the DCI shall avoid duplication of activities presently directed toward the solution of this problem.

3. This effort shall be coordinated with the military services and the Research and Development Board of the Department of Defense, with the Psychological Board and other Governmental agencies as appropriate.

4. The Director of Central Intelligence shall disseminate information concerning the program of intelligence and research activities in this field to the various departments and agencies which have authorized interest therein.""[12]

On December 4, 1952 the Intelligence Advisory Committee agreed:

The Director of Central Intelligence will:

a. Enlist the services of selected scientists to review and appraise the available evidence in the light of pertinent scientific theories.

b. Draft and circulate to the IAC a proposed NSCID, which would signify the IAC concerning the subject and authorize coordination with appropriate non-IAC departments and agencies.[1]

From the IAC minutes of December 4 and the earlier CIA documents it appears clear that the Robertson Panel was the outcome of recommendation (a) of the IAC decision but that this formed part of a wider intended programme of action aimed at enabling rapid positive identification of UFOs from an air defense perspective (i.e. identifying actual Soviet aircraft from misidentified natural phenomena or other conventional objects) and a desire to reduce reporting of UFOs, which were seen as clogging up air defense communication channels and created the risk of exploitation of this effect. The inter-relationships between these wider aspects of the CIA's recommendations and the Battelle Memorial Institute's study, culminating in Blue Book Special Report 14,[13] which identified a statistically significant difference between 'unknowns' and UFO reports that could subsequently be identified, or the study group referenced in a Canadian government document as operating as early as 1950 under the chairmanship of Dr Vannevar Bush, then head of the Joint Research and Development Board, to discover the 'modus operandi' of UFOs[14] are unclear.

 

Sunday, July 16, 2023

Cognitive Activism (REDUX 5/13/08)

One of my favorite reference sites is Organelle. Hopefully by now, you will have already availed yourself of this extraordinary resource. If not, no time like the present. Enjoy.

Why are you doing this?
Firstly, it is my experience and understanding that we as a species, and Earth as a planet are facing a variety of unprecedented threats for which both are vastly more unprepared than human beings imagine. For the humans, early (current) results include cataclysmic changes in human health and cognition. For the biosphere, the results vastly exceed what can be briefly discussed. Simply stated, the anciently and arduously conserved biocognitive libraries of Earth are being burned, wholesale. Humans believe this has little to do with them, and, as far as action goes, egregiously ignore these matters. No one finds wholesale atrocity surprising anymore. We accept it as a fact of life, whether it is the physical atrocities of war and ‘research’ or the cognitive and relational atrocities bred in the thriving soup of our human cultures.

I do not believe we can give answer to these challenges without some very new and powerful methods of approach and forms of understanding. It is my sincere belief that Cognitive Activism holds forth promises of new and extremely powerful ways of understanding both the genesis of these matters and their resolutions.

If you want to paint me with a label, for some reason or other, the label transhumanist might be relatively accurate, in that I believe we have not yet glimpsed even the tiniest portion of our real cognitive and relational potentials. However, I am an a-mechanical transhumanist in that I do not really believe that machines and our relations with them ‘enhance’ us. It is not enough for there to be an apparent benefit to some dimension of our activity (i.e. relation with machines); the costs of creation, relation, and protection (maintenance) of machines must necessarily be available for evaluation if we are to decide they are ‘beneficial’. But these costs are neither examined, nor available for examination, since many of them exist in terrains we are but poorly equipped to recognize or evaluate.

Simply stated: machines and organisms compete for the same terrain and resources. This has severe cognitive ramifications for human beings, as well as physical ramifications. Humans are almost miraculously cognitively malleable and are prone to biocognitive emulation of various functions and features of their common relationals. In the case of machines, the more we relate with them, the more we become like them. Yet a machine is not even the shadow of an organism. It is the shadow of some function of an organism. This is not something we want the experience of ‘becoming alike with’ cognitively, physically, emotionally, nor in any other way.

Each person (and organism) possesses kinds and forms of relational ability (intelligence potentials) that would make the sum of our science, religion, and fiction look like a charred matchstick compared to the Sun. Having had a direct experience of some of these potentials and abilities, I believe it is possible for us to rediscover them together, with the aid of some new ways of relating to identity and knowledge.

