The Key Reason DC Hates President Trump – It’s a Big Club, and He Ain’t in It…

Something 99% of American voters do not understand.  Congress doesn’t actually write legislation. The last item of legislation written by congress was sometime around the mid 1990’s. Modern legislation is sub-contracted to a segment of operations in DC known as K-Street.  That’s where the lobbyists reside.

Lobbyists write the laws; congress sells the laws; lobbyists then pay congress commissions for passing their laws. That’s the modern legislative business in DC.

CTH often describes the system with the phrase: “There are Trillions at Stake.” The process of creating legislation is behind that phrase. DC politics is not quite based on the ideas that frame most voter’s reference points.

With people taking notice of DC politics for the first time; and with people not as familiar with the purpose of DC politics; perhaps it is valuable to provide clarity.

Most people think when they vote for a federal politician -a House or Senate representative- they are voting for a person who will go to Washington DC and write or enact legislation. This is the old-fashioned “schoolhouse rock” perspective based on decades past. There is not a single person in congress writing legislation or laws.

In modern politics not a single member of the House of Representatives or Senator writes a law, or puts pen to paper to write out a legislative construct. This simply doesn’t happen.

Over the past several decades a system of constructing legislation has taken over Washington DC that more resembles a business operation than a legislative body. Here’s how it works right now.

continue reading…

US Galveston National Laboratory investigated for Wuhan bio-lab ties

Galveston National Laboratory (GNL), part of the University of Texas system, has become a focus for investigators trying to track down the origin of COVID-19.

GNL is the latest concern in a wide-ranging investigation into US-China academic and scientific ties.

“Universities provided unguarded access to sensitive if unclassified data; American research institutions became hubs for information collection and the recruitment of spies; and universities with large numbers of Chinese students engaged in self-censorship lest they offend the Chinese government,” said Patrick Cronin, Asia-Pacific security chair for the Hudson Institute. (Prominent university bio lab urged to reveal extent of relationship with Wuhan lab at center of coronavirus outbreak)

The linked article has a good deal of information and is well-worth reading in-full. For example, a number of US investigations have:

…cast scrutiny on China’s Thousand Talents Plan, an illustrious program tailored to recruit leading academics and promote domestic research. The contracts signed for the plan, to the ire of lawmakers and federal officials, mandated that “participating scientists abide by Chinese law, keep the contract secret, recruit postdocs and sign over any intellectual property rights to the sponsoring Chinese institution.”

According to concerned lawmakers, the contracts thus offer incentives for scientists to set up “shadow labs” in China that emulate U.S. taxpayer-funded research at their home institutions.

But with the novel coronavirus having claimed more than 60,000 lives in the United States alone, the Wuhan-U.S. academia trail is now being met with an even more discerning eye from Washington.

“The scope of China’s exploitation of our open universities, including medical, biology, and other scientific labs, is only recently coming into focus,” Cronin added. “At the end of 2019, the FBI and the NIH announced they were investigating 180 separate cases involving more than 70 institutions

“In almost all cases, the alleged theft of biomedical research information was done by Chinese citizens or Americans of Chinese descent. Bit by bit, China found ways into government scientific labs.”

One point I don’t see mentioned often enough is if COVID-19 evolved in nature and jumped to humans at the Wuhan market, or even at the Wuhan bio-lab, what is the original animal host population of the virus, what animal is it, and where is it? If no host population can be solidly identified, no matter how “natural” the virus looks nor how “natural” its evolution may appear, a more likely explanation for its capacity for human transmission is it was bred in a laboratory by human beings.

related: Coronavirus NSW: Dossier lays out case against China bat virus program

The following links are all unconfirmed but plausible and very consequential if true:

Steve Bannon suggests Chinese scientist holds coronavirus secrets

Breaking news! A Wuhan P4 Lab insider and his family have successfully left China for Europe

China’s “bat woman” Zhengli SHI, seeking asylum in US embassy in France

Nick Bryant on the Franklin Scandal, child trafficking, and more

This interview happened in 2017 but is well-worth listening to today. As bad as the Franklin Scandal was, it was “just” one tentacle on a much larger beast. And as bad as child abuse for sexual purposes is, that too is just one (even larger) tentacle on a much larger beast. That beast itself also murders, maims, and tortures children, both physically and psychologically.

It does this for various reasons: to cover up crimes and discredit witnesses, but also to destroy the communities the children belong to. I have personal knowledge of one, now deceased, actor in the Franklin Scandal. His name is Peter Citron. I know enough about Citron to be certain that he belonged to a large group of prominent child traffickers. And I also know that he was connected, directly or indirectly, to another group that maims and kills children and young people.

It is very difficult to prove child trafficking for reasons Bryant goes into. Children who are abused develop psychological problems and become marginalized. They also feel fear, shame, and profound doubt that anyone will believe them or ever do anything about any of it. Children who have been maimed are even less able to come forward. Those who have been murder obviously can do nothing at all.

