January 2022 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

FreeSpeech and Censorship: Thread
by grarpamp 22 Feb '24

22 Feb '24

https://jonathanturley.org/2020/12/09/krebs-files-lawsuit-against-digenova-… https://onedrive.live.com/?authkey=%21AFtCgSn%2Dq5lrL8c&cid=477107F019583E7… http://www.altlaw.org/v1/cases/390640 https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/376/254/case.html https://newsmax.com/ https://www.twitter.com/newsmax Fired Pussy Christopher Krebs whines to the State to shutter FreeSpeech... " Fired CyberSec Head Krebs Files Lawsuit Against diGenova, The Trump Campaign, And Newsmax Authored by Jonathan Turley, Christopher Krebs, has filed a lawsuit against Trump attorney Joe diGenova over this controversial joke that Krebs should be “drawn and quartered” and then “shot” for his failures as the former head of U.S. cybersecurity. The lawsuit strikes me as meritless under governing tort doctrines. While Mark Zaid declared that “no rational person” who heard diGenova calling for a person to be drawn and quartered and then shot “would have taken it as ‘jest,’” many of us took the comment as an obvious use of exaggerated rhetoric. While I immediately condemned the language, I did not view it as a serious call for violence. Torts cases of defamation often turn common understanding of such expression as jokes or opinion. The lawsuit not only contradicts governing case law but threatens constitutional protections for free speech and the free press in seeking such tort relief. Joe diGenova gave an interview to Newsmax’s The Howie Carr Show and said that Krebs should be “drawn and quartered” and then “taken out at dawn and shot.” It was a typical over-heated statement of “that guy should be shot” variety. diGenova made it even more absurd by combining it with a medieval method of execution. It was both literally and figuratively an example of overkill. In an interview with the Washington Examiner, diGenova quickly stated that his comment was a joke and not intended as a threat. He stated “For anyone listening to the Howie Carr Show, it was obvious that my remarks were sarcastic and made in jest. I, of course, wish Mr. Krebs no harm. This was hyperbole during political discourse.” The lawsuit names diGenova as well as the Trump campaign and Newsmax. The lawsuit is filed by Charles Fax and Liesel Schopler of Rifkin Weiner Livingston Inc and Jim Walden, Jefferey Udell, Jacob Gardener, Rachel Brook, and Derek Borchardt of Walden Macht & Haran. It is not clear who the opposing defense counsel will be in the case. The lawsuit reads at points more like a political screed in defending the “patriot” Krebs against the “angry mob” fueled by Trump and diGenova who is described as a conspiracy theorist. Count I is a straight defamation claim (against all three defendants). Count II is an intentional infliction of emotional distress claim (against diGenova and the campaign). Count III is an aiding and abetting claim (against Newsmax). Count IV is a civil conspiracy claim. >From the outset, the complaint collides with controlling case law. Take Count II. The argument of Krebs would gut the first amendment and run counter to the clear precedent laid down in Snyder v. Phelps, 562 U.S. 443 (2011). I previously wrote that such lawsuits are a direct threat to free speech, though I had serious problems with the awarding of costs to the church in a prior column. I was therefore gladdened by the Supreme Court ruling 8-1 in favor of the free speech in the case, even if it meant a victory for odious Westboro Church. Roberts held that the distasteful message cannot influence the message: “Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and — as it did here — inflict great pain. On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker.” Roberts further noted that “Westboro believes that America is morally flawed; many Americans might feel the same about Westboro. Westboro’s funeral picketing is certainly hurtful and its contribution to public discourse may be negligible. As a nation we have chosen a different course — to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate.” The Court in cases like New York Times v. Sullivan have long limited tort law where it would undermine the first amendment. In this case, the Court continues that line of cases — rejecting the highly subjective approach espoused by Justice Samuel Alito in his dissent: Given that Westboro’s speech was at a public place on a matter of public concern, that speech is entitled to “special protection” under the First Amendment. Such speech cannot be restricted simply because it is upsetting or arouses contempt. “If there is a bedrock principle underly- ing the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Texas v. Johnson, 491 U. S. 397, 414 (1989). Indeed, “the point of all speech protection . . . is to shield just those choices of content that in someone’s eyes are misguided, or even hurtful.” Hurley v. Irish-American Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Group of Boston, Inc., 515 U. S. 557, 574 (1995). The jury here was instructed that it could hold Westboro liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress based on a finding that Westboro’s picketing was “outrageous.” “Outrageousness,” however, is a highly malleable standard with “an inherent subjectiveness about it which would allow a jury to impose liability on the basis of the jurors’ tastes or views, or perhaps on the basis of their dislike of a particular expression.” Hustler, 485 U. S., at 55 (internal quotation marks omitted). In a case such as this, a jury is “unlikely to be neutral with respect to the content of [the] speech,” posing “a real danger of becoming an instrument for the suppression of . . . ‘vehement, caustic, and some- times unpleasan[t]’ ” expression. Bose Corp., 466 U. S., at 510 (quoting New York Times, 376 U. S., at 270). Such a risk is unacceptable; “in public debate [we] must tolerate insulting, and even outrageous, speech in order to provide adequate ‘breathing space’ to the freedoms protected by the First Amendment.” Boos v. Barry, 485 U. S. 312, 322 (1988) (some internal quotation marks omitted). What Westboro said, in the whole context of how and where it is entitled to “special protection” under the First Amendment, and that protection cannot be overcome by a jury finding that the picketing was outrageous. Ironically, these lawyers are espousing the position of the lone dissenter: Justice Alito. The dissent gave little credence to concerns over the constitutional rights raised in the case. He insisted that “[i]n order to have a society in which public issues can be openly and vigorously debated, it is not necessary to allow the brutalization of innocent victims like petitioner.” It is hard to see how any court could accept Count II and not do precisely what the Supreme Court barred in the use of this tort to limit political and religious speech. Count III and Count IV is equally troubling. It makes sweeping and vague claims of aiding and abetting and conspiracies without support. The comment was clearly part of over-heated rhetoric now common on both ends of the political spectrum. Such claims, if successful, would gut the first amendment. That leaves us with Count I on defamation. That claim is equally dubious from both constitutional and tort perspectives. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in New York Times v. Sullivan. Ironically, this is precisely the environment in which the opinion was written and he is precisely the type of plaintiff that the opinion was meant to deter. The Supreme Court ruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. The Court sought to create “breathing space” for the media by articulating that standard that now applies to both public officials and public figures. In order to prevail, West must show either actual knowledge of its falsity or a reckless disregard of the truth. The standard for defamation for public figures and officials in the United States is the product of a decision decades ago in New York Times v. Sullivan. Again, the Supreme Court ruled that tort law could not be used to overcome First Amendment protections for free speech or the free press. The Court sought to create “breathing space” by articulating that standard that now applies to both public officials and public figures. Krebs is a former public official and a current public figure under Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323, 352 (1974) and its progeny of cases. The Supreme Court has held that public figure status applies when someone “thrust[s] himself into the vortex of [the] public issue [and] engage[s] the public’s attention in an attempt to influence its outcome.” He would have to carry the burden of proving that the defendant knew the statement was false or showed reckless disregard for its truth. The problem is the the statement is clearly opinion given in the heat of a contested election. The Supreme Court dealt with such an overheated council meeting in Greenbelt Cooperative Publishing Association v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6 (1970), in which a newspaper was sued for using the word “blackmail” in connection to a real estate developer who was negotiating with the Greenbelt City Council to obtain zoning variances. The Court applied the actual malice standard and noted: It is simply impossible to believe that a reader who reached the word “blackmail” in either article would not have understood exactly what was meant: It was Bresler’s public and wholly legal negotiating proposals that were being criticized. No reader could have thought that either the speakers at the meetings or the newspaper articles reporting their words were charging Bresler with the commission of a criminal offense. On the contrary, even the most careless reader must have perceived that the word was no more than rhetorical hyperbole, a vigorous epithet used by those who considered Bresler’s negotiating position extremely unreasonable. The comment here is clearly “rhetorical hyperbole” that is part of public debate over the 2020 election. Ironically, I have previously criticized President Trump for his calls (here and here and here and here) to change defamation laws to erode protections for the media and free speech. These lawyers and Krebs are doing precisely what Trump has called for. Notably, while I consider this lawsuit to be meritless, I do not believe that any of these lawyers should be charged with bar complaints. That has been the call of Democratic members and many liberal lawyers who want to see bar complaints filed against lawyers challenging the election. I also would not support a campaign like the one at the Lincoln Project (funded by many lawyers) to harass these lawyers or put pressure on their clients. The lawsuit in my view will fail and the legal system will protect free speech from such ill-considered and unsupportable legal claims. Here is the complaint: Krebs v. diGenova "

