Wednesday, January 27, 2021

Cartoonist arrested for making political cartoons

If he would have made Trump or anti white cartoons, all would be fine in the neighborhood. But alas, he called out the satanic left's bullshit for what it is. Now, he is in jail awaiting federal hate crime charges and a very long prison sentence.

It's official. Speak out and go to jail...if it exposes the lies of the satanic left...or right. Satanism is everywhere.

The sniffy DOJ is claiming that by putting out cartoons, he was violating people's right to vote. Which is clearly not true. He wasn't out trying to physically stop people from voting.  

Clearly this act is to send a message. To others. And it is this:

Speak out. Tell the TRUTH. And you will be crushed, viciously, by satanic smockcuckers.

Any support you can provide, as they start their sweeps (for it is beginning) will be greatly appreciated. Before I am deplatformed and any way of supporting me or this work, is taken away, for good and all.

At least sniffy was honest about one single thing: it is going to be a dark winter.

DB


---------------

Biden’s DOJ arrested Vaughn this morning

 Biden’s Department of (Justice has charged a Trump voter who had 58,000 followers on twitter with election interference because he posted a meme in 2016 telling Democrats to vote for Hillary Clinton via text as a joke.

  Defendant Unlawfully Used Social Media to Deprive Individuals of Their Right to Vote

A Florida man was arrested this morning on charges of conspiring with others in advance of the 2016 U.S. Election to disseminate misinformation designed to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote.

 Douglass Mackey, aka Ricky Vaughn, 31, of West Palm Beach, was charged by criminal complaint in the Eastern District of New York. He was taken into custody this morning in West Palm Beach and made his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart of the Southern District of Florida.

 “There is no place in public discourse for lies and misinformation to defraud citizens of their right to vote,” said Seth D. DuCharme, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. “With Mackey’s arrest, we serve notice that those who would subvert the democratic process in this manner cannot rely on the cloak of Internet anonymity to evade responsibility for their crimes. They will be investigated, caught and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.”

The complaint alleges that in 2016, Mackey established an audience on Twitter with approximately 58,000 followers. A February 2016 analysis by the MIT Media Lab ranked Mackey as the 107th most important influencer of the then-upcoming Election, ranking his account above outlets and individuals such as NBC News (#114), Stephen Colbert (#119) and Newt Gingrich (#141).

As alleged in the complaint, between September 2016 and November 2016, in the lead up to the Nov. 8, 2016, U.S. Presidential Election, Mackey conspired with others to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages designed to encourage supporters of one of the presidential candidates (the “Candidate”) to “vote” via text message or social media, a legally invalid method of voting.

For example, on Nov. 1, 2016, Mackey allegedly tweeted an image that featured an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for [the Candidate]” sign. The image included the following text: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home. Text ‘[Candidate’s first name]’ to 59925[.] Vote for [the Candidate] and be a part of history.” The fine print at the bottom of the image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by [Candidate] for President 2016.”

 


Continue reading at DOJ…

 


 

Proud Boys Leader Was 'Prolific' FBI Snitch: Court Docs

 Classic ENEMY INSIDE THE GATES situation. Every single group that is constitutionally minded has these operatives, sent in to rise to the top and then snitch on every little plan made.

Your new BFF maybe more than they let on.

DB

--------------

While US officials claim that 'far-right extremism' is one of the largest threats facing America, the leader of the group most commonly singled out as an example - the Proud Boys - was a 'prolific' informant for federal and local law enforcement, according to Reuters, citing a 2014 federal court proceeding.

Enrique Tarrio (left)

Enrique Tarrio repeatedly worked undercover for investigators following a 2012 arrest, court documents reveal.

Curiously, Tarrio was ordered to stay away from Washington D.C. one day before the January 6 Capitol riot after he was arrested on vandalism and weapons charges - upon a request by government prosecutors that he be prohibited from attending. At least five Proud Boys members were charged as part of the riot.

In the 2014 hearing, a federal prosecutor, an FBI agent and Tarrio's attorney describe his undercover work - noting that the Proud Boys leader helped authorities prosecute over a dozen people in various cases involving drugs, gambling and human smuggling, accoding to Reuters.

In a Tuesday interview with Reuters, Tarrio denied working undercover or cooperating in cases.

"I don't know any of this," he said, adding "I don't recall any of this."

Law-enforcement officials and the court transcript contradict Tarrio’s denial. In a statement to Reuters, the former federal prosecutor in Tarrio’s case, Vanessa Singh Johannes, confirmed that “he cooperated with local and federal law enforcement, to aid in the prosecution of those running other, separate criminal enterprises, ranging from running marijuana grow houses in Miami to operating pharmaceutical fraud schemes.”

