Destroying Ukraine to save it

The Saker is concerned that Ukraine is the next Syria to be “saved” by the USA:

The initial plan was to make the Ukraine a sort of “black hole” which would suck in all the economic, political, and military resources of Russia, ideally by having Russia occupying the Donbass. But now that the Russians have declined to get sucked in, it is Europe which is now threatened with the Ukrainian black hole.

The Americans probably realize by now that it is too late to put Humpty Dumpty together again and they are right. While, in theory, a join effort of the USA, EU and Russia could, at a huge cost, try to rebuild the Ukraine, political realities make such a joint action impossible, at least for the foreseeable future. They also realize that, courtesy of Mrs Nuland’s candid words, the blame for the disastrous outcome in the Ukraine will be put on the USA (which is not quite fair, the Europeans are also guilty as hell, but such is life). And if “losing Syria” was bad enough, then “losing the Ukraine” will do irreparable damage to the USA simply by debunking the myth of the USA’s omnipotence. This is very serious, especially for an Empire which has basically given up on negotiations or diplomacy and which now only delivers ultimatums.

So what are the US options here?

It is hard to predict at this time what the US might try to do. The normal US practice in such a situation is to simply declare victory and leave. That would work in Africa or Asia, but smack in the middle of the European continent that is hardly an option as it would result in a PR disaster.

The second option could be to basically blame the Ukrainians themselves for everything and try to protect Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Moldova from the inevitable consequences of the spreading chaos. The risk here, at least from the US point of view, is that Russia and her Novorussian allies would be more or less free to move in the created vacuum and that is something the USA absolutely cannot accept. The Americans would have visions of Zakharchenko in Kiev or pro-Russian riots in Odessa and that is simply beyond unacceptable.

Which leaves option three: to deliberately blow up the Ukraine.

It’s going to be fascinating to see what happens once President Trump is able to put the leash on the foreign policy lunatics who still think they can control the world through their ever-judicious interventions. Did no one ever explain to them that breaking things is a) is not controlling them, and b) is a lot easier than controlling them?


Go with your gut

Looks like my first instinct was correct and the Orlando shooting appears to have been gay-on-gay:

Omar Mateen, the gunman who murdered 49 people in an Orlando gay club early Sunday morning, was a gay man himself according to multiple people who knew and had met the man.

A gay man who attended the police academy in 2006 with Mateen said that the pair went out to gay bars and that at one point Mateen told the man he wanted to pursue a relationship.

Meanwhile, multiple people are now coming forward to say that they had spoken with Mateen on gay hookup apps including Grindr and Jack’d.  

The attack, which many assumed was an act of Islamic extremism, now appears to possibly be tied to Mateen’s own shame over his sexuality and investigators are now looking into this internal conflict as a possibly motive. 

The shooter’s father, Seddique Mateen, made his beliefs on gay people very clear in a video he posted to Facebook on Monday saying ‘homosexuals will be punished by God.’

ISIS meanwhile, the terrorist group some believe Mateen killed in the name of, executes gay men on a daily basis in horrific fashions.

‘He’s a homosexual and he was trying to pick up men,’ said Jim Van Horn, who called Mateen a Pulse ‘regular’ and described his approach to chatting with people in the club.

Of course, this doesn’t negate Islam as an additional motive; human beings are complicated creatures and seldom do anything for one and only one reason. But there is a genuine problem with the Muslim motive, as the Saker observes:

While most of us have now heard that Omar Mateen was a Muslim and that he had pledged allegiance to Daesh. It now turns out that he did pledged allegiance to both ISIS and Hezbollah! It might be useful to repeat here that while nominally both ISIS and Hezbollah are “Muslim”, the ISIS Takfiris consider Shia as kufars, as apostates, who betrayed true Islam and turned to idolatry. They also consider them “Iranian agents”. As for Hezbollah, they are The Number One (all in caps) enemy of Daesh/ISIS gang and they refer to these Takfiri maniacs as “devils” (shaitan). What this means is simple and leaves only a few options:

1) Either Omar Mateen knew nothing about Islam

2) Or Omar Mateen was coerced into making this statement and he deliberately made it absurd

3) Or Omar Mateen never said any such thing

Pick your favorite hypothesis, but what is darn certain is that the contents of his alleged statement leave the “Islamic theory” shattered into pieces. There is simply absolutely no way any real Muslim would simultaneously pledged allegiance to ISIS and Hezbollah at the same time.

