The Lindsay Shepherd Affair: Context & Analysis

These matters are not simple and straightforward, and I am glad that there are those with developed skill, knowledge and understanding who are shining a spotlight on these matters.

There is a historical context here - to large degree, the west is struggling through the long term consequences of recent history. The threads are often tenuous, tangled, and reach back decades. It takes time and effort to follow them back to their origins, and some of the origins go further back, they are ancient, seemingly written into our evolutionary biology - which would neatly explain why these issues continue to reoccur in one form or another throughout human history.

Though small groups, such as a family, can and do work according to the underlying ideas of socialism, the connection between effort and gain within that unit is still understood - children gain much but can contribute little, the family exists exactly because of this reality. That situation is transitory; children grow, contribute more over time, become self-sufficient, self-supporting adults. The connection between gain and effort, between effort and gain, re-establishes itself over time. In any larger society, should the principle be applied, that connection becomes increasingly tenuous, (the connection between effort and gain is not re-established over time), and as soon as it becomes invisible (through distance between members of larger society) the whole social system collapses. In short, when it is possible that an individual gain from the efforts of the group while contributing little, it is entirely consistent with human nature that they do so, and that the inclination then spread through the group as it becomes more obvious that some gain as much as others through little effort. The whole output of the group declines, eventually to the point that there is no output and the whole group suffers the consequences of that.

There are so many examples of collectivist principles applied to societies of various sizes, including but not limited to entire nations and empires that failed - every single time - that it seems incredible to me that it is not generally accepted common knowledge. Here is just one example... yes, it is a long piece by Stefan Molyneux (who has a problem being brief, but these matters are complex and require full analysis) but worth your time:

Now, back to the title.

"During the proceedings, Shepherd was accused of breaking the law, both federal (Bill C16) and provincial, violating Wilfred Laurier's standards of conduct, and of being actively transphobic. Rambukkana compared me directly to Hitler (and Milo Yiannopoulos, to be fair), failing to recognize that what I predicted would happen in the aftermath of Bill C16 (see http://bit.ly/2AZqj4B) was exactly what was undertaken by the tripartite disciplinary panel he headed."

Yes, this is also long, but also very much worth your time.

If you tend to feel you don't have time, then here's something shorter and more fun. I'm pretty sure that no one who reads my very occasional posts will fall into the snowflake category of human being, so I'd guess you are more likely to laugh than be offended.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

RIP Jerry Pournelle

Though we never met, I find I feel the loss quite personally.

We have lost a Champion of Reason.

Dr. Pournelle's blog holds a wealth of insight and information spanning many years. You will not have to spend much time there to realize that we have lost someone far more than significant that those who think of him primarily as a writer of Science Fiction.

Chaos Manor

Libertarian Game of Thrones

Stumbled across this today and thought I would post it here. Yes, it is as funny as you might think, but...

... but there is as deep a flaw with Libertarianism as any there is with other ideology. Real world functionality relies on all members of a society understanding, accepting and acting on its principles at all times. And that isn't going to fly.

There are several reasons why, but the most obvious is that the Big Five personality traits exist - they are real - and we are each born with a propensity toward a mixed bag of those traits, which leads to us each being unique, especially when factors of environment and personal experience are figured in. In short, getting a society to abide consistantly by the same set of rules is no easy task. Bad enough, but worse when it is clear that our species has a desire to control its environment... a passive, non-controlling ideology is about as contra-evolutionary reality as you can get. As a species, we did not evolve to be Libertarians, and attempting to adopt a philosophy that is fundamentally against our evolutionary biology is just about as futile an objective as I can imagine. A significant percentage of people wil work against it, work to influence, control, steer the ship, grow their following, and utliamately dominate.

Yes, it's a shame. But we are what we are and need something a little more robust and structured to keep more-or-less all of us more-or-less in line within a functioning society more-or-less all of the time. One society, one set of rules, within which we can compete without violence.

I don't think I'm going to explore that line any further, right now. Instead I'll pass you on to someone else who has a few thoughts to express that might be useful in developing or refining your own ideas: /Before western civilization - sowing the wind

There is more to the article than I reproduce here, and I recommend the visit required to read the whole piece.

"It is self-evident that men and women are not equal in all respects. It is self-evident that all men are not created equal. It is self-evident that all women are not created equal. The Bible exhorts us to be kind to strangers – but not submissive to them. Western tradition tells us to act as if it were self-evident that all men are created equal, and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; those principles became the common heritage of much of the west, but they are only an assumption; we have no proof, only the observation that things work better if we accept them.

That, of course is not strictly true; there is a great history of philosophy that leads to modern Western ethics and moral principles; but the average citizen of the west does not know this, other than having a vague knowledge that those who should know can teach it to those smart and interested enough;  but for practical discussion, the fundamentals of Western ethics and morals are assumed. We assume these truths to be self-evident even though it is really self evident that they are not literally true.

But like all rules contrary to observable facts, it is easy to carry them too far – and to assume that others share them when they do not."

That's Not Fair!

Stumbled across this vid' just a little while ago and had some thoughts about it. Probably best watch it first or you won't know what I'm talking about. It's short but sweet.

So, something we probably already knew is demonstrated fairly well. What child hasn't spontaneously put together the concept of 'That's not fair' all by themselves?

What this Vid' demonstrates is that the concept is built into our evolution at a very early stage. In a natural environment, effort and reward would be fairly equal. When inequality is artificially introduced, it is noticed really fast.

For me, this is kind of a wasted experiment, though. Wouldn't ti be interesting to push the boundaries a little? What would be the response if the greater reward were given for greater effort, or a more complex task? What response without access to the tools of that task, and then with the needed tools? With and without the ability to watch and learn the complex task? I think a good deal more insight into our own nature could be squeezed out of a series of experiments building on this theme.

