Believe it or not
TheeOSU
FUCK IT!
WARS AND RUMORS OF SECRET WARS
The more I read about trends in the new year, I shudder to think that when the curtain is raised on the world’s stage in 2017, the show will be explosive and deadly as it appears the Cold War is being rekindled and secret wars and occupations have been ignored in the mainstream media, or entirely censored.
The previews of the future that the elite war hawks want are now being presented in a theater of pain.
All predictions of war in 2017 will be made by left-leaning mainstream interests, as the so-called peace president makes his exit, and the new president deemed the fascist, is handed the keys to the kingdom.
There is no science to validate speculation about a coming war, only emotional tirades and propaganda being spun to create scapegoats on all sides of the world which indicate that beyond the president there are politicians and bankers with itchy trigger fingers.
Looking back through the pages of history we will see that the left and the right have somehow changed their spots and as we hear confusing speeches and see failed diplomacy.
There appears to be a pattern.
We have been lead down the primrose path of dalliance in 2016 and the madness that has crossed over into the new timeline is not showing signs of abatement. It is a time of ideological apostasy where both the right and the left are confused as to which country or ideology is persecuting them.
With this type of perplexity and division it is probable that our country is going to be in the cross hairs and the so-called safety net the intelligence operatives and the pseudo police state has promised us, will unravel leaving us vulnerable.
During the Cold War, from the time Churchill gave his “Iron Curtain” speech to Reagan’s “tear down this wall” speech, American liberals were saying that the Soviet threat was largely a figment of the Conservative Right’s imagination.
Now the left is championing the Russian hack illusion and there are plenty of neo-cons and neo-liberals available to destroy Donald Trump by believing the lie that gets told, over and over again.
The reversal of attitude is compelling as well as disturbing.
President Obama said that before he left the White House on January 20th, 2017 he would provide the president-elect a smooth transition. It is now apparent that he went back on his promise.
He is leaving us with questions about the legitimacy of our last election. We are told the Russians interfered with our elections, and this lie has become the all pervasive story that has lasted for weeks in the news cycle.
This should send a red flag to anyone who can smell a conspiracy that is over ripened and over reported. They don’t offer any evidence or proof whatsoever. They haven’t even shown us fake evidence. Their claims are based on anonymous sources, unnamed sources, and terms like “consensus view”, with not a shred of absolute proof.
Because the big lie has been repeated so many times by corporate media, about half of the US public, according to a recent poll, believes Russia interfered with our last election, even though there is not a bit of evidence to support it.
Any challenges to the consensus view are labeled fake news and this newspeak talking point has turned into a caricature of itself as some Americans freely use the term to describe any alternative news story that tramples their normalcy bias.
The words “fake” and “news” used in tandem are now potent magical words to discredit anything that doesn’t fit the agenda of those who play in the left wing sandbox.
Together the words “fake” and “news” create a dismissive stance against information and it is also a form of self censorship and a policing of language that is seen in despotic states.
These are trigger words being used in the secret war where censored stories will be more of the norm in 2017.
Every year there are stories that are conveniently ignored by the mainstream media—many our censored because of their inconvenient status, meaning that they are not politically expedient.
Most countries like China censor material that is politically sensitive both in the media and on the Internet.
Censorship in the People’s Republic of China is implemented or mandated by the China’s ruling party, the Communist Party of China. The government censors content for mainly political reasons, but also to maintain its control over the populace.
In the United States, we are supposed to support a free and open press including internet press.
The internet has been a vital tool in receiving information and uncovering political malfeasance that has been ignored or overlooked by corporate controlled network media.
However even on the internet, there are stories that don’t really springboard into going viral, which is also suspect in my opinion.
There is one particular story that has not seen the light of day and that deals with the fact that we are in the middle of a secret war, we are engaging in proxy wars, and it appears that there are plans ahead for many wars that may go full-blown nuclear.
Corporate media has not covered the massive expansion of US Special Operations Forces around the globe, much less raised critical questions about whether these missions result in meaningful accomplishments. The military expansion that has taken place over the past five to ten years is not “breaking” news, and so it has gone all but completely unreported by the corporate press.
Instead, the global presence of US military personnel is typically treated as the unspoken background for more dramatic reports of specific military operations or policy decisions.
It was reported by Nick Turse of Tom Dispatch that U.S. Special Operations forces have already deployed to 135 nations, according to Ken McGraw, a spokesman for Special Operations Command (SOCOM). That’s roughly 70% of the countries on the planet. Every day, in fact, America’s most elite troops are carrying out missions in 80 to 90 nations, practicing night raids or sometimes conducting them for real, engaging in sniper training or sometimes actually gunning down enemies from afar.