Tarrio, 36, is a high-profile figure who organizes and leads the right-wing Proud Boys in their confrontations with those they believe to be Antifa, short for “anti-fascism,” an amorphous and often violent leftist movement. The Proud Boys were involved in the deadly insurrection at the Capitol January 6.

The records uncovered by Reuters are startling because they show that a leader of a far-right group now under intense scrutiny by law enforcement was previously an active collaborator with criminal investigators. -Reuters

During Tarrio's 2014 hearing, both the prosecutor and Tarrio's defense attorney asked for a reduced prison sentence after pleading guilty in a fraud case related to the relabeling and sale of stolen diabetes test kits. In requesting leniency for Tarrio and two co-defendants, the prosecutor noted that Tarrio's information had resulted in the prosecution of 13 people on federal charges in two separate cases, and helped local authorities investigate a gambling ring.

Just because he is black, doesn't mean he's not a narc. He is. There are four others in the PB ensemble. 3 are at the top leadership.

Tarrio's former attorney, Jeffrey Feiler, noted that his client worked undercover several times - one involving "wholesale prescription narcotics," another involving the sale of anabolic steroids, and a third involving human smuggling. Tarrio also helped police uncover three marijuana grow houses, and was a "prolific" cooperator, according to the report.

In the smuggling case, Tarrio, “at his own risk, in an undercover role met and negotiated to pay $11,000 to members of that ring to bring in fictitious family members of his from another country,” the lawyer said in court.

In an interview, Feiler said he did not recall details about the case but added, “The information I provided to the court was based on information provided to me by law enforcement and the prosecutor.”

An FBI agent at the hearing called Tarrio a “key component” in local police investigations involving marijuana, cocaine and MDMA, or ecstasy. The Miami FBI office declined comment. -Reuters

Reuters notes that there is no evidence Tarrio has cooperated with authorities since his previous involvement, however he admitted to notifying local law enforcement prior to Proud Boys rallies in various cities - letting police know of the group's plans. Tarrio said he stopped this coordination after December 12 due to the DC police cracking down on the group. 

Tarrio's involvement with law enforcement will no doubt fuel speculation over just how 'organic' the threat of 'far-right extremism' is, particularly when the vast majority of violence observed over 2020 was committed by far-left groups rioting in the name of racial justice.

 

Hunger Games America


 
You cannot escape the symbolism of a small group of elites gathered behind fences and razor wire to install an illegitimate leader guarded by 25000 soldiers with machine guns in a closed capitol city. This is what despotism looks like.

-------------------

The Hunger Games have the outward appearance of a vapid millennial trilogy with nothing particularly interesting to say, in the vein of Twilight or Harry Potter. But don’t be fooled — the series contains a remarkably insightful depiction of what a 21st-century dystopia might look like.

See if the following sounds familiar:

A ruling class of corrupt, morally depraved elites congregate in the nation’s seat of power, called the Capitol.

Fond of self-indulgence, high fashion, and celebrity culture, they lead a life of luxury while commoners in the outer regions, called the Districts, suffer terminal economic depression.

The elites of the Capitol know they are despised by the common people, and they despise them right back. They delight in the suffering and ritual humiliation of the Districts, which they justify as punishment for a past act of insurrection.

The regime maintains control through a mixture of martial law and mass-media propaganda.

The chief mouthpiece of the regime is a late-night talk show host: a Stephen Colbert type figure called Caesar Flickerman who mixes official talking points with entertainment and celebrity interviews.

The crown jewel of the Capitol’s propaganda apparatus is the Hunger Games, an annual, televised spectacle in which representatives of each of the Districts (but not the Capitol itself) fight to the death in a giant arena for the amusement of the elites.

Ahead of every Hunger Games, the representatives — known as tributes — entertain the Capitol by attending the Capitol talk show circuit and wearing the latest in Capitol fashion.

If a tribute is fortunate enough to survive the Games, the ordeal doesn’t end there. The survivors of the Hunger Games, known as victors, enter a seedy, abusive world as permanent celebrities in the Capitol. It is revealed in later novels that the Capitol’s rulers use attractive victors as political bartering tools, loaning them out to influential elites to use as sexual playthings.

The heroine of the story, Katniss Everdeen, is the daughter of a coal miner from Appalachia. Forced to fight in the Hunger Games to save her sister from the same fate, she eventually defeats the Capitol by playing the mass media game better than they do.

