…In the final accounting, Charles Bronfman is not merely a man of wealth, but a pillar of a shadow-governance structure that has rendered the traditional legislative bodies obsolete. Our elected officials have been reduced to mere stage actors, reciting lines written by an unelected inner circle of organized Jewish interests that treat sovereign nations like proprietary assets. As the Epstein files continue to strip away the veneer of legitimacy from the elite, we are forced to confront an undeniable reality: the levers of state have been seized by a cohesive Jewish network whose loyalties reside solely within their tribe. Recognizing this hostile architecture is the prerequisite for the struggle ahead—a definitive political confrontation, Gentile versus Jew, that is the only path to reclaiming our country.
…The Founding of the Mega Group
In 1991, Charles Bronfman and Leslie Wexner, founder of The Limited and Victoria’s Secret, co-founded what they called the “Study Group.” The innocuous name concealed something far more significant. This was an invitation-only club of approximately 20 of the wealthiest and most influential Jewish businesspeople in America, a number that would eventually swell to nearly 50 by 2001.
The group became publicly known as the Mega Group after a Wall Street Journal investigative report in May 1998, headlined “Titans of Industry Join Forces To Work for Jewish Philanthropy,” pulled back the curtain on its existence. Annual dues reportedly ran approximately $30,000. Members met twice a year for two-day seminars on philanthropy and Jewish identity. But the guest list alone suggested this was no ordinary study circle.
Members included Les Wexner, Charles Bronfman, Edgar Bronfman Sr., Max Fisher, Michael Steinhardt, Leonard Abramson, Harvey Meyerhoff, Laurence Tisch, Charles Schusterman, Lester Crown, Ronald Lauder, Marvin Lender, and Hollywood director Steven Spielberg. These were men who controlled billions in personal wealth and sat on the boards of the most powerful Jewish organizations in America.
Bronfman’s 1998 Wall Street Journal comment, “From the beginning, we didn’t want to be seen as a threat to anybody… We don’t want to be seen as the Sanhedrin,” functioned as a classic tactical admission. By explicitly citing the ancient Jewish governing body as the image he sought to avoid, he inadvertently confirmed that such a structure of Jewish influence was indeed the functional reality he managed.
The clip just below has lousy sound and I do not know how to make a better clip. If you have these skills, please make a better clip from roughly where the video below starts at 41:29 to the end of Wolfram talking about computational irreducibility which goes to 42:51, and ends with ‘little things you can say’.
I would like to have a clip I can upload to this site. The reason for this is this segment illustrates an important point but the YT video keeps changing, so using YT timing does not work well. Thanks. ABN
I betray my poor education by admitting that I had never heard of W. V. Quine’s “indeterminacy of translation” until last week1. My ignorance is especially egregious as I have worked as a professional translator for many years.
Maybe I had heard about it but had forgotten. I am being self-reflective because FIML practice is deeply, fundamentally concerned with the “indeterminacy” of translating one person’s thoughts into another person’s head.
Quine’s thesis is not just about translating from one language to another, though there is that. It is much more about the fundamental impossibility of determining what anything means well enough to “translate” it into another context, a next sentence, into another person’s mind, or even “translating” your own speech from the past into the context of your mind today.
If I had known about Quine, I probably never would have thought of FIML because his ideas and the slews of papers written on “indeterminacy of translation” surely would have made me believe that the subject had been worked through.
As it was, I have plodded along in a delightful state of ignorance and, due to that, maybe added something practical to the subject.
In the first place, I wholeheartedly believe that speech is filled with indeterminacy, which I have generally called ambiguity or uncertainty. In the second place, I have confined my FIML-related investigations mainly to interpersonal speech between partners who care about each other. I see no solution to the more general problem of indeterminacy within groups, subcultures, or linguistic communities. Until brain scans get much better, large groups will be forced to resort to hierarchical “determinacy” to exist or function at all.