Well, I suspect you might if you’re an unbalanced, self-hating Muslim homosexual who knows considerably less about Islamic political theology than about the bathrooms of the Orlando gay clubs. Furthermore, the Saker clearly doesn’t know much about the cruel reality of gay life, as he admits he doesn’t “believe that homosexuals are more likely to commit violent crime than heterosexuals.”

However, not only are gays more likely to commit violent crime, but when the violence of a murder is particularly over the top, the police and profilers usually assume, correctly, that the perpetrator is gay.

And all of this assumes, of course, that the Official Story is a reasonable approximation of the truth, which one can no longer reasonably assume these days.


Two shooters

Mike Cernovich explains why the “lone wolf” explanation for the Orlando shootings doesn’t hold up:

Assuming the shooter had tactical training, he’d be carrying a load bearing vest with 8 fully loaded 30 round magazines, for a total of 9 magazines (one on his weapon). That’s 270 rounds.

Mateen would also have a fully-loaded pistol with an unknown number of magazines. Let’s assume he was using a 9mm handgun, which holds a 15 round magazine, and that he was carrying 4 additional magazines. That’s 75 rounds of 9mm ammo.

In total, Mateen would have had 345 rounds of ammunition.

If you think 345 rounds of ammo is a lot, talk to some soldiers. People are hard to kill.

Also watch this video. You can hear 30 rounds go off in a matter of seconds. Yet somehow the shooter was killing people for 3 hours?

Talk to any soldier. Even at close ranges, that is not much ammo. According to the official story, Mateen averaged 3.45 rounds per casualty. That short of sheer killing power would make him the envy of even trained special operations soldiers.

If Mateen had over 345 rounds of ammo, where was he holding it?

And there is the fact that multiple witnesses have reported at least one additional shooter. Janiel Gonzalez, who was in the club, said, “I’m pretty sure it was more than one person. I heard two guns going at the same time.”

I was dubious about the official story once I heard the final numbers. 50 killed out of 103 wounded is an absurdly high fatality rate, particularly with a high-velocity rifle that shoots rounds that are fairly small in diameter and tend to go through the body. Contrast this with the massacre at the Bataclan theatre, where three attackers armed with grenades and bomb vests killed 89 out of more than 300 wounded.

Now, obviously I have zero reliable information concerning what happened in Orlando. But based on the similarity of the Pulse attack to the Paris attacks, which involved three-man strike teams, I would conclude that there are may have been two gunmen who escaped as Omar Mateen kept the police occupied. Remember that it was reported that Mateen left the club and then came back. Why leave and then go back? Also, given the ethnicity of the club-goers, it wouldn’t have been hard for the other shooters to shed their gear and pose as escaped hostages in the confusion.


What do they know about #Brexit?

Heat Street analyzes the Bilderberg 2016 attendees and notices something of potential significance:

As Heat Street has previously made clear, the secretive Bilderberg Group is rabidly anti-Brexit and ultra pro-EU. This year’s meeting, held in the German city of Dresden between Thursday and Sunday, will be no different.

No Brexiteers have been invited.

Having seen the guest list of the so-called shadow world government, it confirms that the attendees from Britain and Ireland have been campaigning publicly for months to keep Britain IN.

It might mean nothing. But my admittedly uninformed guess is that it means Bilderberg knows that Britain is going to vote for #Brexit, so they are having a strategy session on how to keep Britain in the European Union despite the British people clearly voting to leave it.


