Trying to sort out OCD vs Psychopath
Here's a raw unformed thought pattern.

I've been puzzling about the roles of OCD types and psychopaths in the current holocaust. Are they just different views of the same personality, or are they different types?

Order is another name for life. Order means COMPLEXITY and HIERARCHY. Each system includes a huge number of DIFFERENT TYPES, and the TYPES are connected in an infinite number of TWO-WAY OBLIGATION LOOPS.

In a chaotic setup there are no loops and no types. The types still exist, but the ruler doesn't recognize them as legitimate and tries to eliminate them.

Psychopaths rule by imposing chaos to ACHIEVE equality.

Chaos breaks down the order and hierarchy in the victim's brain, leaving him typeless and loopless and lifeless. All victims are created equal, or more precisely transformed to equal. The only exception is the ruler himself.

I think OCD and psychopath are not the same thing. They are two personality types that end up doing the same thing for different motives.

OCD wants to be the sole occupant of the universe. Everything else is dirt that must be scrubbed.

Psychopath wants to be the sole occupant of the universe. Everything else is vermin that must be exterminated.

Maybe it's just a difference of scale, small germs vs large vermin.

At any rate, both are working together in the current holocaust. Psychopaths like Carter Mecher are in charge, and the subordinate Nazis are OCD types who love working in this particular type of tyranny.

Labels: #WholeOfSociety, Asked and badly answered

  ¶ 11:31 PM

  Familiar side, puzzling side
I've been following Carreyrou's coverage of the Theranos trial.

Carreyrou is the ONLY actual reporter still working for mass media. He knows how to dig and ask and pester sources until they give him what he wants, and he also knows how to protect sources from retaliation. Above all he knows how to knit the info into a riveting story.

The tech side of the Theranos story is complex but familiar. It's not clear that Holmes intended from the start to commit a fraud. Like some Ponzi schemers, she may have fully intended to build the proposed machine and solve the proposed problem. Also like some Ponzis, she didn't know when to stop. When experts told her it was impossible, her Silicon Valley arrogance tried to bullshit through the experts. Fake it till you make it works when the sole purpose is Share Value. Faking doesn't get there when the PHYSICAL MACHINE is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE and PHYSICALLY DANGEROUS. As she got deeper into cognitive dissonance, her insatiable psychopathic tendencies blasted down the opposition instead of halting.

The personal side is more puzzling. Carreyrou repeats this theme over and over with each of the board members and sponsors. Holmes had a hypnotic grip on these POWERFUL OLD MEN. These aren't lonely unpopular dudes who are desperately hungry for the slightest hint of attention. These monsters have been admired and obeyed and sycophanted for 70 years. They have been at the top of the food chain for money and power and sex.

Each of them saw Holmes as a goddess in the pantheon of war. The ultimate leader, the new Marcus Aurelius.

Board member George Schultz got his grandson a job working for Theranos. The grandson is a supersmart tech type, and he quickly saw through the fake demonstrations and empty machines. He started to complain through various channels, and ultimately got in touch with Carreyrou. At that point Grandpa George brought in the heavy artillery of private investigators and mobbed-up lawyers to threaten the life of his own grandson. After the grandson nearly killed himself, grandpa halfway realized what was going on.

What's the secret? Elizabeth isn't notably beautiful or sexy, at least in pictures. Some commentators focus on her supposedly cultivated "low voice". It's an average adult female voice, nothing special. Her appeal to these monsters must be partly sexual and partly something else. Best guess is plain old blackmail. She already knew these men through her family connections, so she didn't need to introduce herself with sex. The family connections may also have provided the source of the blackmail.

Later: No, blackmail can't be the source of power. Victims of blackmail don't want to talk about the blackmailer, and are usually forbidden to talk about the blackmailer. This religious devotion is simply a cult, not a blackmail operation. Cults sometimes engage in blackmail, but it's not an essential ingredient.

= = = = =

Totally irrelevant footnote: Back when shortwave broadcasting existed, I sometimes listened to Radio Beijing. Needless to say, they didn't appreciate our imperialism, so they often talked about our leaders. Their English was far from perfect, and they pronounced George Schultz as Jo-Da Shorts. Whenever his name comes up in the news, I read it as Jo-Da Shorts.

Labels: Asked and badly answered

  ¶ 11:59 PM

  Another note for my own records
The TSA, created by the 2001 fake panic, has become the last holdout of ballgags in the current fake panic. Even in the craziest states like Wash, muzzles are gone in most businesses and stores.

I can't throw away the satanic device because it's still needed on the bus. TSA is firmly requiring ballgags on all public transportation until Sept 13, and I'm sure that date will be extended until 9999999999999999999 gigayears after the end of the universe.

But why Sept 13? It's a Monday, not a Friday, and it doesn't correspond to any fiscal year or tax deadlines.