In essence, I see the potential for a sudden revolution in human relational intelligence, something more dramatic than anything we can currently imagine. If we can remove the elemental obstructions at the roots of our relational intelligence, we have the chance to radically and positively change what it means to be human.

Do You Taste Chocolate Or Just Read Its Ingredients? (REDUX 5/7/08)

Of the three lines of evolution perceptible to man (and hence attributed by him to nature), the highest, because the most inclusive, is spiritual evolution defined as the self-perception of self. But between, first, this verbal definition and the realization of its meaning; and secondly, the realization of its meaning and its actualization in being—there may be aeons of difference. From merely understanding that the highest value is self-objectivity (the ability, that is to say, to see everything thought of as self exactly as if it were not self) it does not follow that we have it, any more that it follows that if we understand that gold is of more value than silver, we necessarily possess gold. The attainment of the state of self-objectivity is something totally different from its understanding just as acquiring gold is something totally different from the appreciation of its value.

What I am therefore disposed to say of the problems already referred to is that their understanding and appreciation need to be supplemented by something entirely different before they can be solved; and that, in fact, the modern mind, even when desirous of objectivity, is incapable of solving such problems for the simple reason that the modern mind is not, in actuality, self-objective.

I beg myself as well as my readers not to mistake understanding for attainment; and not to imagine, on the strength of their realization of certain truths, that they possess them, or still less, that they can use them. Our being, in which alone truth is possessed, is still a long way behind our understanding. Is then, Progress a "myth"? I do not know. Is it, on the other hand, a fact in Nature? Again, I do not know. Nor do I find it necessary to settle the question one way or the other for my peace of mind. To understand what the question implies, to be satisfied that one can not answer it now, but to hope to be able one day to answer it, that, I think, is enough. . .

 

Gurdjieff On Influences (REDUX 5/18/08)

ONCE there was a meeting with a large number of people who had not been at our meetings before. One of them asked: “From what does the way start?” The person who asked the question had not heard G.’s description of the four ways and he used the word “way” in the usual religious-mystical sense.

“The chief difficulty in understanding the idea of the way,”‘ said G., “consists in the fact that people usually think that the way” (he emphasized this word) “starts on the same level on which life is going. This is quite wrong. The way begins on another, much higher, level. This is exactly what people usually do not understand. The beginning of the way is thought to be easier or simpler than it is in reality. I will try to explain this in the following way.
 
“Man lives in life under the law of accident and under two kinds of influences again governed by accident.

“The first kind are influences created in life itself or by life itself. Influences of race, nation, country, climate, family, education, society, profession, manners and customs, wealth, poverty, current ideas, and so on. The second kind are influences created outside this life, influences of the inner circle, or esoteric influences- influences, that is, created under different laws, although also on the earth. These influences differ from the former, first of all in being conscious in their origin. This means that they have been created consciously by conscious men for a definite purpose. Influences of this kind are usually embodied in the form of religious systems and teachings, philosophical doctrines, works of art, and so on.

of the first kind. But it must be borne in mind that these influences are conscious only in their origin. Coming into the general vortex of life they fall under the general law of accident and begin to act mechanically, that is, they may act on a certain definite man or may not act; they may reach him or they may not. In undergoing change and distortion in life through transmission and interpretation, influences of the second kind are transformed into influences of the first kind, that is, they become, as it were, merged into the influences of the first kind.
 

The Enneagram - A Lecture By G.I. Gurdjieff (REDUX 5/18/08)

In every man there has been implanted a need of (desire for) knowledge, differing only in its intensity. But the passive human mind, while utilizing every means possible to it of taking in (and working over) impressions, often gets into an impasse in trying to find an answer to the question "Why".

Man's eyes are dazzled by the bright play of the colors of multiformity, and under the glittering surface he does not see the hidden kernel of the one-ness of all that exists. This multiformity is so real that its single modes approach him from all sides - some by way of logical deduction and philosophy, others by way or faith and feeling. From the most ancient times down to our own epoch, throughout the ages of its life, humanity as a whole has been yearning for a knowledge of this one-ness and seeking for it, pouring itself out into various philosophies and religions which remain, as it were, monuments on the path of these searches for the Path, leading to the knowledge of unity.
 
