Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • Noose, Pike, and Pyre. Every. Last. One. Dii Velint! (“the gods will it”)

    Noose, Pike, and Pyre.

    Every. Last. One.

    Dii Velint!

    (“the gods will it”)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-24 13:45:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-24 12:43:14 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-24 11:22:00 UTC

  • TO THE MOST STRONG OBAMA FAN THAT SCORNS OUR LOVE AND LOYALTY TO DONALD TRUMP by

    TO THE MOST STRONG OBAMA FAN THAT SCORNS OUR LOVE AND LOYALTY TO DONALD TRUMP

    by Alexander Brown

    Listen, we are not blind to Donald Trump’s faults. So you lie, when you write of our “blank check [ sic ] support” for Donald J. Trump.

    We don’t have that for the President. In fact we are prepared to oppose his regime and if he would go against United States interests and increase the risk to the international community.

    We are with Trump because he is the best for the United States at this time, and had demonstrably contained heretofore raging regional and international conflicts, while working a deserved rapprochement with Russia and China. Importantly he had done well with the United States economy.

    Under his rule for the first time in US history, there was more available job openings [ 6.7 million ] than people [ 6.4 million ] to take them only weeks ago. Trump grew the economy beyond the 3% that Barack Hussein Obama had been unable to scale in his 8 years in power, and is negotiating favourable trade terms for the United States. Consumer confidence is high.

    Donald Trump is seeking to secure US borders, manage and fix US infrastructure, free US energy to make it independent, and to limit US military spending on so called friendly states that do not reciprocate the US generosity. So that I ask, who would not clamour for this President and wish all people have a leader like him in their respective nation – states or sovereigns?

    But we also have occasions to severely criticize Trump as for example when he bombed Bashar al Assad over so called chemical weapon use in Syria. We criticised and damned him.

    Moreover we don’t like the fact that Trump lies and except that we know that he uses a technique that is hard for you and many of the opposition to appreciate: HYPERBOLE.

    President Trump exaggerates nearly everything to cause the opposition including the controlled media to make corrections while in their error and lying, as strategy to market himself, his views, position and policy. He had done this over and over again yet the media and his opponents failed to get it, and so continue to market him and give him free publicity!

    Geopolitically and with regards to patriotism and nationalism, Trump is no angel of course. But he has not done what he is accused of with regards to Russia. IF he were a Putin agent, he would have been caught and impeached already, and except that you are saying Trump is smarter than the entire 16 or 17 US intelligence agencies and could outwit the first class counterintelligence and counterespionage capability of the United States.

    James Clapper, John Brennan, James Comey*, Andrew McCabe*, Michael Hayden, Susan E. Rice, whose security clearances Trump want revoked, according to Press Secretary S. Huckabee Sanders, are very serious people that know their jobs and could have outed Trump if he was and or remain a Russian agent. But they have not bee able to. WHY?

    When Mueller indicted the Russian 12 to distract from the Strzok congressional humiliation and set Trump up at Helsinki, was any of the names Donald an. Trump?

    WHY NOT?

    Because there is no there there!

    There was Russian INTERFERENCE as would be expected, and as happened in the past and would occur in future US elections, but there was no demonstrable Russia – Trump campaign links, collisions and coordinations that influenced the elections outcomes.

    Any way. John Brennan just described Trump’s rapprochement with Putin, treasonous. But how could that be when all recent United States Presidents sought peace with Putin, engaged and cooperated with him?

    Bill Clinton made business in Russia while a former President. George W. Bush said he could trust Putin by looking into his eyes. Obama attempted the RESET with Putin. Hillary was the envoy that sent the PEREGRUSKA [ overcharged ] ERROR FOR PEREZAGRUSKA [ reset ] to the Russians. She would have been President after Obama today, and had it not been for Trump. What that means plainly is that Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Hillary R. Clinton all had little or no problems befriending Putin or wanting to. So WHY should Donald Trump not?

    Trump admires Putin, and the honor is mutual.

    Trump isn’t bothered so very much about his relationship and love for Putin, except the fabrications that became the basis for lying to the FISA court to secure counterintelligence warrant to surveil him and his campaign, and which became the excuse for special prosecutor Mueller after Trump had to fire then FBI chief Comey that he felt he could no longer work with. Comey now calls on Democrats to vote against Trump and the GOP, so vindicating the President!