I was instantly reminded of the story of Cain & Abel, for reasons which will only perhaps become clear if you invest the time in watching a much longer and more complex Vid' - but I do recommend it. The insights here have great value and are worth your time.

What is God? What is Religion?

These are questions we tend to answer flippantly, if at all, but given that every single culture in the whole of human history has proposed answers the questions must be rather more important than we might tend to think from a modern perspective.

Here are the answers I think are most useful, a condensed subjective view derived from the work of Jordan B. Peterson (I'll link below because I really think that JBP's work has practical value for any individual).

God

If we conceive God as the most ideal, moral leader possible then a couple of useful things happen. One, there is an ideal to aim for, whatever that ideal may be. Two, that spot is already taken by an abstracted ideal so that any given living glorious leader cannot delude themselves that that are that perfect ideal - the top spot is already taken. Nor can the people, or any substantial percentage, think that their glorious leader is God.

A good deal of historical nastiness could have been avoided. A good deal of potential future nastiness can be avoided.

Religion

If we conceive of Religion as a blueprint for 'how society should be' then it is literally possible to look around the world and see which blueprints are most successful when mapped onto reality. It is even possible to break that down into subsets of a given religion. Even done in a cursory kind of way, some useful results can be gained.

Adopting the most successful blueprint might be an idea. Consciously attempting to improve that blueprint might be a better idea. Discard all such blueprints look to me to be a ludicrous waste of a great deal of effort expended over a long long time.

One other useful aspect of religion is that it provided moral absolutes. Without those, morality within a culture becomes subjective, each individual making unique decisions about what is and is not moral. It doesn't take much thought to see where that path leads; the first and most obvious consequence being that every single individual you meet would be an unknown interaction of potentially conflicting moralities. The word 'Dangerous' doesn't even begin to cover that situation.

Maps of Meaning

The Climate Change (AGW) Meme

The experiment explained. An-example-of-cognitive-dissonance

I am not going to reproduce any of the text from Scott Adam's blog here. That would kind of ruin the experiment, and I think it's a worthwhile experiment. So, read the cartoon, react, then go look at the blog. Or not. Your call.

I have been saying for a while now that a meme is a dangerous thing; an individual does not posses ideas, ideas possess the individual. A meme is like a virus, an idea that spreads from mind to mind often without notice, let alone analysis. This was and is (you still have time if you haven't read the cartoon, reacted, etc) a fair way to test yourself to see if you are possessed by an idea. How did you do?

In The Wake Of Manchester, some soul-searching is going on.

The Immediately below is lifted from Facebook. Brendan O'Neill writes primarily for The Spectator (google will show you the way there, and his FB links are intact). I read some of what he writes and agree with some of it to some extend and disagree with some somewhat, depending on what he is saying - predictably enough.

Before reading that, almost as an aside, I'll mention a Ctrl Left individual I encountered long before some of the current situations developed. I was talking about Spain, and mentioned fairly casually that I liked Spanish people. "People are the same everywhere!" she snapped, as though revealing an Obvious Truth. I held myself in check, public place and all that, but I was annoyed some, because in fact she was repeating an Obvious Lie. Cultures and peoples have developed in semi-isolation over long periods of and have different characters as a consequence. Individuals also differ, but the Ctrl Left won't have that either. It is an absurd position, contra to everyday experience, and everyone knows it. But, as Jordan B. Peterson said, "You don't have ideas. Ideas have you," and that 'people are all the same' idea has invaded our culture to a large extent. It is one of many consequences of a Pathological Openness (Openness in this sense is one of the Big Five personality traits) and other unhealthy psychologies and philosophies. More about that another day, but for now let's look at what Brendan has to say here. It's not uninteresting in itself.

Brendan O'Neill

5 hrs · 

"How predictable that Salman Abedi considered himself a victim of "Islamophobia". Apparently he complained about a schoolteacher who asked him what he thought of conflicts in the Middle East and the practise of suicide bombing -- he thought this was an "Islamophobic" line of questioning. When a friend of his was stabbed to death, he assumed, without any evidence, that it was an Islamophobic hate crime. He reportedly said Britons are "unfair" to Muslims, especially Arab ones. His sister says his bombing was revenge for all the "victims" of the West's hatred for and wars against Muslims.

This is a common feature among the young radical Muslims I have met: a seemingly boundless capacity for self-pity; a deep conviction that mainstream society hates them; an incredible sensitivity to slight and even to everyday conversation about Islam. They embody the Ali G attitude to the world: "Is it because I is a Muslim?" And it isn't hard to see where they get it from. When politicians and the media and the Islamophobia industry constantly tell Muslims they're under threat and that everything from jokes about Muhammad to criticism of the hijab is "Islamophobia", it is not surprising that some come to see themselves as victims, as being under siege, as basically on a war footing against the rest of us. We tell them society hates them, and what happens? They start to hate society. It's so dangerous.

This is what's so worrying about officialdom and the media's handwringing over Islamophobic hate crimes after the Manchester attack and their cry of, "Oh God, there's gonna be an Islamophobic backlash": they are fuelling the radical Islamist politics of victimhood that sees ordinary Britons as stupid, hateful creatures who possibly deserve to be punished; they are fuelling the very sentiment that lies behind atrocities like the Manchester attack."

I added the Bold for the bits I find particularly interesting, and next we have another article which explains Why I find those comments interesting. Brendan O'Neill touched on something relevant, and then drifted off point without exploring it properly imho.

Freearabs Ideas - an interesting site in itself, and worth a look - here's the article I thought of...