I thought it might have been tied to primary elections, since primaries are on Tuesday. Checking dates, no statewide primaries are even in Sept. The latest one is in Aug. Odd years are mainly city elections. There are probably some city primaries in Sept, but I can't see one city primary as important enough to influence TSA.

The most likely answer is the California recall, which is Sept 14. As with the riots, the correlation makes sense but the causation is entirely unclear.

Later thought: 9/11/2021 is the 20th anniversary of the GLORIOUS FOUNDING OF TSA. 9/13/2021 is the first weekday after GLORIOUS FOUNDING.

Labels: #WholeOfSociety, Asked and badly answered, endless hell

  ¶ 10:32 AM

  Note for my own records
Just noting a connection that needs further exploration.

Last summer's riots were unquestionably related SOMEHOW to the holocaust. All of the participating murderers officially SCREECHED that riots are an intrinsic part of Public "Health". The clinic where I'm forced to get annual "checkups" sent out an official email PRESCRIBING RIOTS AS THE CURE FOR PANDEMICS.

The correlation is lethally clear. But how and why? Where's the causation or the driving force?

One dubious hypothesis, based loosely on old dystopian novels:

It's a switchover.

Diseases are now crimes and crimes are now diseases.

Defund and disempower cops. Simultaneously give all power and money to the Public Death Officers.

This doesn't seem to hit the point. Maybe it's a start, maybe not.

Variable that isn't accounted for: The riots were more crudely political than the rest of this shit. Riots in 2020 because the puppet in the White House had R on his label. No riots in 2021 because the puppet in the White House has D on his label.

The media might be the main driver for the riots. Media are crudely and stupidly partisan, while the organizers of the holocaust are above labels. They started work under the command of Bush Junior, and continued smoothly through Obama and Trump and Biden, three changes of label.

Labels: #WholeOfSociety, Asked and badly answered, switchover

  ¶ 7:07 AM

  Rambling leads to important question
Rambling:

What happened to the Carter Mecher story? It was all around the usual fact-gatherers for a couple days, then gone. As I mentioned, it's NOT the whole story, and doesn't account for the worldwide synchronized holocaust. A few utopian wackos working as government contractors can't force 200 countries and all governors and premiers and mayors to act in unison, destroying their own countries, for no gain.

Utopian wackos don't control the BLACKMAIL MACHINERY.

Who does? As I also noted before, Epstein went underground via the old intel trick of fake death, shortly before the holocaust started. Does this connect? We don't know, but we DO know that Epstein had full control of MANY countries and corporations and NGOs and foundations, especially in the tech world.

= = = = =

Another possible connection drifted back into my tired mind today. Mecher was "bioterror coordinator" for the VA.

Spokane had some of the earliest publicly known cases of the "virus" that served as the pretext for the holocaust. Those cases were in the VA hospital. I had discussed this before in the context of contagion. I live a few blocks downwind from the VA hospital. If the "virus" was the sticky all-pervading glittery orange TrumpWitch Powder that we were reliably informed, this entire neighborhood would have died. The vent fans from the VA hospital, and random comings and goings through the doors, would have dispersed the Witch Powder downwind.

Important question:

When I wrote about the VA hospital exactly a year ago, I didn't know the Mecher story. Mecher is "bioterror coordinator" for the VA.

Now the connection is worth examining. WHY were the earliest cases in the VA hospital? Allegedly the "virus" came from China. There aren't any Chinese vets**, and we haven't been stationed in China since 1946, except for the handful of athletes who may have been vectors in one direction or the other.

= = = = =

** No Chinese vets: The US military sometimes semi-integrates members of other national militaries. Before our SOB Khomeini broke his CIA contract, we had been training Persian air force and army personnel as if they were our own. Filipinos had emigrated and served in the same not-quite-citizen way. We were doing this share routine with China in 1946 before Mao took over, but those were only a handful, and would be dead by now.

Hmm.

Second thought: We allowed and encouraged Chinese spies to steal our tech secrets in the '80s. I saw it. So maybe we've been doing the same thing with the regular army, without much publicity?

Since I'm in drift mode, here's another military-related mystery. Early in the holocaust, one of the regulars in the Poser graphics forum announced that he would be out of contact for an indefinite period. He was a Navy man who was on a ship at the time when the lockdown order was issued. The Navy was keeping all ships far out at sea indefinitely and limiting email contacts. Why?

Everyone knows by now, and the public data has ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR, that the named "virus" is no risk at all to young healthy people. Military men are the healthiest of all. So the sailors were NOT being protected against this particular "virus". Were they being protected from KNOWLEDGE of reality, so they were ready to strike down all opposition without being confused by facts?

Later ramble: Justin Hart appeared to be tracking Pence as an important power center, but also left the story dangling. I'm probably being too impatient. From day 1 this shit has needed to be OPENED, and now that a few hints are appearing, I want MORE!

Labels: Asked and badly answered

  ¶ 1:00 PM

  Ears and wings
Random thought mode this morning.

Humans are closer to birds than other mammals in many ways. Bipedal, use tools, use language and music. Even the shape and orientation of our head is more birdy than mammaly.

