You have no idea how many ways to kill you are lurking in the little laboratory of mass destruction known as your neighbor’s garden. Gardening is just a hobby for most – but for some, it’s a matter of life and death. Who keeps killing soil scientists and agriculture industry executives around the world? If you dare to ask, you may end up as the next corpse left to serve as garden compost. When gardener Jack Broccoli and his boss are targeted by a radical farming cult, Jack’s entire life is turned upside-down as he’s forced into a terrifying world of international agro-industrial intrigue. TURNED EARTH is a frighteningly funny novel by master gardener David The Good and the first in the Jack Broccoli series of gardening thrillers.
This is one of those books you have to read to believe that it’s real. Yes, it’s a gardening thriller, and somehow, inexplicably, the concept actually works. Also, it appears that gardeners have considerably more ways to kill you than ninjas, hit men, and the U.S. Marine Corps combined. I am now officially terrified of all those little blue-haired women who spend their days laboring painstakingly over their well-tended laboratories of mass destruction.
This might the world’s first garden thriller ever to be published. Imagine Mel Bartholomew meets Liam Neeson as written by a graft of Douglas Adams and Dave Barry, and lyrics by David Byrne, if it had lyrics. You aren’t going to read the secrets of Life, the Universe, and Everything, but you will be asking yourself “How did I get here?” and “That’s not my house” which is more of a statement than question.
Italians threaten to defy EU rules by kicking out 500,000 immigrants, tearing up spending plans and forging links with Russia
Last week the parties said they would renegotiate EU rules that require migrants to be dealt with by the first country they arrive in. They also pledged to build more detention centres and review the policy of rescuing migrants whose boats capsize. Italy has been on the front line of the EU’s migrant crisis, with hundreds of thousands making the journey across the Mediterranean from North Africa.
Lega leader Matteo Salvini has said an estimated 500,000 undocumented migrants in Italy must be deported ‘as a priority’. He told supporters he would rid the country of ‘delinquents’. The parties have also warned they will ignore Brussels rules on spending designed to prevent another eurozone crisis. They reject what they call the EU’s ‘austerity’ measures and want to renegotiate Italy’s debts.
Luigi Di Maio, the Five Star leader, said money to fund tax cuts would be found through investments and upcoming negotiations on the EU budget.
Euroskepticism has been on the rise throughout Italy since the Euro was forced on the country. Now the nationalists of both Left and Right have come to power even earlier than expected by virtue of joining forces. And once other Europeans see how the Italians improve their quality of life without migrants and Eurocrats, I expect they will follow suit.
Nationalists need to learn from the Italian example that an opponent from the other side of the political spectrum is not necessarily an enemy, unlike the globalists, who are the enemies of every nation.
Stefan Halper was not the only spy that the Federal agencies attempted to insert into the Trump campaign:
At least one additional government “informant” attempted to infiltrate the Trump campaign under President Barack Obama, former Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo revealed exclusively on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” Monday night.
“Let me tell you something that I know for a fact,” Caputo told host Laura Ingraham. “This informant, this person that they tried to plant into the campaign — and even into the administration, if you believe Axios — he’s not the only person who came at the campaign. And the FBI is not the only Obama agency who came at the campaign.
“I know because they came at me,” Caputo added. “And I’m looking for clearance from my attorney to reveal this to the public. This is just the beginning.”
This is already far worse than Watergate, and we don’t even know the half of it yet.
Zuckerberg responded after the questioning, addressing the issue of political bias.
“We are committed to being a platform for all ideas,” he declared. “It’s very important to me that we’re a service that allows a wide variety of political discourse.”
“We have never and will not make decisions about what content is allowed or how we do ranking on the basis of a political orientation,” Zuckerberg said.
“We’ve made a number of changes this year to make sure we’re showing people’s friends and family and community content,” he said, citing the “well-being” research the company has done to make sure that the technology is helping people. All the research, he said, shows that connecting with people you care about is “good for your well-being.” He explained that news “isn’t correlated with those same benefits.”
He reiterated that Facebook is “not targeting any specific political ideology.”
I’m dubious that such shameless lying is going to help his cause much.
In fairness, the Royal diversity program does appear to have gone over rather better than the average corporate diversity program:
LONDON—Touting the remarkable progress made towards broader cultural representation in the royal family, Queen Elizabeth II declared Monday that the British monarchy’s recent diversity initiative was a complete success. “It is with great pleasure that I tell you all that the Crown’s plan to introduce diversity into the royal family has been a rousing success,” said the queen, who launched the initiative in 2013 in response to mounting public pressure for the Blood Royal to include more perspectives of people of color. “We’ve done a lot to bring more women in over the last decade, but we lagged behind in terms of multiethnic inclusion. It’s important that the royal family represents the true face of Britannia. Now, with Meghan in the fold, we’re just that much closer.”
