Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 04/02/2020 in Posts

  1. 1 point
    https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2010/12/Global-Health-Leaders-Launch-Decade-of-Vaccines-Collaboration The press release doesn't have a date which I could find. Sometime between January 2010 and mid-2012. Ellen
  2. 1 point
    Polly's lively mind at work again. I haven't any doubt that individuals in power and with money-power get together, birds of a feather which pass the same signals of recognition to others, colluding, conspiring and complicit, all towards a tacit, un-named goal. I shall from now call this "a complicity fact" rather than tired, "conspiracy theory". Similarly, people of virtue will and do combine honestly using each one's 'power' for a specified, objective, common good. I think, in minor criticism that Polly doesn't take enough into account the magnitude of mind control - for its own sake - which propels these people. Money and power matter to the underlings but only the means to an end for the top dogs. The evil of the do-gooders is that they believe they have the right Answer for all of us, that no one must be allowed his/her own choice of path, and any dissidents be contained or struck down. Watching Bill Gates speak in interview with Trevor Noah (another in that category) last night, I had that old queasy feeling at something sick in operation. What's another half-billion or so to a multi-billionaire? Gates has a grander picture in mind.
  3. 1 point
    No time to write, but here is the latest from Polly. Bill Gates is turning out to be one interesting dude. It looks like he has cornered the market in vaccines by helping create the markets for them. His hands are in everything vaccine-related, including being the second largest donor to WHO behind the US. (btw - President Trump today put a hold on moneys going to WHO). It looks like Gates's big dream is to put nano-particles in vaccines and make the vaccines mandatory for the world over. That way everyone will be walking around like tagged animals. Some of this is seriously wicked--and I mean that in an evil way. Gotta run... Enjoy the video... It's well worth watching. Michael EDIT: Quick note. I keep hearing sporadic people remind us that a vaccine was never developed for AIDS. The scientists focused on a cure instead because they couldn't find a vaccine. Now think about the coronavirus. Hydroxychloroquine, anyone? Why is that such a bad idea like some people keep insisting? I also heard there is major moolah in vaccines. And imagine the power if the nano-particle idea gets going.
  4. 1 point
    New on ARI Watch, a guest article by William Swig: Carl Barney Versus Objectivity To rather loosely paraphrase the author writing elsewhere: Barney focuses on a few things he claims benefited him in the Scientology of the 1960s and 1970s, superficial things like “structured questions,” “mental blocks” and various “courses.” That is not Scientology. Scientology is the specific ideas and practices put together. It’s a system. Barney doesn’t mention engrams or banks or clearing. Auditing is nothing without these “concepts.” Barney appeals to his unrevealed life to defend Scientology. So what happens when we start revealing it?
  5. 1 point
    TG, Not just related. This is smack dab in the middle of the unfolding into the mainstream. These Internet lifestyle celebrities see the ideas from sources they trust, the ideas make sense to them and they run with them. I doubt any of these lovely celebs are keeping strict tabs on sources and running down vague ones. These celebs are not mainstream, but they are one of the middle stepping stones Q's ideas go over on the way to the mainstream. The Buzzfeed article and awful video about Q therein are at the perplexed stage of wondering how this could be happening. So they pat the wayward ladies on the head amidst snark and tsk tsk tsking to try to get them back in line. The dorks haven't figured out that these women are merely trading up the chain in a manner they themselves did earlier with different narratives. Tsk tsk tsk... I'm not criticizing the celebs or Q, though. I'm just mentioning how the process works. The efficacy of the process has little to do with the content. It worked like hell for the globalists. Now it's working like hell for Q and Trump supporters. Leftie globalists are not amused. Trading up the chain done right is very powerful as a publicity tool. it even works well as a philosophical publicity tool. Have you ever read Rand talk about how a philosophical premise gets into the mainstream? She mentioned somewhere that when an idea gets to the level of TV sitcoms and comic books (I'm paraphrasing, so this isn't exact, although the gist is correct), only then is the idea embedded in the culture enough to shape society. She talked about this several times. She never did get around to saying how that works, though. (Or at