Katniss uses the Games as an opportunity to broadcast her own acts of defiance, which trigger imitation in the Districts. A full-blown uprising follows, and the system swiftly crumbles. Too late, the Capitol realizes that its propaganda machine — built around celebrity and reality TV — created the perfect conditions for a dissident to acquire a national audience.

1984 does a fine job of explaining how control over language can lead to control over society. But where Orwell’s story falls short is in its rather sterile depiction of the ruling class. Big Brother, in the end, is just a sinister, distant idea — you never meet him. He doesn’t appear to be quite human. He may not even exist.

The elites of The Hunger Games, by contrast, are all too human. The story captures the decadence and depravity of an overly powerful metropolitan elite. It captures their mixture of contempt and fear of the common people. And, like the Stanford Prison Experiment, it captures their capacity for cruelty, if sufficiently radicalized against ordinary people and given enough power to manifest their fantasies.

It’s possible that The Hunger Games wasn’t intended to be a critique of modern society. The author of the books, Suzanne Collins, has never claimed it as such. The names of some of the characters — Cato, Plutarch, Seneca, Caesar — speak to the author’s classical influences. But if a story intended to depict the injustice and decay of late Rome bears a closer resemblance to modern society, that’s revealing in itself.

But perhaps the cleverest thing about The Hunger Games is that it attracted hundreds of millions of millennial fans who appear to have completely missed its political undertones.

There’s a lesson for dissident storytellers: It seems you can convince reflexively liberal millennials to eagerly consume the most right-wing messages imaginable… as long as the main character looks like a Girlboss.

 Allum Bokhari

 

 

The World Economic Forum wants you to know that there is nothing sinister about its globalist masterplan — aka The Great Reset — for a New World Order.

This is from the satanic crowd that steals and tortures children for their terrified blood. Any thing they say to dissuade you from this simple truth will always be a lie. This is the group of damned souls who murder, rape, and destroy victims for their dark rituals.

And the children disappear.

And the children disappear.

DB

 

In the video, the WEF admits that some people think that the Great Reset sounds like ‘some nefarious plan for world domination.’

But nothing could be further from the truth, the video goes on to insist. The Great Reset is simply “an opportunity to build a better world.”

If people think otherwise, it claims, it’s all the fault of the ‘broken system’ and the ‘pandemic.’

It’s not surprising that people who’ve been disenfranchised by a broken system and pushed even further by the pandemic will suspect global leaders of conspiracy.

So says the WEF. But could there be a more plausible explanation for people’s concern about the Great Reset: that they’ve started to do their homework and don’t like what they’ve discovered.

For many years, the annual Davos cavalcade of private jets and limousines was something of a joke: ‘billionaires coming to tell millionaires how ordinary people should live.’

Russian President Vladimir Putin and the WEF’s Klaus Schwab speak via a video link on January 27, 2021. (Photo by MIKHAIL KLIMENTYEV/SPUTNIK/AFP via Getty Images)

But since the Chinese coronavirus pandemic, people have been paying much closer to attention to what this annual plutocrats’ shindig in Davos actually entails: a totalitarian world takeover in which a tiny elite will control every aspect of the lives of ordinary people, reducing them to the status of Medieval serfs.

In the past, the WEF has not been secretive about its aims. In 2016, it released a video in which it boasted about a future where no one owned any property.

Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better.

Last year, the WEF’s founder Klaus Schwab even wrote a book celebrating the pandemic not as a crisis but an opportunity for a ‘new normal.’

In Covid-19: the Great Reset, he wrote:

At the time of writing (June 2020), the pandemic continues to worsen globally. Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal. The short response is: never. Nothing will ever return to the ‘broken’ sense of normalcy that prevailed prior to the crisis because the coronavirus pandemic marks a fundamental inflection point in our global trajectory.

But what if what most people actually want is not a ‘new normal’ but to get their old lives back as quickly as possible. Neither Schwab nor the people pushing the Great Reset appear to understand this.

Their latest video urges:

So we can move towards a better world

One of the curious aspects of the video is its criticism that, since the pandemic, the ultra rich have got richer and the poor poorer.

At the beginning of 2020 1 percent of the world’s population owned 44 percent of the wealth. Since the start of the pandemic, billionaires have increased theirs by more than 25 percent while the 150 million poorest have fallen back into extreme poverty.

This may be true but it’s a bit hypocritical coming from the WEF, given that so many of its members and speakers belong in the billionaire category that has most benefited from the pandemic.