For individuals, though, there is much we can do. FIML practice does not remove all “indeterminacy.” Rather, it removes much more than most people are aware is possible, even remotely aware is possible. My guess is FIML communication provides a level of detail and resolution that is an order of magnitude or two better than non-FIML.
That is a huge improvement. It is life-changing on many levels and extremely satisfying.
FIML does not fix everything—and philosophical or “artistic” differences between partners are still possible—but it does fix a great deal. By clearing up interpersonal micro-indeterminacy again and again, FIML practice frees partners from the inevitable macro-problems that micro-ambiguity inevitably causes.
Moreover, this freedom, in turn, frees partners from a great deal of subconscious adhesion to the hierarchical “determinacy” of whichever culture they are part of. Rather than trapping themselves in a state of helpless acceptance of predefined hierarchical “meaning,” FIML partners have the capacity to sort through existential semiotics and make of them what they will with far less “indeterminacy,” or ambiguity, than had been possible without FIML practice.
UPDATE: Both indeterminacy of translation and FIML fit with Buddhism very well. The core Buddhist concepts of impermanence, emptiness, and no-self (or intrinsic self-nature) are in the same philosophical region as indeterminacy of translation and FIML. Indeterminacy provides a philosophical grounding for the emptiness, impermanence, and no-intrinsic-self nature of anything within the human realm. FIML addresses this overall area of indeterminacy/ emptiness with a technique which greatly improves resolution of what is indeterminable. As empty humans we are agglomerations of indeterminable thought and action, more or less floating in a thick Bayesian mist of probabilities which are likewise indeterminable, impermanent, and empty of intrinsic self-nature. ABN
Results from the March poll of 3,851 U.S. adults conducted by Public First show that a plurality of Americans question the safety of vaccines, support reducing the number administered and believe that people’s right to decide what they put in their bodies is more important than preventing the spread of disease.
God’s heart is torn apart by wars, violence, injustice and lies. But our Father’s heart is not with the wicked, the arrogant, or the proud. God’s heart is with the little ones and the humble, and with them He builds up His Kingdom of love and peace day by day. Wherever there is love and service, God is there.
How can a human being make this claim? I assume ‘God’s heart’ is a metaphor. But how does a man know where God’s heart is or what tears it apart or what causes God to be somewhere or not somewhere? I ask these questions respectfully. Pragmatically and spiritually, I largely support Christians and the flourishing of Christianity. A good Christian is a good person. But what theology allows Christians, including the Pope, to claim they know what God wants? ABN
UPDATE: Candace has been doing some of the best journalism available today. I feel a bit sorry for people who have not been following her Charlie Kirk story. It is complex, but you can jump in with this episode and gradually figure out what the stakes are and why the story is so important. Candace uses copious crowd-sourcing information to back up very serious allegations. Within months she destroyed the FBI narrative. ABN
Mushroom networks fire voltage spikes that travel consistently in one direction.
Scrambling the timing destroys the pattern, proving it’s biological, not noise.
The same signalling logic that brains rely on may be over a billion years old.
A neuron fires in milliseconds. A fungal thread takes three minutes to pass the same kind of message across two centimeters of wood shavings. The difference in speed is staggering, roughly 40 million-fold. But the underlying principle is the same: an electrical signal starts at one point and travels, directionally, to another. If that sounds like a coincidence, consider the timeline. Fungi and animals share a common ancestor that lived over a billion years ago, long before anything resembling a brain existed. The question isn’t whether neurons are impressive. They are. The question is whether they invented directional electrical signalling, or inherited it.
A new study by Andrew Adamatzky, a researcher at UWE Bristol, published in Scientific Reports, offers evidence for the inheritance theory. Adamatzky spent fifteen days recording the electrical activity of oyster mushrooms, Pleurotus ostreatus, the common edible variety you’d find in a grocery store. What he discovered is that fungi electrical signals don’t just flicker randomly. They propagate through the fungal network in one consistent direction, at a measurable speed, with a structure that disappears when you scramble the biological timing.