8 162

An Open Letter to Bloomberg on Modern BitLicense Logic
by Gunnar Larson 07 Feb '24

07 Feb '24

Dear Bloomberg: Thank you for pioneering innovation spanning all facets of global finance. For the last 15 years, Bloomberg has served as a wise friend offering daily, quality inspiration. Interviewing Mayor Mike Bloomberg on occasion as a young journalist and advancing to become a global executive and regular Bloomberg Breakaway attendee has fostered a dream of learning from top global business idols. Forever inspired by Bloomberg’s pioneering contributions to the culture of New York and global financial innovation, today’s memo highlights our now eventful journey to fundamentally modernize New York's BitLicense and global regulatory logic. - Our global team <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S3hI4G7QYR7PmlKlc7oQHhl4RnroLYF-/view?usp=…> is comprised of seasoned professionals who cumulatively represent decades of industry experience across various fields and disciplines. - Our strategic partnerships <https://news.bitcoin.com/ternio-joins-visas-fast-track-program-as-new-enabl…> with the world’s leading financial, healthcare services <http://mydr.co/> and mobile payments providers support the key aim of our endeavor: to attain the legitimate financial inclusion and economic prosperity of all the excluded, under-privileged and under-served, offering financial inclusion and global citizenry. Pioneering global virtual currency innovation is in part due to pedigree responsibility as a “Bill and Melinda Gates Scholar,” (UG) a “Blockchain Scholar” (GR) and a principle creator of “United Nations AudioVisual Library on International Law <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BweeaClFZ8c0dDNDWGFveVFTXzlOTjhXY2tKS2FZN2…>.” Humble scholars and UN esteem are indeed supportive. However, our working example of success is modeled on Bloomberg's business of international excellence, pioneering many of the world's greatest financial systems and technology frameworks out of New York. *The New York BitLicense vs. Global Regulatory Arbitrage* The 2015 BitLicense mandate was envisioned as synonymous with New York’s leadership of next-generation global innovation. New York’s contemporary virtual currency innovation rests with a modern BitLicense with cross-border logic (similar to New York human rights law <https://dhr.ny.gov/law#HRL298a>). 1. Today many New York firms have various legacy regulatory arbitrage frameworks. 2. The utility concept behind virtual currency is in its cross-border appeal. 3. Modern European regulation shares this logic. New York’s BitLicense does not, therefore creating a virtual currency “Crypto Bank” regulatory arbitrage loophole between Europe and New York. New York banks’ traditional engagement of regulatory arbitrage has overflowed the BitLicense and correspondingly is responsible for global virtual currency marketplace manipulation. Circumnavigating this problem is key to modern BitLicense logic. Given the inherent universal cross-border nature of virtual currencies, there is no real good reason for New York firms under the BitLicense mandate to manipulate other global markets via regulatory arbitrage. Engaging the New York Department of Financial services’ new “Conditional BitLicense” framework as a vehicle, we have signed our clear intent to win the Superintendent's Conditional Approval and other necessary regulatory approvals of modern virtual currency logic. - BitLicense members today should not be surprised by New York wasting no time issuing modern logic and that virtual currency regulatory arbitrage is a lawless New York rights concern affecting <https://dhr.ny.gov/law#HRL298a> over 1 billion people. - European regulation has allowed our team to build these concepts which are theoretically illegal in New York, thus creating global loopholes. - Africa is the most concerning “virtual currency regulatory arbitrage market” directed outside of New York and Europe jurisdictions. African consumers are being manipulated most. United States consumers also are affected at various levels. European consumers have a favorable environment, but do not have the “dynamism” New York affords. Working in New York, European and African jurisdictions as “Blockchain Scholars,” we tested the concept of our Modern BitLicense Logic at our “sister” University in Africa <https://drive.google.com/file/d/1S3hI4G7QYR7PmlKlc7oQHhl4RnroLYF-/view?usp=…>, and interestingly Goldman Sachs out of New York was a lead investor. The key observation is that New York banks “own,” or lead investment in, the European and African marketplace leaders. At every level, New York’s BitLicense is the most significant hurdle to the global virtual currency industry. Given our own experience in these markets, we have found that Goldman Sachs has fine tuned global virtual currency regulatory arbitrage. To be fair, we have reported on various other Silicon Valley firms leveraging the BitLicense, given that Valley firms like Robinhood <https://thecapital.io/article/robinhoods-brand-fake-vs-paypals-crypto-corru…> use New York banks, like Goldman Sachs, as a key actor. Note, as some of the industries top “real global scholars” we understand it would be a mistake to be adversarial to the current New York environment. Like Boomberg, we aim to be very impressive in terms of successfully shepherding/persuading meaningful New York innovation. *The Art of Diplomacy* Rather than a merry-go-round, the process of change is like a slide, and Modern BitLicense Logic is necessary. As a matter of New York law, there is no other option. The process of filing complaints or legal mediation is sub-par. Furthermore, if virtual currency firms want to game regulatory markets they honestly should forfeit the prestige of New York’s BitLicense. 2020 will go down in history as New York banks continued to profit heavily under regulatory arbitrage frameworks while virtual currency reached global proportions. New York’s newly announced “Conditional BitLicense” framework offered our group the perfect opportunity to earn a “Conditional License” and suggests advancing the BitLicense mandate with “modern logic.” - The interests ensured through interpretations of specific provisions in the existing national and supra-national legal framework (civil law, securities law, bankruptcy law, international human rights law) call for New York to clarify the rights of the public and obligations of BitLicense members engaged in the global virtual currency economy. - BitLicense regulation must preserve a technology-neutral, principle-based, non-discriminatory framework for the next generation of modern New York virtual currency public policy, naturally to support innovation within the limits imposed by overriding international public interests. As a proud New Yorker, the only option is to be a “real scholar,” and the job would not be complete without New York regulator approval and campaign for cross-border