Indeed, those who have been watching these developments closely even argue that this is the whole point. Delingpod guest Patrick M Wood told me he thinks draconian anti-coronavirus measures taken by world leaders, at the instigation of the CCP-controlled World Health Organisation, represent a deliberate and concerted attempt to crush small businesses, empower large corporations, and make ordinary people more dependent on the state.

To me, it’s highly revealing of the elitist nature of the World Economic Forum that hardly anyone has been watching its panel discussions.

Even the week’s biggest draw so far — President Xi Jinping of China — has garnered less than 19,000 views for his admittedly uninspiring speech. Comments have been disabled by the WEF for all its panel discussions, suggesting that it is perfectly well aware that most would be negative. The Xi speech has so far got nearly 400 thumbs up but 1.1K thumbs down. I expect the ratio would be greater if anyone bothered to watch it.

Nor does anyone much seem to care about the creepy music video the WEF has made, clearly at great expense for it features classical musicians playing at locations all over the world –(Massachusetts, USA; Sao Paolo, Brazil; Drakensberg, South Africa; Kabul, Afghanistan; Philadelphia, USA; Beijing, China; Florence, Italy;  Vienna, Austria).

The video — titled See Me: A Global Concert/Davos Agenda 2021 — has attracted less than 7,200 views so far. Again, comments are off.

There is a huge disparity between the impressively high level names that the WEF attracts — speakers at this year’s online conference include French president Emmanuel Macron; German Chancellor Angela Merkel; doom goblin Greta Thunberg; Dr Snake Anthony Fauci; etc — and the deeply unimpressive viewing figures.

But this should not be taken to mean, as my fellow broadcaster Toby Young has suggested on our London Calling podcast, that the WEF is an irrelevance. Rather it’s an indication of the remote, elitist, anti-democratic nature of the enterprise. The one percent of the one percent — and their sympathisers in business and politics — all seem to be in agreement that the Great Reset is a great idea. But the fact that no ordinary person shares their enthusiasm seems to bother them not one bit.


 

Tuesday, January 26, 2021

Woke mental illness is eating expert inquiry from the inside out

The parasite leucochloridium paradoxum, shown here infecting a snail, is a flatworm that takes over the brains of gastropods and forces them into self-destructive behaviors. As this essay demonstrates, woke social teaching has been known to do the same with academic departments.

It was Franz Kafka meets Jabba the Hutt. Instead of a seraglio on Tatooine, the location was a hotel ballroom in Arlington, Virginia, at a large gathering of scientists and engineers brought together by the National Science Foundation (NSF). We were there to compete for a very large sum of money. 

At stake was funding for a “research center,” something akin to national laboratories like Brookhaven Labs or Livermore Labs. Research centers are built around a strategic theme, like nuclear physics, and are intended to provide a venue for scientists nationwide to come together to explore that theme. Research centers are high-stakes competitions, involving tens of millions of dollars doled out over a term of ten years or so. The prizes are big, and the prestige immense. They are intended to go to the best of the best. 

The competition for research centers takes place in two stages. The first stage winnows wheat from chaff. Hopeful teams of scientists apply for a “planning grant,” which supports the work involved in crafting the actual proposal for the center. If a team is awarded a planning grant, the next step is a “planning meeting,” where the NSF gathers the successful teams together to provide detailed guidance on what might make for a successful proposal. I was on one of those teams, and that is how I came to be in that hotel ballroom.

At the opening session, we were told that proposals would be judged on four “foundational components,” or “pillars,” as they were styled in the PowerPoints. A successful proposal would be strong on all four: weakness in one would cast the proposal into the abyss, we were told, no matter how strong the other pillars might be. At the planning meeting, each pillar was to have a dedicated panel discussion, just to make clear to us what the NSF’s expectations were. Three of the four pillars were conventionally scientific and academic: innovation, training, etc. The remaining pillar was “Diversity and Culture of Inclusion” (DCI). 

That was where things took a bizarre turn. 

The DCI panel consisted of bureaucrats from the NSF’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI). Naturally, there were many questions from the floor about what the criteria for a strong DCI pillar would be. We are talking about engineers, remember, whose culture is: “give us ‘the specs’ and we will solve any problem.” The assembled engineers were looking for “the specs” they needed to build that DCI pillar. 

I remember the scene. Each team was seated at its own round table on the ballroom floor. The DCI panel was seated on a raised platform, looking down on us, as from thrones on high. They were, collectively, our Jabba. 