Part One

Part Two

From last month: Nick Bryant | From Franklin to Epstein: The Cover-Up Continues

General analyses of signaling systems illuminate fundamentals of psychology

Individual psychology is a locus or node within a larger social system.

More precisely, individual psychologies are particular signaling systems within larger social signaling systems.

It is valuable to see this because general analyses of signaling systems—even those having nothing to do with human psychology—can shed light on human signaling systems, including both individual psychology and many aspects of sociology.

When human psychology is viewed as a signaling system, we can readily see that narcissism is bound to occur because narcissism is fundamentally a simplistic signal system.  (See Narcissism redefined (yet again) for more.)

When human sociology is viewed as a signaling system, we can similarly see that parasitism is bound to occur because the exploitation of one system by another is a fairly simple matter.  (See Social parasitism in ants and humans for more.)

In like manner, we can see that social hierarchies importantly have evolved because they are simple and decently efficient signal (communication) systems.

We can also see why hierarchical system often are overthrown and why they often do not arise in systems where they are not needed.  For example, no hierarchy is needed for a language system once the basics have been established.  A parasitic or authoritarian group might impose a hierarchy on a language system, but that’s a different animal.

When individual psychology is viewed as a signaling system, we can see that a great deal of what we consider “disordered” or “ill” within that system is fundamentally a problem of the signal system itself and not the “personality” we have mistakenly abstracted out of that system.

Indeed, most of what we think of as personality is nothing more than an individual signal system attempting to conform to its understanding of the larger social system within which it exists.  When science is applied to “personality” erroneously conceived, we arrive at the many psychometric tautologies on personality traits we now have.  Psychometrics have limited value for describing societies, but are frequently misleading, even damaging, when applied to individuals.  In this, they resemble BMI data which originally was used as a marker for the health of whole populations, not individuals, and which can be misleading when applied to individuals.

When we view individuals as signaling systems rather than personalities, we can immediately see that these systems can and should be optimized for better communication.  Indeed, this is the real job of psychology—optimizing individual signaling systems. Not just treating “personality” disorders.


first posted

Imaginary communication

Normal socially-defined communication—business, school, professional, etc.—operates within known limits and terminologies. Skill is largely defined as understanding how to use the system without exceeding its limits, how to play the game.

Many other forms of communication must be imagined. That is, I have to imagine what you mean and you have to imagine what I mean.

In many cases of this type I will imagine that you are normal to the extent that I am able to imagine what normal is. And I will imagine that you imagine me to be normal. As I imagine you I will probably assume that your sense of what is normal is more or less the same as mine. This is probably what the central part of the bell curve of imagined communication looks like. People in this group are capable of imagining and cleaving to normal communication standards. If you reciprocate, we will probably get along fine.

If my imagination is better than normal, I will be able to imagine more than the normal person or given to imagining more. If this is the case, I will tend to want to find a way to communicate more than the norm to you. If you reciprocate, we might do well communicating. If you don’t, I might appear eccentric to you or distracted.

If my imagination is worse than normal, I will have trouble imagining or understanding normal communication. I won’t have a good sense of the cartoons we are required to make of each other and will probably appear awkward or scatterbrained to most people. If you reciprocate, we might do well communicating and find comfort in each other.

Normal communication, even when imagined, is based on something like cartoons. I see myself as a cartoon acting in relation to the cartoon I imagine for you. If my cartoon fits you well enough that you like it and if your cartoon of me fits well enough that I like it, we have a good chance of becoming friends.

A great deal of normal imagined communication is cartoon-like, and being normal, will take the bulk of its cartoons from mass media—movies, TV, radio, and, to a lesser extent today, books and other art forms.

People still read and learn from books and art, but normal communication has come to rely heavily on the powerful cartoons of mass media.

The big problem with our systems of imagined communication is they are highly idiosyncratic, messy, and ambiguous. We have to spend a lot of time fixing problems and explaining what we really mean.

It’s good to have idiosyncratic communication, but we have to find ways to understand each other on those terms.


first posted

Unrestricted Warfare: English translation

Since the whole world is now fundamentally at war with the Chinese Communist Party, I am supplying a PDF of Unrestricted Warfare. The text is roughly explained below.

Unrestricted Warfare (超限战, literally “warfare beyond bounds”) is a book on military strategy written in 1999 by two colonels in the People’s Liberation ArmyQiao Liang (乔良) and Wang Xiangsui (王湘穗). Its primary concern is how a nation such as China can defeat a technologically superior opponent (such as the United States) through a variety of means. Rather than focusing on direct military confrontation, this book instead examines a variety of other means. Such means include using International Law (see Lawfare) and a variety of economic means to place one’s opponent in a bad position and circumvent the need for direct military action. (Link)

The CCP did not disclose human-to-human transmission of COVID19 until January 20 of this year. They have known of the virus since late November or early December of 2019 and have engaged in covering up crucial information about it ever since. Doing so ensured the virus would spread throughout the world.