As part of a global engagement strategy of endless secret operations conducted on every continent but Antarctica, they have now eclipsed the number and range of special ops missions undertaken at the height of the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Every day, Turse wrote, “America’s most elite troops are carrying out missions in 80 to 90 nations.” The majority of these are training missions, “designed to tutor proxies and forge stronger ties with allies.”
Training missions focus on everything from basic rifle marksmanship and land navigation to small unit tactics and counterterrorism operations. Special Operations Forces have carried out 500 Joint Combined Exchange Training (JCET) missions in as many as sixty-seven countries per year since 2012. Officially, JCETs are devoted to training US forces, but according to a SOCOM official interviewed by Turse; these missions also “foster key military partnerships with foreign militaries” and “build interoperability between U.S. SOF and partner-nation forces.” JCETs, Turse wrote, “are just a fraction of the story” when it comes to multinational overseas training operations.
In 2014, Special Operations Forces organized seventy-five training operations in thirty countries, a figure projected to increase to ninety-eight exercises by the end of 2015, according to the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense.
In addition to training, Special Operations Forces also engage in “direct action.” Counterterrorism missions, including what Turse described as “low-profile drone assassinations and kill/capture raids by muscled-up, high-octane operators,” are the specific domains of Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) forces, such as the Navy’s SEAL Team 6 and the Army’s Delta Force.
I have received a lot of e-mail lately, from people who secretly tell me about spouses that have deployed – young men who tell their parents they are shipping out to Africa or Ukraine and others who do war games in American cities.
They have their suspicions about why and most say that they think the secret build up will lead us to World War III.
Since 1950, presidents have claimed powers to start wars even without any authorization from Congress. Bill Clinton’s war to separate Kosovo from Serbia in 1999 had no authorization, nor did Barack Obama in the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya in 2011.
Now, The Obama Administration has decided to stretch the 15-year-old congressional authorization for war against the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, or those harboring them, to include an illegal war against a group in Somalia, al-Shabab.
They weren’t even in existence at the time of the attacks in 2001. But it doesn’t matter; in our mainstream corporate media agenda the story of a lame duck president acting like a tyrant gets in the way of naming the president-elect a fascist.
The mainstream media willfully avoids the trouble of reporting constitutional malfeasance as he Obama administration over the last eight years has drone killed American Citizens without trial violating the Fifth Amendment, authorized the spying on all of us violating the Fourth Amendment and racked up the worst Freedom of Information Act response rate since the Act was created which violates the First Amendment.
President Obama promised greater governmental transparency to the American people. In practice, the Obama administration has set a record for failures to find and produce government documents in response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
Signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson in 1966, the Freedom of Information Act encourages and enforces government disclosures to citizens and foreigners who request federal records, with exemptions for disclosures that would threaten national security, violate personal privacy, or expose confidential decision-making in certain areas.
Though the corporate press, including the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times, has run stories on the Obama administration’s efforts to improve government transparency, most of these articles predate the dramatic increase in the number of FOIA requests that the Obama administration has failed to respond to adequately. And, whereas corporate media have focused on stories that seem to be false flags and fabrications, the American people are unable to check sources, narrow down documentation or even fact check anything that comes from the Whitehouse or the Pentagon.
This appears to be the game plan of secret neo-con and neo-lib groups who call themselves “The Resistance.” They are declaring a secret war against the President elect and will continue to block or censor block what the CIA and the neoconservative Trump haters fear the most: Trump’s vow to turn US foreign policy around, align with Russia against Saudi-jihadist elements in the Middle East, and bring an end to the policy of what he calls “intervention and chaos.”
The first phase of this assault is slated to be endless congressional hearings on the subject of Russian “influence” in American politics which reminds me of the old antiquated House Un-American activities committee.
We know that the corporate media has all but accepted the resounding narrative that Russia hacked the U.S. election. But as outlets like the Washington Post receive harsh criticism for perpetuating these as-of-yet unconfirmed allegations, it appears the media isn’t the only institution that’s failing to practice due diligence.
Last week, the FBI released a joint analysis report with the Department of Homeland Security that focused on providing tips to prevent another cyber attack. But the agencies also claimed to have proof Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) servers, acts that resulted in the leaks of private emails that embarrassed the party and Hillary Clinton and arguably helped defeat her presidential campaign. But even as the media has parroted this analysis without question, ignoring valid objections from cyber security experts — the FBI itself reportedly failed to conduct an investigation into the DNC’s email servers.
