THE CLANCY CASE AND CHILDHOOD EXPENDABILITY

    As we mentioned in our last article, postmodern American attitudes towards children is deeply hypocritical---like most of our attitudes towards everything else. One of the commonest soundbites that political and social charlatans employ to promote their evil agendas is that their proposals are 'for the children,' or 'to keep our kids safe.' Such phrases work like magic charms on a population conditioned to accept them. The truth, of course, is exactly the opposite: the US is a brutal place for children to grow up in.  

    The US Supreme Court decision that overturned Roe vs. Wade stripped away the facade that the welfare of children has ever been the concern of the American Left---although their fanatical devotion to Abortion, the overt sadism of our public schools, the corruption of child welfare agencies, the tolerance of homosexual grooming and child trafficking should have given us a clue to their characters all along. Not that the Right has been less guilty: they well knew of all these things and went along with them. Since Roe was overturned, only about a dozen states have banned abortion, while about a dozen more have de facto legalized infanticide, allowing for the procedure up to the moment of birth. 

   Our last post featured a flagrant example of how little postmodern Americans really value children (and human life in general). The Whacko Left Wing is engaging a moral crusade on behalf of a drug-addicted pediatric nurse who murdered her own children by the exceptionally horrid method of ligature strangulation before unsuccessfully attempting suicide by jumping out a second-story window. Note that this was done while Hubby was 'running errands' so that he could come back and find the scene. 

   None of this seems to have made much of an impression upon Mr. Patrick Clancy; the grieving husband and father who seems to be among the forefront of those seeking to make a martyr of his spouse. Less than a week after the murders, Clancy wrote a statement published on a GoFundMe site initiated by one Matthew Glaser, a hospice administrator, from Wakefield, Massachusetts. The stated goal of this fundraiser---which has netted now close to $1.1 million thanks to the gullibility of about 16,000 chumps---is "intended to help Pat pay for medical bills, funeral services, and legal help." I'll let the readers draw their own conclusions about whose medical and legal bills are being paid.

   

     Clancy's statement has an element of detachment to it which, for lack of a better description, is just weird. There are two segments to his statement: the first is something of a reminiscence about his family, the second is a defense of his spouse. 

     He begins by saying that, "Thank you all for your love and support. The warmth I’ve received from the community is palpable and your generosity gives me hope that I can focus on some sort of healing. I’ve seen all of your messages and contributions, including some from people I haven’t seen in over a decade and many I’ve never met. I see and appreciate everyone of you...Any parent knows, it’s impossible to understand how much you will love your kids until you have them. The same goes for understanding the devastation of losing them."

     Honestly: does this sound like a normal reaction? To me, it reads like: "You know it really sucks when your kids get murdered by your spouse. Thanks to everyone who's donated, so I can focus on moving on now and getting on with life." 

    Clancy goes on from here to deliver some rather spiritless paens to his departed children. He focuses on their habits; but there's very little in these paragraphs which express much sense of empathy or feeling for what they must have suffered. There are a lot of superficial observations, but nothing that really comes across as if he experienced them as human. All of these passages remind me of the way that some people talk of the passing of the family dog. In fact, at the end of his tribute to the youngest (an 8-month old baby), he makes this astonishing observation: 

   "If I was ever having a bad day, Callan always knew how to heal me. Perhaps that’s why he held on a little longer - to spare me whatever pain he could. As excruciating as it was, I was fortunate and grateful to feel his warmth until his very last moment. Faith is my only hope of believing he felt mine.Callan died with enormous courage despite being so little. Maybe it was his way of demonstrating what I need to do to press forward. I’ll always try to draw inspiration from him. He’ll always be my little hero."

   We're not talking here about a son who died heroically in the line of duty as a grown man. We're talking here about a baby who was murdered in cold blood. He didn't "die with courage" and he didn't die slowly just to impress and inspire you, Mr. Clancy. 

   This is another glaring sentiment that appears throughout the entire essay: it's really all about him. How he feels, how he needs to 'move on', how the children affected him; how "they gave me purpose" etc. I get the distinct feeling that this was not a good husband, father, or is a good man in general. Like many postmodern familial relationships, the husband and wife seem to have viewed each other and their offspring as accessories to their own lives. That may go a long way to explaining why it ended as it did.

   Our suspicions about these attitudes are apparently supported by what he has to say about his spouse in the next segment: "Our marriage was wonderful and diametrically grew stronger as her condition rapidly worsened. {But apparently not so strong that, while he observed her deteriorating condition, he took any decisive action}. I took as much pride in being her husband as I did in being a father and felt persistently lucky to have her in my life." Again, it is all about him, and how he benefited from the relationship. 

   Clancy then goes on to slobber about his romantic feelings for his spouse, which in the context of the killing of his three children, is revolting in the extreme. There's no need to elaborate much on these anecdotes, other than the fact that Clancy devotes a significant portion of his essay to it shows again his narcissism and detachment from human empathy. 

   "I want to ask all of you that you find it deep within yourselves to forgive Lindsay, as I have." he continues, "The real Lindsay was generously loving and caring towards everyone - me, our kids, family, friends, and her patients. The very fibers of her soul are loving. All I wish for her now is that she can somehow find peace." I understand. I'm sure that when they weren't preying on young women, Dennis Rader  and Gary Ridgway were likeable sorts of fellows too; family men and active in their communities. 

   Contrary to what postmodern schools teach, good and evil are not relative things. People simply don't murder their own offspring because "the very fibers of their soul are loving." People do not become violent drug addicts because they are "generously loving and caring towards everyone." And people's lives don't end like hers because "nothing matched her intense love for our kids and dedication to being a mother." 

   In fact, reading through most of the anecdotes of Lindsay Clancy's character---including those from many from her supporters---there were indications that something was tellingly abnormal about her as well. In Patrick Clancy's own description of their relationship, she comes across as toxically co-dependent. Co-dependency isn't a bad thing by itself; in fact, it's a positive thing. But accounts of her as Patrick gives them indicates a constant need for reassurance, and a need to prove herself a good---if not superior---wife and mother. This is reflected too in the accounts from some of her supporters in the nursing profession. One gets the impression that she was going out of her way to prove (likely to herself) that she really loved children and her family. 