We have in a way been diverted from our original aim of examining the symbol. As a matter of fact, those of us who know how to listen have approached nearer to an understanding of it. As a perfect synthesis it contains in itself all elements of knowledge of the law expressed by it, and out of it may be deduced and developed in detail in the most accurate fashion all that we have just been saying. By all I have said today, I have not exhausted even the smallest part of what can be said on the subject. In the future we shall once more return to it and dwell on it in greater detail. I by no means think that I have been able to explain anything, as I did not pursue that aim. My task was to give my listeners a sensation of the taste of the understanding with which one must approach the search after the laws of truth. Once more I repeat: in order to understand in these matters, constant efforts are necessary.

Before closing the lecture, I wish to say a few words on what is termed "Initiation". Initiation is customarily regarded as some act whereby one man "The Knower" transfers to another man "The non-knower" knowledge and powers hitherto not peculiar to him and without any trouble on his part; assigning it as thing which becomes his inalienable possession. But from all that has been said by me today, you will already be able to understand, that there is no such transfer and cannot be. There is only self-initiation, which is got by constant and stubborn work, by constant efforts. No one conceals the knowledge of truth. It simply cannot be transferred, just as the finest mathematical ideas cannot be transferred to a man unacquainted with mathematics. And in questions relating to the transfer of a knowledge of the Truth, matters are more complicated than in the example quoted. You have been able to convince yourself of this today. It is possible to teach a man mathematics, but an understanding of the truth he conquers for himself. And woe to man, if under the influence of the poison of what seems Truth, and striving after "practical" results without possessing a perfect understanding and knowledge of what must be done and how to do it, he starts experimenting on himself, often doing himself irreparable harm. Harmony is destroyed and it is incomparably better to do nothing at all than to do without possessing the knowledge. 
 

Saturday, July 15, 2023

Assessing Memetic Weapons Capability Of Neoconservatism (REDUX 5/6/08)

Use of radio as a form of memetic warfare has long been known and exploited (Voice of America, Radio Free Europe). The early innovations of memetic warfare are evident in spam, now reaching 80% of internet traffic -- possible to justify future implementation of severely restrictive counter-measures. In contrast to the threat of viruses, spam has a cognitive component. The focus on sexually explicit imagery, together with performance improving drugs and devices, is clearly associated with evocation of lust as a memetic weapon. It is no coincidence that a high percentage of such spam originates in the USA -- where even the highest ranked hotels offer "adult movies". Only the naive would fail to recognize the offensive function of such memetic weapons against other cultures, such as Islam.

Whilst such spam may be understood as a memetic analogue to biological warfare, there is a case for anticipating the development and deployment of memetic analogues to tactical and strategic nuclear weapons. There is also a case for recognizing the probable nature and targets of such weaponry and the appropriate modes of defence.
 
Nuclear weapons -- with their emphasis on mass destruction -- have proven to be a fundamental revolution in warfare. They are destructive not only of mass in the physical sense but also of masses in the demographic sense -- as well as of ecosystems on which life depends. It is therefore useful to question whether any memetic analogue would be equally fundamental in its effect on the:

    "nuclear family", as it has come to be understood in its more restrictive sense
    "nuclear community", as it it is understood in the neighbourhood or quartier sense
    "nuclear culture", as it is increasingly understood, especially by threatened minorities and ethnic groups, and it is becoming framed in the case of "Christian civilization" or the "Muslim Umah"

What are the consequences on these "nuclear" bonds of the emergent possibilities of memetic nuclear warfare? Already the effects of "information warfare" are apparent and a feature of Psy-Ops. Censorship and the control of information on problematic issues can already be understood as "nuclear shields" (cf Missiles, Missives, Missions and Memetic Warfare: Navigation of strategic interfaces in multidimensional knowledge space, 2001). Intriguingly the manipumation of statements regarding "sins" and "virtues" seem to be used in such warfare rather like "binary weapons" -- composed of two ingredients that become lethal only when combined at the last minute before detonation. The art would appear to be ensure the implosive deployment of memetic components based on "sin" (its recognition, evocation of guilt, etc) in conjunction with deployment of "virtue" (occupying the vaccum created). This might be seen as analogous to the deployment of thermobaric weapons.