One engineer at a neighboring table kept trying to pin the DCI panel down on those DCI specs. Jabba kept deflecting the question. We’ll know it when we see it, was the blithe answer, issued with the monotonous imperiousness of the entitled ruler indulging inconvenient questioning from the proles. Engineering is too white and too male, was one panelist’s message to us, and that needed to be corrected. Irony alert: the engineer pressing the point was not white, but an Indian immigrant. 

Nor would Jabba provide the specs the engineers sought, and this is where Franz entered the chat. It became clearer with every question that the specs not only would not be laid out: they would in any event change according to inscrutable whim of the ODI bureaucrats. Foolish engineers, one might imagine Jabba chortling, the “specs” are not to help you solve a problem: they are there to keep you off-balance, uncertain, and in my power. It is enough for you to know you depend upon my mercy for funding.

How Infection Spreads

Speaking of mercy, the coffee break by then intervened to terminate the bizarre exchange—leaving me, Styrofoam cup and stale Danish in hand, to contemplate the message that had just been delivered. We, the diversicrats, not you, the scientists and engineers, will decide what science and engineering is worthy of support. And you will be glad of it when we do. 

All are familiar with the Left’s “long march” through the institutions. What might not be so well known is just how thorough the conquest has been. Evidence of this sometimes pops up into prominent public view, as in the recent exposure of “critical race theory” training in federal agencies (including places like Sandia National Labs, where one would expect such hokum to be laughed out the door). Such incidents, though quite frequent, are only the tips of a very large iceberg. In the academic sciences, where I have spent my career, “diversity, inclusion, and equity” (DIE) has become as pervasive as one might expect it to be in any grievance studies department. 

How did this happen? More to the point, how could it happen to the supposedly sensible people that scientists are generally thought to be? 

The concept of “zombie parasites” provides an apt metaphor for how things got to this point. These are parasites that colonize the brains and nervous systems of their hosts, taking the controls, so to speak, over the host’s behavior. One striking example of a zombie parasite is a worm that infects the brains of snails, which normally crawl around stealthily at night. A snail infected with the parasite crawls out onto a grass stalk during the day, where it is now visible to birds that gobble them up. The parasite then breeds in the bird’s digestive tract and deposits its eggs in the bird’s feces. When uninfected snails eat the feces, the parasite’s life cycle is completed. 

DIE has spread into the academic sciences as a kind of zombie parasite. It is not a real worm at work, of course, but a metaphorical “brainworm”—three of them, in fact, that together spread a kind of altered cognitive reality through any institution that is infected by them. 

The route of infection usually starts with a “study” that identifies a “problem” that no one knew existed: the overwhelming whiteness of, say, fishery science. Once an unwitting host takes the bait, the next phase of the infection kicks in: all are invited to contemplate with horror the dark future that awaits should fishery scientists not take immediate steps to correct the “problem.” In the final stage of the infection, the brainworm plants its “diversity is our strength” meme in the host’s nervous system. The infected now babble about solving the impending crisis through a crash outreach program to “under-represented” or “marginalized” groups, who, by virtue of their class membership, think differently about fisheries, and so can save the field from stultifying white maleness.

As in those parasitized snails, the DIE brainworm induces a cognitive disconnect in the infected. None of the assertions planted by the DIE zombie parasite have a sound basis in fact or reason. The accusation of too much whiteness usually is based upon a simple observation that the ethnic, gender, and sexual orientation mix in, say, fishery science, departs from the statistical distributions found in the general population. Why this should be, where it is considered at all, is usually buried under a panoply of repetitive charts and diagrams of dubious critical value. 

Also lacking is any evidence of a future critical shortage of scientists and engineers that would put, say, fishery science at risk. Colleges and universities are turning out science graduates in far greater numbers than there are jobs that can usefully employ them, and they’ve been doing so for nearly 70 years. 

The “diversity is our strength” mantra, for its part, rests on some disturbingly racist presumptions. If “thinking differently” is an inherent attribute of race (or gender, or sexual orientation), this edges up very close to the forbidden argument that there might be inherent racial (or gender, or sexual orientation) disparities in, say, IQ. Both are cognitive attributes. Yet one is beyond the pale, and the other is almost a compulsory point of doctrine. Both cannot simultaneously be true.