    Listen. We think that our disagreement with people that think this that Trump actually did hold direct links to Moscow; colluded with Putin and his agents; and coordinated with Russian operatives to defeat Hillary in November 2016 is our frustration that they continue to disrespect us, disregard our intelligence and all available open and closed sourced information / intelligence. And when this is the problem, you can be certain that we would not cede our position and because we are NOT in error and have not been shown any contrary argument worth abandoning our positions for. To the contrary, we do know that GOB George Bush, Obama and the Clintons all made money out of government while Trump is NOT EVEN TAKING HIS SALARY AS POTUS, and when the GOB had links and business with Russia.

    Obama is worth some $20 million when his annually salary was some $400, 000. He lives in an $8 million Washington DC house while he berates the wealthy and decry economic inequality but would NOT OPEN HIS HOME TO THE POOR AND SHARE HIS WEALTH.

    We know that George Bush did business with the Saudis, and that the Hillary campaign was well oiled and funded by cash from Russian and Saudi sources amongst others.

    We know that the Uranium One deal with Russia, BENEFITTED AND ENRICHED THE CLINTONS. And we are aware that the Clinton Foundation was a means to launder money globally.

    We know that the CIA – FBI Peter Strzok, held anti Trump bias and is pro Hillary. His text messages to FBI lawyer Lisa Page, made this very plain. We know or at least suspect then that while Strzok admitted to Lisa that there was “no there there” to warrant the Mueller investigation of collusion, expected by some to be uncovered, the process was for other objectives than was publicly stated by the special prosecutor or DOJ’s Rod Rosenstein. So that when the New York Police found classified information in the emails Hillary sent using unsecured servers and informed then FBI Director Comey and deputy McCabe, so that Melissa Hodgman – Strzok, the wife of Peter, would be promoted to Security and Exchange Commission directorship within hours [ October 24, 2016 ], we knew that was a certain chess pawn promotion to PREVENT CLINTON GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRIME INVESTIGATIONS AND TO PROTECT HER INTERESTS TO SAFEGUARD HER CAMPAIGN FOR THE COMING NOVEMBER 09 ELECTIONS. This was done for Obama over Benghazi, Libya, when he had boasted that al Qaeda was decimated only for an al Qaeda affiliate to attack the United States diplomatic compound [ consulate ] in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 and murder ambo Christopher Stephens, Sean Smith and two CIA contractors. And it would have to be done for Hillary too.

    For Obama, Susan Rice was sent to propagate the YouTube video lie when available intelligence proved otherwise: that it was a premeditated terrorist attack. Hillary had sent emails to daughter Chelsea Clinton, to say so: terrorist attack. In public though, the YouTube lie was propagated so that Obama could win in November 2012. Similarly then, the Strzoks were part of the operation in 2016 to ENSURE THAT HILLARY COULD WIN except that Trump was the upset nominee that would foil ALL this grand scheme.

    The Clintons politicised, weaponised and monetised US government agencies including State, FBI, CIA and Justice Department. Hillary Clinton’s coronation as President would have been the milestone in the US government monetization business model. There was to be wealth distribution to cronies and allies; careers to be maintained and enhanced; and controlled consolidated. John Brennan was to remain at the CIA for example and with the others. Peter Strzok would have been handsomely rewarded, and so on and so forth. Then Trump came, to disrupt all this excellent arrangement. This is what the anti Trump fury is mainly / all about.

    That Trump defied the Clinton – DNC sponsored salacious dossier ops, would outwit the Mueller insurance policy until now, and would seek mutually beneficial partnership with Putin, who had been the US national security architecture threat model for annual agency budgeting, was enough to create TDS Trump Derangement Syndrome pandemic. So we keep recording daily TDS cases.

    And yet, we are watching and relating events as they happen and as accurately as may be possible. So that when you disagree with us, you must show where we err that we may gladly accept and make corrections, if you do so. Do however stop insulting our collective intelligence and when you would not recount, relate, and analyse anymore accurately than we do, but would resort to GRS Gossip, Rally, and Shaming, to prevent us from discussing the unfolding.

    Yours,

    Alexander. July 24, 2018. 1320 GMT.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-24 09:55:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-24 09:53:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-24 00:56:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. ARTISTIC AGENCY by Michael Churchill Homogene

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    ARTISTIC AGENCY
    by Michael Churchill

    Homogeneity may be a red herring. The larger issue behind the boredom is the loss of “artistic agency.”

    It’s so easy to get passively entertained that we have lost the ability to make art on a man-by-man basis — real music, neighborhood plays, etc.

    In Kentucky where the spirit of actual neighborhood music gatherings is still alive … wow … when you stumble across it it is very powerful to see.