least, I don't recall ever seeing it.) She did illustrate a few processes and outcomes in Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead, but she was vague on the precise actions individuals take in handing off an idea from one person to another in a form that the receiver accepts it--how word of mouth works so to speak. Or how an idea becomes viral. Trading up the chain is one such mechanism--on the press level. From the press to individuals, though, it works differently. It woks on trust--there is an unspoken bond of trust individuals hold for the press. That trust is the basis of an enormous amount of uncritical acceptance of weird ideas and bad ideas and lousy-ass ideas. As an aside, that bond is so deep and fits so well with how the human mind is constructed, it's impressive to see it breaking down in modern times. The dorks in the press really had to work hard to screw up that badly. I guess suicide is hard to pull off, but they're hard at work on making it happen. By God, no one will tell them what to do. They'll be blatantly lying, mocking their readers and laughing all the way to the grave. So there! Back to point, trading up the chain works equally well for good ideas and evil ones. Obviously, it works great for marketing and selling stuff. That's the world Ryan Holiday was in when he came up with this thing. .Michael
  6. 1 point
    Would you say that something like this is the end-result, or, at least related: (regarding a Buzzfeed article: "Lifestyle Influencers Are Now Sharing Some Bogus Far-Right Conspiracy Theories About The Coronavirus On Instagram" https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemcneal/coronavirus-lifestyle-influencers-sharing-conspiracy-qanon
  7. 1 point
    There is another way I understand Q--in essential terms. I've talked about this before. It's called " trading up the chain." In mainstream press terms, the QAnon phenomenon has been a variation on this. Note: I'm not talking about who is behind this. I'm merely talking about how this spread. Trading-up-the-chain is a press strategy identified and named by Ryan Holiday. It works like this. If a person wants to get an idea (or any kind of publicity) into the mainstream press through the back door, so to speak, he starts with a small site or place with no audience. But at that site or place is a discussion of the issue in legitimate-sounding highly-informative terms, but slanted. This slant is what is really being promoted. (Whether this slant is on the side of the good guys or bad guys, whether it is more objective or totally misleading, is not the issue. The mechanics work the same.) Then the person using this strategy gets in contact with people a little higher up in the press food chain who are sympathetic to the slant and points them to this information. As these people are overworked, they don't have time or inclination to check sources. The material sounds legitimate and looks like a source, so they report it. And the people above them use their publication as a source, since they suffer from the same lack of time under a lot of pressure. And off the slant goes up to the mainstream as if it were proven fact. This is happening with QAnon and here is a very good example of how Q has reached the stage right before the mainstream. Notice that Stephen Bannon does not mention QAnon, but he does mention what Q wants in quite clear terms, and specifically naming Kissinger, Davos, hedge fund managers, etc., as a starting point. Bannon is hardly ever this explicit in threats. Before too long, expect to see this--and other things like it, maybe mentioning other targets--as regular news items in the mainstream. That's how Q has spread. Q was the starting point, but instead of going away and relying on a single push, it kept pumping out drops laden with mystique and some solid predictions. So many people started pushing it up the chain. The fringe carried it at first, then the larger alt media got on board. Now Q is penetrating into much higher-ups in the press and, like with a typical trading up the chain process, Q, being the original source, stops being mentioned up near the top. But the ideas are. And once these ideas are in the mainstream press that way, not even the coronavirus can keep them from getting into people's hearts and minds in the mainstream culture. Like Bannon said, after saying, "It's all going to come out," about Kissinger and cronies (including Davos people, Wall Street people, etc): "The world is going to stand in judgment of you." It will, too. And these people are going to get thrown into the garbage bin of history along with tin-pot dictators, Bernie Madoff and the like. Their end will be jail, being killed and/or disgraced forever throughout history as evil people who did evil things. That is how the world changes when the trading-up-the-chain process is used effectively. Michael
  8. 1 point