Another resemblance: Lack of pinnas. (Triggered by the beautiful painting of an early dinobird on her nest.)

Most mammals have big movable ears that they use intelligently for active direction-finding and for gestures. Most birds have no pinnas at all. Owls may be the only exception.

Humans are closer to birds on this measurement. We have vestigial flat pinnas that help slightly with localizing, mainly by filtering frequencies differently at different angles. This effect isn't important and we can get along without it. We can't rotate our ears like antennas, and we can't use them for gesturing. Like birds, we use vision almost exclusively, with hearing and smell as auxiliaries.

Most people dream of flying. Myths and stories and attempted inventions are eternal. We want to be full-fledged (heh) birds. We didn't actually leave the ground until we switched from bird-style flapping to squirrel-style gliding with power assistance.

How did this similarity happen? HGT? Reactivation of a gene that was turned off for most other mammals?

Labels: Asked and badly answered, Grand Blueprint

  ¶ 5:43 AM

  Hangovers
Comparing what I hear in current discussions with what I hear on old radio from the '30s and '40s, I noticed that radio in those decades didn't talk much about stocks and shares and dividends. Stocks were mentioned in cop shows and racket-warning shows, in the context of stock swindles, but otherwise didn't seem to be a common topic of discussion. No jokes about the stock market in comedy shows, no focus on stocks in news or analysis shows. I've previously noted the non-discussion of scrip, which was organized quickly and efficiently to compensate for the closure of most banks in early '33.

Google's Ngram thingie disagrees sharply, but Ngram is processing books and a few magazines, not radio and newspapers.

Here's "stocks and bonds":



And "stocks":



And "government securities", an odd phrase that was fairly common in those cop-type shows:



Books and radio sharply diverge on "stocks and bonds", but agree on "government securities".

Why the disparity? Guessing:

Non-fiction books were either defending the market's crimes against FDR's newly energized cops, or defending the cops against the criminals.

Ordinary people had been deluded by Rockefeller and Morgan into thinking that they could be the next Rockefeller or Morgan. After they lost their shirts**, they felt miserable and didn't want to be reminded of the delusion. Radio writers and advertisers picked up on this misery and avoided the topic.

The same delusion is running now. Bezos and Elon are deluding ordinary people into believing that they can be the next Bezos or Elon. This delusion is much more durable than the 1920s delusion. Even 2008 didn't cause a hangover.

One oddity that doesn't fit this explanation: "Stocks" started to fade from books around 1975, at the same time when dividends and profit and real business were replaced by the Share Value crime. "Government securities" rose at the same time, but then dropped sharply in 2000 and didn't return.

= = = = =

** Irrelevant language puzzle: Why shirts? The basic reference is obvious. Gambling until you have nothing left to lose but your clothing, then stripping off and losing your clothing. But the shirt isn't the last thing you'd strip. Also, in cartoons from that era, the gambler is always wearing a barrel instead of clothes. This doesn't make sense. Bars typically had leftover kegs around, but it takes a lot of work to remove the bottom of a keg so you can wear it. I'd think you'd grab a towel or blanket first.

Oh. Later and better thought: The shirt isn't the last available piece of clothing, but it IS the last thing you'd strip. If you wanted to get home without being arrested, you'd stop before losing your pants.

Labels: Asked and badly answered

  ¶ 1:36 AM

  Folies et follies
Focusing on Italy leads to an odd and possibly meaningful comparison.

Italian people and Italian products are unquestionably more stylish and beautiful than other Euro or US products. That's a valid and well-known generality. French people and products are drab and practical, with a strong emphasis on usability.

BUT: French science in the 1800s was lively and entertaining. French tech journals, from architecture to electricity, had animated illustrations with intense characters and funny vulgarity.

Architecture:



Semaphores:





Telegraphs:



= = = = =

Italian tech journals from those years were just as dull and drab as English or US journals. Not many illustrations, mainly sketches or uninteresting photos.

Why did French science have an attitude of non-serious fun?

Wild guess: Because the Revolution had turned the serious aspect of science into genocide. The Revolution was created by DOCTORS who compressed life into a rigid system of decimal measurement and surgery by guillotine.

The later French attitude was a natural IMMUNE RESPONSE to a toxic corruption of a necessary process.

I've been experiencing the same IMMUNE RESPONSE lately, and trying to express it in my own animated ways.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, Entertainment

  ¶ 1:21 AM

  More rambling on localism
In nature and in human organization, modularity is crucial. Every loss of a layer means more tyranny, because every loss of a layer means a loss of a local feedback loop. Nature functions by feedback within each level, from mitochondria up to hives and populations.

Negative feedback is life. No feedback is tyranny. Positive feedback is quick death.

The current holocaust has dramatically exposed an exception to this rule, which was already starting to show up a few years ago.