I am a stereotypically normal Arab in that half the time I complain about people being lazy, and the other half I am too lazy to bother. I live almost always in a state of nail-biting, eye-rolling jealousy.

Why jealousy is as ubiquitous here as saturated fats are in America, is because the region suffers from the inferiority complex. To start, you condescendingly refer to us as “Third World countries.” What’s that supposed to mean? Like we care? We don’t even want to join your snobby developed world anyway. We’re not stupid, your governments only say they care about Arab nations, when they want our oil. Almost everyone in the Arab world is married, we know a selfish, abusive relationship when we’re in one.

Our insecurities are best demonstrated in fights. The first words exchanged in any argument, regardless of context:

Arab A: “Who the hell do you think you are?”

Arab B: “Have you any idea who I am?”

Arab A: “You think you’re better than me, don’t you?”

We’re so insecure that during the Egyptian revolution, parents worried about being judged because their shameless youth were “being difficult.” Actually, whenever anything bad happens in the region, the society is usually more concerned with how the world will “laugh and gloat,” rather than the actual impact.

It is rumored that Arab societies collectively suffer nightmares about walking naked into the UN assembly.

Anyone who is inferior to us financially or socially is a sad, sad soul who needs to try harder because they’re of little use to the world. And anyone who is superior to us financially or socially is a sad, sad soul who needs not try so hard because they’re of little use to the world.The average Arab will spend the first two decades of his or her life trying to get into that better college, to have that better job, to land that better someone, to prove that they’re better than people who are better than them.

I, like most Arab women, have a central figure on which I direct all my negative energy, the seemingly perfect Mozza (Arabic for “hot girl”) who has done nothing wrong, to me or anyone else, but will suffer regardless.

Mine is little miss captivatingly beautiful philanthropist sitting ahead of me in design class turning everything she looks at into art, gracefully humming classical French music, and periodically flashing her million dollar smile at anyone with eyes.

My seemingly perfect Mozza is the worst type, the kind that doesn’t know they’re a seemingly perfect Mozza. They flip their hair backwards and blush at compliments, whereas when I’m flattered, I snort like a guinea pig and only flip my hair to shake the wind-blown bugs out of it.

The seemingly perfect Mozza is any Arab girl’s worst nightmare. First, she is a Mozza. Second, she isn’t a slut, no matter how many times you argue to the contrary, so you can’t look down at her. Third, they are always tall, so you’re always looking up at her. She is an Arab girl’s living and breathing reminder of what Allah has cruelly denied her and generously bestowed to some mild-tempered, decent human being.

And the fact that Mozzas are visible to men only adds insult to injury. Cats can compete with fellow cats over food—but against a cheetah, they’re doomed.

Shoving the Mozza aside, there is still an infinite number of people more successful than us to relentlessly ridicule and hate.

To Arabs, success can be measured. We measure it in weight, grades, money and social status. Anyone who disagrees with us is either a self-help book author or an idiot.

This is also why Arab students get so many As, because the comparison with others and the jealousy that follows is so daunting, that they go to great lengths to make sure they win these hypothetical competitions, which are simultaneously taking place in the minds of others. A B grade is an insult, and a D is a good reason to slap one’s face with both hands. Hard.

Some Arabs, particularly Gulf Arabs, like to show off their success by cruising the streets in expensive, obnoxiously large vehicles, posting pictures of themselves cradling piles of money on Facebook, and casually airing their bank account balance sheets. Then there are those who dye their hair an implausible shade of blond, pretend not to understand Arabic and speak a heavily accented English, hoping to pass for a foreigner, which is always cooler than being Arab.

“According to the envy theory, ownership of anything valuable would raise the bushy eyebrows of friends and family (who secretly harbor a grudge against you for being so naturally better than them) and earn you their admiration co-mingled with spite and jealousy, which will certainly lead to the complete annihilation of the admired object, if not the owner as well.”  

On the other hand, working class and more old-fashioned Arabs, who are the majority, like to keep a lid on things, following the “if you screen your burning candle, it will glow” logic. This renders the years of trying to achieve superiority useless, because showing “evidence of success,” by buying anything might attract attention, or worse yet, admiration.

According to the envy theory, ownership of anything valuable would raise the bushy eyebrows of friends and family (who secretly harbor a grudge against you for being so naturally better than them) and earn you their admiration co-mingled with spite and jealousy, which will certainly lead to the complete annihilation of the admired object, if not the owner as well.

That object could be anything—a newborn child, a fiancé or a new pair of shoes. Everyone believes in envy, but the extent to which they are willing to act upon these feelings differs. A particularly fearful Arab might lie about their unborn child being a girl to ensure a safe pregnancy and delivery of a boy, the far more coveted choice of offspring for Arabs. The lying parents would later set things right in an awkward hospital room full of congratulating visitors, were they would claim that “the doctor just thought it was a really big clitoris.”

Meanwhile, a less fearful Arab will inwardly recite verses from the Quran for protection, while cautiously telling you their midterm scores. A particularly honest Arab, however, would do so out loud and wave their fingers in your face to ward off your envious eye energy.

Envy and jealousy are probably the most feared and cherished concepts here, because while all believe their effects to be devastating, they still relish the thought of being so much better than someone who makes them mutter “lucky fucking you.”

*Nour Ali Youssef is an Egyptian writer and blogger. This article was originally published on McSweeny’s.

No need for me to 'bold' the bit I found relevant, the piece of the puzzle O'Niell seems to be missing, as Nour Ali Yousseff has placed it front and center. The character of a people will manifest itself, especially in the Ideology they are possessed by. The Arab character and the Ideology that possess the majority of Arab peoples are an explosive mix (and yes I did struggle to see if I could find another way of saying that but decided in the end that it was perfectly apt and to change it would be dishonest).