    Fake news. CBS is working overtime to produce one fake story after another. It was busted just the other day using video of Italy in a report on NYC hospitals. I wonder which billionaire's ass it is kissing. Like I said, fake news: Go to that Twitter thread and all the info is there. Michael
  9. 1 point
    TG, I get the wordplay, but I took a look at Greg Laurie in "identify then judge" mode. I saw the beginning of this sermon: God’s Answer to Fear, Anxiety and Worry, Part 2. What follows is a little off-topic, but who cares? I find it interesting and probably several readers will, too. When I go into "identify then judge" mode on looking at something new, I turn my brain into a sponge. I try to set aside everything I can from what I already know and believe about similar things and just observe. I can't turn off everything, of course. There are countless memories and abstractions floating around in the underbelly of my brain, so I can't do this literally. But I can turn off my critical faculty to a conscious extent and just soak up the experience, which I can later judge consciously. It's like I give my brain a command: "Just observe and identify." In that frame of mind, what I saw surprised me in a pleasant way. It had nothing to do with political message, but instead with music. I normally don't like modern Christian music because the lyrics tend to suck. (Many older hymns rock, though.) Of course, I'm referring to what I've heard. The lyrics of the modern stuff tend to have little poetic value and do not integrate with the music. So on hearing the opening song of the sermon, once again, the lyrics were not what you could call poetic. But I wasn't judging, so I got a nice surprise in the chorus. The lyrics integrated with music and the listener in a really cool way. The verse was the normal first-person statements of the obvious for the context I dislike ("We are your church, we are your sons and daughters" and so on). But the music underneath started getting a real nice groove on. Then the chorus came: "With our hands to the heavens, alive in your presence, Oh God, you are here. So pour out your spirit, we love to be near you, Oh God, you are here." If you allow yourself to get into the groove of the underlying music, you should get a mix of nice, cool, wonder, just let go and feel, and a few other such things thrown in. Granted, this is subjective, but from what I've observed, a smooth easy-listening style of music heavy on ninths in both harmony and melody (sorry for being technical, but I don't have other words for it) generally produces a pleasant hypnotic effect where you let go of negativity at that moment and just coast on feel-good rhythm. But with this song, the words of the lyrics direct this all-consuming emotion toward God at the time you are feeling it, and even give you instructions of what to do with your body and how to feel about God--through presupposition at that. The words don't tell you what to do. They say what you are doing. Note, I'm not analyzing whether God exists. I am analyzing how a strong emotion gets elicited through music and unexpectedly attached to God in lyrics through the image of God pouring his presence over you at the time your are feeling the emotion. This same process could be used for a country, for a person, for the planet, for anything big, or admirable outside of you. There is so much going on in this song and performance in both aesthetic experience and covert persuasion I could write a long article about it and still uncover new things. I am definitely going to do some serious thinking on this. For example, the process I described can also be done in reverse, that is, after eliciting in you (should you allow yourself to get into the music) a negative emotion like raw aggressiveness, using first-person statements in the lyrics--while you are feeling the emotion--to attach that emotion to something or someone outside of you. Instant hate and bigotry. Wow. I did not expect to see, hear and observe that. As the saying goes, people don't remember what you tell them, but they never forget how you make them feel. I don't know anything else about Greg Laurie and his people other than he's a famous preacher, and I didn't watch the video for much longer after the song, but I do know he knows what he is doing. And, I get the feeling he is a good man. Which is good. Bad people with his level of competence could do a lot of damage in society. In fact some do. I'm glad Greg Laurie is on the good guy side. Michael
  10. 1 point
    Re: Pastor Greg Laurie, Harvest, and Corona: Greg Laurie is an American author and pastor who serves as the senior pastor of Harvest Christian Fellowship in Riverside, California, Harvest Corona in Corona, California Harvest Woodcrest in Riverside, California, Harvest at Kumulani in Kapalua, Hawaii, and Harvest Orange County in Irvine, California. Wikipedia https://twitter.com/tobycovfefe2/status/1246829184971870212/photo/2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Laurie (Now, with the Wiki page bio, I'd certainly want to know if that isn't just shenanigans taking place after the fact...) [Edit: Nope, not shenanigans. It's on the the official Harvest.org page as well:] https://harvest.church/location/corona/