   Dead White Male and psychiatrist Alfred Adler once stated his belief that suicide always had an element of revenge as its motivation. I believe that what we see in the real Lindsay was a mixture of deeply repressed hatred for children, her job, her husband, and her marriage which finally exploded under the influence of narcotics in one final act to avenge her life on all of them. Granted, we would have to know more of her background to bear this thesis out, but the established patterns are certainly present. 

   Ending his statement as he began it---i.e. focusing totally on himself---Patrick Clancy concludes "I promise I’ll put all my energy into healing and rediscovering my purpose. I owe that to all of you, Duxbury fire and police, our compassionate healthcare workers, our local faith leaders, the Microsoft community, and especially Cora, Dawson, and Callan. I don’t know how or when I’ll be able to do it, but your love and generosity will help me get started. I know that love always wins." All his talk of 'love' and 'forgiveness' being Virtue-Signalling, of course. 

   Most Ameroboobs naturally aren't going to think about any of this. A search on Google for the case is overwhelmingly supportive of the accused, and are variously blaming things on faulty prescriptions (as if a nurse wouldn't know about their effects) or postpartum depression (which is very rare, and presumably a maternity nurse should have recognized the symptoms). And only since our last post three days ago, three more Bills have been introduced in the Massachusetts Legislature to make America Safe for Child-Killers. I suppose that's what we should expect from a State with a Lesbian Governor and one that funds abortion-on-demand up to six months. In postmodern America, selfishness and stupidity are always protected; the lives of children, not so much. 

   

    

OBJECTIFICATION AND POLITICALLY-CORRECT MURDER

        'Objectification' is one of those essentially meaningless terms that's thrown around in American discourse. It's a neologism from the root verb 'to objectify', which has both a positive and negative meaning. In its positive sense, it is a literary term describing prose or poetry that expresses an abstract notion into a concrete form. The New Testament has many examples of this: for example, describing Christ as a Good Shepherd; not that Jesus literally tends sheep, but that His care for His followers is like that. 

     In postmodern usage, the term typically has its negative aspect: which is reducing a person to the status of an object. The term is most often used as a Shaming Tactic against heterosexual men who dare to find a female attractive. The reason that it is a meaningless term is because our hypocritical culture essentially objectifies everybody. Workers are human capital. Unborn babies are clumps of cells. Immigrants are hordes of invaders. For single people, we're lectured endlessly about sexual market value; people in relationships are told to evaluate its cost/benefit balance; even posting something on Social Media is known as a status update. People are told to have children on the basis of the economic value or deficit to a family: this is laughably called family planning. Children and the young are calculated in schools as enrollment figures (with price tags attached) and the elderly relegated to the same statistical analysis. Just about every aspect of this stupidly dysfunctional society is premised on treating others as objects and getting out of it what we can for our own benefit.

    Our Culture is vociferous in its desire to protect the children; which of course means in reality that children are the most objectified, exploited, and preyed upon segment of our society. The High Priests of Scientism do not even consider a human life to exist until the magic moment of birth; and don't consider legal adulthood to occur until the magic moment of one's 18th birthday. Between Conception and 18 years, a child or legal minor has no rights that society need respect. 

   For anyone who has been following much of pop culture lately, a new legal Cause Celebre has emerged among the Whacko Left Wing, in the State of Massachusetts. A 32-year old nurse and prescription drug addict named Lindsay Clancy strangled her three children---two toddlers and an infant---then decided to crown all of her evil deeds with suicide by jumping out a window. Unfortunately, the attempt was unsuccessful, though the killer remains hospitalized. 

   The crackpots on the Left have been running with this story: not the way the Media usually does by milking a sensational crime story for every dime they can wring out of advertisers. Instead, they seem to be bent on exonerating the suspect with the kind of zeal most often reserved for criminal scum shot by police in self-defense. Leading the charge are Clancy's fellow-nurses, you remember our Frontline Heroes of the Scamdemic;

   ...along with the usual batch of radical Academics, mercenary trial lawyers, and the bereaved husband Patrick Clancy who seems to have set a new and incredibly low bar for the masochistic postmodern American male to aspire. His GoFundMe page--which has topped $1,000,000 as of this writing---contains a statement from him that has to be read to be believed. At some point, we may do a further analysis of the statement because it really deserves a separate commentary. Not to be outdone, some degenerate in the Massachusetts State Legislature is already proposing a Bill which would exonerate future child-killers who belatedly changed their minds and decided on a postpartum abortion. 

   Letters have been flooding into the Defense Team in support of Lindsay Clancy, mostly portraying her in a version of the gentle giant meme we see every time a thug is shot by police in a prominently minority neighborhood. And the vermin in the Corporate Media naturally is playing along with the narrative:

   "Regardless, those who wrote letters of support said it was clear Clancy did not get the help she needed." NBC opined, "Stacey Kabat, who said Clancy shadowed her when she was a nursing student, wrote that she and her family members 'were betrayed by an inadequate medical system that has not devoted enough resources nor time learning how to help our new mothers. Please know that if our Lindsay had proper treatment this family would still be together. Please know that she deserves no further punishment.'”

    Like most of these kinds of defenses, we see two distinct (1) no concern for the victim(s) involved and (2) no sense of responsibility on behalf of the perpetrator, who is always a victim of the system.

   Without getting too graphic, I should point out that an actual dead body that has been strangled looks a lot different that what is shown on TV crime dramas, or even cleaned-up post-mortem autopsy photos released by the police. All I suppose that should be said is that once you see a victim of ligature strangulation 'as found' there's no doubt that they died in abject terror and intense pain. Death can take up to 15-20 minutes depending on the age and health of the victim. In this case, we're talking about preschool aged victims. Children at that age have an imperfect sense of reason and are still governed by their instincts; and the instincts of all higher animals at that stage is to run to their mother when they sense danger. Do we need describe the level of terror these children must have died in? 

   Ken Reddington, the Clancys' defense attorney argues that “Our society fails miserably in treating women with postpartum depression, or even postpartum psychosis. It’s medicate, medicate, medicate. Throw the pills at you, and then see how it works. If it doesn’t work, increase the dose or decrease the dose, then end up trying another combination of medications.”  There is truth to this, but it is no justification nor even a defense in this case. Our Legal System---correctly---has an insanity defense but this defense is premised on the Defendant's actual inability to distinguish right from wrong. Contrary to Media propaganda, only about 10% of cases where insanity is raised as a defense are successful, and certainly voluntary drug abuse is no defense.