Tearing Families Apart

What makes the DIE brainworm a zombie parasite is how it hijacks the host’s behavior to facilitate its spread, to the host’s ultimate detriment. Universities, where future scientists are trained, are a common target. Incubating a future scientist has traditionally involved a very close relationship between a professor and a student (“mentor” and “mentee,” in today’s clumsy parlance). It is not uncommon to speak of this relationship in familial terms: I am the academic “son” of my Ph.D. supervisor, for example, and in turn the academic “grandson” of his Ph.D. supervisor. I am thus the academic “brother” to all the students who studied under my PhD supervisor. Once the rite of Ph.D. passage is cleared, professors will use their “familial” networks to launch the newly minted scientist offspring in their new careers. I could go on, but you get the idea. 

Like all families, academic families have their ups and downs, their rifts and triumphs. Despite their imperfections, these familial networks have, for many years, reliably ensured the scientific future, largely because they are held together by a transcendent ideal. Not an ideal as lofty as justice, mind you, but something more elemental and earthy. Fishery scientists, to trot them out again, become fishery scientists because, well, they love fish. They want to devote their lives to getting to know fish better. The same may be said of nearly every scientific endeavor in academia: at the vital core is a love that can verge into obsession. The genius of the academy is that it provides a place where that love can give value to the society that supports it. Disrupt that elemental drive, and you degrade the real social value of the sciences. 

This almost primitive love provides a kind of immunity to the DIE brainworm, which makes it a particular target. To spread, the parasite must plant the idea that the familial network of relationships cloaks a hostile and dangerous climate, propped up by cronyism, privilege, racism, sexism, and hostility to the non-binary. The only way to make science “safe” for the marginalized, or excluded, or under-represented, is to disrupt the traditional mentoring family. Students and new faculty who are members of “under-represented” or “marginalized” groups are drawn from their intellectual families into self-referential bubbles of grievance: support groups, safe spaces, counseling services, etc., where the normal stresses of academic life can be transformed into evidence of the hostile climate without. 

At some point, earnest administrators, who know nothing about science and understand even less how it works, are brought in to “listen” to the newly aggrieved. At that point, discontent is turned into actionable grievance: committees and study groups are appointed, action plans formulated. Excluded from all this, of course, are the keepers of the academic traditions which, inconveniently for them, have already been condemned in absentia as the problem. 

Pressure is brought on these erstwhile traditionalists to conform, to “listen” to other voices, to “check your privilege,” to be “open” to different “perspectives.” If the brainworm has spread far enough to implant a DIE bureaucracy on campus, penalties for non-conformity will be quietly placed in a corner of the room, a visible reminder of the consequences of resistance to the brainworm. Once that happens, the path is open for the entire academic institution to become infected, triggering the next, and most dangerous, stage of the infection. 

Follow the Money

Parasites do not simply invade a host: they require fertile ground and food. For the DIE brainworm, the mother’s milk is money. And it is the academic sciences, not the humanities, where the ground is lushest. Compare two sources of federal funds that are often tied to woke ideology on campuses: the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). These are NSF-style agencies that fund academic work in the arts and humanities, and in similar ways. Artists and scholars submit proposals, these are scrutinized by peers, and funds are doled out to the successful proposals. 

How much money? The NEA presently enjoys an annual appropriation of about $150 million. For the NEH, it is about $160 million. In contrast, the federal money directed to academic science in 2017 stood at around $40 billion: 250 times more. Over the course of the 50 years of its existence, the NEH has funded a cumulative total of roughly $4.7 billion dollars in grants. The cumulative tally of federal support of academic research over the same time span has been nearly $900 billion: about 200 times more. 

It is to the sciences, then, that the DIE brainworm has gone to feed, and there it has spread as if it were an epidemic. Evidence for this can be ferreted out from the NSF’s searchable databases of its grant awards, by searching for keywords such as “under-represented,” “minority,” or “marginalized” in the grant documents. Prior to 2010, no award carried these keywords. The first to do so was in 2010, when the NSF awarded a large research center grant to MIT, which contained within it a significant program of outreach to marginalized groups. 

Since that year, NSF expenditures on research grants containing the “woke” keywords have risen exponentially, doubling at a rate of about 50% each year, just as a novel virus would when spreading through a new population. In 2018, the last year for which a complete picture can be discerned, the NSF funded nearly a thousand research grants devoted in whole or part to DIE aims, to the tune of more than $1.3 billion. From 2010 to 2018, a total of more than $4 billion have been awarded to more than 2,200 DIE-oriented grants. 

Which is how we get to that scene in the Arlington hotel ballroom, where DIE now holds the trump card in deciding what science is worthy of funding. No matter how stellar the science, the message is clear: gobble up the DIE brainworm, or your funding will dry up, and your career along with it. 

