Saw it not to long after it came out...and captured it as I'm prone to do these days.  The guy's web site was down before I had a chance to look at it (though I have skimmed it in the relatively distant past and it can yet be tracked in the wayback machine (archive.org.)

I'd already researched Dr. Pieczenik to see if he might be for real.  Did some more research and my conclusion is that he probably is.  Quite possibly he is as real as a heart attack.  We can hope.

Dr. Pieczenik is a psychological warfare specialist and by all reports a damn good one.  Certainly he is going to use his skilz to the best of his abilities for whatever project he is working on and it's going to be effective.  Just like Trump and just about every other interesting thing in this world, what, exactly, he is working on is not something I can be 100% confident that I understand fully.

All I can say to Trump, Jones, Pieczenik, etc is that if they are for real they have at least one supporter.  I have, as many others, taken an oath to defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.  I didn't consider the oath especially valid when my ass was on the line in order to get the Bush crime family control of more middle-east oil.  What Pieczenik et-al at least claim to be doing is probably the first project which I consider to actually map to the oath I took in fact.

You are leading the pack Elwar.  The rest of us are watching you walk away.

http://www.infowars.com/top-psychologist-googles-algorithm-will-rig-the-election-for-hillary/

I've heard the Technocrats smugly and confidently brag about this many years and write off the stone-age'ers as no longer relevant.  A big part of what appeals to me about Trump is along the lines of the John Henry (or whoever) fable about the sledge-hammer guy who beat the new-fangled steam drill (although the struggle killed him in the process.)

As far as I can tell, Trump seems to be kind of in the idiot-savant category in terms of being able to figure out the public and formulate a strategy.  And, very importantly, do it as ethically as can be hoped for in today's socio-political climate.  Kind of like one of those (possibly fictional) people who can 'see' huge prime numbers.  

I'm sure that Trump uses 'technology' such as data analytics to a degree, but, as per one of my earlier posts when I explored the data analytics use by various candidates, to a relatively limited degree it seems.  To dredge up another analogy from fiction, Luke folding up the computer assisted targeting system springs to mind.

Trump certainly 'bends reality' in efforts to appeal to the less noble of humanity's characteristics, but he almost always seems to leave himself an out.  So, in this way he remains 'ethical'.  At least the way I define it.  I also find most of his tactical strategies to be similarly ethical.  Most of them are a form of what I consider 'vitruous trolling' where you use the enemies weakness as bait, us the adversary's miss-chosen allies as cover, and use the adversary's wrong-headed momentum in the same way certain of the martial arts prescribe.  ('wrong-headed momentum' and 'political correctness' are often interchangeable here.)

I do wonder sometimes if Trump is doing this stuff mostly himself, or if he has some well hidden confidant helping him out.  The more visible ones don't seem to have a very long shelf life.

Putin seems to recognize some of Trump's skilz as do various other human performance analysts like the Dilbert guy.  Broad swaths of people find him mesmerizing for probably a variety of reasons which is why his campaign got a lot of somewhat neutral air-time.  At least until the corporate media started to panic.

For my part I have a lot of admiration for Trump, but then I have the same for the likes of Kissinger and Cheney both of whom I would not mind seeing in front of a firing squad.  In addition to admiration, I also kind of like the guy and will until someone gives me a valid reason not to or until I discover enough of them on my own.  He's not particularly 'my kind of people', but that does not define who I do or don't like.  Of course there are policy issues which I don't agree with Trump on, but one of the reasons I like him is that he doesn't seem to have a problem 'flip/flopping' and more often than not it seems that his flop ends up for the better.  Seems that it is currently in-vogue for people, and especially for pseudo-intellectual people, to claim they don't like him but support him anyway.  I sense that this 'mush-ball' attitude is fall-out from the laughably transparent attempts the the establishment to vilify the guy and the natural human tendency for most people to be herd-like creatures.

Hilarious if true:

http://www.daveweinbaum.com/single-post/2016/10/31/Must-be-getting-NERVOUS-Look-at-who-she-leaves-her-money-with--allies-of-ISIS

I had a sense that this was going to be the most interesting campaign of all time.  The Clintons always come through with corruption-laden chaos.

Having Hillary's campaign airplane unable to leave American airspace due to concerns over 'flight risk' would be a nice little bit of icing on the cake.

 - Electricity will be in use in almost any conceivable scenario.

 - 'the internet' is, at it's core, simply a set of communications protocols.

 - Some people have a store of food which alleviates the immediate necessity of scavenging for it.  Markets tend to develop quite rapidly so the problem will not persist indefinately...though it will certainly take longer if the 'government' shows up to 'help.'

 - In many communities, cops are already the second-source for personal protection due to a variety of logistical and political considerations.  World-wide it's probably more common than not.