Should nothing change, nothing will change, and that's not a realistic option. Something has to change, it's just a matter of what or who and how.

Being an arrogant SOB, I have my own ideas, so I'll share them here - or (once again) have someone who knows a little more on the subject do it for me. As a spoiler (because this is a long youtube video, though historically interesting) what I would most prefer to see happen is for Muslims to do something they actually have quite good reason to do, to convert wholesale to Christianity. After all, their iconic leader once looked to Judaism and was rejected. Christianity would Accept All who turned to this more useful faith (It promotes the individual over the state, after all, and I'm all for that). Pragmatism again, you see. Problem solved, and no one needs to get nailed to anything.

Islamic Scholar Explains Why - A Useful 2 Hours Long

Trump (The President) and Realpolitik

In this place, I try and stay out of politics, but the Ctrl-Left have successfully made everything political over the last few decades, so there really is no choice but to be political. Can't say I like it much, but accepting reality is an indication of sanity - to the extent our interestingly evolved brains can be considered to be sane in the first place.

Realpolitik is a little used word these days, and is a system based on practical rather than ideological considerations. As such, my being firmly against any ideology due to the above mentioned sanity (such as I may be considered to possess). Instead, Realpolitik is based on principles purely practical. Here's a problem, here's a valid and implementable solution to the problem, now let's move right along to the next problem and consider that.

Trump ran on a ticket of Drain the Swamp, and that was and is his most significant value imho (though it would not be enough alone, as mere words without competence that would mean nothing). The whole Western World could use a good drain of the swamp, being infested with a political class acting purely on self interest and personal power utterly regardless of consequences to anyone at all. This idea-set seems to be a derivative of Postmodernist philosophy masked in Cultural Marxism - as an aside, why is it that the hammer and sickle is an acceptable symbol when the swastika is not? Both are drenched in blood, Communism far more so than the other, having a body count of its own citizens of 200,000,000 and counting. well, I guess Communism gets Socialist approval, and a better press (a better press perhaps being a related subject).

In any case, it seems to me from here that Trump is a pragmatist, someone who views each problem in its own context without bias and develops functional and practical solutions to implement.

Dr. Jerry Pournelle's site has had much of interest on several subjects for many years. Here, he posts significant analysis from a reader who seems to have a handle on exactly why the Draining of the Swamp project has taken a while to get started. For myself, I have long noted that those who are manipulating whole nations of people solely for their own benefit have been too powerful and interconnected to be effectively dealt with. Well, maybe no more - I'll post the text below and let you see what you think of the analysis. Personally, I think it's pretty much bang on the money - though as Dr. Pournelle himself states, "I warn you that this analysis contains statements I have not verified, and clearly states opinions as well as facts.."

Chaos Manor

There are very few crime/mystery novels that approach this true story for compelling drama, intrigue and brinkmanship (with the nation in the balance).

Don’t believe the fake-media story that Trump made a mistake or huge gaffe by firing Comey.

Don’t believe the media narrative from the left that it was an attempt to silence Comey from some investigation into Trump.

Don’t believe the RINO narrative that Comey is a good guy just trying to do his job in terrible circumstances and the timing was bad.

Don’t believe the lie that Comey was admired and respected by career FBI investigators and agents.

Don’t believe the lie that Trump’s “tweets” are not professional and have no strategic purpose.  His tweets are weaponized and deadly.

James Comey is a poisonous snake of the highest order… a deep-water Swamp Denizen who has been highly paid to deliberately provide cover for high-level corruption by the Clintons and Obama.  He is has been central to trying to destroy the Trump campaign and then the Trump administration from the start. He is as dirty as they come in DC.  He had highest-level cover (the FBI no less) and was deep into an effort to eliminate Trump.  Trump had to move hard, fast, and at exactly the right time to cut the head off the snake without getting bitten by the snake or being finished by the other swamp denizens.

Begin by noticing how the President fired Comey when Comey was 3,000 miles away from his office, that Comey had no inkling he was being cut, that all his files, computers, and everything in his office were seized by his boss Sessions and the justice department.  This was not a violation of protocol, it was tactical. Notice how Prez Trump compartmentalized the strike and did not inform any of his White House “staff” to prevent leaks.  Notice how he emasculated Comey and the swamp denizens by letting them know in a tweet that the Attorney General got information (surveillance “tapes” from the seizure of Comey’s office) to let Comey and his handlers know that Trump’s DOJ has the goods on them.  This was a brilliant, strategic and totally imperative move at exactly the right time against horrible, evil and corrupt powers infesting our government.

The swamp is on notice that the President is on to them, they are sweating bullets because their criminal games of corruption are being pursued and they know it.  They are screaming and ranting because they are desperate denizens of the swamp who are beginning to realize they are roadkill.

THIS IS WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE COMEY SCAM.  Taken from credible public sources (readily available if you want to look or want me to sent them to you), with a few reasonable “fill in the blank” conclusions of my own.

The Highlights:

Comey was a minor assistant US attorney in the late 90’s.  He only gained power and money by being the DOJ official who “investigated” and cleared Bill Clinton of any wrong-doing in Clinton’s totally corrupt pardon (for huge payoffs) of criminal financier Marc Rich as Clinton was leaving the Presidency.  This is how Comey began his career as a creature of the “swamp” years ago, as a servant of the Clintons.

Comey provided “cover” for the Clintons in their gaining incredible power and wealth after leaving office through pardoning a billionaire money-launderer, arms dealer and criminal.  Comey was a key piece in how the Clintons upped their corruption game and gained incredible wealth through their foundation after leaving the White House.  A huge part of the scheme was giving Marc Rich a free pass when he should have spent life in prison, and that is what Comey covered-up for the Clintons.  This set up Comey to be part of the corruption machine, making him powerful and wealthy.

