Author: VD

Aware of the Risks

The Secret Service had identified the rooftop from which the would-be assassin fired as “a potential vulnerability” before the event.

The rooftop where a gunman shot at former President Donald Trump during a campaign rally was identified by the Secret Service as a potential vulnerability in the days before the event, two sources familiar with the agency’s operations told NBC News. The building, owned by a glass research company, is adjacent to the Butler Farm Show, an outdoor venue in Butler, Pennsylvania. The Secret Service was aware of the risks associated with it, the sources said.

“Someone should have been on the roof or securing the building so no one could get on the roof,” said one of the sources, a former senior Secret Service agent who was familiar with the planning. Understanding how the gunman got onto the roof — despite those concerns — is a central question for investigators scrutinizing how a lone attacker managed to shoot at Trump during Saturday’s campaign event.

The Secret Service worked with local law enforcement to maintain event security, including sniper teams poised on rooftops to identify and eliminate threats, Secret Service spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said. But no officers were posted on the building used by the would-be assassin, outside the event’s security perimeter but only about 148 yards from the stage — within range of a semiautomatic rifle like the one the gunman was carrying.

The Secret Service had designated that rooftop as being under the jurisdiction of local law enforcement, a common practice in securing outdoor rallies, Guglielmi said. Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldinger said his office maintains an Emergency Services Unit team, which deployed four sniper teams and four “quick response teams” at the rally. But he said the Secret Service agents were in charge of security outside the venue.

“They had meetings in the week prior. The Secret Service ran the show. They were the ones who designated who did what,” Goldinger said. “In the command hierarchy, they were top, they were No. 1.”

Goldinger said the commander of the Emergency Services Unit told him it was not responsible for securing areas outside the venue.

Question: if the Secret Service was not responsible for securing areas outside the venue, then why didn’t the police sniper fire sooner, as soon as he saw the would-be assassin on the rooftop that was a known vulnerability for which the police were responsible? Why would he require, or wait for, any permission from the Secret Service to take the shot?

DISCUSS ON SG

The Most Alpha Thing Ever

I go into this in a bit more detail on Sigma Game, but now that the full audio of the assassination attempt is out, I am genuinely amused by President Trump’s first response to being told to move by the Secret Service.

“Let me get my shoes, let me get my shoes on.”

A man simply doesn’t walk off the stage in his socks just because some overmedicated patsy took a pop at him with a .22, after all. First things first, gentlemen. And lady.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Trump Rally Story

Simplicius notes that the Clown World media complex is desperately attempting to avoid the term “assassination attempt” despite using it to describe the January 6 honeytrap.

I have never witnessed such an openly diabolical psyop and mass gaslighting operation. We literally just watched the attempted assassination of an American president, and the media is treating it like a superfluous nonevent.

Later, Barrack Obama joined the coordinated coverup, playing dumb as per his handlers’ orders. And the final proof of the operation came as Biden gave an unplanned national address, half an hour past his newly-announced 8pm bedtime and looking all the worse for it. Watch the coordinated coverup, as Biden openly refuses to call it an assassination even when directly asked…

Now, the big thing to watch is how the regime media goes forward—particularly the middle tastemaker and gatekeeper rungs like your Rachel Maddows and ‘The View’ harridans. They will be desperate to keep Trump as far away from martyrdom as possible—that means obfuscation, obfuscation, obfuscation. They will likely continue via the old CIA playbook of tangling things up, pointlessly hyperfocusing on the procedural minutiae of the investigation into what kind of attack it was. They’ll likely drag it out for weeks, months, or however long it takes without definitively ascribing it to the verboten “A” word, falling back on the false high horse of their “journalistic due diligence” and nonexistent “thoroughness and integrity”.

Yet we know full well if this had happened to a Democrat candidate, all the regime media would be rising up in one voice calling for the total lockdown of the country and physical purge of all rightwing and ‘ideological opponents’.

Alarmingly, the chief of communications for the Secret Service, Anthony Guglielmi, has already posted their official stance on the event which likewise eschews any strongly deterministic language. Given Trump’s rebuffed attempts to beef up security, and given the eyewitness who spotted the shooter and claims to have been ignored by Secret Service agents, the above release looks highly troubling.