  11. 1 point
    Re: "Harvest": https://qmap.pub/read/3897 https://qmap.pub/read/3599 https://qmap.pub/read/3708 https://qmap.pub/read/3525
  12. 1 point
    So wrong... In so many ways... LOL... Michael
  13. 1 point
    In The Virtue of Selfishness, Ayn Rand wrote an article called "The Argument from Intimidation." It is chapter 19. If you want to see a great example of an argument from intimidation and how to respond, look at the tweet below. But first, let's look at Rand's own words which can be found online: The Argument from intimidation. President Trump just offered a perfect example of how to respond by refusing to accept the moral premise of a questioner using this form of framing. It's not as evident in the first tweet (which I did not want to embed, but it comes automatically with the second) but it's still there. However in the second tweet, it's there in all its glory. Rather than accept moral guilt for being inconsistent, which was the reporter's frame, President Trump essentially said his legal and moral standard for acting was The Constitution. President Trump answers gotcha questions a lot in this manner--by refusing to accept the moral premise of the question and giving an answer based on his own moral premises instead. I noticed this a long time ago. And that's how you do it. That's how Rand did it. Michael
  14. 1 point
    I just saw the following live on a broadcast. A guy in the press was trying to bust President Trump's balls over firing Michael Atkinson. In responding, after blasting the hell out of Atkinson, President Trump started talking about Ciaramella without mentioning his name, but pointing to different people and saying, "You know who he is, you know who he is, you know who he is, I know who he is..." and so on. Then he came out with this: Michael
  15. 1 point
    I’m thankfully still working because my profession is deemed to be an essential service. Lots of new procedures in place. Hand sanitizing stations everywhere. Etc.
  16. 1 point
    Man, it's so good and inspiring to see how Brandon Straka's Walk Away movement grew from nothing but an idea just a few short years ago. This is doable and he is proof. Michael
  17. 1 point
    Tony, That's what's running me crazy. And the thing is, fear is making people turn off their brains. That, at medium range, not even at long rage, is more dangerous to civilization than the virus itself. That will cause far more death and destruction than this virus. Aren't the deaths from the virus enough? Why cause more? We humans can face a disaster and use our brains at the same time. Oh well... What's happening now is human nature in all its glory. I've studied a lot of the underbelly of the mind and can practically predict the way the herd will go, but I've never seen anything real that shows it on this scale before. What's worse, the bad guys are using their brains. Everything they are doing is aimed at gaining and consolidating power and, by extension, money. That's what they want. Thant's what they are doing. And people are letting them. I refuse to be a part of that. There is great good in the American spirit. Don't forget, Rand herself came out of the American spirit. The US was founded on the idea that man can govern himself through a participatory structure based on individual rights, not just conquest of the herd. I refuse to let fear kill that spirit in me. (No offense to South Africa. ) Michael
  18. 1 point
    The lady spoke self-evident truth. What absorbs me about the leftist mindset, they don't see "self-evident" facts, only a public construct of "truth". That's why you can't catch them out in lies and deceit, you can't shame them, they individually haven't the self-awareness to "know" what they're doing. Precisely as they could not, ever, justly attribute the president's influence on causing a booming US economy, they'll attempt to make the public associate with and attribute the subsequent coronavirus economic slump, to him. Followers with the same mindset will lap it up. Self-contradiction? Double standards, hypocrisy? Nope, that can't possibly occur to any. This thing's an anti-epistemic pandemic. 😉
  19. 1 point
    It looks like I'm not the only one complaining about this. Citizen journalism to the rescue. Michael
  20. 1 point
    Another screenshot from Facebook. That's Robin Williams, so it doesn't have anything to do with the coronavirus. Unless one thinks of Robin Williams being a man ahead of his times. Michael
  21. 1 point
    At first, Rachel Maddow was saying those ships wouldn't get there in time...now, they're crowing about the lack of patients? I can't, with these people...just can't.