Immediately after doing the Clinton’s dirty work as a DOJ official, Comey resigned from the DOJ and took a position as the head attorney (Counsel) of the Lockheed Martin company, a huge military contractor.  While he was in that position Lockheed became a major contributor (millions) to the Clinton Foundation and its fake charity spin-offs.  In return for these payment to Clinton Inc., Lockheed received huge contracts with Hillary’s state department.  Comey was the chief legal officer of Lockheed throughout this period of contributions to Clinton Inc. in return for State Dept. contracts.

In late 2012, after overseeing Lockheed’s successful relationship with the Hillary State Department and the resulting profits, Comey stepped down from Lockheed and received a $6 million dollar payout for his services.

In 2013, the largest bank of England, HSBC Holdings, was deep into a scandal.  Investigations by federal authorities and law-enforcement had revealed that for years HSBC had been laundering billions of dollars for Mexican Drug Cartels, channeling money for Saudi banks who were financing terror, moving money for Iran in violation of the sanctions, and other major criminal activity.  HSBC’s criminality was pervasive and deliberate by the Bank and its officials.  HSBC was a huge Clinton Foundation contributor (many millions) throughout the “investigation” and Bill Clinton was being paid large personal fees for speaking at HSBC events (while Hillary was Sec of State).   Eric Holder and the Obama Justice Department did what they were paid to do, and let HSBC off of the hook for a paltry 1.2 Billion dollar fine (paid by its stockholders), and not one Director, officer or management member at HSBC was fired or charged with any criminal.  Exactly when everyone involved with HSBC Bank (including the Clintons and all of their “donors”) were being let off without penalty, and cover had to be provided to HSBC, Comey was appointed as a Director and Member of the Board of HSBC (in the middle of the fallout from the scandal).  He was part of the effort to cover up the scandal and make HSBC “respectable” again.

After about a year as HSBC director, despite his lack of any law enforcement experience, no DOJ leadership experience, and no qualifications for the job, Comey was appointed FBI director by Obama.  The only qualification Comey had was that the Clinton’s and their cronies knew Comey was in bed with them, was compromised and was willing to do their dirty work.  Comey was appointed to the FBI right when Hillary was leaving the State Department, and was vulnerable to the FBI because she had been using a private-server, mis-handling classified information, selling access to favors/contracts from the State Department to Clinton Foundation Donors (including Comey’s Lockheed Martin), and much more. Remember that this was about the time the Inspector General of the State Department found over 2 billion “missing” from the State Department finances during Hillary’s tenure.

The obvious conclusion is that Comey was appointed to the FBI (along with other reliable Clinton-Obama cronies)  to run interference for the Clinton’s and Obama’s at the nation’s federal law enforcement agency(in conjunction with a corrupt Department of Justice).  Comey was and is owned by the Clintons.  He owed all of his power and wealth to being part of their machine and providing them with cover.

In late 2015 and early 2016, information began to come out about the Clinton Foundation and its use by the Clinton’s as a multi-billion dollar slush fund for corruption and political favors. (even Chelsea’s wedding had been paid for by the “charity) This was right as Hillary was beginning her campaign for President. It was revealed that the Foundation had never completed required reports or had an audit.  Supposedly the FBI, under Comey, began an “investigation” of the Clinton Funds.  A “professional” accounting firm was brought in by the Clintons to do a review, file some reports, make recommendations to the Clinton Foundation Board, and provide a veneer of legitimacy to the Clinton Fund operations.  Predictably, one of the partners in the firm that was chosen (and paid lots of money) is the brother of James Comey (FBI Director).  This brother owes James Comey $700,000 for a loan James gave him to buy a house, and presumably some of the money from the Clinton Fund was used to make payments to James on the loan.  Over 2 years later and nothing has happened as a result of the FBI “investigating” the Clinton Funds under Comey.

No one in congress or federal law enforcement was intending to actually pursue the Clintons, but Judicial Watch and other independent sources obtained information proving that Hillary had been running her own server, sending out classified information, etc.  This information began to come out right in the middle of her campaign to be coronated as President.  A “show” investigation had to be performed to appear to look into it and clear her.  Who to use?…the reliable shill James Comey.

As head of the FBI, Comey (and his lackeys in key positions) deliberately screwed up the investigation into Hillary’s use of a private server and her plain violation of national security law on classified information.  The investigation was deliberately mis-handled in every aspect. Comey gave immunity to all of Hillary’s lackeys, did not use subpoenas or warrants, lost evidence, allowed the destruction of evidence, failed to do any searches or seizures of evidence, did not use a grand-jury, did not swear witnesses, did not record testimony, allowed attorneys to represent multiple suspects (corrupting the testimony).  Everything that could be done to ruin the FBI investigation and to cover for Hillary was done.  A “slam-dunk” case became a mess. Immunity was given every witness even though they provided no help.  Maybe more importantly, by focusing the FBI on the email scandal, attention was drawn away from the much bigger scandal of the Clinton Foundation that could bring down a huge number of corrupt politicians, lobbyists, and even governments.

Originally, Comey’s job was simply to totally botch the Hillary investigation and ruin the case against her and her minions within the FBI regarding he emails. At the same time Comey also started work on a parallel assignment to illegally “wiretap” and surveil Donald Trump and every other person involved in the Republican campaign.  He was tasked with digging up any dirt or fact that could be used to hurt the Trump campaign later.  This included using a fake “dossier” paid for by the Clinton campaign to obtain authorization for the surveillance and to try to associate Trump’s campaign with the Russians. Under Comey’s direction the Trump/republican campaign was monitored and surveilled and all information was provided to the Obama Whitehouse and the Clinton camp all during the campaign. 