Fungi now join plants and slime molds in a growing catalogue of brainless organisms that can send electrical messages across their bodies. And because fungi split from the animal lineage so long ago, the capacity for this kind of signalling may be something life figured out well before it figured out nerves.
Adamatzky describes the mycelium as “a spatially extended excitable medium in which electrical signals propagate as ionic waves.”
The speed is telling. At 40 centimeters per hour, fungal propagation sits in the same range as ionic and calcium waves in plants and slime molds. All of these are incomparably slower than nerve conduction. But they share the same functional architecture: a signal that starts somewhere, moves directionally, and arrives somewhere else with a predictable delay. “Information is not encoded in fast all-or-none impulses but in the timing, duration, and spatial progression of slow electrical events.” writes Adamatzky.
Buddhism and Christianity meet at junctures like this. Buddhism is 100% about truth or as close to it as we humans can get. All Buddhist philosophy and practice falls into three categories: 1) morality and ethics; 2) mindfulness and samadhi; 3) wisdom or clear thinking, truthful thinking. The West is very strong in many areas, but weak in mindfulness and samadhi. Mindfulness and samadhi are fundamentally the experiential part of Buddhism, the experience of truth. For a Buddhist, a Christian who experiences spiritual truth is having a real experience. The Buddha used the word nirvana to describe ultimate spiritual experience, but if you want to call it grace or God’s love or some other word, that’s fine. Doesn’t matter how you get there either. A good Christian is as good as a good Buddhist. Buddhism is a living tradition based on a very deep Buddhist tenet — if something is true it is good Buddhism whether a Buddha said it or not. If something is not true, it is not good Buddhism, even if a Buddha said it. Buddhism is a living tradition because, based on sound evidence and experience, Buddhist practice and philosophy can and do change as the world changes; as our vocabularies change, as experiences and truth endeavors change, as new discoveries are made. On a personal note, I love these brave Christians. They do so much good. ABN
Most people who take vitamin C take 1,000mg in a single pill. Most people who criticize that dose say absorption drops above 200mg so you’re wasting your money. Both groups are missing the more interesting part of the data.
Levine et al. (1996, PNAS) conducted one of the most rigorous vitamin C pharmacokinetic studies ever done. Seven healthy men were hospitalized for 4 to 6 months on a diet containing less than 5mg of vitamin C per day. They were then repleted at seven sequential doses from 30 to 2,500mg, with steady-state plasma concentrations measured at each level.
The absorption curve is sigmoidal. Bioavailability is complete (100%) for a single 200mg dose. At 500mg it drops to roughly 73%. At 1,000mg it drops to roughly 50%. At 1,250mg it is approximately 33%. The intestinal transporter SVCT1 saturates, renal excretion increases, and the fraction you absorb declines with every step above 200mg. Levine et al. (2001, PNAS) confirmed the same pattern in 15 women. This is the part most people stop at. It’s also where the analysis gets lazy.
The fraction drops, but the total milligrams absorbed still increases. At 200mg you absorb about 200mg. At 500mg you absorb about 365mg. At 1,000mg you absorb about 500mg. You are absorbing more vitamin C at every dose increase. You are just doing it less efficiently per milligram. Less efficient is not the same as useless. This matters because of what happens on the demand side. Immune cells, particularly neutrophils, monocytes, and lymphocytes, actively concentrate vitamin C to levels 50 to 100 times higher than plasma through SVCT2 transporters. In healthy people consuming at least 100mg per day, intracellular concentrations reach roughly 1.5 mM in neutrophils and 3.5 mM in lymphocytes. These cells saturate at about 100mg daily intake under normal conditions.
But conditions are not always normal. During infection, inflammation, surgery, or critical illness, plasma vitamin C can drop below 30 micromol/L within days. Activated neutrophils burn through vitamin C during the oxidative burst, taking up oxidized dehydroascorbic acid via glucose transporters and reaching intracellular concentrations as high as 10 mM. The body pool, roughly 1.5 to 2 grams total, can be substantially depleted during severe illness. At that point, the rate of consumption exceeds what a 200mg dose can replace.