Traditionally cities are the most important module in governance. A neighborhood or unincorporated settlement isn't large enough to make useful rules or perform useful services like policing. A city can perform those services, and it can shape them to local preferences. Cities that grow too large lose the directness of the feedback loop, and they generally start losing population until they fall back to a rational size.

Cities can also be "corrupted" by local gangs, some of which are called corporations. This form of corruption isn't necessarily bad. Mafia-controlled cities are usually pleasant places with very little ordinary crime. Before globalism took hold, corporations created local jobs, and many of them created real beauty and real social services for their employees, which also made life easier for the non-employees. When a creative force like Conoco or NCR had total control of the city government in Ponca or Dayton, the city was vastly better off.

Since 1975 this model has been gradually decaying, as corporations gradually pulled away from products and employees and moved into pure finance, sucking free money from the Treasury's tit. The source of pure numbers is NOT in places like Ponca or Dayton. It's in NYC. So all corporations now serve the tastes and needs of NYC.

About ten years ago the NYC loop became personal, as Bloomberg started buying up all the mayors. Now the cities are not just abstractly serving NYC "values"; they're directly obeying Bloomberg himself. For several years cities have been ruining local police to satisfy Bloomberg's NYC tastes. In 2020 all mayors acted in unison, starting and encouraging riots, ferociously enforcing and aiding the holocaust, trying to countermand sane governors.

This is NOT how cities are supposed to work.

It was easy for Bloomberg to buy the cities since they no longer had local revenue sources and local "corruption" to fend off outside money.

Now more localism just means more places for Bloomberg or Bezos to buy and run in deadly unison.

What's the answer? Ideally a strong national figure like FDR, who knows how to fight the blackmailers, and who insists on using the national government to BREAK the NYC control. FDR broke the stock market and investment banks, and his regulations prevented the regrowth of giant monsters like Bezos and Bloomberg for several decades.

Unfortunately there's no way to get there, except by prayer.

A smaller and more incremental solution might be through TAXATION.

We've seen this in the clinical trial of the current holocaust. "Party" turned out to be a meaningless variable. The most important real variable is TAXATION. The states that remained sane depend on REAL local farms and industries. They decided not to lockdown and shutdown their industries because they depended on taxes from those industries. The crazy states are either mainly dependent on DC, or derive taxes from Bezos and Zuck and Gates, who are the main cui bono of the holocaust.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, the broken circle

  ¶ 1:16 AM

  Packard vaporware
Several old brands have been "reborn" as fakes and vaporware. Emerson radios and Elgin clocks are rebranded cheap Chinese crap.

Packard has been tried a few times. The most recent attempt started about 20 years ago and seems to be still alive as a corporation. It made one serious try to build a new car, and currently sells just one repro part for real Packards. (Why not gear up and make more repros? Much less risky than betting on regulatory approval for a complete car.)

The website has some nice pix of the prototype, which was built in 1999 and sold to a private party in 2014.

The prototype had most of the usual modern shit expected in a luxury car, but peculiarly it missed Packard's unique modern tech.

In the '30s, Packard and several other luxury makes had adjustable suspensions, with a lever on the dash that made the ride stiffer or looser.

In 1956, just before it was killed by the Studie LBO, Packard developed a fully adaptive electronic suspension, which disappeared immediately and wasn't reborn until the '90s.

The prototype doesn't have any of those modern features. It has a transverse leaf spring like the Model T. This type of suspension is unfairly described as "primitive", even though it was later used by Tatra and some Corvettes. Still, it's less "advanced" than Packard's 1930 suspension.

Older is nearly always better than newer, but if you're going to use the Packard name you should use Packard's older, not Ford's older.

Vaporware companies rarely put in enough effort to make a full prototype. I'm familiar with another exception to the rule, Custer Channel Wing, which operated in Enid for at least 20 years, doing real research in aviation and building real flying prototypes, but never going into production. I had some sideways connections with Custer, and never truly decided whether it was a tax dodge, a rich man's toy, or a serious attempt that wasn't quite serious enough. This new Packard is mysterious in the same way.

Labels: Asked and badly answered

  ¶ 3:37 PM

  Revisiting guess
Now that the D puppet has "won" the "election", replacing the R puppet, I'll sort of halfway watch for my prediction in May:

= = = = =

Replacing the puppet in the White House wouldn't change the behavior of the Federal dysgovernment. Biden puppet and Trump puppet are identical passive mechanisms controlled by the same Master. But it would definitely change the actions of the governors and the media.

The holocauster governors are driven by infinitely evil bloodlust, but they are also driven by a specific hatred of Deplorables. In their cranial cavities Trump represents Deplorables, so he must be removed. Removing him would relieve some of the pressure in those alien cavities.

For damn sure electing Biden would solve the media end of the holocaust, immediately and completely. The media aren't in direct control of the ovens and gas chambers, but they are providing the fuel and the torches. If Biden was in the White House, the media WOULDN'T HAVE ANY MOTIVATION to continue killing millions of Americans. They would want their team to succeed. The Branded Witch Flu would instantly be treated as just another ordinary annual flu season, which would accidentally agree with fucking reality.