Lorretta Lynch was supposed to complete the coverup for Hillary as Attorney General by issuing a finding that the deliberately botched FBI “investigation” did not justify prosecution of Hillary.  But someone screwed up and Bill Clinton was video’d meeting with Loretta Lynch in Arizona shortly before she was supposed to make her decision on Hillary (interference with a federal investigation), and Lynch could no longer credibly squash the Hillary scandal.  The solution, give the job to James.  The Clinton’s owned him and he would have to do whatever is necessary to provide cover.

Comey goes on national TV and violates every rule of the FBI, the Justice Department and American law enforcement by revealing some of the FBI’s “evidence” of what Hillary did (enough to make it look like the FBI and Comey did some investigation), then declaring that there was no “intent” and clearing Hillary.  He did what he was ordered to do.  The Justice Department and Obama backed Comey’s coverup and it looked like Hillary had survived the scandal.

Then, right before the election, the NYPD obtained pervert Anthony Wiener’s laptop and found classified emails from Hillary on the laptop.  The NYPD began leaking details to new-media outlets, and the story was about to explode.  Comey once again stepped in to cover Hillary.  He short-circuited the NYPD leaks by publicly acknowledging the laptop and the emails, but then claimed just days later that hundreds of thousands of emails had all been reviewed and “nothing new” was on the laptop.  Once again, he had done his job.  Providing cover and FBI “protection” for Hillary on the newest scandal when it broke.

If Hillary had won, Comey would have kept right on providing cover for the corruption of the Clinton machine.  He would have kept the FBI paralyzed, prevented the Clinton Fund from being investigated, and continued to do his job as the Clinton’s personal scandal eraser at the FBI.

BUT TRUMP WON.

The Swamp and its bottom-dwelling denizens realize they are at risk from this political outsider who is not connected to the uni-party machines.  Before Trump takes office, a “failsafe” plan is implemented to ruin Trump’s administration and try to force him out of the Presidency.  The key players committed to the plan are the democrat politicians, the RINO establishment, the media, the Obama-Clinton operatives imbedded throughout the intelligence agencies and the entire bureaucracy, and most importantly, the Obama DOJ and JAMES COMEY.    The scheme is to smear Trump with Russian “connections,” through a fake FBI “investigation” and more importantly, to trap him into a charge of criminal interference with the FBI.   COMEY IS THE CENTRAL FIGURE IN THE SCHEME TO TAKE DOWN TRUMP.

The surveillance of the Trump campaign is continued after he is elected, all participants are “unmasked” illegally, and the transcripts are leaked throughout the government and to the media.  When General Flynn appropriately calls Russian officials on behalf of Trump, they brush off the old fake “dossier” and all of the surveillance of the campaign, and Comey creates the “Russian Conspiracy” investigation. With help by RINO swamp kingpin and warmonger sell-out McCain, the fake “Russian pee dossier” is leaked to the press. There is no actual evidence of any collusion or connection between Trump or his campaign with Russia, but that does not prevent Comey from initiating an “investigation” at the FBI.  This provides Comey with protection from Trump firing him immediately.  Comey (or his minions) constantly leak news of the “Russia Investigation” to the media, and the media does its scripted part by screaming constantly about “Russia.”  The Democrats fill their role and constantly scream about “Russia.”  McCain and the RINO establishment do their part by promising to “investigate” how the Russians influenced the campaign.

Immediately after Trump is sworn in, the DOJ Hillary/Obama operatives and Comey start the direct attack.  This is before Sessions has been appointed to the Department of Justice and the DOJ is still controlled by Obama operatives. DOJ Obama appointee Sally Yates approaches the Whitehouse with news that General Flynn had been in contact with Russia and alleges that he might be compromised.  She reveals that there is an FBI “investigation” into the Russia ties (which they are constantly leaking to the media themselves).  The White House Counsel (who Yates talks to, not Trump) asks for some more information.

The day before the promised additional information is to be provided by Yates to the Whitehouse, Comey sets up a dinner with Trump.  If he can get Trump to ask about Flynn or try to intervene regarding Flynn or Russia then Trump can be charged with “interfering with an FBI investigation.”  MY OPINION IS THAT COMEY SURVEILLED AND “TAPED” THIS MEETING IN HIS ATTEMPT TO SET UP TRUMP.

This is a two-pronged attack.  It protects Comey and DOJ democrat holdovers from being terminated by the new administration because they are involved in an “ongoing investigation” that they control the timetable on(albeit one with absolutely no evidence). If Trump fires Comey then he is “interfering with the investigation” which is itself a federal crime that the FBI could then “investigate.”  Alternatively, if they can get Trump to question Comey about Flynn or try to get him to back off of Flynn or the “Russia” investigation, then they again have him “interfering.”

Trump knows it is a set up by Comey and that he is probably being recorded (tips from FBI or DOJ who are not part of the corruption?)  Maybe because his phone calls in the Whitehouse as President have already been bugged and released to the media.  (FBI is in the best position to do this) Maybe because he was used to the Mafia in NY trying to shake him down every time he built a hotel.   Comey tells Trump that Trump is not under investigation regarding Russia, but that others involved with the campaign are being investigated.  Trump does not take the bait and attempt to intervene about Flynn or the Russia scam.  Later, Flynn is cut loose because he is being used by Comey and the Obama-holdover Justice to try to damage Trump.  He did not thing wrong, but if he stayed the charge of “interfering with an investigation” might seem to have teeth.  Comey verbally tells Trump on two more occasions that he is not being investigated, but refuses to state this fact publicly or when testifying in Congress.