This is the argument for higher doses during illness. Not that absorption is efficient. It is not. But that the absolute amount reaching your bloodstream is still higher at 500 or 1,000mg than at 200, and during periods of high demand, that additional supply maintains the plasma floor your immune cells draw from. The Cochrane review on vitamin C and the common cold (Hemila & Chalker, 2013) found that regular supplementation (200mg to 2g daily) reduced cold duration by 8% in adults and 14% in children, with larger effects in those under physical stress.
The practical insight is not about whether to take more. It is about how to take it.
200mg taken five times per day delivers approximately 1,000mg absorbed, because each individual dose falls within the range of complete bioavailability. 1,000mg taken once per day delivers approximately 500mg absorbed, because the single large dose exceeds SVCT1 saturation.
Same total dose. Roughly double the absorption. If you are going to take a gram of vitamin C per day, splitting it into smaller doses across the day is a straightforward way to get more of it into your body.
For most healthy people eating a reasonable diet, 200 to 400mg per day is sufficient to saturate plasma and immune cells. Supplementation beyond that has diminishing returns under normal conditions. But during acute illness or high physical stress, the math changes because the demand side changes, and split dosing becomes the most efficient way to meet it.
Levine et al., PNAS, 1996 Levine et al., PNAS, 2001 Hemila & Chalker, Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2013
Stark new details have emerged of Vladimir Putin‘s poisoning laboratories where he hones toxic substances to kill his enemies.
Experiments are conducted on humans in a sprawling network of secretive structures highlighting the evil underpinning his repressive rule.
Investigative outlet Proekt revealed a staggering 3,500 people are employed on the Putin regime’s poison programmes.
Among the operations based on deadly toxins from this warped empire were the 2018 Novichok attack on ex-GRU spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia in the UK – and later poisoning of Putin political foe Alexei Navalny.
At the network’s centre is a little-known scientific hub in Moscow called Signal, created on Putin’s direct order in 2010.
According to leaked staffing data, the 500-strong centre is capable of synthesising deadly toxins, studying how to evade detection, testing substances on animals and humans, developing delivery systems and ‘gene editing.’
The sinister institute is run by a mix of senior scientists and security officials – including a former FSB officer – with reported links to operatives involved in high-profile poisonings.
The unashamed aim, according to internal writings, is to determine how best to ‘destroy or disable enemy personnel.’
No sources cited for this article, but I am posting it because it highlights poison and its covert uses. A good example of a probable covert use of poisons or targeted energy weapons against a prominent figure is Donald Trump. No way to know for certain but he appears to have lost touch with reality. When someone is poisoned or zapped with energy frequencies — 1) they will go off the rails in an exaggerated version of their former self; or 2) become subdued, shy, depressed and abandon their former life role. Trump looks to me like victim type #1. He himself appears to be oblivious to what he is doing, how outrageously he is conducting himself and USA policy. This is classic behavior resulting from some types of lobotomy, chemical or otherwise, and many kinds of drugs which interfere with normal forebrain monitoring of behavior and memory. Whether Trump is a victim of this or not, and I do believe we all must seriously consider this possibility, poison and other weapons are commonly used by governments and powerful groups to disable their perceived rivals. USA and the West has already been taken over by a small army of covert operators who direct their attacks against perceived enemies or people who may be blocking their grab for ever more power. This kind of civilizational assault is a form of ‘silent terrorism’. It is silent because it harms not just the direct victim but their entire community. Driving Trump crazy will do far more harm to MAGA, conservatives and traditional Westerners than unaliving him. That is a conspicuous example. When your next door neighbor, colleague or family member suddenly goes off the rails, keep in mind they may be victims of covert attacks. ABN
Ritter makes a few good points about the foolishness and feasibility of blockading the Hormuz Strait, but after that he launches into an anti-Trump rant that never ends. I put this video up before watching it. I do not recommend it except for the first few points Ritter makes. ABN
American Buddhist Net 