modernization of the BitLicense logic in any way possible. *Vast Undue Economic Hardship* Bloomberg has championed actions to promote an inclusive economy -- one in which people have the chance to move themselves and their families out of poverty, one in which systemic racism does not limit opportunities and one in which all people can fully participate. Without this inclusivity, the global economy will not be able to live up to its full potential and people will suffer. As we have reported <https://thecapital.io/article/new-yorks-raging-regulatory-arbitrage-racket-…>, virtual currency fraud is a serious problem for such a developed country as the United States, whose bank regulators have drawn attention to the increase of these crimes. Having discovered that an unregulated virtual currency sphere (such as in Africa, or other developing markets) is very popular among virtual currency fraudsters <https://www.americanbanker.com/news/jpmorgan-chase-warns-of-upcoming-fine-o…>, the New York State Department of Financial Services concluded that this kind of regulatory fraud was threatening US national security. Research on the social importance and credibility <https://thecapital.io/article/robinhoods-brand-fake-vs-paypals-crypto-corru…> of good institutional design from an organizational perspective seeks to prevent undue hardship requiring significant expense or difficulty (including a significant interference with the safe or efficient operation of international operations due to the seniority system of New York banks who are playing global markets). - Factors to be considered in determining whether an undue economic hardship exists shall include, but not be limited to, special requirements or conditions that are imposed upon an applicant or class of applicants in circumstances where similar requirements or conditions are not imposed upon other applicants. - Consumer protection is an umbrella term covering a group of laws and organizations that protect the rights of consumers and foster the free flow of accurate information in the marketplace. Consumer protection laws are designed to prevent businesses from engaging in fraud or unfair practices, to protect individuals from scam artists, and to identity thieves and crooks. - A New York State resident or corporation is in violation if found to have contributed to an act committed outside New York State against a resident of this state or against a corporation organized under the laws of this state (or authorized to do business in this state) that would constitute an unlawful discriminatory practice if committed within New York State. - If the New York State has reason to believe that a non-resident person or foreign corporation has committed or is about to commit outside of this state an act which if committed within this state would constitute an unlawful practice, such act is in violation. Speaking generally, at least during its 2015-2020 implementation phase, the BitLicense has likely contributed to increased cross-border virtual currency market manipulation. Specifically, we reference our individual hardship example in New York, Europe and Africa with concern to Goldman Sachs’ cross-border manipulation as a violation of New York Human Rights law. *New York Human Rights Law* Our analysis of the factors that drive cross-border differences in the implementation of BitLicense reform link the resulting heterogeneity to cross-jurisdictional arbitrage. In this manner we identify New York in a “virtual currency regulatory crisis” – to the extent that the BitLicense is unevenly implemented – as a source of new and unchecked global financial risk. Given the nature of traditional regulatory arbitrage, it is key to differentiate the BitLicense and understand New York’s universal nature <https://dhr.ny.gov/law#HRL298a> of Human Rights Law. - The science of pure virtual currency design and human rights are universal movements to end ins <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutionalisation>titutionalized <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutionalisation> discrimination and disenfranchisement <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disenfranchisement_in_the_United_States>, and to offer quality consumer financial product access without cross-border regulatory segregation. - We trust that virtual currency regulatory arbitrage can be addressed via BitLicense modernization and that New York regulators share our logical provisional interpretation of cross-borders with respect to human rights. Our experience in Europe and Africa points to the necessity to work with New York regulators directly without BitLicense member interference. This approach is not to purposely irritate the esteemed Superintendent or rock the boat that is New York State and risk disrupting the system that guarantees our future. *Conditional BitLicense Approval* Modern BitLicense Logic’s opportunity is to meet a new global standard for virtual currency regulatory innovation while protecting market integrity by stringent standards applicable to all law-abiding business enterprises. In our case, a few approvals are necessary and are proposed via a hybrid model under the supervision of the Superintendent. Following this desire, we have navigated the five step process for Conditional review. 1. *Inform*: Applicants inform NYDFS of the intent to collaborate with a specific BitLicensee and provide a copy of the draft agreement between the applicant and the BitLicensee. 2. *Submit: *Applicants submit information on the expected type of business and the perceived risks, among other things. 3. *Review: *NYDFS begins its substantive review after all of the requested documentation has been submitted. 4. *Contract: *NYDFS and the applicant enter into a supervisory agreement defining the scope of the applicant’s business, shared responsibilities with its sponsor BitLicensee and NYDFS’ level of oversight. 5. *Approve:* If NYDFS approves the application, a Conditional BitLicense is issued. Every day of delay in ambiguity of Modern BitLicense Logic poses a problem for those who want to offer additional products and services at international scale while staying within the letter of the law. Currently, we believe that our Conditional application is ready to enter stage four and seek to begin negotiation of the supervisory agreement. Bloomberg as the prime example of global prestige and success fuels our desire to be best in class in providing global virtual currency financial services out of New York. Warm regards, *Gunnar Larson* Bill and Melinda Gates Scholar | Blockchain Scholar Conditional BitLicense Applicant (Global Team Lead) New York, New York 10001 -- *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xNY.io> | Bank.org <http://Bank.org>* MSc <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - Digital Currency MBA <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ip) G(a)xNY.io +1-646-454-9107 New York, New York 10001