“Six months after the FBI first said it was investigating the hack of the Democratic National Committee’s computer network, the bureau has still not requested access to the hacked servers,” Buzzfeed News reported exclusively yesterday.
According to their report, Eric Walker, the DNC’s deputy communications director, said in an email:
“The DNC had several meetings with representatives of the FBI’s Cyber Division and its Washington DC Field Office, the Department of Justice’s National Security Division, and U.S. Attorney’s Offices, and it responded to a variety of requests for cooperation, but the FBI never requested access to the DNC’s computer servers.”
As the media continues to report the ‘Russia-hacked-the-election’ narrative as fact and their articles are increasingly condemned for failing to provide hard evidence, it appears the authorities making the claims are also failing to conduct sufficient research.
The outgoing administration is demanding a “report” on the whole matter of Russian interference ordered by President Obama to be placed on his desk before January 20th.
Now that Facebook and Google are creating an alliance with the media, we will be seeing mechanisms to filter out “fake news,” basically news and opinion they would rather you didn’t read or even know about, the truth is going to be even harder to get out.
Censorship is now threatening the free press and thanks to a highly-controlled and pervasive corporate media, you probably won’t even hear about it.
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
55 comments
Latest
Trump denies all of this because he has a thin skin and can't put his own ego over the interests of the country.
Part of growing up, @OSU, is having the ability to discern "real" news from the horseshit you just posted.
RM, Where exactly did I say anything about my post being accurate or my opinion? Your constant harping and dredging the bottom of the barrel trying to promote your often inaccurate and misinformed agenda says more about you than your actual words do.
Example: Being called out by SGGay regarding your originally verbatim statements about H Clinton voting for Goldwater. That mea culpa moment was good for a genuine laugh! There were a couple other times that you were called out by other posters but I don't recall the exact posts ATM and i'm not going to waste my time looking for them. You lecturing me on growing up and discerning real from horseshit is the LOL comment of the day! Coming from a pea brain like you I take it as a compliment, asswipe!
"This is The Ohio State University".
The SJG
Deep Purple- Hallelujah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b375QyD…
!!!!!!
SJG
Nothing could have a higher likely return, less overall risk, or greater satisfaction in the effort.
My scale is small, but eventually I will be my own VC, though a type of VC not before known.
You and your ilk are promoting fatalism, a spiritual sickness.
SJG
I don't believe in either fate or free will.
SJG
Deep Purple - Smoke on the Water
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUwEIt9e…
But I do need to stay guarded about my own, as there are lots of other things which tie into it. Economic dimensions, and sexual dimensions, are only part of it.
SJG
SJG
http://www.khoslaventures.com/
Now I have explained at length about how I dislike Kleiner Perkins. Khosla is a former Sun Microsystems CEO, and then he was a Junior Partner for KP. Now he does is own stuff.
What this showed me is that there is not just one kind of VC.
Now what Khosla does is interesting. But it also is not what I am starting to do.
Khosla has changed his web site, but one of the things I noticed was where they listed some of the services and assistance they gave to entrepreneurs. At the bottom of the list was cash. I took note of that. There are lots of ways to help someone build a business, besides cash. And some types of businesses don't take that much cash to start. These can have a greater chance of success too.
So there can be VC's who are not really VC's, meaning that most of what they do is not providing cash in exchange for equity. For some businesses, the VC doesn't really want an ownership interest. They can be more interesting in having the entrepreneur pay them service fees. And this can be ideal for the entrepreneur too, as they get mostly full ownership of the business, as well as a continuing relationship which all but guarantees commercial success. Helping the business to succeed by providing all sorts of incubator services, as well as employees at all levels, and a customer base too. Not really a VC, more of a business building partner.
Two great books, old now, but still just as valid today:
https://www.amazon.com/Honest-Business-M…
https://www.amazon.com/Growing-Business-…
Now I and my associates will not ever do anything with people we don't know and know very well. We will never deal with strangers and never hire people we don't know and never accept business plans which we have not ourselves solicited.
Suffice to say, there are lots of ways to help a business get started. And there are some people who will want to start a business, for one thing because subject to IRS limits you can use it to soak up taxable salary income, for some amount of time. So they can spend their money on this business and soak off income and reduce taxes very far. I have done this myself, and to do this was the only time I have ever sought professional tax advice.