It’s not just the Left who suspect that the assassination attempt was fake. And certainly, skepticism is valid considering how there have been no shortage of orchestrated events that were clearly staged over the last few decades.

That being said, we know Clown World is increasingly desperate. We know a number of world leaders have either been assassinated or been the target of attempted assassinations. And we also know that the Democrats have been very publicly utilizing the sort of heated rhetoric that they genuinely believe will cause people to commit political violence. Throw in the Secret Service phoning in their security, slow-rolling their response, and downplaying the assassination attempt after the fact, and I think the odds favor the attempt to kill Donald Trump – or, perhaps, his body double – being a real one.

But we can’t say anything with certainty now. If we’re fortunate, we’ll be able to figure it out one way or another soon enough. The one thing we do know is that Trump didn’t need any additional help to beat the decaying, dementia-addled Biden in November.

Razorfist has an unmissable rant on what he describes as “the expected unaliving attempt”. And Clown World color revolutionary Victoria Nuland quite vehemently predicted that Donald Trump would not be elected President in a recent interview.

UPDATE: If you want a conspiracy theory, here’s one for you. The dead guy in the crowd behind Trump who was shot in the head wasn’t an innocent victim. He was the Deep State’s second shooter who was supposed to deliver the kill shot while everyone was distracted by the windup toy with the rifle on the roof. And I don’t think it’s an accident that this happened less than two weeks after the intentional public exposure of the 5 Bidens as dementia-addled walking corpses.

UPDATE: The Chinese don’t think it was staged. From Global Times:

“The gunman’s background has three possibilities,” Li Haidong, a professor from the China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times on Sunday. “First, it could be someone from the deep state, an elusive force within the government that does not want to see Trump win. Second, it could be from the far-left extremist forces, who do not want to see Trump, representing the far-right, win the election and thus have taken radical actions. Lastly, it could be an individual extremist without any organizational background, simply a person who is tired of Trump,” Li said.

Assuming the Chinese are correct, I think the obvious stand-down by the Secret Service and the police, the Z-team makeup of the security detail, and the headshot victim in the crowd, tend to suggest the first possibility.

DISCUSS ON SG

Attempted Assassination of Trump at Rally

Shooting just took place at the Trump rally. Looks like Trump – or more likely, his body double – might have been grazed on the neck or the ear.

It didn’t sound like a large caliber rifle. Six to eight shots were fired in fairly rapid succession. Any experts able to tell what it was?

UPDATE: He appears to have been lightly wounded, but he’s fine. Before the Secret Service ushered him from the stage, he stood up and pumped his fist several times. Legend.

UPDATE: Yes, his ear was clipped. Close call.

UPDATE: Butler County District Attorney Richard Goldfinger reportedly said one person is believed to be dead and ‘possibly a second.’ He said the person believed to be dead was ‘someone in the crowd.’ Secret Service agents killed the gunman within moments. 

There is also a video of what appears to be the dead shooter on a rooftop. I’ve also noticed that the media have stopped putting doubt quotes around “shot” now.

UPDATE: Some people spotted the shooter with a rifle crawling up the roof about 150 yards away from the platform and tried to warn the police and the Secret Service for several minutes, but the Secret Service didn’t do anything until after five shots were fired. They also witnessed Secret Service snipers shoot and kill the would-be assassin.

If you watch the video, you can hear the first shots are fired, then 2-3 seconds later, nearly twice as many shots are fired even though Trump is down and covered by agents. I suspect the second series of shots are the Secret Service snipers taking out the shooter.

DISCUSS ON SG

Barbarians at the Gates

I mean, they’re quite literally at the borders and killing border guards with spears:

A Polish border guard was killed last month by a group of spear-throwing migrants as they attempted to cross the border into Europe, as officials say a surge in arrivals through Belarus is Putin’s latest war tactic against the West.