What do you figure the odds of the new Duke and Duchess of Sussex making it longer than Charles and Diana did? I’d probably give 20-1.
After all, Jordan Peterson himself has assured us that one should never assume malevolence when stupidity can explain an action. I mean, only stupidity could explain why top FBI officials would discuss their secret investigations with CNN executives, right?
E-mails Show FBI Brass Discussed Dossier Briefing Details With CNN
New e-mails show former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe was surprisingly knowledgeable about CNN’s understanding of and deliberation about a dossier briefing given to Donald Trump days before CNN ever reported on the matter.
Newly revealed e-mails show that former Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI) deputy director Andrew McCabe was keenly aware of CNN’s internal understanding of a secret briefing about the infamous Steele dossier, days before CNN published any stories on the matter. The e-mails, which were obtained by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), also reveal that top officials used coded language to refer to the salacious and unverified allegations made by Steele.
Peterson’s “general rule of thumb” is a false dilemma. There is no contradiction between evil and stupidity. Evil comes in many forms, most of them stupid, some of them intelligent.
But a better rule of thumb is this: Anyone who claims stupidity is sufficient explanation for malevolence is in league with the malevolent. If there is one thing I have learned from editing Moira Greyland’s book and observing how various scandals have played out over the last five years, it is that the truth is usually worse than the skeptics and conspiracy theorists ever imagine.
These revelations about the man are entirely consistent with his philosophy. His philosophy is openly evil; His philosophy is not, contra most of his fans’ assumptions, respectful of the Bible and respectful of Christianity in any way. You know, the fact that you talk about them as myth and you talk about the importance of myth and all this sort of thing is it’s more polite than calling them fairy stories, but in some ways it’s actually more damaging because if you’re a frothing-at-the-mouth New Atheist who is just complaining about fairy tales and no evidence and that sort of thing, you’re very easily dismissed. It’s very very easy to demonstrate that what those people are saying is objectively false.
On the other hand, when you are talking about myth, and you’re talking about tradition, and you’re babbling away in this huge fog of barely penetrable citations and these meandering streams of references that resemble a Joycean novel more than anything else, more than anything coherent, it’s it’s difficult to disprove that because it’s just nonsense. I mean, how how do you factually disprove ambiguous nonsense? You know, it’s very, very difficult because there’s nothing there. When somebody tells you 2+2 is 37, it’s relatively easy to to prove that that’s not the case, but when the person is going on and babbling about the snake in the tree is because the Garden of the Eden, and children in the trees, and vision over the horizons, and this relates to the shame one feels, and is not worthy of taking one’s pills… I mean how do you disprove that?
There’s nothing there to disprove, it’s just this streaming salad of words. It’s like being presented with a fruit salad and someone says “well critique that, critique that argument!” Yeah, you’re looking at it and, I mean forget, Stefan Molyneux’s “that’s not an argument”, I mean, it’s a fruit salad! There’s nothing to it, there’s nothing to argue about it, and so, you know, it’s it’s very difficult for me to deal with Peterson’s defenders because what they do is they inform you that he really means X when he says Y, and so how do you argue with that?
All you can say is well, no, he said what he said. They say, no, but that’s because he would get in trouble in Canada, you know, he has to be careful of what he says, and he has to speak this nonsense but what he really means is… you know, then they come up with something. Sometimes they come up with something sensible, more often they don’t, but it’s all nonsense. And so there’s a reason why Peterson tells his fans not to read Maps of Meaning because when you read Maps of Meaning, if you are able to not be overly impressed by this stream of barely relevant citations and references, even if you don’t understand the references well enough to understand that he doesn’t always know what he’s talking about, you still have to understand that the connection of these things isn’t there.
It’s because he’s drawing such bizarre connections that if I were to simply prove that his syllogism doesn’t hold up, the average person’s response to me is going to be “well what does that have to do with it?” To which my response is EXACTLY! It’s both wrong and unrelated at which point the sufficiently intelligent or the sufficiently open-minded individual realizes Jordan Peterson is crazy. But the Peterson defender just does the “I can’t hear you, I don’t want to hear it, you know he’s doing so much good!” But what Peterson is functionally doing in terms of the “good” that he is doing is that he is helping young men jump from the fire into the frying pan. Now you might say oh that’s good, you know, that’s progress, but it’s really not, because whether you’re in the fire or whether you’re in the frying pan you’re still going to get cooked. There is no natural progression from the fire to the frying pan to getting out of the kitchen.