2 7

Freedom of Speech: Islam Goes Apeshit over Charlie Hebdo Muhammad Cartoons Repub, Quran Eating, and Successful Critical Analysis
by grarpamp 05 Feb '24

05 Feb '24

7 166

Jan6: The American Gulag
by grarpamp 23 Jan '24

23 Jan '24

Political persecutions, witch trials, gulags, false flags, agents provocateur, false witness, lives destroyed taken as prize for nothing but grotesque political maneuvers, and more. One of many sites now helping document the absurdity, the bias in entities, the imbalanced cruel and unfree nature of democracy. https://americangulag.org/ Number of people arrested: 631 Number of people charged with insurrection: 0 61-Year-Old Jan. 6 Defendant and Veteran Who Begged Police For Help During Capitol Riot Dies Awaiting Trial on Trumped-Up Charges Anderson’s attorney, high-profile defense lawyer Marina Medvin, confirmed his death to WUSA9, saying in an email that the deceased was a “good-hearted man.” Oklahoma Man Pleads Guilty to Misdemeanor for Taking Nancy Pelosi’s Beer on January 6 — Will Serve 6 Months in Federal Prison for the Crime Prosecutors will drop three related misdemeanor charges in exchange for his plea. IT WAS A SETUP! FBI Admits Jan. 6 Was Deep State Operation – They Were Running At Least One Operative in the Crowd at the US Capitol (VIDEO) We all already knew this was happening as The Gateway Pundit reported back in June. G.W. Bush Appointed Judge Says Individual Who Took Selfie in Capitol on January 6 Should Be Locked Up “You’ve disgraced this country in the eyes of the world and my inclination would be to lock you up.” Must Watch: Tucker Carlson Raises Questions About Jan 6th Security Footage Showing Black-Clad Operatives Leading the Charge into The Capitol Building; “How Many Federal Agents Were Involved?” – (Video) In the video, a group of Black-clad operatives can be seen breaking into the building, only to disappear seconds later as the crowd rushes in behind them. Letter from Prisoner in Solitary Confinement! DC Gitmo Violating International Codes on Torture! Mellis has been detained without bond since his arrest in February. BREAKING: House Committee Investigating Jan. 6 Issue Subpoenas for Steve Bannon, Dan Scavino, Kash Patel and Mark Meadows on Night Before AZ Audit Results Here we go. The House Committee investigating the protests on Jan. 6 issued subpoenas for Steve Bannon, Dan Scavino, Kash… Read more » ‘Justice For J6’ Rally Organizer: Ashli Babbitt And The Political Prisoners Deserve Justice And We Are Going To Get It For Them As legitimate terror threats fester overseas, hundreds of patriots who are deemed domestic terrorists and insurrectionists by the Biden administration… Read more » Was Rosanne Boyland Beaten By Female Officer Before She Died on January 6th? (Video) Rosanne was killed on January 6th when she was beaten, pepper-sprayed and trampled on the US Capitol Steps. Greg Kelly Suggests Trigger-Happy Killer Lt. Mike Byrd May Work This Weekend at DC “Justice for J6” Protest (VIDEO) In July, The Gateway Pundit confirmed that Lt. Mike Byrd was Ashli Babbit’s shooter. Lt. Byrd killed Ashli Babbitt in… Read more » Three California Recall Ballots Sent to Address of Deceased American Veteran and Patriot Ashli Babbitt, Who Was Shot and Killed at Capitol on Jan 6 Ashli Babbitt was shot and killed at the Capitol on January 6th. This past week multiple ballots were sent to… Read more » Capitol Fence Going Back Up Ahead of Rally in Support of January 6 Political Prisoners on September 18: Capitol Police Chief (VIDEO) The fence at the Capitol will be returning. The elites hate the American people and will continue to impose their… Read more » “Children of the Same Foul Spirit” – George Bush Compares January 6 “Domestic Extremists” to Islamic Terrorists in 9/11 Speech (VIDEO) Former President George W. Bush delivered remarks on Saturday on the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attack. Bush was… Read more » EXCLUSIVE: Lawyer for January 6 Clients Released From Hospital, Says Reports That He Was ‘Missing’ Are False John Pierce of Pierce Bainbridge, the law firm representing seventeen January 6 protesters has finally recovered after an 12 day… Read more » Registered Democrat Caught Storming US Capitol, Attacking Police Pleads with Court for Light Sentence Because He Is Not Trump Supporter Robert Maurice Reeder was arrested after he was caught inside the US Capitol on January 6th. Robert Maurice Reeder is… Read more » EXCLUSIVE: ROGER STONE Hits Back Against Left-Wing Lawfare Using the Courts Against Him and His Ailing Wife Guest post by Roger Stone The far-left continues its assault on Roger Stone with a new suit against him and… Read more » “Q Shaman” Pleads Guilty to One Felony Charge “Obstruction of Official Hearing” in Connection with Jan. 6 in Deal with Feds – Faces Up to 4.5 Years in Prison (Minus Time Served) Jacob Chansley, AKA, the “Q Shaman” pleaded guilty to one felony charge on Friday in connection with the January 6… Read more » Another FBI Manufactured and Funded Operation in the Works? Fake News Media Warns “Extremists” May Attend Sept 18 Rally in DC (VIDEO) In October 2020, the FBI announced during a press conference that it thwarted a plot by a so-called “right-wing militia”… Read more » MUST READ: Iowa Man Charged in Capitol “Insurrection” Is Sent Back To Jail For Watching Mike Lindell’s Cyber Symposium Hundreds of people were arrested for entering the Capitol building on January 6, 2021. Inside the Capitol, several Republican lawmakers… Read more » Pelosi’s GOP Spy: RINO Liz Cheney Chosen as Vice Chair for Pelosi’s Sham Jan. 6th Commission On Thursday, RINO sellout Liz Cheney was appointed to leadership within the sham Jan. 6th select committee. The unhinged congresswoman… Read more » International Day of the Disappeared: Gateway Pundit Announces Upcoming Launch of Jan. 6th Prisoner Information Website – AmericanGULAG.org By Jim Hoft Monday marked the annual International Day of the Disappeared, observed by human rights advocates and families of… Read more » The New Witch Hunt: Dem Jan 6 Committee Demands Data From 15 Social Media Companies The witch hunt against President Donald Trump and his supporters continues. The Democrats’ Jan 6th committee is now demanding that… Read more » Official Complaint Filed with UN Human Rights Committee Over Mistreatment of Jan. 6 Prisoners An America First community organizing group called Look Forward America and Citizens Against Political Persecution (CAPP), gathered outside the United… Read more » WATCH: Ashli Babbitt’s Husband Appears on Tucker Carlson to Respond to MSNBC Interview With Her Killer Ashli Babbitt’s husband Aaron appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight on Thursday and responded to the MSNBC interview with his wife’s… Read more »

1 50

UFO: Inside the BlackVault, FOIA POSSE, MKULTRA, ARTICHOKE, BLUEBIRD
by grarpamp 21 Jan '24