= = = = =

A lot of new monstrous evil has been added since May, but I still think the general direction of the guess is right. The media will calm down, which will make it possible for some of the less crazed demons to calm down. We shall see.

Incidentally, not that it matters, I didn't "vote" for either of the puppets. I "voted" for sane candidates in a sane state, Mack and Babs of Tennessee.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, immodest and imperative proposal, Jackboot stomping forever

  ¶ 10:30 AM

  Rambling about culture and radio
Thinking about Colonel Green's unapologetically aristocratic radio station....

I've discussed this point often. Radio began with an overlay of high culture, which was sometimes condescending but usually productive.

Classical music and poetry were major parts of LOCAL radio for several decades, offering opportunities for LOCAL performers to showcase their capacities. The cultural slant was enforced by FCC, thus enhancing and broadening the SKILLS of LOCAL talent and LOCAL appreciation for culture.

So Green's pure aristocracy wasn't unusual or contrarian, just more extreme.

TV started without the overlay of culture. Why?

One possibility: The basic skill of radio was new. Writing for the ear and acting for the ear were new techniques that had to be developed from scratch.

Some older cultures had a tradition of oral storytelling, with all characters voiced by one narrator and no visual output. Those cultures weren't involved in the birth of radio. No Osages or Kiowas.

The dramatic side of radio began with Vaudevillians and 'classical' stage actors. The biggest stars in the first two decades were Vauds. Gracie and George, Fibber and Molly, Jack and Mary, Amos and Andy, Edgar and Charlie. Serious actors like Hans Conried and Katharine Cornell were also well represented.

Vaudeville had a visual aspect, but it was primarily audio. Vauds had to walk into an unfamiliar theater without any stage sets and create a scene in the minds of the audience. Stage actors were accustomed to fixed sets, but they were focused heavily on projecting the WORDS of the playwright. Both of these groups had to aim toward a large audience at a considerable distance, so their faces weren't important and often weren't attractive.

Who was missing? Movie actors. Occasionally they made cameo appearances in dramas or quiz shows, but they never fitted into the dramas and couldn't handle the quiz shows. They were accustomed to performing FOR THE CAMERA, not for the ear, and most of them weren't intelligent or flexible. They were hired for attractive faces and obedience, not for creativity.

When radio started in 1920, movies were still silent. Successful movie actors were PURELY visual, and the visual emphasis continued after sound was attached in the late '20s.

When TV started in 1948, the movie actors transferred their skills easily and directly. Exactly the same situation. A set built for camera angles, acting directly to the camera. Following the director's instructions perfectly.

= = = = =

Hmm. Well, that didn't answer the cultural difference, did it?

The FCC was still pushing culture and public service in '48, so its influence isn't the variable. I'm guessing that plain old money made the difference. Most of the founders of radio were starting on a shoestring. They were turning a hobby into a business, often working with a local store that was willing to support the bet as an advertising method. They had to follow FCC's guidance. TV requires a lot more money, and the networks were already established and powerful in '48. They could afford to lobby and ignore.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, Constants and Variables, skill-estate

  ¶ 1:15 AM

  Conditioned?
From the article on casino tricks that I linked in previous item:

We have been socially conditioned into believing that bright lights and noises indicate something of importance, that flashing colors are a hallmark of success and that shine and sparkle are a stand-in for beauty and wealth. The casino machines constantly light up and flash, never content to stay at a single luminosity, always progressing and giving you the impression that winning is constant and all around you.

Any time I see socially conditioned, bright lights and noises light up in my mind. Nearly always, socially conditioned really means innate and inherent.

This may be a partial exception. Taking it apart:

Shine and sparkle are innate for sure. Birds use shiny rocks as mating advertisements, and humans have done the same with gold and gems forever. Females enjoy receiving sparkly things from males, and males want to acquire sparkly things so they can trade them for sex.

Never constant is basic neurology. Regardless of the purpose, fast variation is the best way to hold attention.

Bright lights and noise as a sign of importance and wealth isn't obviously innate, and may be learned or conditioned... or may even be a wrong assumption. Real wealth is subtle. Wealthy people don't advertise their wealth. Restaurants and clubs that want to create an atmosphere of prosperity are quiet and dim.

Labels: Asked and badly answered

  ¶ 5:16 AM

  Random stories
Halfway following on previous item about candidate selection.

Deepstate runs different brands just as GM and Budweiser run different brands, widening the appeal. If you're too snobbish to buy a Chevy Citation, you'll buy it when it's branded as a Cadillac Cimarron.

Just for fun, let's try to sort out the brands within Deepstate for recent candidates. The pattern is perfectly clear after 1980. Before 1980 I'm wildly guessing, probably wrong.

Start with Nixon. He made some mistakes in his early career, then after Cohn's takeover of the media and Congress in 1954, Nixon decided to ride with the winner. Cohn was the head of the NYC mafia, and Nixon became his main hitman.