Once the business is no longer in the red, you can start paying yourself a salary ( the smaller the better), but there are also other benefits as you own all of it and hence can never be accuses of defrauding shareholders. And then, you can soak off extra money for a time again, by starting another business, and then another and another and another. And they can be very plastic, and none of them ever actually need to fail.
This is the world we live in.
SJG
Deep Purple - Burn (1974), California Jam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8YU-Fcm…
There is some portion of the stock market still controlled by insurance and pension funds, and then there are companies which buy other companies, by purchasing their stock. As we have these types of practices, we have a stock market. But it's importance ordinary people should not be that great.
Thomas Edison I consider to be a strikingly negative example, the sort we do not want. Invented nothing on his own, but was able to figure out ways of getting money for the Moran Family.
I would not think that Bill Gates took much VC money. And he was very slow to bring his company public. Forced to because employees demanded it. Stock was a way of rewarding them, our you could say of not paying them. I do not really object to this. as IPO's are often sought by these insurance and pension funds, or by large firms who want to buy up their supplies or customers.
Not all stock market activity do I consider bad, just the bullshit Dougster is promoting.
And Dougster, people who start their own businesses end up owning means of production. Little guys who get into the stock market are just engaging in a glorified form of gambling, knowing nothing about these firms outside of what has already set their prices, and funding PARASITIC BROKERS WHO PREACH FATALISM, LIKE YOURSELF! YOU COULD BE REPLACED BY AN AI PROGRAM ANY DAY NOW!
SJG
Very few really big things have been done in recent decades. And again I am not against all aspects of the stock market.
Back in the early 90's the VCs got terrified of the large scale semiconductor FAB's going up in Asia, $1Gig. Nothing like that in the US ever.
Now today, there are US fabs of that scale. But the VC's had nothing to do with it, it was all the customer generated revenues of our semi-conductor industry. And also, without the VC's I feel that the semiconductor industry has made more progress.
As far as Musk, some cite him as a more visionary type of entrepreneur, taking as back to the days before the dotcom boom, as startups were running just a few months, and all software.
I do not know how much money he has raised or from where. I plan to read about him, as he is very interesting.
But remember that he had built a few successful companies before he went to electric cars, and then he started with that Lotus based 2 seater. So to me he is very much different from the types of people KP funds. Musk has been in this for quite a while already.
And most software stuff does not cost that much. I would say that AI talk is mostly just hype.
And don't listen to Dougster, as everything he says is just malicious manipulation.
SJG
I already told you I don't believe in fate so how can I be a "fatalism".
Finally, no I don't work for a broker.
Just keeping charging those windmills, buddy.
They started mostly by offering consulting services. And they used the software the developed on these jobs in pieces to begin making their operating system.
And they went on to provide the software for some of the most critical situations, things being launched into space.
One of their early consulting clients was Francis Ford Coppola, as he would edit his movies himself, in his directorial trailer, and he wanted this editing machine which would facilitate this, and show the frames on video displays. All computerized.
So these guys made it work for him.
Now they site a huge milestone as being the first time a client wanted to buy their software, or license use of it, instead of hiring them as consultants.
I don't know if they ever took any outside money. Not likely any need for it. That would just mean another vulture making demands on them.
And so today we see that their company is owned by Intel. Fine with me. That greatly compliments Intel's product mix, and their own internal automation needs too. Excellent use of the stock market, one giant publicly traded company makes a strategic buy of another company. And founders and employees get a big benefit, much bigger and much more tax deferred than if one was just getting a bigger salary.
And having nothing whatsoever to do with the fatalism and non-sense Dougster is preaching.
Lots of people who would like to start companies along these lines, brains, hard work, supporting intellectual environment, HIGHLY SUPPORTIVE SEXUAL ENVIRONMENT.
Remember, my salary is just going to be $1 per year, and I will have no ownership stake in other people's companies. Don't want to own things I don't control. Would never do like KP does, and own someone else's company. But for me and my team, there are vast other benefits to helping other people start and own their own companies, and get rich.
People who do big things are usually people who have studied situations very carefully and then come up with there own unique approaches. For me, vast amounts of money will be there, but this is not my primary objective, not at all.
:)
SJG
You must have a degenerative mental condition, SJG, because you get more and more psycho not better as time goes along here.
So given this, having such entities involved in the stock market is not a problem.
Dougster, if only you were just a windmill. You are part of an entire industry devoted to making people money crazy and making them believe that their own talents and abilities are worthless. You are wrong, it is not they who will be replaced by automation, it is you who can be retired at any moment, because you are a parasite.