21 Jan '24

https://www.cjr.org/special_report/black-vault-foia-john-greenewald.php https://twitter.com/blackvaultcom https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/cia-mkultra-collection/ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcrHQYXIodvtf7omyx10LHA https://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/u-s-navy-confirms-videos-depi… https://twitter.com/JasonLeopold/status/1208104526286225409 https://knightfoundation.org/reports/mapping-the-civic-data-universe/ https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/They-Are-Already-Here/Sarah-Scoles/9… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Men_Who_Stare_at_Goats https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/research/a30645682/navy-ufo-paten… In the summer of 1996, John Greenewald, fifteen years old and fascinated by UFOs, was living at his parents’ house, in the San Fernando Valley. Like his dad, an ex-Marine who worked as a welder on the space shuttle and Mars landers, Greenewald liked looking up at the stars. One day he decided to feed his curiosity by surfing the Web, which at the time meant dialing into America Online and waiting patiently. When he had a connection, he went to the Computer UFO Network, or cufon, a site that had been around since, believe it or not, 1983, disseminating “reliable, verifiable information” on UFO phenomena. cufon had just posted what it claimed to be a document from the United States government describing the sighting of a mother ship—that is, a large aircraft that could release smaller “parasite” aircraft—flying over Iran. Greenewald clicked. It was a report from... Greenewald sent a foia request for the missing files, but the CIA said it could not find them. Greenewald then sent a ninety-seven-page fax to the CIA proving their existence. The CIA admitted it had made a mistake but said that Greenewald would need to pay $425.80 for the remaining pages. For a while he called himself an archivist. “But at this point I don’t even know if that’s accurate, because it is more than that. I’m trying to educate the public on what really is there to be discovered. I’m not sure how to label it.”

5 119

Collapse: Is Now Locked In
by grarpamp 10 Jan '24

10 Jan '24

A random blurb on overpopulation, resources, stupid Govts and Peoples... http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2021/12/can-any-nation-state-survive-e… Can Any Nation-State Survive The Era Of Inequality And Scarcity? We have an extraordinary opportunity to transform our unsustainable "waste is growth" economy and toxic inequality to sustainable systems that optimize well-being rather than collapse. The possibility that the United States could fragment is no longer a marginalized topic. Maps displaying various post-U.S. regional configurations accompany essays exploring how and why a break-up of the U.S. would be a solution to regional and ideological polarization, for example, Max Borders' recent article, Dear America: It's Time to Break Up. But two forces larger than political polarization may fragment nation-states across the globe, including the U.S.: inequality and scarcity. Inequality and corruption go hand in hand, of course, as the wealthiest few influence the state to protect their monopolies and backstop their speculative gains. Inequality also goes hand in hand with the collapse of nation-states, as this seminal paper explains: Human and nature dynamics (HANDY): Modeling inequality and use of resources in the collapse or sustainability of societies. The parasitic elite can accumulate the majority of income, wealth, political power and resources in eras of expanding abundance, as what's left is enough to support an expanding populace that consumes more per capita every year, i.e. broad-based prosperity. But once abundance transitions to scarcity, the economy and society can no longer sustain the dead weight of its outsized parasitic elite. The parasitic elite believes its bloated share of resources, wealth and power is not only sustainable but can be expanded without consequence, and so it deploys all its formidable power to keep the status quo unchanged even as scarcity lowers the living standards of the bottom 90% and hollows out the economy. In effect, the modern central state, regardless of ideological label, optimizes inequality and growth. Once growth falters while inequality continues increasing, the only possible outcome is fragmentation and/or collapse. Put another way: the status quo is no longer the solution to inequality and scarcity, it is the problem. Private-sector and political elites are incapable of recognizing they are now the problem, and so the rapid unraveling of the status quo will come as a great shock to their magical-thinking confidence in their power. The elite's delusional "solution" is a seamless, painless transition to a new era of abundance via "green energy." Unfortunately, this vision is 100% magical thinking, as all these projections ignore the physical realities of building out a global energy system that generates energy on the same scale as existing hydrocarbon energy sources. Read these three reports for reality-based assessments: The "New Energy Economy": An Exercise in Magical Thinking (manhattan-institute.org) The Delusion of Infinite Economic Growth: Even "sustainable" technologies such as electric vehicles and wind turbines face unbreachable physical limits and exact grave environmental costs. (scientificamerican.com) Assessment of the Extra Capacity Required of Alternative Energy Electrical Power Systems to Completely Replace Fossil Fuels (PDF, Simon P. Michaux, Geological Survey of Finland) Read the 3-page abstract. As explained in the first paper, inequality generates collapse and so does a decline in resources, i.e. scarcity. Put the two together and the only possible outcome is collapse of all centralized nation-states that optimize inequality and endless expansion of consumption. The issue isn't ideological labels or principles, it's whether the state solves problems or covers them up with fake fixes that accelerate collapse. Nations which want to not just survive but emerge stronger have one path: a revolutionary transformation from "waste is growth" to degrowth, from an economy and state dominated by a parasitic elite to a strictly limited parasitic elite and from abject dependence on fragile supply chains originating in other nations to decentralized, localized independence for essentials. I've written a book that is a template for this transformation. This book is the culmination of a lifetime of study, observation, experience and analysis: Global Crisis, National Renewal: A (Revolutionary) Grand Strategy for the United States. Though I devote some analysis specifically to the U.S., the book is a template for any nation to not just survive scarcity but emerge stronger by evolving a degrowth economy and a decentralized political order. We have an extraordinary opportunity to transform our unsustainable "waste is growth" economy and toxic inequality to sustainable systems that optimize well-being rather than collapse.