Nixon began to take power in '56 after Ike was heartattacked. Castro, initially sponsored by CIA, went rogue and started working for Cuba after winning the revolution. Castro was kicking out the casinos run by the NYC mafia. Nixon worked with CIA to create various countercoups.

JFK is harder to guess. The Kennedy family ran the Irish branch of the mafia, so JFK vs Nixon looked like Irish vs Jewish mafia. Some stories say that JFK rebelled against his masters and got killed. He clearly didn't like the CIA branch of Deepstate, but real rebellion is harder to find. He allowed Nixon's countercoup to proceed. Maybe he sabotaged it, but more likely the countercoup was just a dumb idea. Castro was serving the Cuban people, so the Color Revolution couldn't succeed.

LBJ was unquestionably CIA. He killed JFK, for reasons still unclear, then went ahead and did everything CIA wanted.

Nixon in '68 was simply LBJ's heir. LBJ wanted Nixon to win, so Nixon won. Humphrey was a slot-filler to make the "election" worth the trouble for the media.

From '68 to '73 Nixon served Deepstate perfectly, especially the NYC Jewish brand. It's still not clear why he was removed. He didn't fail or rebel. Maybe Deepstate just didn't trust him to continue serving loyally? Maybe he had plans to rebel?

McGovern was a slot-filler, giving the leftist activist brand of Deepstate something to "vote" "for".

In '74 Deepstate reasserted full control of Congress and the media, and began the long series of fake emergencies with the "global warming" panic.

Carter and Ford are oddballs. Both look like slot-fillers, expected to lose. Carter followed CIA orders, ruining both agriculture and petroleum sectors of the economy "because" "Afghanistan". He went on to serve CIA as an "independent" "diplomat" after the end of his term, but he never seemed to enjoy it. Best guess: Carter was basically a sane man, driven by blackmail, not by natural psychopathic inclination.

After 1980 there's no veil of secrecy. Sucker Filter all the way. Bush Senior was openly and proudly CIA. Following LBJ's model, he assassinated Reagan to prevent possible disloyalty. His shot was good, but the assassination failed because the nearest hospital had tremendous experience with gunshots. Why did they have experience? Because of the drug wars created by Deepstate. Nice bit of Emerson justice, but it didn't really matter. Reagan was weak after the shooting, and Bush Senior assumed the presidency. He crashed Russia to cover Soros's shorts, and advanced the "global warming" panic well beyond Nixon's efforts.

Dukakis? Another slot-filler.

The brand competition gets interesing in 1992. Clinton represented the up-and-coming Epstein brand, closely tied to the new tech industry and Mossad. Bush Senior continued with CIA. Sort of like Saturn replacing Oldsmobile.

Dole? etc.

CIA returned in 2000 with Bush Junior. Gore carried on the Epstein/tech brand. A literal coin-toss gave the "win" to Bush Junior. He focused again on Afghanistan and Russia.

Kerry? etc.

2008 marked the resurgence of the banking brand of Deepstate, which had been out of the public eye since 1946. Obama represented Epstein/tech, PLUS the bankers.

2012: Both markers were working mainly for the bank brand. Romney was pure bank, Obama was bank plus Epstein. Epstein won, unsurprisingly.

2016 was interesting in the same way as 1992. Trump brought the NYC Cohn brand back into the picture, for the first time since Nixon's removal. The NYC Cohn brand "won", but only as a Pied Piper creating useful backwash for the Epstein brand.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, Parkinson, Sucker Filter

  ¶ 7:31 AM

  Partial correlation
Let's rehash (again) this item written in 2017. Obviously the part about doctors needs revision, since doctors have advanced from extortion to mass murder.

There's an interesting correlation in some of these pairs, which doesn't entirely work but certainly works on the current pair.

= = = = = START REPRINT:

How do you know which side of a "debate" is good?


"Scientists" jail you for questioning "science".

Astrologers don't jail you for questioning astrology.


MDs force you to follow orders by withholding life-sustaining prescriptions. (In any other context this would be called extortion.)

Alternative healers don't force you to do anything.


Social "scientists" design and operate torture chambers.

Psychics and faith healers don't.


Non-smokers jail you for smoking in the wrong place, which is pretty much every place.

Smokers don't jail you for not smoking.


Bankers jail you for using cash.

Goldbugs don't jail you for using debit cards.


Globalists bomb you for questioning the Empire.

Localists don't bomb you for being a globalist.


The non-jailing and non-bombing and non-interventionist side of each debate is good. The jailing side is bad. Jailoleth.

= = = = = END REPRINT.

Here's the partial correlation. The jailing side always says that a godlike abstraction requires them to kill or jail you; but their description and understanding of the godlike abstraction is PERFECTLY WRONG. The non-jailing side doesn't use the abstraction to justify anything, and usually gets the abstraction right.

It's most obvious in "global warming" and "evolution" and "virus".