Reason’s Last Stand

Is there any hope? I’d like to offer another perspective. In my 40-year career in the academic sciences, I have spent significant time, by my rough count, in ten academic institutions, including post-doctoral fellowships, sabbatical leaves, and regular faculty appointments. The institutions I have inhabited have included a small liberal arts college, a medical school, two colleges in southern Africa, top-flight research universities, and finally, the college where I spent the bulk of my academic career. So, I have seen a pretty good cross-section of campus climates. Here is my impression, for what it’s worth. 

Academic family life can be a pretty rough affair, populated as it is by imperfect and sometimes difficult people. The ticket for admission to an academic family can be hard to win, the criteria inscrutable. One vice I have never witnessed, however, is bigotry. Among my colleagues, I have never seen the ticket for admission stamped for having the “right” skin color, gender, or sexual orientation. Rather, admission to the family has turned on whether there is a shared love and the commitment to sustain it. 

Where I have seen real bigotry, in contrast, is when the DIE brainworm is challenged. For questioning the DIE orthodoxy, I once was branded an “institutional terrorist” by a high-priced consultant brought in to heal our supposedly sick and bigoted campus culture. It is no surprise that the DIE brainworm has spread through the campuses to an alarming extent, spread largely by acquiescence to the altered cognitive states the worm wants us to accept. When the brainworm acquires the power of the purse and the HR department, the infection has become near-fatal. 

Can the patient be cured? The prognosis, as a physician might say, is clouded. “Chemotherapy” is a possibility, which in this instance means cutting off the tens of billions of dollars of federal money the zombie parasite feeds on. At this late stage, however, the infection is far advanced, and the realistic prospects for a successful course of treatment are slim. There is too much money and power at stake for the zombie parasite to passively accept doom. 

What hope remains emerges from the same dilemma that confronted those last human survivors in the classic novel about zombie parasites, Jack Finney’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers. The one thing that defeated that zombie parasite in the end was a superhuman assertion of will against the infection. The one ray of hope against the DIE zombie parasite streams from the few and isolated pockets of the uninfected still lingering in the academic ecosystem. It is there that the parasite will mount its fiercest attack. Can the academic sciences resist and recover? The flame is sputtering. If the wax rises high enough to extinguish the flame, the zombie parasite’s takeover will be complete. 

H.R.1: For Making Sure Republicans Never Win Another National Election Act of 2021

The following contains editorial content written by a retired Chief of Police and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today

WASHINGTON, DC- Are you familiar with H.R.1: For the People Act of 2021? If you’re not you should be. The act would be better named “H.R.1: For Making Sure Republicans Never Win Another National Election Act of 2021.”

This bill, if passed will fundamentally change how America conducts elections. Actually what it will do in part is codify the apparent massive irregularities that occurred in the 2020 election.

Before getting into the sordid details of this abomination, let’s take a look at Article II, Section I, Clause II of the United States Constitution:

 Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress…

In other words, the Framers of the Constitution specifically said that state legislatures, not Congress shall determine how electors are determined in their states.

This argument was part of the irregularities argued in the 2020 election, as several states, among them Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan all had election laws changed either by courts, governors or unelected election officials.

It would appear that what Congress is trying to do, in part would be unconstitutional, although truth be told, it is uncertain if the Supreme Court, which has shown itself to be pretty much gutless with a few exceptions would do their Constitutional duty. However, here is what is proposed in H.R., proposed by Rep. John P. Sarbanes (D-MD). This is not the full text of the bill, just the “highlights”:

1). Internet-only registration with electronic signature submission.

(a) Requiring Availability For Online Registration- Each State, acting through the chief State election official shall ensure that the following services are available to the public at any time on the official public websites of the appropriate State and local election officials in the State, in the same manner and subject to the same terms and conditions as the services provided by voter registration agencies under section 7(a);

(1) Online application for voter registration

2). Banning the requirement to provide a full SSN for voter registration

Sec 1005. PROHIBITING STATE FROM REQUIRING APPLICANTS TO PROVIDE MORE THAN LAST 4 DIGITS OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER

(a) Form Included With Application For Motor Vehicle Driver’s License- Section 5 (c)(2)(B)(ii) of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (52 U.S.C. 20504(c)(2)(B)(ii) is amended by striking the semicolon at the end and inserting the following: “and to the extent that the application requires the applicant to provide a Social Security number, may not require the applicant to provide more than the last 4 digits of such number;”.

3) Nationwide “Motor Voter” registration

(2) DEFINITION.—The term “automatic registration” means a system that registers an individual to vote in elections for Federal office in a State, if eligible, by electronically transferring the information necessary for registration from government agencies to election officials of the State so that, unless the individual affirmatively declines to be registered, the individual will be registered to vote in such elections.