A failure of proposition propaganda

Yesterday, I took a Twitter poll. I asked who best defined what it was to be an American. 702 people voted.

38%: The 1st U.S. Congress
02%: Israel Zangwill
02%: Emma Lazarus
58%: Thomas Jefferson

What this tells us is that while the #AltRight has a long way to go, most people are not dumb enough, or intelligent enough to engage in the necessary rationalizations, to take the ludicrous “proposition nation” concept at face value.

Nations refer solely to people, not polities or political constructs. People are distinguished by DNA. If your DNA is Chinese, you are not and you will never be Norwegian, German, Bantu, or American.

Those attempting to sell the “proposition nation” concept are doing so for self-serving purposes; it is a 19th century concept created by immigrants and foreigners in order to elevate their status to the level of the native population.

The fact that it is an ahistorical lie is sufficient to demonstrate its falsity, however, the fact that it is now being used to attack both the English and Swedish nations indicates that it is spiritually malevolent and has been incorporated into the Kalergi Plan.

Remember, it is not merely America and the white race that is targeted for destruction by the Neo-Babylonians, it is every nation and every race.

“The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals.”

But both Man and Devil are fallible. I am the man of the future and I am not what they were expecting. And for every Babylon, there is an Assyria and an Achaemenid empire.

UPDATE: It gets better. According to the ADL, the poll was “Hate on Display”. Because parentheses are Hitler.


Smells like SFWA

Elijah Wood speaks out about the pedophiles in Hollywood:

Hollywood is in the grip a child sexual abuse scandal similar to that of Jimmy Savile in Britain, Lord of the Rings star Elijah Wood has claimed.

The 35-year-old former child actor said paedophiles had been protected by powerful figures in the movie business and that abuse was probably still taking place.

In an interview with the Sunday Times, Wood said he had been protected from abuse as he was growing up, but that other child actors had been regularly “preyed upon” at parties by industry figures.

“You all grew up with Savile – Jesus, it must have been devastating,” he said.

“Clearly something major was going on in Hollywood.

“It was all organised.

“There are a lot of vipers in this industry, people who only have their own interests in mind.

“There is a darkness in the underbelly – if you can imagine it, it’s probably happened.”

Considering the physical proximity of Hollywood to the California SF scene, it would not surprise me in the least if there turns out to be links between the Hollywood coven that Wood is describing, the Breen-MZB coven, and the coven of convicted pedophiles that the Sacramento police department reported were in contact with Arthur C. Clarke in Sri Lanka.

The truth will come out eventually. Eventually the victims will find the courage to speak out and save others from suffering their fate.

Anne Henry, co-founder of Bizparents, a group set up to help child actors, said Hollywood is currently sheltering around 100 active abusers and said a “tsunami” of claims was beginning.


Nicolas Kristof admits left-wing intolerance

It’s a rather remarkable admission, considering the average left-liberal’s ability to deny the difference between black and white, between male and female, and between American and non-American:

WE progressives believe in diversity, and we want women, blacks, Latinos, gays and Muslims at the table — er, so long as they aren’t conservatives.

Universities are the bedrock of progressive values, but the one kind of diversity that universities disregard is ideological and religious. We’re fine with people who don’t look like us, as long as they think like us.

O.K., that’s a little harsh. But consider George Yancey, a sociologist who is black and evangelical.

“Outside of academia I faced more problems as a black,” he told me. “But inside academia I face more problems as a Christian, and it is not even close.”

I’ve been thinking about this because on Facebook recently I wondered aloud whether universities stigmatize conservatives and undermine intellectual diversity. The scornful reaction from my fellow liberals proved the point.

“Much of the ‘conservative’ worldview consists of ideas that are known empirically to be false,” said Carmi.

“The truth has a liberal slant,” wrote Michelle.

“Why stop there?” asked Steven. “How about we make faculties more diverse by hiring idiots?”