    "A mental disease or disorder constituting legal insanity does not include 'disorders that result from acute voluntary intoxication or withdrawal from alcohol or drugs, character defects, psychosexual disorders or impulse control disorders.' It also does not include 'momentary, temporary conditions arising from the pressure of the circumstances, moral decadence, depravity or passion growing out of anger, jealousy, revenge, hatred, or other motives in a person who does not suffer from a mental disease.'"

    The truly troubling thing to note here is that this the second time in two weeks, we've seen a murder trial where the projected outcome seems to be based in wholly political motives. Unlike the Clancy Case, that particular case has become a Cause Celebre on the political Right. While our society has been trending in this direction for the last few years, the interjection of an amoral populist partisanship into legal proceedings is an acceleration of an already dangerous trend. True, we've had actual show-trials (i.e. Derrick Chauvin, Ghislaine Maxwell, Julian Assange) which were actually politically motivated convictions and the trial was only a farce; and the Jan 6th Hearings and the Rittenhouse Case which were also politically-motivated but the legal circumstances are hazier. 

  In the two cases profiled here, however, we have two very clear-cut cases of deliberate murder (at least according to the accusations) where the public is demanding exoneration on the grounds that the killings serve a higher political or social purpose. In other words, the lives of the victims are held of less value than the social statement made by their deaths. This is a complete perversion of why our legal system was organized on the principles that it was. In the case of a homicide, the State intervenes and acts as prosecutor on behalf of the slain, who cannot defend themselves, and the accused has a right to argue why the killing was justified, or why they are otherwise innocent. 

  It hardly needs explaining why such cases being tried by Public Opinion based on Political Expediency is a terrible prospect. Ultimately, such a policy results in the utter dehumanizing of the victim. The proposed Massachusetts Bill "would create a path for defendants who gave birth within a year before their crime and are diagnosed with perinatal psychiatric complications to be found not guilty by reason of mental illness. The bill, which applies to all criminal cases, also incorporates the definitions of postpartum psychosis and postpartum depression into state statute." 

  And what of the babies literally murdered? "Oh well...they were just a zygote a few months before anyway. Who cares? Babies are a burden on the economy; and this Bill will create revenue for Big Pharma!" And likewise the case of the migrant who was gunned down by an anti-immigrant fanatic we see the same responses: "Who cares? He was just some illegal immigrant sneaking across our border---probably stealing an American job or getting on the welfare roll anyway!"

   Americans at this point really need to stop and take a hard look at their values. If we've really reached a state where human life has no intrinsic worth and actual homicide can be excused on grounds of public benefit, then there is very little hope that we're going to survive as a Constitutional Republic. 

    

    

BLOODY SATURDAY REMEMBERED AND THE FUTURE OF THE WEST

      One year ago today, a paramilitary squad of stormtroopers from nobody knows where swooped down upon and routed a group of workers and citizens killing, injuring, and taking prisoner an unknown number of them. Dissidents had their assets seized, their property confiscated, children were torn from their homes. Protesters were hunted down like animals---what the fate of many of these captured is also unknown. This didn't happen in China or Cuba. It happened on our Northern Border, with our 'Government's' wholehearted approval (if not its actual complicity). 

    Earlier this week, Canada's Rump-Parliament ruled that the Trudeau Regime Administration did not commit any acts worthy of censure during the so-called 'emergency.' Big Surprise. Trudeau and most of his confederates are known operatives of the World Economic Forum; in fact, not only is Tiananmen Trudeau himself in the WEF's 'Young Global Leaders' club, his second-in-command Chrystia Freeland is on the WEF Board of Trustees. The Trudeau Family---like their 'sovereigns', the British Royal Family---are deeply connected with dangerous cult leader, Aga Khan. 

    Since this blog was founded, we have maintained that the two gravest threats to Civilization are Western Neo-Liberalism and religious cults. The struggle for Civilization always has been impeded by variants of these two tendencies. Authoritarian rule rests on a self-appointed 'Elite' backed by paid academics, hired flatterers and unprincipled armed mercenaries. The danger such systems face is that the population might realize the Equality of Man before God and begin asserting their Rights. Thus, leaders of false cults (and not infrequently corrupt officials of mainstream religions) work with the Regimes to mislead the public into accepting the evils of their Governments as morally righteous actions. Benjamin Franklin's maxim "Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God" is reversed; as we saw in the case of Canada where Churches have not only not resisted Trudeau's tyranny, they've fully gone along with and encouraged it. As for Aga Khan, he's practically become Canada's Patron Saint. 

    Lest we imagine. however, that we in the United States aren't only a few steps behind our neighbors to the North on the Road to Serfdom, we would draw your attention to a recent poll alluded to in our last article. Polls in America always should be treated with a measure of suspicion, however after examining this one in more detail, it---sadly---appears to be legitimate and based upon sound methodology. 

   According to these numbers, approximately 57% of Democrats, 63% of Independents, and a whopping 90% of Republicans agree with the statement "The only way our country can solve its current problems is by supporting tough leaders who will crack down on those who undermine American values." Four supplementary polls reveal that over half of these respondents actually mean that they favor Authoritarian Dictatorship and not merely a decisive leader. 

   The implications of these trends should cause us all to take notice. The researchers noted that "Anti-democratic statements are embraced by members of both U.S. parties, but more commonly by Republicans. For example, around 90% of Republicans would support tough leaders who crack down on groups that “undermine American values” – in whatever way the survey respondents define those values. More than half of Democrats take the same position.

  "Perhaps even more notably, nearly half of citizens who strongly support the Republican Party and over a third of those who strongly support the Democratic Party endorse the view that it is acceptable to 'bend the rules' for people like themselves to achieve political goals. This echoes other research that has found Americans, on both sides of the political aisle, are willing to sacrifice democratic principles and practices if it means their political party wins elections."

   This certainly puts America's rather passive acceptance of Electoral Fraud into some perspective. There's hardly any doubt among anyone cognizant of the facts that at least a high percentage of Democrats and the Left not only agree with bending the rules, but actively doing so. The worrisome thing is the high percentage of Republicans who believe in it. What these numbers show is that some of the alarming trends we saw in 2022---and described in four articles beginning here---are not an illusion, but have become deeply entrenched in the party system. 