NOTE: In other words, motor voter, which provides registration for anyone either obtaining or renewing an operator’s license or registration, would be mandatory. This type of program is alleged to be the reason that thousands of illegals became registered voters in states such as California and Nevada.

4) 16 year olds required to be registered to vote

(d) Treatment of Individuals Under 18 Years of Age—A state may not refuse to treat an individual as an eligible individual for purposes of this part on the grounds that the individual is less than 18 years of age at the time a contributing agency receives information with respect to the individual, so long as the individual is at least 16 years of age at such time. Nothing in the previous sentence may be construed to require a State to permit an individual who is under 18 years of age at the time of an election for Federal office to vote in the election.

5) Nationwide same-day registration

(1) REGISTRATION.—Each State shall permit an eligible individual on the day of a Federal election and on any day when voting, including early voting is permitted for a Federal election—

(A) to register to vote in such election at the polling place using a form that meets the requirements under section 9(b) of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (or, if the individual is already registered to vote, to revise any of the individual’s voter registration information); and

(B) to cast a vote in such election

6) Grants (25M for using minors in election activities.

(1) IN GENERAL- The Election Assistance Commission (hereafter in this section referred to as the “Commission”) shall make grants to eligible States to enable such States to carry out a plan to increase the involvement of individuals under 18 years of age in public election activities in the State.

7) More children voters.

(k) Acceptance of Applications From Individuals Under 18 Years of Age-

(1) IN GENERAL- A State may not refuse to accept or process an individuals application to register to vote in elections for Federal office on the grounds that the individual is under 18 years of age at the time the individual submits the application, so long as the individual is at least 16 years of age at such time.

8) Prohibiting attempts to clean voter rolls of non-residents.

(1) REQUIREMENTS FOR CHALLENGESNo person, other than a State or local election official, shall submit a formal challenge to an individual’s eligibility to register to vote in an election for Federal office or to vote in an election for Federal office unless that challenge is supported by personal knowledge regarding the grounds for ineligibility which is—

9) Would permit convicted felons the right to vote

(1) NOTIFICATION—On the date determined under paragraph (2), each State shall notify in writing any individual who has been convicted of a criminal offense under the law of that State that such individual has the right to vote in an election for Federal office pursuant to the Democracy Restoration Act of 2021 and may register to vote in any such election and provide such individual with any materials that are necessary to register to vote in any such election.

 

Twitter Encourages Users to Snitch on Each Other with ‘Birdwatch’ Feature

A perfect gift for the CIA assets who do gang stalking for the agency. The people who gang stalk, ARE THE KARENS.

Now you know who they are.

Get it?

Monday, January 25, 2021

BREAKING: Isaac Kappy Photo MetaData Shows Car Pics Taken BEFORE Death

The Phoenix Enigma has published photographs allegedly from the Cococino County Sheriff’s office in relation to Isaac Kappy’s death.

There’s just one problem: the metadata from the photos of Isaac’s car shows they were taken on May 12 2019 between 5:25pm and 5:28pm. The first EMS traffic mention of Isaac Kappy “forcing himself” off the Transwestern overpass onto Historic Route-66 was at 7:28am. He was pronounced dead on the scene right as Officer Luna arrived with the body camera running at 7:44am – on May 13 2019.

The Phoenix Enigma has also published 35 of 52 photos he received from the Arizona Department of Public Safety. These were taken with a different camera, a Nikon Coolpix A10. The creation date for each of these photos is the same, suggesting it was not actually set on the camera.

The Phoenix Enigma has published 5 videos of Body Camera footage from officers at the scene. The video marked “Officer Luna Body-Cam Footage #3” shows inspection of his Days Inn hotel room #234, which did not contain any personal effects. at 1:05 says “his car was pretty full. Had, uh, laundry and all that stuff in the back”. Where is the bodycam footage of this inspection and photo-shoot? Why would it not have been provided in response to the FOIA request?

If the police really did take these photos as part of a death investigation, within 2 hours of the death…why would the capture date be incorrect? Were the photos taken with a professional camera and lens before Isaac’s death? If so, how did they get mixed in with the FOIA response?

The timestamp on the bodycam footage of the hotel room inspection says 2019-05-13 15:30. Bodycams record in UTC time so this was -6, 9:30am on the 13th.

 https://burners.me/2021/01/25/breaking-isaac-kappy-photo-metadata-shows-car-pics-taken-before-death/