To me, the conversation illuminated primarily liberal arrogance — the implication that conservatives don’t have anything significant to add to the discussion. My Facebook followers have incredible compassion for war victims in South Sudan, for kids who have been trafficked, even for abused chickens, but no obvious empathy for conservative scholars facing discrimination.

The truth is that they don’t believe in what they claim to believe. They think they want La Raza, Muslims, and American Indians at the table, but they’d be scared out of their gourds if they actually believed that they weren’t going to do the driving.

I am increasingly certain that the white liberal-left simply has no idea whatsoever what is in store for it or what the consequences of its actions are going to be. This should not be a surprise, as they show very short time preferences in every other aspect of their thinking. They simply can’t think outside of their childish “America is white and strong and always will be, so Mommy and Daddy will save us if our stupidity gets us into trouble” mode.

Anyhow, it’s just as well they underestimate and fail to understand us. It will make it that much easier to move them out of the way when the real world finally comes home to roost.


The intrinsic unreliability of science

More and more investigations of quasi-scientific shenanigans are demonstrating the need for more precision in the language used to describe the field that is too broadly and misleadingly known as “science”:

The problem with ­science is that so much of it simply isn’t. Last summer, the Open Science Collaboration announced that it had tried to replicate one hundred published psychology experiments sampled from three of the most prestigious journals in the field. Scientific claims rest on the idea that experiments repeated under nearly identical conditions ought to yield approximately the same results, but until very recently, very few had bothered to check in a systematic way whether this was actually the case. The OSC was the biggest attempt yet to check a field’s results, and the most shocking. In many cases, they had used original experimental materials, and sometimes even performed the experiments under the guidance of the original researchers. Of the studies that had originally reported positive results, an astonishing 65 percent failed to show statistical significance on replication, and many of the remainder showed greatly reduced effect sizes.

Their findings made the news, and quickly became a club with which to bash the social sciences. But the problem isn’t just with psychology. There’s an ­unspoken rule in the pharmaceutical industry that half of all academic biomedical research will ultimately prove false, and in 2011 a group of researchers at Bayer decided to test it. Looking at sixty-seven recent drug discovery projects based on preclinical cancer biology research, they found that in more than 75 percent of cases the published data did not match up with their in-house attempts to replicate. These were not studies published in fly-by-night oncology journals, but blockbuster research featured in Science, Nature, Cell, and the like. The Bayer researchers were drowning in bad studies, and it was to this, in part, that they attributed the mysteriously declining yields of drug pipelines. Perhaps so many of these new drugs fail to have an effect because the basic research on which their development was based isn’t valid….

Paradoxically, the situation is actually made worse by the
fact that a promising connection is often studied by several
independent teams. To see why, suppose that three groups of researchers
are studying a phenomenon, and when all the data are analyzed, one group
announces that it has discovered a connection, but the other two find
nothing of note. Assuming that all the tests involved have a high
statistical power, the lone positive finding is almost certainly the
spurious one. However, when it comes time to report these findings, what
happens? The teams that found a negative result may not even bother to
write up their non-discovery. After all, a report that a fanciful
connection probably isn’t true is not the stuff of which scientific
prizes, grant money, and tenure decisions are made.
And even if they did write it up, it probably wouldn’t be
accepted for publication. Journals are in competition with one another
for attention and “impact factor,” and are always more eager to report a
new, exciting finding than a killjoy failure to find an association. In
fact, both of these effects can be quantified. Since the majority of
all investigated hypotheses are false, if positive and negative evidence
were written up and accepted for publication in equal proportions, then
the majority of articles in scientific journals should report no
findings. When tallies are actually made, though, the precise opposite
turns out to be true: Nearly every published scientific article reports
the presence of an association. There must be massive bias at work. 
Ioannidis’s argument would be potent even if all
scientists were angels motivated by the best of intentions, but when the
human element is considered, the picture becomes truly dismal.
Scientists have long been aware of something euphemistically called the
“experimenter effect”: the curious fact that when a phenomenon is
investigated by a researcher who happens to believe in the phenomenon,
it is far more likely to be detected. Much of the effect can likely be
explained by researchers unconsciously giving hints or suggestions to
their human or animal subjects, perhaps in something as subtle as body
language or tone of voice. Even those with the best of intentions have
been caught fudging measurements, or making small errors in rounding or
in statistical analysis that happen to give a more favorable result.
Very often, this is just the result of an honest statistical error that
leads to a desirable outcome, and therefore it isn’t checked as
deliberately as it might have been had it pointed in the opposite
direction. 