    Anyway, this is an excellence that can be cultivated personally.

    That was something I got from Evola btw — if the culture around us feels like it sucks … like it’s aimed at a lower level of sophistication — then what are WE PERSONALLY doing to elevate it?


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-24 00:12:50 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise o

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Descartes, Newton or others. He always has an agenda. I think his agenda is anti-everything. And so he gives Galileo undue praise for his battles with the church.

    —“The Aristotelian scientific tradition’s primary mode of interacting with the world was through observation and searching for “natural” circumstances through reasoning. Coupled with this approach was the belief that rare events which seemed to contradict theoretical models were aberrations, telling nothing about nature as it “naturally” was.

    By the start of the Scientific Revolution, empiricism had already become an important component of science and natural philosophy. Prior thinkers, including the early 14th century nominalist philosopher William of Ockham, had begun the intellectual movement toward empiricism.

    The term British empiricism came into use to describe philosophical differences perceived between two of its founders Francis Bacon, described as EMPIRICIST, and René Descartes, who was described as a RATIONALIST.

    (CURT: IT BEGINS WITH DESCARTES.. EVEN BEFORE ROUSSEAU)

    Thomas Hobbes, George Berkeley, and David Hume were the philosophy’s primary exponents, who developed a sophisticated empirical tradition as the basis of human knowledge.

    An influential formulation of empiricism was John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), in which he maintained that the only true knowledge that could be accessible to the human mind was that which was based on experience. He wrote that the human mind was created as a tabula rasa, a “blank tablet,” upon which sensory impressions were recorded and built up knowledge through a process of reflection.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-23 21:31:44 UTC

  • Chomsky Heaps Undue Praise on Galileo

    Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Descartes, Newton or others. He always has an agenda. I think his agenda is anti-everything. And so he gives Galileo undue praise for his battles with the church. —“The Aristotelian scientific tradition’s primary mode of interacting with the world was through observation and searching for “natural” circumstances through reasoning. Coupled with this approach was the belief that rare events which seemed to contradict theoretical models were aberrations, telling nothing about nature as it “naturally” was. By the start of the Scientific Revolution, empiricism had already become an important component of science and natural philosophy. Prior thinkers, including the early 14th century nominalist philosopher William of Ockham, had begun the intellectual movement toward empiricism. The term British empiricism came into use to describe philosophical differences perceived between two of its founders Francis Bacon, described as EMPIRICIST, and René Descartes, who was described as a RATIONALIST. (CURT: IT BEGINS WITH DESCARTES.. EVEN BEFORE ROUSSEAU) Thomas Hobbes, George Berkeley, and David Hume were the philosophy’s primary exponents, who developed a sophisticated empirical tradition as the basis of human knowledge. An influential formulation of empiricism was John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), in which he maintained that the only true knowledge that could be accessible to the human mind was that which was based on experience. He wrote that the human mind was created as a tabula rasa, a “blank tablet,” upon which sensory impressions were recorded and built up knowledge through a process of reflection.”—

  • Chomsky Heaps Undue Praise on Galileo

    Interesting that Chomsky heaps undue praise on Galileo, but not Copernicus, Descartes, Newton or others. He always has an agenda. I think his agenda is anti-everything. And so he gives Galileo undue praise for his battles with the church. —“The Aristotelian scientific tradition’s primary mode of interacting with the world was through observation and searching for “natural” circumstances through reasoning. Coupled with this approach was the belief that rare events which seemed to contradict theoretical models were aberrations, telling nothing about nature as it “naturally” was. By the start of the Scientific Revolution, empiricism had already become an important component of science and natural philosophy. Prior thinkers, including the early 14th century nominalist philosopher William of Ockham, had begun the intellectual movement toward empiricism. The term British empiricism came into use to describe philosophical differences perceived between two of its founders Francis Bacon, described as EMPIRICIST, and René Descartes, who was described as a RATIONALIST. (CURT: IT BEGINS WITH DESCARTES.. EVEN BEFORE ROUSSEAU) Thomas Hobbes, George Berkeley, and David Hume were the philosophy’s primary exponents, who developed a sophisticated empirical tradition as the basis of human knowledge. An influential formulation of empiricism was John Locke’s An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), in which he maintained that the only true knowledge that could be accessible to the human mind was that which was based on experience. He wrote that the human mind was created as a tabula rasa, a “blank tablet,” upon which sensory impressions were recorded and built up knowledge through a process of reflection.”—