4 15

Coronavirus: Thread
by grarpamp 10 Jan '24

10 Jan '24

On 3/5/20, Georgi Guninski <guninski(a)guninski.com> wrote: > Is the so called "society" ready for the time when there > are not enough hospitals for ill from corona virus? > > AFAIK all ill from corona virus are sent to hospitals > to not spread the disease further. > > The Chinese built a new hospital for about a week. General purpose hospital is utterly stupid thing to be flooding cases into under a mass affliction. Hospital are general triage and specialized case facilities. Flood them with disease transmitters and you end up wiping out the entire staff thus shutting the entire hospital down. Staff and facilities are far more valuable alive to handle the random shit that shows up at hospitals and do the specialized things. Instead focus care efficiently tuned to the mass affliction by diverting all the diseased people away from hospitals and out to warehouses, cruise ships, new rapid builds, etc full of cots, food service, mass produced respirators and other med gear and supplies, tv's, internet, books, showers, tent farms, drywalled family rooms inside, etc. Everybody there is already afflicted with the single underlying issue, so train them to self care and peer care for that, same as they'd get in the flooded out hospitals for that issue. Then move whatever number you can handle out to more complex "hospital" treatment sections of the same isolation farms as needed. And accept that big losses will happen. Flooding your hospitals is *not* going to change that, and *will* make things worse. Trying to wipe out all your hospitals, all your doctors, surgeons, knowledge, etc... is not smart. Civilization shutdown its mass facilities, wrote off and forgot how to deal with massive single cause casualties since 70 years quiet since last big wars, and other causes on that scale, many of which were easy... "stop the bleeding"... not "do not catch it too" kind of pandemic hasn't really been seen in 100+ years. Now all you have left in cities of *millions* of people, is under 500 beds total worth of proper isolation wards, those are largely meant for holding new unknown bugs and the recurring background noise of known nasties, with all other space on hospital land dedicated to five star baby birthing hotels, trendy cancer shops, pointless architectural atriums, big office rooms, etc. And all other space in the cities completely tuned to commercial purposes. With zero durables supply stockpiles, and no excess production capacity maintained on decade[s] span cold standby... because "just in time" wiped all that out. Deadly contagion is fucked up, expect that. You should have. People warned you. Oldnews Protip: Think, prepare, options, then you can isolate yourselves from people, buy some time, ride some things out. https://old.reddit.com/r/preppers+prepping+supplychain/

22 1068

US 2nd Amendment Under Assault, Freedom Firearms Guns Defense
by grarpamp 10 Jan '24