   What we're witnessing here is a radical departure from Trumpism (which was really closer philosophically to Reagan, Nixon, and Eisenhower) towards the variant Deep-State Republican ideology of the Bush Machine. It's not without reason we've always referred to the Alt-Right as Alt-RINOs. The Bush brand of 'Conservatism' is based on Elitism and disregard for the Constitutional Rule of Law. Trump's ability to achieve positive goals came from the fact that he enforced the laws---i.e. made the Constitution work, Obviously, people who engage in rule-bending for power and profit don't like to see laws enforced; and it's no coincident that many of the hucksters driving the so-called 'New Right' are Never-Trump special interests from the 2016 campaign. 

   To put this in perspective, note that only about 10% of Republican and GOP-supporters strongly disagreed with the question:  "If political leaders believe that a news organization is attempting to undermine American values, they should take action to shut down that news organization." Ironically too, this coming from the same group complaining the loudest about Cancel Culture. Cancel Culture is indeed evil; but numbers like these prove that too many aren't opposing it on grounds of violating the 1st Amendment: their only real problem with it is that it is being directed at the wrong people. 

   The real antidote to both Cancel Culture and Woke-Left Media bias would be to enforce antitrust laws against the Media Cartels. If 90% of the MSM was diffused between 50 companies like it was in 1980 compared to the 6 conglomerates which dominate it today, we'd have information instead of narratives again. Unfortunately, practically nobody on the Right is even discussing this. Instead, they seem infatuated with the likes of Elon Musk doing hostile takeovers of existing monopolies and simply turning the 'narrative' in a different direction. 

   With the recent memory of Bloody Saturday still fresh in even dope-addled American minds, why would there be such a clamor for a strongman here? The article touches on two points, both of which fundamentally are correct. They note at first that this attitude is not recent---although today's numbers are higher. "About two decades ago, an important study found that roughly 1 in 4 Americans supported leaders who are uncompromising and take decisive action. These people said they would also prefer non-elected experts to make decisions." The study to which the authors refer was conducted at the University of Nebraska in 2009, at the end of the Bush term. That date alone is nearly self-explanatory. Based on my own memories, about 1/4 Americans applauding and supporting Bush's unprecedented shredding of the Constitution sounds about right for the period. This was roughly within a decade of the Oklahoma City Bombing, the Columbine  Massacre, another disputed Election, and the September 11th Attacks. Of the latter, Pew Research notes that

   "Just as Americans largely endorsed the use of U.S. military force as a response to the 9/11 attacks, they were initially open to a variety of other far-reaching measures to combat terrorism at home and abroad. In the days following the attack, for example, majorities favored a requirement that all citizens carry national ID cards, allowing the CIA to contract with criminals in pursuing suspected terrorists and permitting the CIA to conduct assassinations overseas when pursuing suspected terrorists...It was clear that from the public’s perspective, the balance between protecting civil liberties and protecting the country from terrorism had shifted. In September 2001 and January 2002, 55% majorities said that, in order to curb terrorism in the U.S., it was necessary for the average citizen to give up some civil liberties. In 1997, just 29% said this would be necessary while 62% said it would not."

   More recently, we saw similar support for suspension of Civil Liberties during the COVID-19 Scamdemic. The numbers since then were predictable, as we mentioned in a recent article: "We saw in 2020 a foretaste of how Americans will behave in an atmosphere of mass-hysteria. They've shown then and since that at least half will have little reluctance to turn on their neighbors or even family at whatever 'emergency' our overlords have ginned up. The 'war mentality' that's been sown in the American psyche since Bush 41 unveiled the New World Order: aside from the endless literal wars against so-called 'enemies', Americans have been bombarded with drug wars, gender wars, tobacco wars, wars on terrorism, wars on climate, wars on drunk driving, wars on extremism, race wars, etc: liberally punctuated with outbursts of Russophobia, Sinophobia, paedohysteria, fears of immigrant 'invasions' and 'health emergencies."

   This is not by accident: it is completely by design and part of The Strategy of Tension which the Deep State has been cultivating since at least 1990. This is also known as The Culture of Fear, heavily promoted by the scum in Big Media. The method and purpose of such tactics is to sow a mistrust of one another and of the world at large, to increase child-like dependence upon authority figures. Here again we see the interaction of totalitarian ideologies and the practices of cults. This is natural since our Deep State's psyop program was developed by the founder of a cult. 

   The Strategy of Tension is the second---and main---reason for the growing acceptance of Authoritarianism. This article itself recognizes the basic premise. "The key to understanding these views, we believe, is a desire for protection. Many Americans view those in the other party as existential threats to the country and closed-minded, dishonest, immoral, and unintelligent too. All this coexists with growing evidence that more people are willing to support political violence under certain circumstances. Many citizens prefer leaders who are willing to undermine democracy if it means protecting people like themselves from groups that threaten their values or status. Although most Americans do not subscribe to these beliefs, a substantial portion of the country does."

   Psychologists who have studied the effects of abuse in relationships on a personal level understand that trauma induced on a national scale can cause many of the same types of Post-Traumatic Stress on a larger level. Dutch psychologist Bessel van der Kolk wrote that: 

   "In child abuse or spouse battering, this mechanism is accentuated by the extreme contrast of terror followed by submission and reconciliation. When such negative reinforcement occurs intermittently, the reinforced response consolidates the attachment between victim and victimizer. During the abuse, victims tend to dissociate emotionally with a sense of disbelief that the incident is really happening. This is followed by the typical post-traumatic response of numbing and constriction, resulting in inactivity, depression, self-blame, and feelings of helplessness. Walker describes the process as follows: "tension gradually builds" (during phase one), an explosive battering incident occurs (during phase two), and a "calm, loving respite follows phase three). The violence allows intense emotional engagement and dramatic scenes of forgiveness, reconciliation, and physical contact that restores the fantasy of fusion and symbiosis. Hence, there are two powerful sources of reinforcement: the "arousal-jag" or excitement before the violence and the peace of surrender afterwards, Both of these responses, placed at appropriate intervals, reinforce the traumatic bond between victim and abuser. To varying degrees, the memory of the battering incidents is state-dependent or dissociated, and thus only comes back in full force during renewed situations of terror. This interferes with good judgment about the relationship and allows longing for love and reconciliation to overcome realistic fears." This is of course a pattern which both cult leaders and aspiring dictators employ. They create the surreal dichotomy of being both the source of the Trauma and the protection against Traumatic experiences. We hear much today about school bullying: what's often overlooked is that juvenile bullies often form gangs around them composed of other victims of bullying who've identified with their tormentor and become loyal to them. Most grown-up bullies---who seem to drift towards positions of authority---do essentially the same thing in their respective social milieux. 