21-year-old Sgt Mateusz Sitek from the Polish village of Nowy Lubiel was killed after a group of migrants reportedly from Africa and the Middle East attempting to cross the Polish border hurled a volley of makeshift weapons at officers. Several more were injured during the clash.

The improvised weapons appear to have been made out of tree branches and steel blades taped to the top.

If migrants are a war tactic against the West, shouldn’t Angela Merkel be arrested for war crimes? Whatever happened to “welcome refugees”?

DISCUSS ON SG

We Tell You Who We Are

Whether we want to or not, whether we try to disguise ourselves or not, the writer always tells the reader something about himself. This is a very astute observation from a member of the club that dare not talk about Neil Gaiman:

There was a writer whose books I loved–incidentally he is respected and talked about by NG. I had a chance to meet him at a multiple-day convention over a decade ago.

During that trip, this writer behaved sneakily and shittily toward my friend (much how NG’s behavior is being described now). At the time I was so disappointed but I figured that I loved his books and could separate the art from the artist.

Only I realized, reading his new work and trying to reread the books I’d loved, that I could see the tells in the writing. How the main characters behaved, how women were characterized, etc.–I could see him crafting justification for his characters’ behaviors that echoed his own. And that was the end of that for me.

I think the work usually reflects the creator behind it, but sometimes it takes clarity elsewhere to really see what is there.

“Sometimes it takes clarity elsewhere to really see what is there” is absolutely correct. Because what’s there is always there, but the reader is not necessarily seeing it in a relevant and meaningful context. Even when the writer explicitly warns you.

“Everybody has a secret world inside of them. All of the people of the world, I mean everybody. No matter how dull and boring they are on the outside, inside them they’ve all got unimaginable, magnificent, wonderful, stupid, amazing worlds.”
– Neil Gaiman

For distinctly different values of “unimaginable” and “amazing”, of course. On that note, it might be interesting to know what those of you who read my fiction believe you have gleaned from it concerning my own inadvertent literary confessions, as I’ve generally tried to avoid self-inserts since my earliest attempts at fiction.

Then again, some readers never see anything at all, no matter how loudly the writer trumpets his shortcomings and evildoings. Who wants to tell this poor woman the bad news?

I’m autistic, and for the longest time the collected works of Joss Whedon and Neil Gaiman were my special interest. That’s still true, but just feels different and complicated and ickier. GRRM had better not pull any shit because I can’t take any more of this!

Yeah, so, there’s a reason for those two Rs…

DISCUSS ON SG

Do NOT Talk About Neil Gaiman

Especially not anywhere that is devoted to talking about him. The Reddit community devoted to discussing Neil Gaiman has banned all discussion of his personal life. Only discussion of his work will be permitted.

The first rule of Neil Gaiman club: don’t talk about Neil Gaiman.

I wanted to take this opportunity to provide some updates regarding the direction of our community. After carefully considering all the feedback received, I have decided to shift the focus of the sub from Neil and his personal life to solely his work. This decision was not made lightly, and I spent considerable time pondering this matter.

Consequently, you may have noticed some changes such as the removal of Neil’s face as the sub’s avatar, the retirement of the “Good Gaiman” flair, and some adjustments to the rules. I have also archived older posts and updated the automod. This also means the response thread will now be closed. It’s important to note that this change is not intended to discourage discussions about Neil’s life or the significance of biographical context in his work. Instead, it aims to foster meaningful analysis and critique of his work within those contexts along with other forms of literary criticism.

In arriving at this decision, I sought guidance from Reddit’s crisis management team and consulted with moderators from other subs focused on notable individuals. I also reviewed information from sexual assault support sites, as well as reports and papers from educational institutions and law firms. Additionally, I reflected on my own experiences with grooming and considered this matter from the perspectives of being a partner, a parent, a child, and a sibling. It is essential to approach this situation with integrity and empathy for all parties involved.

Our community is committed to upholding the principles of believing victims and recognizing the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. These are not conflicting ideas but fundamental principles that ensure fairness for all involved: we believe when someone says something happened to support a fair investigation while also believing the accused is innocent to ensure fair representation. We are not vigilantes.