With "global warming", the environmentalists always say that "the environment" requires them to kill us. But their understanding of "the environment" is backwards, omitting all the negative feedback and adaptation.

With "evolution", the Darwinists say that Darwin requires them to silence dissent. But their understanding of Darwin disagrees with Darwin himself on every major point. The Darwinists don't believe in genes, while the non-Darwinists do believe in genes.

With the Haute-Couture Branded Virus, the torturers say that the virus itself or the epidemic itself requires lockdowns and torture. Exactly backwards. Our immune system works when we live a normal healthy life, without being imprisoned or starved or tortured or forced to recirculate our own breath. All of these measures are EXPLICITLY DESIGNED TO DESTROY IMMUNITY, designed to CREATE AND EXPAND an epidemic.

The non-lockdowners don't bother to cite the virus itself because we know the real reason for the torture.

In all three cases the genocide or torture or silencing is really required by the demented psychopaths who require it. They need torture and domination and humiliation to get their rocks off.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, malign misattribution

  ¶ 8:39 AM

  1882 stereo
Inventions for sound are always DECADES behind inventions for vision. Other senses like smell haven't even STARTED to develop ways of recording and playing.

From an 1884 book on experimental telephones:

It is a common experience that, in listening at a telephone, it is practically impossible to have even a vague idea of the distance at which the person at the other end of the line appears to be. To some listeners this distance seems to be only a few yards, to others the voice apparently proceeds out of a great depth of the earth. In this case there was nothing of the kind. As soon as the experiment commenced the singers placed themselves, in the mind of the listener, at a fixed distance, some to the right and others to the left It was easy to follow their movements, and to indicate exactly, each time that they changed their position, the imaginary distance at which they appeared to be. This phenomenon, which was very curious, approximated to the theory of binauricular audition, and has never been applied, we believe, before to produce this remarkable illusion, to which may almost be given the name of auditive perspective.

When the singer is at the point A, the transmitter T is more strongly influenced than the transmitter T' ; the left ear is, therefore, more deeply impressed than the right ear, and the singer appears to be on the left to the eight listeners of the group. When the singer is at A' the transmitter T', is more affected than the transmitter T, and the singer appears to the right of the audience; these aural impressions change with the relative positions of the singers, and their movements can in this way be followed.

It's strange that the author was treating this as a mere illusion, only useful for amusement purposes. The importance of localizing sound was well understood by musicians and soldiers. Why didn't they pick up the idea immediately? The author mentioned the analogy to stereoscopes for 3d viewing, which were commercially popular then.

Nothing happened until WW1, when binaural sound telescopes were used for locating a distant cannon or aircraft. After that, the idea sat dormant again until 1940 when it started to percolate into broadcasting and music recording. Stereo sound didn't go fully commercial until the mid 50s. That's a 70 year gap between idea and implementation, with NO technical barriers in the way. Unlike transistors, stereo didn't need to wait for new materials to be developed.

In 1882 the telephone and the phonograph were both freshly invented. This experiment showed how to expand the telephone to stereo, and it's easy to imagine several ways to expand the phonograph. The latter would have been too large and finicky for home use, but practical for theaters.

Brute force: Record two disks at the same time, then play them on two phonographs coupled together, both turned by the same clockwork. The disks would have to be 'keyed' with an extra locator hole to insure synchrony.



Sidenote: I've asked the broader question about sound vs vision dozens of times. This was probably the best answer.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, Entertainment

  ¶ 1:13 PM

  Why NYC?
Random thought, probably wrong...

Why is NYC so special for epidemics?

EPA.

Most NYC demons live and work in tall towers with hermetically sealed HVAC systems. Before the era of air conditioning, even the taller buildings had openable windows. Fresh air and sunlight could get into every office. In the '70s energy efficiency required everything to be sealed up. You can't control a full-building AC system for uniform efficiency when windows can be opened and sunlight can heat up offices.

NYC is a giant cruise ship. Same type of incalculably WICKED incomprehensibly STUPID featherless bipeds, same sealed petri-dish environment.

= = = = =

Relevant footnote: Vintage.es has a nice feature about a time when NYC had open windows and open minds. In 1956, an air force veteran made a bar bet than he could fly from Jersey to the bar. He stole a small plane at Teterboro and landed it neatly in front of the bar on 191st. Nobody pressed charges, everyone thought it was a cool achievement. The pictures show every window open, lots of people leaning out of windows enjoying the spectacle. He made the bet again two years later and succeeded again, but this time he was arrested and jailed. Once is a neat trick, twice is a crime. Fully sane.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, Carbon Cult, Emersonian justice

  ¶ 10:07 AM

  Dubious correlation
Highly dubious, but I'm in a dubious mood this morning, so here goes.

Every decade or so we get a Circuit Breaker, an event that removes all the masks of fake "opposition" and allows all the rulers to work together for genocide.

The Swine Flu this year. TARP in 2008. 9/11 in 2001. Fall of USSR in 1990.