But, and there is no putting it nicely, deliberate fraud
is far more widespread than the scientific establishment is generally
willing to admit.

Never confuse either scientistry or sciensophy for scientody. To paraphrase, and reject, Daniel Dennett’s contention, do not trust biologists or sociologists or climatologists, or anyone else who calls himself a scientist, simply because physicists get amazingly accurate results.


Reprehensible

If you’re ever wondering why I generally refuse to have anything to do with the so-called “non-profit” world, this scandal at the Wounded Warrior Project is a very good example of why:

Wounded Warrior Project aims to empower wounded veterans, but a recent exposé revealed that the charity spent nearly half of its funding empowering its executives instead. The board of directors responded by beginning to clean house, starting at the top.

Wounded Warrior Project has raised more than a billion dollars in donations since 2003, according to CBS News. Donors might expect their money would be used “to honor and empower Wounded Warriors,” as the nonprofit’s mission states. However, CBS revealed the charity spends between 40 to 50 percent of their money on overhead – while other veterans’ charities spend an average of 10 to 15 percent on the same expenses.

Wounded Warrior Project Chief Executive Officer Steven Nardizzi and Chief Operating Officer Al Giordano were both removed from the organization after accusations arose alleging that the charity’s donations were being misused…. Over $26 million was spent on employee conferences in 2014, compared to $1.7 million in 2010. The events were described as being lavish and boozy, such as one annual meeting held in a luxury hotel in Colorado Springs, where 500 staff members attended a four-day conference that came with a final price tag of $3 million.

The corporate world is predatory, and the mercenary class of executives are certainly in it for no one but themselves, but for sheer thievery, I think only the financial industry can even begin to compete with the non-profit world. At least the corporations have to deliver to their customers on some level, or they go out of business.

Not so the non-profit charities and foundations, which often seem to exist primarily to provide those who run them a very good living.

The fact that these con artists would rip off American military veterans, of all people, just makes them among the lowest of the very low.


That’s one way to shut him down

Apparently Marco Rubio didn’t know when to quit, so the GOPe decided to call time on his campaign in order to clear the way for Ted Cruz in Florida:

U.S. Senator Marco Rubio has carried on at least two extramarital affairs since he entered politics.

GotNews.com can confirm through lobbyist sources in DC and Tallahassee that at least one DC-based lobbyist has had an extramarital affair with the first-term U.S. Senator. Still another Florida-based lobbyist has been IDed as carrying on an affair.

The first woman was Amber Stoner, a 36-year-old woman who worked for Rubio when he was head of the Florida Republican Party…. The second woman is Dana Hudson, a blonde lobbyist based in the Beltway.

If there are similar revelations about John Kasich, or if he quits the race before Friday, that should suffice to confirm that the GOPe has been doing the math and they know they have to stop Trump in Florida and Ohio or they’re done.

Assuming this is indeed her, doesn’t Miss Hudson look rather like the taller half of Garfunkel and Oates?

Let that be a lesson to all you young would-be politicians out there. When the elders of the party take you out for dinner, and suggest that maybe it is time for you to consider getting out of the race for the good of the party, that’s just their way of being polite. What they really mean is that it is time to get out of the race… if you’re smart enough know what is good for you.

Seriously, does no one watch The Godfather anymore?