Moving forward, the sub will enforce a zero-tolerance policy for defamation, including victim blaming and baseless accusations.

Translation: Even Mr. Tubcuddle’s biggest fans believe he’s probably guilty as charged, and that more is eventually going to come out, but they don’t want him to be cancelled, so they’re just going to pretend that his personal life has no connection to the dark fantasies that he expresses throughout his violent and sexually-deviant work.

It would appear that they’ve done this in order to justify eliminating the very detailed summaries of the accusations as well as the exposures of Gaiman’s inadequate and dishonest responses to those accusations that were being posted in the forum about him. That being said, the moderator hasn’t deleted any of the previous discussions yet, so it’s possible that they just want to prevent any further damage to their hero’s reputation.

The media is really doing a full-court press to try to protect Gaiman. This is the sum total of what presently appears on his Wikipedia page about the matter.

Accusation of sexual assault
In July 2024, Tortoise Media reported that Gaiman was accused by two women of sexual assault, and that Gaiman had denied both of the accusations.

It’s rather amusing that there is far more critical content about me on Wikipedia than there is about Gaiman, despite his alleged sex crimes.

In any event, it’s pretty sure his ex-wife knows what’s happening. These are what would appear to be highly-prescient lyrics from her song Whakanewha, recorded in 2024.

Another clear-cut load of crap
A few more corpses in the sack
You’ll get away with it, it’s just the same old script
This world is shaped to have your back
You said, “I’m sorry,” then you ran
And went and did it all again
I’m such a fool, I know
Street smart but gullible
I see the good in everything
A pound of flax, a pound of steel
I may be dumb, but I can feel
I wonder when you’ll realize what you had

A frightened bird, a crystal ball
So sad, you could’ve had it all
But you hate yourself too much to want all that
I had so much hope for your broken heart
But you’ve made your choice, and you chose the dark

DISCUSS ON SG

Evolutionists are Retarded

It’s almost astonishing to read the papers and presentations of the 1966 Symposium and see how a) biologists simply do not understand the logical and mathematical criticisms of their vacuous tautologies, and b) how their futile defenses of evolution by natural selection haven’t substantively changed in nearly sixty years despite all of the advances in genetics. Consider the similarities between three following attempts, separated by 55 years, to address the obvious problem of probability and fixation when applied to mutations, by resorting to what the evolutionists call “cumulative selection” and “massively parallel fixation”.

  • Natural selection may appear to be a vacuous and tautological principle if only a single step is considered, but considered over a long succession of little steps, it is the only guiding principle that has stood up under experiment. Eden refers to the 10350 proteins, each consisting of 250 amino acids. He seems to imply that it would require something like this number of operations of natural selection to arrive at a particular useful one. On the principle of the children’s game of twenty questions in which it is possible to arrive at the correct one of about a million objects by a succession of 20 yes-or-no answers, it would require less than 1250 questions to arrive at a specified one of these proteins. While this is not a perfect analogy to natural selection, it is enormously more like natural selection than the typing at random of a library of 1,000 volumes with its infinitesimal chance of arriving at any sensible result. – Dr. Sewall Wright, 1966
  • I don’t know who it was first pointed out that, given enough time, a monkey bashing away at random on a typewriter could produce all the works of Shakespeare. The operative phrase is, of course, given enough time. Let us limit the task facing our monkey somewhat. Suppose that he has to produce, not the complete works of Shakespeare but just the short sentence ‘Methinks it is like a weasel’, and we shall make it relatively easy by giving him a typewriter with a restricted keyboard, one with just the 26 (capital) letters, and a space bar. How long will he take to write this one little sentence? We again use our computer monkey, but with a crucial difference in its program. It again begins by choosing a random sequence of 28 letters, just as before, it duplicates it repeatedly, but with a certain chance of random error – ‘mutation’ – in the copying. The computer examines the mutant nonsense phrases, the ‘progeny’ of the original phrase, and chooses the one which, however slightly, most resembles the target phrase, METHINKS IT IS LIKE A WEASEL. – Richard Dawkins, 1988.
  • Essentially the key of my program in comparison with your hypothesis which you laid out is that, when I have this letter of G trying to change to A, that doesn’t stop this other letter to be working toward modifying itself toward this. So essentially, the key to the difference between our two models, which differ by billions of years probably, if we were to ultimately make calculations with them, is that my model allows parallel evolution of different genes. – JF Gariepy, 2021