The revelations to which I referred in the video are these, which is the news that in 2009, Jordan Peterson attempted to dismiss as conspiracy theory the accusations of a police officer concerning a high-level coverup of a pedophile ring in Canada. It’s hard not to recall that similar accusations of coverups by the authorities were similarly dismissed in the well-known cases Jimmy Savile, Rotherham, and Telford scandals, to name but a few, before being subsequently confirmed.
Commissioner G. Normand Glaude concluded Tuesday that children were sexually abused by people in positions of authority and that public institutions failed victims by mishandling complaints dating back to the 1960s.
But many were looking to him to lay to rest a more sinister explanation for those events, that it was the work of a pedophile ring and a cover-up that reached all the way to the Attorney General’s office was at play.
He did not, saying in his 1600-page report that he would not make an unequivocal statement about the theory either way.
For some, it may not have mattered.
An explanation that to some appears to debunk a conspiracy theory just further confirms others’ suspicions, said University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan B. Peterson.
“It’s very difficult to disprove a conspiracy theory, because every bit of disproving evidence can be just written off as additional evidence that these conspirators are particularly intelligent and sneaky,” he said.
Conspiracy theories are usually started by people who are very untrusting and it gathers steam among others who are somewhat untrusting, Peterson said.
They’re psychologically compelling because they neatly tie together troubling facts or assertions, he said. When things go badly there are often many explanations, and an orchestrated conspiracy “should be pretty low on your list of plausible hypotheses,” Peterson said.
“A good rule of thumb is: Don’t presume malevolence where stupidity is sufficient explanation,” he said.
“Organizations can act badly and things can fall apart without any group of people driving that.”
While Glaude made no definitive statements about a ring, he declared there was not a conspiracy by several institutions to cover up the existence of any such operation, rather that agency bungling left that impression.
I recall to your attention my reliable heuristic for detecting evil: does it justify, rationalize, excuse, defend, encourage, advocate, or require sex with children in any way, openly or covertly, directly or indirectly? Then it is evil, topped by an evil sauce, with a side of evil.
And given that we already know Jordan Peterson’s philosophy is evil, given that we already know that the man himself is seriously disturbed, we can’t pretend to be too surprised to discover that its true depths may be considerably deeper than anyone imagined.
I’ll be appearing on the Alex Jones Show today at 2:15 Eastern to discuss the ramifications of the Stefan Halper revelations and possibly the #1 New Release in Comics & Graphic Novels, Alt★Hero #1, as well. Should be an interesting conversation.
And Alex is absolutely right. The Left is panicking over Arkhaven’s flagship series. Consider this informative review from a longtime industry artist who, in addition to being a member of Furry fandom, has worked on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Heavy Metal.
Utter garbage. Been in the comic business 35+ years, and this is trash. But I’m sure your fellow Hitler Youth will eat it up like the gullible nobodies that they are. Absolute hilarity seeing all of these paid 4-5 star posts, pretty much the only ones you’ll get you shills.
Or, you know, maybe those who read it and gave it good reviews simply aren’t particularly interested in having sexual deviancy, SJW politics, globalism, and fat, ugly women with short pink hair being pushed on them every time they open a comic book. Perhaps they prefer a good story and intringuing characters to SJW preaching and cardboard cutouts.
It’s just a fun, innocent movie about dog shows for kids, right? So fun, so entertaining! FFS, do you not yet realize that you never accept candy from strangers?
What could have been solely a fun movie for kids that would get my highest recommendation is damaged by a dark and disturbing message hidden, not so subtly between the fluffy dogs and glamorous parties of the show dog lifestyle. As part of any dog show, contestants are judged on their abilities and physical attributes. One part, in particular, is the inspection of the dog’s private parts. Being that Max is new to competing, he needs to learn the process so his partner, Frank, along with a former show champion work to get him ready for the final round of the competition. Since the inspection of the private parts will happen in the finals, Frank touches Max’s private parts to get him use to it. Of course, Max doesn’t like it and snaps at Frank for him to stop. Max is then told by the former champion, who has been through the process before, that he needs to go to his “zen place” while it happens so he can get through it. More attempts are made by Frank to touch Max’s private parts, but Max is still having trouble letting it happen and keeps snapping at him.
The day of the finals come and if Max doesn’t let his private parts be touched, he may lose the competition and any hope of finding the kidnapped panda. It all rests on his ability to let someone touch his private parts. The judge’s hands slowly reach behind Max and he goes to his “zen place”. He’s flying through the sky, dancing with his partner, there are fireworks and flowers-everything is great-all while someone is touching his private parts.