Trump knows everything I have gone through above about Comey.  But he has to move carefully.  He has to get his Attorney General and Deputy AG in place, get enough leverage on the Russia narrative, and ideally get rid of Comey in a way that allows him to obtain all the information that Comey has been accumulating (if he is taping Trump he is taping others).  Comey, and others testify in Congress.  Under oath, both Sally Yates and Intelligence officials from the Obama administration state that there has been no actual evidence of any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.  More importantly, Comey, while refusing to say that Trump is not under investigation, testifies that he has informed the Senate Intelligence Committee heads who exactly is under investigation regarding Russia.

Trump tells almost no one at the White House that he is moving against Comey (so no leaks… no listening in on his conversations) Trump somehow contacts Sen. Grassley (the Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee) and confirms that Comey told the Senator that Trump was not under investigation personally.  Trump gets both the Attorney General and the new Deputy Attorney General to legitimately review Comey’s unprofessional actions at the FBI and to recommend in writing that Trump terminate Comey.  Somehow Comey goes to California (at the request of AG Sessions or already scheduled and someone at FBI telling Trump?).

Trump seizes the moment and acts. While Comey is in California, 3000 miles away and 7 hours from his office, Trump prepares a letter firing him (with Sessions and the Deputy AG recommendations attached).  In the letter Trump states that he had been told 3 times by Comey that he (Trump) was not under investigation.  The letter is hand-delivered to the FBI headquarters by DOJ officials to lock-down and seize everything in Comey’s office, including all surveillance files (“tapes”) of Trump and others.  All of Comey’s files, docs, computers and “tapes” are taken to Sessions at DOJ.  They are not taken to the Whitehouse or Trump, but to Sessions, who has every right to have them.  Sessions can tell Trump that Comey had surveillance tapes of Trump that contradict what Comey has been telling Trump, and perhaps tapes of conversations with other swamp “conspirators.”  But Trump does not have them personally or at the Whitehouse.

Comey learns he has been fired when the media broadcasts it in California.  He had no idea it was coming and he is ticked.  On cue, the Democrat politicians and media begin screaming about Trump’s “interference with the Russia  investigation” in accordance with the plan to set up Trump for that charge.  The Swamp wants to blow up the Russia narrative using Comey, and Comey is set to testify before Congress to try to hurt Trump by saying he was interfering with the FBI investigation.  Comey intends to follow through with the plan to take down Trump.

But because of his brilliant timing on this, Trump has Comey’s files, documents and information safely with Sessions at DOJ.  Trump sends out a “crazy” tweet that says:  “James Comey better hope that there are no “tapes” of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press.” 

The media and the politicians go crazy about the “inappropriateness” of this tweet.   They accuse Trump of “taping” everyone at the White House (forgetting that the Presidents phone calls with foreign leaders have been “taped” without his knowledge.)

Notice that Trump did not say he taped anyone, or that he has any tapes at the White House. It seem apparent that Trump is telling Comey that the DOJ (who has every legal right to possess it) has the surveillance information and files from Comey’s office, the “tapes” obtained and kept by Comey.  Comey and all the Swamp Creatures understand the clear message… their plan has failed and Trump’s DOJ is now holding all the cards.

The whole Russia interference scheme crashes and burns. While the mouthpiece media, Hollywood and the insane fringe continue to scream about Russia and Comey being fired, the politicians  who will soon be in the crosshairs of a legitimate (and ticked) FBI and DOJ are starting to fall strangely silent.  Comey realizes all the leverage is with Trump and that he will be lucky if he is not added to the Clinton Death List because of his knowledge (better not take any baths near an electrical outlet or get on any airplanes). 

Comey tells Congress he will not testify and writes a public letter to the FBI accepting his firing and telling them he does not want to discuss why or how he was terminated.  Senator Grassley and Senator Feinstein (she must be covering her butt in fear …) issue public statements confirming that Comey told them that the “Russia Investigation” does not involve President Trump personally.

AG Sessions and his Deputy AG use the Comey trove of information to determine who has been part of the Comey Syndicate at the FBI.  They will be appointing an “interim” Director of the FBI shortly who has not been compromised by Comey, Clinton or Obama.  That “interim” Director does not have to be approved by Congress or anyone, and can immediately begin cleaning house at the FBI of all Comey/Clinton/Obama minions, initiating investigations of the Clintons, Clinton Fund, violations of intelligence confidentiality laws by Susan Rice and Obama, human trafficking in DC, political corruption… draining the Swamp.  Using the Comey files they can be fairly certain they are not getting another Comey as an “interim”, and they do not have to wait for the circus of appointing a new permanent “Director” through Congressional approval.  Most of the heavy lifting on rooting out FBI corruption and starting investigations into the swamp will be done by the “interim” before a new director is appointed. I suspect the Trump administration hopes the approval FBI Director process will be slow and tedious, so there is no political interference with the housecleaning that is starting.

In one masterstroke, Trump has eliminated a truly toxic and dangerous enemy to his administration and our country, dealt a horrendous blow to the Clinton/Obama and deep state machines, begun the restoration of the integrity of the FBI and the DOJ, and gained incredible ammunition to begin hunting the foul creatures in the swamp.

Do dreams mean anything?

I recently came across an idea that seems both right and useful, so I thought I'd share the idea. Here it is: a dream is your brain trying to share something it has figured out subconsciously, and it is trying to tell you what it has figured out As Clearly as it can.

In order to make this idea real, I'm going to have to share a dream I had when I was young, which I still remember – so it's obviously important – and that I now think I understand.

Here's the dream. I'm running away from a bull. I burst through a door and I'm in the living room of my childhood home, but it is also the centre of an enormous maze and the bull is still chasing me. That's it.