The challenge for fundamentalists in engaging in such memetic warfare is that even after such deployment, as is evident in Iraq, the population remains highly resistant to replacing Islamic virtues, framed as sinful by the crusading occupation forces, by Christian virtues. In memetic terms, destruction of nuclear bonds in order to reform a culture through "nation-building" processes (conceived as analogous to interrogation, brain-washing, indoctrination and re-education techniques) has proven to be far from successful -- despite the arrogance with which it was envisaged sending an army of missionaries into Iraq to follow the invasion by the Coalition of the Willing [more].

What would seem to be required in relation to community building, nation building, and building a viable planetary culture, is a memetic analogue to nuclear "fusion technology" -- rather than the "fission technology" through which the bonds of the "pattern that connects" are broken. This would call for investment in a degree of imaginative "memetic innovation" analogous to that currently deployed internationally in relation to nuclear fusion [more]. In this light the "clash of civilizations" would be designed into a framework capable of holding their interaction so as to reinvigorate humanity through the rich pattern of energetic relationships the "clash" engendered. Can humanity control its own functions as a memetic nuclear fusion reactor? Is the design challenge analogous to that of avoiding plasma "quenching" in order to ensure sustained fusion? Perhaps "sin" is best to be understood in terms of "quenching" the spirit?

This approach is to be contrasted with fundamentalist efforts to eliminate the difference which enables that memetic energy release in order to create a homogeneous hegemony in which everyone sings from the same hymn sheet -- composed in Washington. Is it possible that models deriving from fusion technology would point to radically new approaches to fusion at a far more fundamental level between contrasting faith perspectives -- a level respectful of both the differences (that are otherwise expressed so violently) and the inspiration that sustains them?

It is the memetic technology required to work with requisite difference that would enable civilization to enegage more effectively with questions of a higher order (Engaging with Questions of Higher Order: cognitive vigilance required for higher degrees of twistedness, 2004).


From Anthony Judge's Seven Deadly Sins of Fundamentalism

The Thought Crime Bill (REDUX 4/4/08)

The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 is a bill sponsored by Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) in the 110th United States Congress. Its stated purpose is to deal with "homegrown terrorism and violent radicalization" by establishing a national commission, establishing a center for study, and cooperating with other nations.

The bill was introduced to the House on April 19 2007, and passed on Oct 23, 2007. It was introduced to the Senate on August 2, 2007 as S-1959. The bill defines some terms including "violent radicalization," "homegrown terrorism," and "ideologically based violence," which have provoked controversy from some quarters. Although Section 899F of HR 1955 specifically prohibits "the violation of Civil Rights and Liberties in the enforcement of the bill," critics claim its enactment would pave the way for violations of Civil Rights and Liberties.

Former presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich has said he believes the bill is "unconstitutional" and has referred to the bill as a "thought crime bill".

Representative Ron Paul (R-TX), addressed the bill in he House on Dec. 5, 2007 saying: "This seems to be an unwise and dangerous solution in search of a real problem. Previous acts of ideologically motivated violence, though rare, have been resolved successfully using law enforcement techniques, existing laws against violence, and our court system," despite the fact that this bill does not "solve" anything and enacts no new laws of or pertaining to speech in the United States.

5th Circuit Lets Bidencorp Continue F*cking With Your Cognitive Infrastructure....,

dailycaller  |   A federal appeals court issued a temporary stay on a judge’s injunction barring federal officials from communicating with social media companies for the purposes of censoring protected speech on Friday.

Western District of Louisiana Judge Terry A. Doughty previously denied the Biden administration’s request for an emergency order pausing his injunction on July 10. In an order Friday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay on the injunction “until further orders” of the court.

Doughty had previously issued a preliminary injunction barring the Biden administration from communicating with social media companies to censor protected speech on July 4.

The panel of judges who hear the case for arguments on the merits will later consider the administration’s motion for a longer stay, according to the order.

When Doughty denied the administration’s request for an emergency order Monday, he said the injunction only bars the administration from doing something they “no legal right to do—contacting social media companies for the purpose of urging, encouraging, pressuring, or inducing in any manner, the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms. It also contains numerous exceptions.”

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey and Louisiana Attorney General Jeffrey Landry slammed the administration’s attempt to stop the injunction as asking to “continue violating the First Amendment” in a July 10 court filing.

 

 

WHO Put The Hit On Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico?

Eyes on Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico who has just announced a Covid Inquiry that will investigate the vaccine, excess deaths, the EU...