The series doesn't extend before 1990 with similar events. Earlier big events didn't have the same flavor of "opposition" before, consolidation after.

Soros was deeply involved in TARP and 1990, but not obviously part of the other two.

The only constant element in all four is Saudi.

The Swine Flu circuit breaker happened just after Saudi switched sides and joined Russia. TARP supposedly happened because Saudi investors threatened to pull their backing from Wall Street. 9/11 was ALL Saudi. 1990 resulted from our multi-front campaign against Russia, with Saudi playing a major role in running AlQaeda and in cutting oil prices.

The oil shocks of 1973 and 1979 were purely Saudi events, but weren't Circuit Breakers. No consolidation. American people and politicians were free to complain about the shortages.

1990 and 2020 are thus symmetrical. In the '80s Saudi joined USA to cut oil prices to ruin Russia. In 2020 Saudi joined Russia to cut oil prices to ruin USA.

Labels: Asked and badly answered, constants and constants, Emersonian justice

  ¶ 5:35 AM

  Maybe it's like dog years
Before 1980, medical guidelines assumed that blood pressure was meant to rise somewhat with age. There was a formula for linear rise with age.

After 1980 the formula disappeared and an absolute unchanging standard was set in stone. 120/80 from birth to death.

A new statistical survey indicates that the old setup was closer to correct, though perhaps not the right linear formula:

The team found that people aged 75 or over with low blood pressure (below 130 / 80) had increased mortality rates in the follow-up, compared to those with normal blood pressure. This was especially pronounced in 'frail' individuals, who had 62 per cent increased risk of death during the ten year follow-up.

Although high blood pressure increased risk of cardiovascular incidents, such as heart attacks, it was not linked to higher mortality in frail adults over 75. Older people aged 85 and over who had raised blood pressure actually had reduced mortality rates, compared to those with lower blood pressure, regardless of whether they were frail or not.

I've been wondering about this. At age 60 I had extremely high BP, undoubtedly dangerous by any formula. The prescribed pills have done an excellent job of holding it down to 120/80. Now at age 70 I have the impression that I feel better and less anxious when the vagus nerve is tensed up; when I relax to let the heart slow down all the way, I don't feel as good. Maybe the pressure should be around 140, as the old formula suggested. (This impression is most likely wrong, as most of my internal 'correlations' turn out to be wrong.)

Labels: Asked and badly answered

  ¶ 5:30 AM

  AI meta-point-missing
Charles Rubin reviews a book on tech dreams and myths in ancient times.

As we move from chapter to chapter, we accumulate fascinating information, but the book does not obviously develop an argument about the lessons we might learn from it. Mayor hopes that “rereading those ancient stories might enrich today’s discussions of robotics, driverless cars, biotechnology, AI, machine learning, and other innovations.” And indeed, almost by definition, to find out that thinking about these matters goes back far longer than we might have expected is enriching.

Without trying to read the original, it sounds like both the author and reviewer are missing a basic distinction. (I could be wrong here because the reviewer could be wrong about the original.)

Patient machines have been around for thousands of years. Negative feedback, the essential difference between living and non-living, has been part of devices for thousands of years. These devices, from drain traps to toilets to thermostats to automatic lighthouses, operate independently like living things, running their own simple lives without human control.

In ancient times full-fledged automata, literal robots, were either a dream or a scam. The famous automatic chess-player was a scam, containing a midget who operated the robot arm.

In modern times full-fledged automata, literal robots, are STILL either a dream or a scam.

Autonomous cars will never work. Factory automation has been around since Jacquard, and STILL isn't much beyond Jacquard. Some routine operations can be automated and have been automated for a long time. The peak point was reached 50 years ago. Idiots like Elon keep trying to break through the peak, and keep failing.

= = = = =

The reviewer raises a better question that doesn't have a simple answer.

Mayor notes, but hardly lingers to investigate, that in the mythic record there is frequently a link between robot-like beings (or other innovations) and tyrants. Shouldn’t this strike us as odd, given that in the modern world successful technical innovations seem more associated with the free world than with tyranny?

I don't think there's a correlation either way. Many important inventions were developed by armies or for armies, and strong empires tend to have bigger and better-funded armies. In that class of innovation, empires are the leader.

But other inventions come from a variety of needs, which exist in all sorts of governing systems.

Example from my most recent 'tutorial': The Optophone was developed from a desire to help blind people. Its later rejuvenation happened with military funding, attempting to help blinded veterans.

The only real constant is a conjunction of two factors: available funding and perceived need.

Military tyrannies like USA have plenty of available funding for the needs of Deepstate, but very little for tinkering.

Small countries with looser governments may leave more room for tinkerers to work on perceived needs.... BUT the best tinkerers in the modern world are in socialist countries like Cuba and Persia, where our blockades create the need for many inventions that would otherwise be bought from China.

Labels: $TSLAQ, AI point-missing, Asked and badly answered, Patient things

  ¶ 1:59 PM