Now, there is no shame in their trying to address the criticism, but the retardery lies in the fact that they believe they have addressed it successfully when they haven’t even grasped the problem correctly. None of these explanatory models hold up. What we actually have here is nothing more than ontological appeals to their own imaginations, supported by simplistic and irrelevant metaphors.

Somnio ergo est is their motto. I dream, therefore it is.

In this vein, consider the sum total of one biologist’s response to the mathematical arguments of a professor of electrical engineering from MIT and a French mathematician:

I cannot accept the mathematical arguments of M. Eden and M. P. Schutzenberger that many of the statements of the principles of evolution are tautologous. Evolutionary theory, at least to me, is certainly not vacuous.

That’s it. Just an appeal to his own authority. That’s literally all they’ve got. As for the three models, there are a panoply of errors and false assumptions in them, but the most fundamental mistake the three model-makers are all making should be obvious to anyone who has ever played a game involving dice. The previous die has no effect on the subsequent one and there is no cumulative result. This is particularly true for Gariepy’s model, wherein he proposes rolling two or more dice at the same time.

But there is no model that will support evolution by natural selection, and there never will be, because models require math and math clearly and comprehensively disproves even the most remote possibility of sufficient genetic fixation required for speciation taking place as a result of evolution over time.

There exists no (computer) model successfully describing undirected Darwinian evolution. Period. By “model,” we mean definitive simulations or foundational mathematics required of a hard science. We show that no meaningful information can arise from an evolutionary process unless that process is guided. Even when guided, the degree of evolution’s accomplishment is limited by the expertise of the guiding information source — a limit we call Basener’s ceiling. An evolutionary program whose goal is to master chess will never evolve further and offer investment advice. There exists no model successfully describing undirected Darwinian evolution. Hard sciences are built on foundations of mathematics or definitive simulations. Examples include electromagnetics, Newtonian mechanics, geophysics, relativity, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, optics, and many areas in biology. Those hoping to establish Darwinian evolution as a hard science with a model have either failed or inadvertently cheated.

Top Ten Questions and Objections to ‘Introduction to Evolutionary Informatics’ – Robert J. Marks II – June 12, 2017

DISCUSS ON SG

Booktopia Goes Under

The combination of Amazon, an increase in paper prices, and a foolish decision to spend $12 million on a roboticized warehouse killed Australia’s largest book retailer.

Australian online book retailer Booktopia has gone into voluntary administration, leaving customers in the dark about the status of their orders. An “urgent assessment” of Booktopia’s assets has been flagged, with a possible sale or restructure the focus of three administrators from McGrathNicol Restructuring, who have been appointed to head the evaluation of Booktopia Group Limited and three subsidiaries.

The company’s shares have not traded on the ASX since June 13 while it was attempting to secure additional funding. In its initial public offering in 2020, Booktopia issued shares at $2.30 and debuted on the ASX at $2.86. The stock has since lost more than 98 per cent and last traded at $0.045.

Booktopia suffered a $16.7 million loss for the six months to December 31, compared to a $3.9 million loss a year ago. The company has said that economic headwinds and the continued soft performance of the Australian book market had diminished its core business which was selling books via two websites,

The company was founded in 2004 by current executive director Tony Nash, his brother Simon Nash, and Steve Traurig. A transition to a new $12 million robotic warehouse in the Sydney suburb of South Strathfield that opened last year had also been plagued with difficulties and had not resulted in the cost savings the company had expected.

If you’re ever frustrated with how long it takes Castalia or Arkhaven to get a book out to you, or how long Arktoons can go between episodes of a popular series, please recognize that our zero-risk philosophy is why we are still around and going strong when so many newer, more successful, and bigger publishing houses have gone under.

DISCUSS ON SG