10 Jan '24

"... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constit… 2nd Amendment, Firearms, Guns, Self Defense, Freedom's Defense Against Tyranny, Gun Confiscation, 3D printed Guns, Blueprint Censorship, FreeSpeech, Crypto Munitions, Natural Law Posession nor production nor transfer of any nonliving "thing" can never logically be "illegal". This is not in conflict with those voluntarily choosing to not themselves posess a "thing", nor preclude sanction for those who use a "thing" against the NAP. Per the Great Reset, all your rights are now under assault by tyrant globalist politicians... the US 2nd Amd is one of them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diz-8FzHOLM Meaning and Purpose of 2ndA pt1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vioWTwGiELo Meaning and Purpose of 2ndA pt2 Witness the list of non-libertarian countries, ~195, literally all of them, non NAP compliant, anti-libertarian shitholes, including yours... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation History proves sequences of "democratic" and tyranny practices will stomp whatever freedom they can leading to brainwashed life lacking means or any will for freedom... During the dictatorship of Juan Vicente Gómez, in 1919, a disarmament law was decreed, ordering every weapon owner to give them away to the authorities; the only exceptions were machetes and hunting shotguns. Historian Manuel Caballero argues that while Gómez final intention was to prevent his enemies from obtaining weapons, the law contributed to avoid civil wars in Venezuela for the next century.[212] In 2012 Venezuela banned private sales of firearms and ammunition hoping to lower crime rates. The Army, police, and certain groups trusted by the government (colectivos) are exempted from the ban and can buy firearms from state-owned manufacturers.[213] In 2013 Venezuela stopped issuing new firearm licenses.[214] In 2017 government banned carrying firearms in public places.[143] Since then, the government began to seize guns from civilian hands, destroying thousands every year, including more than 15,000 in 2018. More than 483,000 private guns have been destroyed since 2003, with only 3,000 of them being surrendered voluntarily. 60 disarmament centres were created in the country and the penalty for illegal firearm possession was raised to 20 years imprisonment.[215] According to the government, the only people who should carry guns are public agents. Néstor Reverol, Minister of the People's Power for Interior Relations and Justice, claimed that strict gun control led to a reduction in crime and kidnappings in Venezuela.[216] No, the top mass shootings, and murders in general, have and are ALWAYS performed by Government and religion... in wars, and in silencing opposition and freedom, and in death sentences, specifically by those following "orders" and willfully violating the NAP. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2021/04/10/putting_bidens_gun_co… https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-18-440 https://crimeresearch.org/2018/02/op-ed-new-york-times-background-checks-no… https://crimeresearch.org/2016/01/why-the-so-called-charleston-gun-purchase… https://crimeresearch.org/2018/02/with-39-killed-in-tunisia-attack-the-top-… https://crimeresearch.org/2019/01/responding-voxs-popular-americas-unique-g… https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-are-coming-for-your-guns-11601938911 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3671740 There were so many lies in Vice President Kamala Harris’ and President Joe Biden’s presentations on guns Thursday that it is hard to know where to start. One thing is certain, though: The media fact-checkers won’t question their claims. Here are just a few of the false ones: The background check system “has kept more than 3 million firearms out of the hands of dangerous people.” Since the Brady background checks began in 1994, there have been 3.5 million initial denials. However, it is one thing to stop a felon from buying a gun. It is quite another to stop a law-abiding citizen from buying a gun just because his or her name is similar to a felon’s. In 2017, for example, there were 112,000 initial denials for supposedly attempted prohibited purchases, but just 12 federal prosecutions by June 2018. The reason is that these weren’t real cases. The background check system is a mess, with the mistakes primarily born by minorities through no fault of their own. The error rate for black males is three times their share of the population. The Charleston Loophole Biden says that if there had only been more than three days to check Dylann Roof’s background, Roof would have been stopped from buying a gun, thereby preventing the horrible Charleston, S.C., church shooting. But that is a lie. You can’t buy a gun if you have a felony or certain misdemeanor convictions, or if you are arrested but not yet convicted of a crime with a possible prison sentence of at least one year. Since Roof’s arrest was for a misdemeanor drug offense, which had a maximum possible sentence of six months, a longer waiting period would not have blocked his gun purchase. If Democrats want to change the law so that any misdemeanor arrest prevents gun purchases, this would at least be related to the Charleston case. But Democrats want to impose up to a 30-day waiting period without explicitly stating that is their real aim. If they want a long waiting period, they should make a case for why this would