During the movie, I kept thinking, “This is wrong, it doesn’t need to be in a kids movie. Everything else in the movie is good fun except for this.” Afterward, my husband mentioned that he picked up on this message too, as did my mother who saw the movie with us. My daughter, on the other hand, said her favorite part of the movie was when Max got his privates touched and the funny reaction he had.
Sweet Darwin, but these parents are stupid. Even a mother smart enough to pick up on what is going on still won’t tell other parents that they should not take their children to this pedoganda film.
Here is a reliable heuristic for evil: does it justify, rationalize, excuse, defend, encourage, advocate, or require sex with children in any way, openly or covertly, directly or indirectly? Then it is evil, topped by an evil sauce, with a side of evil.
Stop waiting for everyone else to drain the swamp. At the very least, you could refrain from refilling it.
I should like to sincerely apologize to Dr. Jordan Peterson, whom I have apparently falsely accused in my recent series of Darkstreams. It has come to my attention that I need to correct my erroneous assertion that Jordan Peterson is a globalist shill who helped author the UN High-level Panel report published in 2013 entitled A New Global Partnership, and is connected through that to John Podesta, a member of the High-level Panel. After more research, I have learned that this may not be true.
The truth, as it turns out, is that Jordan Peterson is a globalist shill who helped author the UN High-level Panel report published in 2012 entitled Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A future worth choosing and is connected through that to Jacob Zuma, the co-chair of that High-level Panel, and at the time, President of South Africa.
Zuma said the policy of “radical economic transformation,” which has also seen moves to change the constitution to allow for the expropriation of land for redistribution to landless blacks, was needed to “correct the past.” “The ANC must follow this policy because if you don’t, we are going to stay in poverty, in inequality, for a long time.” – “Jacob Zuma calls for confiscation of white land without compensation”
Which tends to put an interesting spin on the future that Dr. Peterson believes is worth choosing. The confusion stemmed from the fact that Peterson was recorded on video claiming to have written the narrative for a UN high-level panel report on sustainable development delivered in 2013, but he appears to have misspoken, as the only UN high-level panel report that specifically credits him as a contributor was actually published in 2012.
“I worked on the UN Secretary-General’s High Panel for sustainability report that was delivered, I believe, in 2013, and rewrote the underlying narrative to strip out most of the ideological claptrap.” – Dr. Jordan Peterson, October 2016
This confusion was further compounded by the fact that the 2013 report repeats, almost verbatim, more than a few of the passages of the 2012 report, and based on their similar themes and length, the 2013 report appears to be little more than a repackaging of the 2012 one. But there can be no question that Peterson was a contributor to the 2012 report.
United Nations Secretary-General’s High-level Panel on Global Sustainability (2012). Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A future worth choosing. New York: United Nations.
P. 93. Annex IV Sherpas and advisers
For: James Laurence Baisillie Sherpa: David Runnalls Advisers: Paul Jenkins, Jordan B. Peterson, Simon Zadek
So, who were the other people on Peterson’s team? They are all second- and third-tier globalists, including an economist who was, until recently, #2 at the Canadian version of the Federal Reserve.
James Balsillie Chair of the Board of the Centre for International Governance Innovation, Canada, and former Co-Chief Executive Officer of Research in Motion). Balsillie is also the founder of CIGI (Centre for International Governance Innovation) which is in partnership with the Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET), an organization founded by George Soros.
David Runnalls Former Director of the International Institute for Environment and Development. A distinguished fellow with IISD, he is a member of the board of the Institute of Advanced Studies of the United Nations University. He is a member of the Advisory Council for Export Development Canada; a member of the Council for Sustainable Development Technology Canada; and a member of the Ivey Business School Leadership Council. Paul Jenkins Canadian economist and Distinguished Fellow at The Centre for International Governance Innovation. He was most recently the Senior Deputy Governor and Chief Operating Officer of the Bank of Canada, the number two position in that institution.
Simon Zadek The Co-Director of the UNEP Inquiry into the Design of a Sustainable Financial System. In 1992 he joined the New Economics Foundation, becoming its Development Director and leading its work on corporate social responsibility. He helped to found the Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability in 1995, acting as its CEO from 2002-2009. In 2003 he was named as one of the World Economic Forum’s ‘Global Leaders of Tomorrow’ and he currently serves as an advisor to WEF on sustainability.
So, in addition to his more recent ties to Swamplings like Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson has been in bed with the the globalists at the UN as well as the banksters for over 14 years. The case against him is conclusive, and his virulent opposition to nationalism and the West is no longer a mystery.
You have no idea how many ways to kill you are lurking in the little laboratory of mass destruction known as your neighbor’s garden.