    Van der Kolk also explains how narcotics play a part: "Freud observed that early memory traces can be activated by later events that cause partial reliving of earlier traumas in the form of affect states, anxiety, or re-enactments. Patients generally had a poor memory for traumatic childhood events, until they were brought back, by means of hypnosis, to a state of mind similar to the one they were in at the time of the trauma. In the past few decades, these notions have gained scientific confirmation with the discovery of state-dependent learning; for example what is learned under the influence of a particular drug tends to become dissociated and seemingly lost until return of the state similar to the one in which the memory was stored. State dependency can be roughly related to arousal levels. For example, state-dependent learning in humans is produced by both psychostimulants and depressants: alcohol, marijuana, barbiturates, and amphetamines as well as other psychoactive agents... Disinhibition resulting from drugs or alcohol strongly facilitates the occurrence of such reliving experiences, which then may take the form of acting out violent or sexual traumatic episodes."

    It's not without reason therefore that the Deep Statists both in Canada and the US also encourage the breakdown of family, faith, and community, as well as promoting the consumption of narcotics. 

   This is why it is extremely important for those of us on the Right not only lay these facts out to the general public; but it is also highly important that we expose and call out the same tendencies within our own movement. The fantasies of various pundits notwithstanding, a Right-Wing dictatorship is no improvement over a Left-Wing one. No government that disregards the Constitution and holds that Rights are unequal is going to amount to anything positive. 

AMERICAN CULTURE IS OFFICIALLY LOSING IT

     So, as predicted this has been an 'interesting' week in the news. The nominal Heads-of-State in the US and Canada seem to be playing a high-level arcade game of shooting balloons. The score so far is Biden 3, Trudeau 1. When all of these objects were shot down, nobody in the Pentagon actually knew what they were; but acting first and thinking later seems to be how Americans operate these days. The Pentagon didn't even rule out the idea that the craft were extraterrestrial in origin: I can't imagine that killing citizens of a highly advanced civilization is a smart idea, but I'm presumed to know nothing, not having gone to West Point. We can all rest easy, since we now know that one was a Chinese weather balloon (since China admitted to that one). Two of the other three have been identified as a weather balloon operated by the US National Weather Service and the other a test balloon released by a ballooning club in Chicago. 

   The Super Bowl was predictable too: having watched enough World Wrestling Federation matches in my youth, one can fairly accurately guess how postmodern-era NFL games are going to come out. I didn't watch the spectacle; but surprisingly the halftime show wasn't as weirdly cultish as usual (relatively speaking of course) other than having pregnant celebrity as its centerpiece. Apparently there was also an ad run at some point that portrayed Jesus that some interpreted as too positive, bringing down the ire of Congressional Democrats. Meanwhile, an NFL player named Juju (no really, his real name) arrived at the game wearing a dress. 

   On the subject of praying and Congress; the media has been hyping mass-shootings again this week. After yet another suspiciously timed and executed shooting at Michigan State University, an exasperated State Legislator pushed the 'Berserk Button' online and demanded that people stop praying and pass more gun laws. Not to be outdone, Left-Wing Whacko extraordinaire Keith Olbermann called for an economic civil war against so-called 'Red States.' 

   I can't help but think that it's got to be the drugs. Decades now of high-potency pot; prescription SSRI's and over-prescriptions of opioids, amphetamines, and barbiturates---not to mention ever more potent street drugs and God-only-knows-what toxins are dumped into processed foods may indeed be the reason behind what is now obviously a national Nervous Breakdown bordering on outright Schizophrenia. 

   People, especially those of the Boomer and Gen X ages ought to reflect on this very carefully. At the turn of the last century, did any of us imagine that less than 25 years into the future, we'd be panicking over weather balloons and influenza outbreaks to the point where it became a National Security issue? Did we envision hideous men winning beauty contests and NFL stars wearing dresses at the Super Bowl? Who among us predicted that going to Church would be equated with Right-Wing Extremism or that migrant sharecroppers picking strawberries in California would be believed to be spearheading an invasion of the United States? 

  It's gotten so bad that the foreign press is openly starting to ask serious questions about it---questions that our media ought to be asking. Actually, it was starting to become apparent just a few years ago. President Trump was making actual progress in turning back our national problem with drug abuse, and we saw the first significant decline in overdose deaths in years. But 'Orange Man Bad' and today we're back to---and exceeding--- pre-2016 levels of drug-related fatalities. It's isn't even the fatalities that are the whole problem: it's the increasingly self-evident effects on the human mind of the survivors. The article cited above noted that in 2008:

  “Once psychiatrists started putting ‘hyperactive’ children on Ritalin, they started to see prepubertal children with manic symptoms. Same thing happened when psychiatrists started prescribing antidepressants to children and teenagers. A significant percentage had manic or hypomanic reactions to the antidepressants. And then these children and teenagers are put on heavier duty drugs, including drug cocktails, often do not respond favorably to treatment and deteriorate. And that is a major reason for the 35-fold increase between 1987 and 2007 of children classified as being disabled by mental disorders."

    So it isn't exactly as though Americans didn't know what was going on or where any of this was likely to lead. As another indicator, consider that there have been nearly 16,000 overdoses in the US Military over the last five years, 332 of them fatal. As the study released by China showed that, while the MSM is pushing gun violence onto the front pages, the death toll from narcotics overdoses is eight times higher than deaths from firearms. The Chinese experts attributed the reason behind our addiction rates is "social malaise" which is probably not far from the truth. 

   My own feeling is that this is part of a deliberate Strategy of Tension, whereby the Elites are intentionally fomenting mass-hysteria, fear, chaos, despair, violence, and general insanity to obtain a strong enough plurality of Americans to demand a dictatorship simply to restore order. Before the rent-a-skeptic crowd begins knee-slapping and hooting about tin-foil hats, read this poll first and prepare to eat crow. Bear in mind that the source here is not exactly a site that tends to lean Conservative. Their findings? "Anti-democratic statements are embraced by members of both U.S. parties, but more commonly by Republicans. For example, around 90% of Republicans would support tough leaders who crack down on groups that “undermine American values” – however the survey respondents define those values. More than half of Democrats take the same position."