Scary dream, right? So, what does that dream mean? What is my brain trying to tell me, to tell me as clearly as it can? The centre of the home is a maze. The bull is dangerous, chasing you, and you are not safe from it here, in a place that should be the safest place there is as a child.

All the information is there, remember, because the dream is a message which is as clear as it can be.

The very fact that it is a safe space is both the maze you are lost in and the danger. Don't stay in the maze, don't stay in the safe space, there are real dangers in the world, so get out and learn how to be tough enough to deal with them.

If you have a recurring dream, or a dream you don't understand that still comes to mind, the idea that your brain had figured something out and was trying to tell you something as Clearly As it Possibly could... that idea might be useful to you. And that's why I'm sharing the idea.

Now, back to work.

What Is A Hero?

And why would we want one?

A hero is an individual who travels into the threatening unknown, learns how to deal with the threat and defeat the danger, and then brings that knowledge and experience home to share with his community so that they are not at risk from that danger.

Sounds simple, doesn't it? Sounds 'Obvious', so obvious that it's simply stating something you knew already.

That's because you did know already. It's a very successful idea. The idea worked so well as a survival strategy - and our ancestors came up with the story idea so long ago - that it's written into our genes by selective evolution.

The idea worked. The idea of the hero still works. But only if the hero comes home and shares the idea... otherwise the hero put himself at risk for no gain to the species, and what's the point of that?

This is not my idea. I was introduced to the idea by someone who understood it far more thoroughly than I do. It was not his idea either. I think this is an idea so old that when the idea was expressed in a story we couldn't yet write it down, a time when our species was so surrounded by threats that we were failing as a species. If we had not come up with this idea and built it into our culture we would not have survived long enough to invent writing so that we could write the idea down. It's a bloody good idea, obviously. We survived, and thrived, and we have so few threats that we seem to have to make up threats or be the threat to ourselves (maybe just so we can challenge a threat and sate our genetic desire to be a hero and enact our generic heritage).

Yet, e still need heroes. Maybe specifically because we have forgotten why we need them. A threat, to expand just a little, can be an idea - a bad idea, an idea that destroys cultures and economies and people.

It can also be a lapsed good idea, or even a forgotten good idea, an idea that promotes the desire to defend a culture that protects the individuals of the culture from self-destruction because people no longer explicitly teach their children about what a good idea they once had about how exactly to keep society and themselves from self-destruction. That's an important gain from a hero who took risks to learn how to deal with a threat and share the idea with others.

As an example, Richard Dreyfuss reminds us of a neglected good idea:

And if you agree with him, go to the link and sign the petition.

http://www.thedreyfussinitiative.org/

As an aside, it might be worth thinking about taking the good idea home in a more explicit fashion than has so far been the case. Some people are still waiting for you.

Everything You Do Matters - Jordan B Peterson

Jordan B. Peterson has rendered my own humble and developing body of work unnecessary, which is a relief in a way - though I will doubtless continue Sumto's story as he continues to stumble his way forward toward some understanding of value. This video could be considered to contain spoilers, but I recommend it anyway - partly because i have no way of knowing at this point if Sumto will succeed and so knowing the goal I have in mind isn't so much of a spoiler after all.

This is also the goal I have for myself, of course, and a goal that I suggest might be a worthy one for everyone.

There's a section in here that I think may be important. We all have something in common, which is a rare thing to see and so worth noting. Because we all act as though our own pain is real then it is, so we all have that in common. Our own pain is real, be it mental or emotional or physical. It's a worthwhile base to rest our thinking on because there are consequences - it might be considered wrong to add to someones unique pain, and good to spend a moment easing it a little if you can.

I was reminded of something that happened many years ago when watching this and noting what D.Peterson says about this. A brief story follows.

My then lady and I were meeting in a bar to rent a house for a for months somewhere-or-other. The husband of the negotiator terned up as well and we chatted a bit. He talked a little about his childhood. He had been born into money - huge trust fund kind of money - and gone to a public (a private if you prefer) school. When a child he had a holiday from school but his parents were 'busy' and he had to stay at The Hilton hotel in London on his own. A child. On his own.

My then lady laughed and said "Oh no, the horror, you had to stay at The Hilton."

I winced. I said something different. I don' remember what. I don't think he noticed, but his wife did. she said something like, "You have some experience of this?" I don't remember what I said, but I meant was, "Yes. I have some experience of being a child neglected and left alone."

I don't think I would have swapped his experience for mine. I would still be a child, during the holidays, left alone while my parents went and dealt with much more important matters than me. Do you see? Everyone's pain is real to them. We have this in common. It's not a bad place to begin understanding each other.

Of course, there are worse neglects, and lesser. But they are all real to the individual. And that's a start.

In any case, there is also this. This video is an expression of free speech, and Dr. Peterson talks about that more than a little. It is worth noting that... I will say 'some people' wanted him not to say these things. After watching this I thought, This is what they wanted him not to say!?!

If you watch this, and listen carefully, you might also wonder why 'some people' wanted to stop him saying these things. There can be, sadly, no 'good' reason.

Entrenched Ideas: Stefan Molyneux on The History of the Plymouth Plantation

Actually, the piece below is called What Pisses Me Off About Thanksgiving. It's pretty much the same subject because it is the seeming lack of awareness of the actual history that pisses him off. It's kind of interesting and worth the watch. I doubt the vague entrenched ideas will go away fast, but the truth about a given subject is not always the entrenched idea about it. It strikes me as strange how rare it is that the source material is used, especially when it isn't that hard to find in the information age...

 History of the Plymouth Plantation 1620-1647 by William Bradford http://www.fdrurl.com/History-of-Plym...