  22. 1 point
    Maybe the ships are intended for other victims? Trump and military announced total war on [Mitt’s] Mexican drug and human trafficking operations. Many previously trafficked victims currently held inside US? Commander in Chief empowered to destroy domestic enemies? Total war coming with some near death to be freed, protected, and healed?
  23. 1 point
    I don't know if there is anything else behind this, but if true... Are you friggin' kidding me?!!! BROKEN MODELS: The CDC Doctors Screwed Up Bigly! USNS Comfort in NY Harbor Sits Idle with 3 Patients -- USNS Mercy in LA has Only 15 Patients These are big-ass ships. Ask yourself the following if you are in a panic: If I allow evil people to destroy the society around me, will that help my panic? Get rational, people. There are things--effective things--that can be done about COVID-19, but they start with correctly identifying reality. If Objectivism means anything, it means identifying reality to the best of one's ability. And one big honking part of reality is that the media sucks right now. It promotes panic on purpose with lies--with INCORRECTLY identifying reality. There is a widespread medical situation that requires diligence, but panic is making people do all the wrong things. Michael
  24. 1 point
    That ring again. Mount Sinai’s “first patient” in Central Park wears one.
  25. 1 point
    Feds are charging him with intentionally attempting to destroy Mercy. What possible motive? Is that ship for something other than what you are being told? https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/train-operator-port-los-angeles-charged-derailing-locomotive-near-us-navy-s-hospital
  26. 1 point
    Here is Polly just trashing the "trusted voices" in the mainstream for being so contradictory. Her thesis is that when people keep getting a barrage of contradictory stories from the same people all the time--people they've trusted before--this throws them off balance. And they know full well that people off-balance are properly prepared for being led to places they may not otherwise want to go. These off-balance people want to restore some sense of balance so much, they make the tradeoff and go where they are led. Especially to places where crony elitists stand to make a killing by offering solutions to their fear. This means Silicon Valley related companies that offer home medical treatment through proprietary apps, to those involved in vaccines, home entertainment, even to those who offer work at home opportunities on a mass scale. Everything. Imagine how much money can be made by cronies with plenty of cash flow during a time when the entire country resets economically to the citizens staying at home more. There's a lot to be gained by bad guys from this virus. Not to mention the left and the items on the leftie agenda. Abortion. Gun control. Universal basic income. Single-payer medical system. And on and on and on. Fortunately, citizen journalists are too numerous right now to let all this go without challenge. As Polly shows, some of the "trusted voices" propped up by the media who tell people to stay home, etc., have financial ties to companies who stand to rake in the moolah from this situation. In other words, in the end, scaring people to death is great for their pockets. And, of course, they try to hide their monetary connections and interests. Polly's facts, as usual, are devastating. From what she said, she only scratched the surface in this video. At least you get a sense of clarity when she talks and puts things side by side. At least I do. I think her perspective here is so important in the current context, I'm giving the BitChute version in addition to the YouTube one since I believe it entirely possible the YouTube video gets banned. Here's the YouTube video: As Polly said near the end (my bold--and the big names she referred to were the "trusted voices" the media prop up): Michael
  27. 1 point
    Not One April Fool's Joke This Year? Wow. Nobody is making an April Fool's joke on OL this year. Why? Does anyone think it's because people are insecure? Maybe because they do not resonate with practical jokes when they feel like society is going upside down all around them? Something to think about. Anyway, it doesn't matter. I'm going to close down OL. I have to. I've had it. Frankly it will be a relief. April Fool! Michael