   In an upcoming article, we'll break down these poll numbers and analyze it in further detail. But for now, we should see the drug problem as part of a larger issue that is systematically dragging down our culture. Others have noted that breaking down of traditional institutions like religion and family are contributing factors; but we also have to understand the breakdown of these personal support networks is part of the same deliberate strategy. If the end goal is to coerce the populace into accepting a dictatorship, then obviously undermining alternative support networks---family, faith, community, and education---is to the Elites' advantage. 

    

   

THIS IS JUST SICK

    Once upon a time, an American Conservative was someone who stood for American values. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Faith, Family, and Freedom. Equality Before the Law. Fair Play, Competition, and Free Enterprise. 

   Then, somewhere along the line, the Right lost its way. Greed, selfishness, and cruelty became virtuous. Manipulating the system and the pursuit of power replaced reasoned debate and leading by example. Force and fraud became good policy while a mockery was made of friendship and faith and the value of a single human life. We hardly need to give examples: anyone who's watched the last 30 years of a movement built by the likes of Reagan and Buckley degenerate into the moral Anarchism of today's Republican Party has seen it. The last 10-20 years have been especially bad; the rise of the Red Pill Cult with its nihilistic the ends justify any means philosophy; human beings translated into human capital---all the way down to having a sexual market value and the recent displays of governors using migrants as show-props. Our system was predicated on the Right of free men to choose from among them representatives best qualified to administer a free State and safeguard those freedoms; not bowing to some 'Alpha' like a bunch of savages dancing around their war-chief. 

    As if we needed any further proof of the level to which 2023 'Conservatism' has sunk, Eric Lendrum, one of the pundits of the 'New Right' wrote this disgusting article published on a leading 'Conservative' website---a site which seems to be degenerating exponentially into White Supremacy, Nihilism, and the Cult of the Alpha Superman. We'll have more to say about Mr. Lendrum presently, but first the problems with his thinking.

   Now the background to this story is that crowdsourcing platform GoFundMe refused funding for the legal defense of an Arizona man facing 1st Degree Murder Charges and $1 million bail for allegedly killing a migrant who was trespassing on his property. Lendrum is all in a knot over this; foaming about "the left-wing crowdfunding website...has shut down all fundraisers for an Arizona cattle rancher who defended his property by killing an illegal alien, thus leaving him and his wife to bear the financial burden of the coming legal battle," which---the last time I checked was the right of a company to set its own Terms of Use. Especially in this case because GoFundMe is not a monopoly and Lendrum even mentions other sites where donations can be made. 

   This type of promoting a Conservative version of Cancel Culture is disturbing enough: but what's particularly chilling about this article is that Lendrum seems more outraged over one company's refusal to fund a legal defense than he is about the actual circumstances involved in the crime. Remember here that we're not talking about some 'woke' Liberal county in California where people don't even stop robberies because they think it's too mean. We're talking about Santa Cruz County Arizona---where the sheriffs don't exactly have a reputation for being anti-2nd Amendment. Arizona, in fact, has some of the most lenient gun and self-defense laws; and for them to charge someone with premeditated murder should imply that something a little more than self-defense was involved here. 

  In fact, there is a lot more to this story. The suspect, George Alan Kelly, is portrayed by Lendrum as "an Arizona cattle rancher who defended his property by killing an illegal alien," and by his shady alternative fundraiser as "a simple farmer, who should be protected by the government, has been abandoned and had to defend himself. That is bad enough, but the government that caused this, now wishes to persecute him.”

      

    We get a little different picture of things by hearing what the police and other officials actually said. According to the police, on January 30th, there were shots fired at a fleeing group around 3 P.M. in Kino Springs, (a 20 year old subdivision of Nogales, Arizona; and not a ranch passed down from generation to generation as is being assumed). Police found nothing at the time (which also doesn't seem to square very neatly with the narrative of an out-of-control 'invasion' going on). They received a second call of 'shots fired' in the same area about three hours later. A half-hour's search found the body of 48-year old Gabriel Cuen-Butimea (yes these migrants actually do have names), a resident of Nogales, Mexico---a few hours' walk from the border. 

   Cuen-Butimea was unarmed, and was 150 yards from Kelly's house when he was shot---according to some sources in the back. Police matched the bullet to a gun Kelly owned, stating that Cuen-Butimea was killed with a single shot (likely at close range, since Kelly's weapon was said to be an AK-47, which is designed for close combat). 

  A few other tidbits emerged: Lendrum doesn't seem to have noticed that Kelly was not only a rancher, but a published author as well. 

  "Kelly has published a novel titled 'Far Beyond the Border Fence;' which, according to its description on Amazon describes how the protagonist and his men have to patrol the ranch daily with AK-47 rifles."

  An excerpt from said story:

  "Stopping construction of the Border Wall was just a ploy taken by Washington politicians trying to buy the votes of Hispanics living legally and illegally in the US."..."George had emptied both clips but he ran towards the cut fence with his Glock drawn and ready to fire. "

So far from being a 'hero' and a 'true patriot' what we obviously have here is yet another sap egged on by Red Pilled rhetoric who lost it one day and gunned down an unarmed Mexican in cold blood. Given that the migrant actually lived just across the border, he was probably not even intending to stay but likely visiting people he knew in America. As for Kelly, he's probably going to hang; and deservedly so.

What about people like Lendrum, Abbott, DeSantis and others encouraging anti-immigrant hysteria and violence? Nothing will happen to them. We've seen it before with these Red Pills: people like Vox Day, Gavin MacInnis, Andrew Anglin, Rollo Tomassi, Mike Cernovich---they go on getting fat donations, doing interviews, and publishing new books while the chumps who act on their advice end up in jail.