somehow be desirable. Instead, Democrats pretend that their proposal would have stopped the Charleston shooting when their actual goal is to obtain a long waiting period. Biden said that gunmakers are “exempt from being sued. ... This is the only outfit that is exempt from being sued.” The president claims this is the top change he wants. In fact, however, if gunmakers make defective guns, you can sue them. Likewise, if they break the law (e.g., sell a firearm without a background check), you can sue them. Biden’s proposal is very different from current law. He wants gun manufacturers held civilly liable for misuse of guns they sell. This would allow lawsuits against manufacturers and sellers whenever a crime, accident, or suicide occurs with a gun. The straightforward result would be to put gunmakers out of business. Imagine what would happen to the car industry if similar rules were applied. The National Safety Council estimates that 39,404 Americans died and 4.5 million were injured from car accidents in 2018. Cars are also frequently used to commit crimes. “The vast majority of Americans believe there should be [universal] background checks.” Gun control advocates frequently claim that over 90% of Americans support background checks for private transfers of guns. Yet, the last time such laws were proposed to voters, they rejected them. When Michael Bloomberg got universal background check initiatives onto Maine and Nevada’s ballots, for example, he lost in Maine by four percentage points and won in Nevada by just 0.8 percentage points. This tough sledding wasn’t for lack of money. In Maine, Bloomberg outspent his opponents by over six times. In Nevada, he spent an incredible $35.30 per vote — three times more than his opponents. If over 90% of Americans supported these laws, this type of spending would be unnecessary. He blamed the “historic spike in homicides” on the lack of gun control laws. No sudden change in gun control laws caused last year’s spike in homicides. Instead, the real explanation is simple, and something Biden refused to consider: prisons released a large number of inmates because of COVID-19, politicians ordered police to stand down, police department budgets were cut, and prosecutors refused to prosecute criminals. In describing mass public shootings, Biden said that gun violence in this country is an “international embarrassment.” The president might not follow international news closely, but mass public shootings are much more common and deadly in the rest of the world than they are in the United States. The U.S. contains 4.6% of the world’s population, yet accounts for only 1% of the world’s shooters. Over the last decade, Europe has experienced deadlier mass public shootings than any of those in the U.S. -- ever. In November 2015, for example, 130 people were shot to death at a concert in Paris. In July 2011, 67 people were shot to death in Norway. European countries such as France, Finland, Norway, and a number of Eastern European countries have higher per capita death rates from mass public shootings than the United States does. Yet, all of these countries have stricter gun control laws than we do. These are just a few of the false claims made on Thursday. No, the rules for buying guns at gun shows are no different than buying them anywhere else. And no, when guns are unavailable neither the suicides nor the suicide attempts drop. Unfortunately, the liberal fact-checkers - as usual - are nowhere to be found. * * * Lott is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center and the author most recently of “Gun Control Myths.” Until last month, Lott was the senior adviser for research and statistics at the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Policy. Thomas Massie is a Republican member of the House who has represented Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District since 2012.

4 162

SpyVeillance: Thread
by grarpamp 09 Jan '24

09 Jan '24

Tucker: NSA planned to leak my emails to media outlets https://nypost.com/2021/07/07/tucker-carlson-claims-he-was-unmasked-by-nsa-… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9bKEPWviEU Tucker: NSA Disclosed My Emails https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlitOLX8KtU SpyVeillance: People are Concerned https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-2n7lEi--M NSA Spying on US Citizens https://video.foxnews.com/v/6262789335001/ Glenn Greenwald on NSA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bll9mmodikM Styx's Pussy Responds

1 23

Harvard inflates wood ...
by Gunnar Larson 17 Dec '23

17 Dec '23

" ... When recommendations by some consultants and the allocation of TIMBER by Harvard University’s endowment led to broad interest in the asset. Timber funds were launched with the understanding that they provided diversification and enhanced returns. Our analysis showed that timber did not add any value to our clients’ portfolios, and we recommended against investing in timber funds." -Goldman Sachs Investment Group (June 2021): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yEQupX1a7VS4K6N018Y0SF_0v4lpJWz8/view?usp=… -- *Gunnar Larson - xNY.io <http://www.xNY.io> | Bank.org <http://Bank.org>* MSc <https://www.unic.ac.cy/blockchain/msc-digital-currency/?utm_source=Google&u…> - Digital Currency MBA <https://www.unic.ac.cy/business-administration-entrepreneurship-and-innovat…> - Entrepreneurship and Innovation (ip) G(a)xNY.io +1-646-454-9107 New York, New York 10001

1 5