90% of VC funded businesses fail. I am not really a VC and I won't be.
I've worked with people mentioned in this book, and this guy is spot on.
https://www.amazon.com/Money-No-Object-V…
Mom and pop businesses, once they are delivering a product or service, have a very low failure rate. Usually they go until the proprietors just get tired.
And like I have described with WindRiver Systems, no reason that would have ever failed, so long as the founders were healthy and competent, or there were others willing to step in and take their places.
25, what I am turning into is not really a VC, more of a business incubator, since there is far less capital involved, and equity is used for other purposes than repaying a VC.
AI is a buzz word which had been thrown around now since the late 1950's
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUcKXJTU…
https://www.amazon.com/Mind-Over-Machine…
SJG
25, things go easier if a group of people can recirculate their own money, and have less of a tax hit for each round. Many types of business strategies are based on tax deferral.
SJG
You ascribe a job to me I don't have (broker) and beliefs to me I don't have (fatalism/dystopian societies). All so you charge your stupid windmills and fantasize you're going to start a revolution that nobody gives a fuck about. When what really seems to be going on is you trying to find a way to get a bunch of non-hookers into some weird cult who will let you fuck them at will.
Your job sounds like promoting the finance sector and getting ordinary people to believe that they need to be in it. And I for one would like to see you retired at once.
If only you and your industry were just a windmill, instead of the main engine driving us towards a two-tier humanity.
Lots of counter culture groups have practiced free love.
But you just go your own way, and keep paying hookers for sex, as you work to turn the very same women into concentration camp inmates.
SJG
Most business incubators are run by VC people there needs to be a profit or the incubator will collapse on its own weight.
AI is more than a buzz word think self driving cars to allow people who cannot drive for whatever reason gaining mobility what a benefit to the blind for example how about robotics that enable cripples to walk
Like I said stop being so judgementai. The reason crayons come in 64 colors is there is something for everybody.
When there are other recirculation benefits to other businesses, one does not necessarily need to be getting much in terms of a business's cash flow or its equity. But like I said, the entrepreneur will be paying something for the services. It is an intentional tax soak off. The benefit the get is total equity control and the associated power which comes with that. :)
Well self driving cars are something we are going to have to consider carefully. I see it as more robotics. People have always assumed that computers can do things which they really cannot.
I think the issue is just this idea that there is only one way. Everything I am doing is based on a commitment to open some new ways.
SJG
No part of my job is not to promote people investing in the market. On TUSCL I just like being wrong when others are wrong and the bearishness on the markets has been a gold mine for me regarding that.
So given that and all your illogical, incorrect leaps still want to see me retired?
Yep, you're getting more and more bonkers as time goes on here.
Just another hole in his logic big enough to driver a CAT bulldozer through.
SJG
Please try to filter out the biggest logical holes in your arguments before presenting them. Unless it's your psycho brain preventing you from seeing those contradictions?
One thing for sure, zero exploited labor. Everyone involved is getting long term benefits and a great deal of other benefit.
I learned this from:
https://www.amazon.com/Kibbutz-Awakening…
Many feel that a key mistake in the Kibbutz Movement was when at the insistence of David Ben-Gurion, they hired lots of refuges as wage labor. So for the first time they had people who were getting paid wages, but they were not full members of the Kibbutz. So the long term committed Kibbutz members refer to this as exploited labor.
SJG
By Googling the Title I found the original manuscript was here:
http://www.groundzeromedia.org/2017/01/0…
A show hosted by Clyde Lewis, and (in spite of referencing Mickey Huff), the monologue is attributed as being authored by Lewis.
The main page of the Ground Zero site should give a bigger picture of the world view this article fits in http://www.groundzeromedia.org/
Mostly alarmist rants by a known climate change denier, some dabbling in occult/ paranormal phenomena, and rants about the end of the world. Lewis is known for this- and to a lesser degree for hosting Klingon Karaoke (read the biography on him on Wikipedia, its a hoot.)
I'm not debunking the whole article with an ad honinem attack but I do think inquiring about the author and the general world view of what we read is important here. I think the authorship was deliberately obfuscated here, and so I'm bringing it out in the open. If you folks collectively choose to read the rants of conspiracy theorists like Mr. Lewis or Alex Jones and form your opinions based on that, fine. I personally find that while the article does make a few strong points it is written to promote an alarmist agenda and muddies the waters more than it clears it.
I
Huge jackass the self righteous self appointed consciousness of TUSCL.
LOLOL! Your pontifications are great entertainment!