This is what is so sickening about all this: it's bad enough that dupes like Kelly are gulled into committing these crimes---but not a word of empathy or even thought passes Lendrum's pen for the victims. And don't imagine that it isn't contagious---just look at the applause Kelly gets from various sources:

It's past time that the Conservatives dealt with this problem. We don't need these people. Thugs, killers, supremacists, grifters: if it takes their kind to win, then we don't deserve to win. In the 1960s, William F. Buckley led a movement to cut these kooks loose, and it created an effective opposition to the radical Left until the turn of the century. Today, it's apparent that the only antidote to Left-Wing extremism is Right-Wing extremism: and that is no improvement.

DISTRACTION AND MORE DISTRACTION

      So, apparently it's happened yet again: the news just came across the wire that the drunken sots at Elmendorf Air Base intercepted a 'UFO' and disposed of it with another half-million dollar missile. Spokesmen at the Pentagon stated that the object "posed a threat" although they also admitted that they have no idea what it was. 

   It's a good thing that Phileas Fogg is retired: he wouldn't stand a chance against our brave xhes in uniform. 

    

     Ah...less uptight, less politically-correct times. If it turns out that the Pentagon just wasted the Goodyear Blimp on it's way to the Super Bowl...well, there will be no shortage of 'experts' with explanations this afternoon---likely before this post is even finished. 

   Meanwhile, in case anyone is interested, here's a sampling of some of the stories driven off the front page while Americans rush to the 420 stores and supermarkets to stock up before---whatever's planned to happen.

   1. The Pfizer Scandal: which would be really intensifying were it not for the fear of Little Green Men made in the Wuhan Lab. Where we left off, a pervert in Pfizer's executive branch admitted to all sorts of unsavory things including bioengineering and suppressing side-effects of the Loyalty Vaxx. This especially blew up in Asia after Thailand's Crown Princess fell into coma after the third booster and hasn't recovered.

   2. Classified Material Turning Up in Strange Places: The Corporate Media really needed a distraction on this one: Head-of-State Biden, his shady son, and treasonous Arch-RINO Mike Pence have been caught with possession of such material since the year began. Nobody seems interested in asking what this material is or how it got there.

  3.  The Nordstream Pipeline Sabotage: Seymour Hirsch, one of the last remaining actual investigative journalists in the United States exposed this week that the Nord Stream Pipeline was destroyed by American operatives. The pipeline's destruction ensured that Europeans will pay extortionate rates for American and Canadian gas; while American and Canadian consumers will pay higher prices because of 'shortages.' 

  4. Missing Kids: This is a story that surfaced yesterday and has been met with silence by the Corporate Media. It seems that since children and teenagers have been returning to the public school gulag system since the Scamdemic lockdowns, an amazing nearly quarter-million of them are unaccounted for. "An analysis by The Associated Press, Stanford University’s Big Local News project found an estimated 230,000 students in 21 states whose absences could not be accounted for. These students didn’t move out of state, and they didn’t sign up for private school or home-school, according to publicly available data. In short, they’re missing." One would think that this might be a little more important than hunting errant weather balloons; but even the AP article gives the impression that they wouldn't have bothered to report it except that schools' budgets depend on enrollment.

  For those interested, our friends at Vulture of Critique compiled a short-list of other stories that seem to have fallen out of Ameroboobs' miniscule attention spans. But none of these things make for exciting LARPs like shooting down UFOs, so we'll see.

  

AMERICA'S COLLECTIVE MELTDOWN IN THE STRATOSPHERE

    If the first six weeks of 2023 is any bell-weather of how this year is going go, then we Americans are in for a rough time. Just a few weeks ago, I get accused of spreading misinformation about the Loyalty Vaxx for citing the government's own casualty statistics and a Pfizer executive's own confessions. That labelled me a Right-Wing Whacko. Then, the country collectively chimps out over an aerostat that accidently blew over North America: I end up spending now four posts in a row countering misinformation about how physics and balloons actually work. That has labelled me a Left-Wing Whacko. 

   To use a postmodern term, I identify as a Conservative. I'm not actually certain anymore that the term means anything. Increasingly, Conservatism is taking on the aspect of the Alt-Right/Red Pilled Cult---which is nothing 'Conservative' but is really the Reactionary Left. I wish that Republican Leaders would get it through their heads that pouncing on every issue and distraction brought up by the Left and making it worse is not a winning strategy.

   The Weather Balloon Panic of 2023 is a great example. The Right has managed to outdo the Left in anti-China posturing and outright paranoia. This is going to end up backfiring on them. What likely began as the Junta exploiting the incident for a cheap anti-China publicity stunt is going to end with the Controlled Opposition Republicans looking like a collection of complete kooks. Just before the Balloon Hysteria broke, a story from a Beltway think-tank postulated that China is implanting espionage devices in Chinese-manufactured appliances to spy on us in our homes. This is all coming from the same people who defend domestic espionage as necessary for National Security.

     
    Sean Callaghan---a former petty official in the Obama Administration---evidently another Liberal Mugged by Reality, wrote an exceptionally hysterical article on an allegedly Conservative website today. Callaghan has bought into an idea which for some inexplicable reason has gained a lot of traction on the Right: that somehow the Biden/Harris Junta and the Communist Party of China are in collusion. It's about as ridiculous an idea as the Left's Conspiracy Theories about Trump colluding with Russia. One would think that the Junta reintroducing the 'Pivot to Asia', arming Taiwan, and supporting Soros-backed uprisings in Hong Kong and Xinjiang, that the alleged 'partnership' isn't going so well.

   Callaghan, has gone even further than most paranoiacs and suggests that the Junta actually worked with China to stage the whole incident. It's noteworthy in this context that the story about the second Spy Balloon has been dropped like a hot potato from the MSM. That object floated further downstream and is believed to be passing over Colombia, Colombia's a nice place with a lot of decent people, but it doesn't really factor as much of a source of global Intel focus.

   But if anyone seriously thought about the implications of China invading Colombian airspace with a spy balloon, it would make us all stop and think: which neither the DNC, nor the RNC, nor the WEF wants. Panic sells these days, not reason.

  Callaghan begins his article citing historical precedent: "It’s usually called an invasion when a military aircraft breaches national airspace without permission. America was in a world war the last known time foreign military aircraft invaded airspace over America’s homeland. Imperial Japan sent thousands of bombs on balloons over the westerly Pacific winds into the continental United States. One killed six Sunday school picnickers in Oregon."  Yes, and the campaign was such a resounding success for the Japanese Military that China has apparently been plotting the same strategy for the last 80 years. Luckily, the Junta shot it down on a Saturday before it got an American Sunday-School this time. Interestingly, Callaghan discreetly omits mention of more recent attacks committed by US drones violating airspaces and bombing out weddings, schools, funerals, aspirin factories, etc.

   "Yet that was not the last time foreign military aircraft flew over the United States. Before last week’s military balloon from China, it had happened dozens of times before—with America’s permission." Heck, it's not even the first balloon hoax hyped for military purposes. In 1896, a State Senator from Arkansas is said to have spoken with the pilot of a UFO during a wave of airship sightings. According to him, the balloon was armed with a Hotchkiss Machine Gun and bound for Cuba, which was then engaged in a revolt against Spain. (In the late 1890s, anti-Spanish sentiment was about as rife in the Media as anti-China propaganda is today). 

   "Take the Pentagon’s response," Callaghan continues, "there was none...The military refused to say when, exactly, it started tracking the balloon, but admitted that it had a track on it by the time it neared American airspace over the remote Aleutian Islands off the southern tip of Alaska. Yet, the administration kept the balloon secret for days and planned to keep it secret forever." On the contrary: it was the Pentagon that hyped up the 'spy balloon' narrative to begin with. Have Americans become so addled they can't even remember what the 'narrative' was just five days ago?

   More to the point, are pundits like Callaghan arguing that we should take anything coming out of the mouths of Lloyd Austin and Mike Milley seriously? Or his, for that matter, when he makes idiotic statements like: "That slow, simple balloon could have been the perfect way to deliver a nuclear bomb over American soil to detonate in the atmosphere before America knew it was under attack: a floating Trojan Horse that would cause an electromagnetic pulse, destroying the electrical grid and frying electronics across swaths of the American continent!"  A bomb that size would roughly be 12 feet long, about 3 feet wide, and weigh around 750 lbs. (You know, the kind that the Media 'experts' assure us can be carried in a suitcase and hidden inconspicuously)---quite a payload for a zero-pressure high-altitude balloon that can't even be steered reliably! Especially since it would unlikely cause much damage outside of a 2-3 mile radius.

   Nobody seems to want to ask one of the most obvious questions: why would China want to do blow up our power grid in the first place? Wouldn't Chinese assets in America be destroyed too? Not to mention the economic damage from the cutting off of trade relations that China would bring upon itself. These same pundits have been howling and complaining that China is buying US farmland (though substantially less than Oligarchs like Gates, Buffett, Bezos, and Ted Turner). Most of the produce of that farmland is intended to be exported back to China: why would they cause a major breakdown in their own food supply? 

   This whole narrative coming out of so-called Conservatives makes about as much sense as their anti-immigrant posturing or their pouring billions down the drain supporting Ukraine. Callaghan's prose breaks into the typical contextless, nonsensical, bowtie-clutching refrains from a Party now so bankrupt of ideas that all they can do is find boogie-men and scapegoats to chase all over the planet. "So, how would Biden and his administration have reacted if Xi asked to fly spy balloons over America’s military bases? Biden and his drippingly pro-China administration, Milley included, probably would have said “welcome to our open skies!” And, they probably would have thought that they could open the door to China, in secret, without asking Congress! No American should ever have to wonder whose side the president or the Pentagon is on! Congress and the press must get real answers explaining why China’s balloon made it over the American homeland! If Joe Biden committed or abetted a crime or a crime-like act to aid a Chinese military mission, he must be impeached and removed from office!" Blah, blah, blah, blah.

    You'd think that with millions of Americans dying from the side-effects of an unsafe (and often mandated vaccine); a few thousand more dying from Opioid addictions (which often started as prescribed medication); record numbers of psychos involved in mass-shootings (nearly all of whom were on FDA-approved psychological drugs)----Maybe Big Pharma might be a bigger threat? So far, Chinese weather balloons haven't caused any American deaths. 

   Since we're talking about bombed-out cities: anybody seen their own downtowns lately? China didn't do any of that; although American robber-barons outsourcing our economy to places like that did.

   Wars also typically displace families and create orphans. Is China responsible for our staggering number of fatherless homes, double-digit divorce rates, escalating suicide rates among children; crashing fertility rates, rising stillbirths and defective children? Did China make us kill 1 in 5 babies before birth? Were they the ones who dumbed down our schools and put Academia up for sale?

   If China occupied us militarily, they'd put us under Martial Law and take over communications. But were they the ones who concentrated 90% of the Media in the hands of an irresponsible monopoly? Did China shred our Constitution and lock us down for two years? Did they set up domestic espionage here? Did they weaponize our healthcare system?

  And, as mentioned in the previous articles on this subject: China noticeably doesn't have celebrities dancing around in Satan costumes and praised by their media. China doesn't have perverts reading nursery-rhymes to 5-year olds. They don't have criminal gangs taking over whole city blocks, burning down police stations and calling it a Summer of Love. But a weather balloon blows off course and Americans have panic attacks over that. 

   How about if we started hearing the so-called Right start coming up with a few solutions instead of trying to outdo the Left in their extremism? And how about if some of the so-called Christian Conservatives started standing up for human rights instead of looking down their noses at their so-called 'inferiors' for a change? 

  Last but not least: another thing that needs to be done is draining the Beltway Swamp known as the Pentagon. The Chinese have known not only our (obsolete) missile silo positions and layouts at least since the Clinton years. Clinton, Bush, and Obama all allowed corrupt defense contractors to outsource sensitive military equipment to China and other countries. A Chinese spy or two have been caught at such bases. A few years ago, an analyst at Janes Defense Weekly alleged that foreign satellites could scramble our launch codes and detonate our missiles on the ground---Russia's proven that they can control our drones in both Ukraine and Syria. 

  In 2017, during a confrontation with North Korea, the Trump Administration learned that we had no anti-missile defenses anywhere in the Pacific. Chinese submarines routinely infiltrate our fleets without being detected. Once they sailed an entire task force to Alaska---within missile range of Obama, who was giving a speech there---and weren't detected until some Eskimos reported them to the Coast Guard. And who can forget the time that the Iranians captured ten of our brave zhes in uniform---along with two gunships---and filmed them kneeling, crying for mercy, and throwing tantrums in front of their captors?

   The bottom line here is that the Chinese really don't have to do much to destroy us. We're accomplishing that on our own with very little help from them.