Me too.

A good skill to have would be the ability to at least absorb data, and to be able to transfer as much as possible.  A working understanding of crypto-currencies in their various permutations may be a big bonus.   ...or it could get you killed.

Let's talk 650,000 e-mails on what is supposedly Weiner's laptop.  That's a lot!  The elephant in the room which I've really not seen mentioned is that this smacks of a straight-up espionage operation of significant proportions.

One possibility is that the e-mails are archive backups full of spam and such, and that accounts for the quantity.  It still needs to be explained how such things ended up on Weiner's laptop.  Parenthetically, I would suggest rubber gloves for anyone tasked with touching a device 'used' by the guy.

It has been proposed that Huma sent material through one of her private account in order to print them off for her boss Hillary.  The way that these got onto Weiner's laptop could be explained by him being the only person in the household that could get the printer working and his laptop acted as a print server.  Fine, but that is more than one e-mail per minute for over a year.  650,000 pages at 1 e-mail per sheet weighs, by my estimation, around two tons of paper.

Anthony Weiner has always been a 'colorful' and 'excitable' character.  Some may remember him for such famous outbursts as 'the gentleman is correct...'.  One thing about excitable people with limited powers of self-control is that it is more common to get a glimpse of their attitudes and allegiances.  The Mavi Marmara affair, where an American met his end with a bullet to the back of the head on the steal deck of a ship in international waters, was at best ambiguous.  Weiner's reaction to the event was not.

Weiner also had arranged an excuse of sorts of streaming a good deal of data off the very device (presumably) that contained what is assumably a trove of potentially high-value intel...and a reason to be somewhat discreet about it.  (Many people here probably know that it is not all that difficult to embed data in a cloaking medium.)  I find myself asking if the Abedin/Weiner coupling did not represent some sort of Saudi/Israeli joint intelligence operation.  And if so, in what proportion?

The FBI's breaking from 'tradition' here would be significant.  A tradition, that is, of leaving protected political operatives alone and not going after intelligence operations run by certain protected allies.  It's actually not as old a 'tradition' as one might be led to believe by mainstream media propaganda, but it is one enforced strongly by at least the last several administrations and Obama's so-called 'justice' department in particular.  So it seems to me.

True (perhaps) IF they already have an ass-load of PM and no crypto (and some basic computer skilz.)

False (perhaps) IF they have have an ass-load of crypto and no PM.

Perhaps you would not have so many failures if you recognized some of the nuances of strategy.  Different people have different situations and there is no way to accurately predict the future.

BTW, it's a fair bet that free internetworking via corporate controlled global packet transmission infrastructure will fail (in one way or another) long before we hit rock bottom in a real SHTF scenario.  (By 'free' I mean free of various kinds of controls of course.)  Not that certain varieties of crypto won't be able to work in such an environment to a degree, but they won't work well for even the more technologically capable and likely not at all for the rest.  A dusty old wallet might be worth a fortune on the other side of such an event, but one needs to stay alive long enough to get there.

Er, nope.  Most nations used pot-metal trinkets or confetti as legal tender which is exactly the significance of the 'American dimes' part.  Probably doesn't need to be pointed out but American coin was 90% silver...back in the day...now just pot-metal like everyone elses' of course.  Money talks and bullshit walks when the shit hits the fan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_government-issued_Philippine_peso

Well, my less than successful Filipino friend, I have other friends who have had more success in times which better relate to an actual failure.  In particular, a friend of mine had been a child during the Japanese occupation.  Her grandmother had a chunk of bamboo filled with American dimes and she said it got them through the whole event.  Several years as I recall.

I didn't 'know' that you were anonymint but I'm also not surprised.  I figured you were some sock-ee individual and obviously kind of a wanker.  Possibly cyphercoc.

I guess your tinkering with blockchain tech has been as disastrous as your experience with gold.  I'm just kind of a lucky dude I guess since I've had nothing but success in my experiences with both.  So far.  Of course one needs to remain ever diligent and 'careful' to assist 'luck' in doing it's thing.

As for sidechains, I've not paid much attention lately.  A little bit of looking just now seems to indicate that they are right on track.  Purring along until they are needed and, presumably, maturing in the process.  Looks like Adam Back has taken over as Blockstream CEO from the last guy who I had not much confidence in.  This as much as anything tells me that things are right on target.  Most importantly, sidechains seem to be singularly responsible for thwarting Mike Hearn's attempts to destroy Bitcoin through unrestrained growth.  Even if there had been some flaw in the idea which was initially undetected, fighting back the HearnDressen attack itself would have made them a success.

I'll not make a final judgement until I have enough information to feel confident in doing so.  The most distructive thing one can own is a crystal ball because such a thing does not exist.

There is, by my estimation about a 0.001% chance that Hillary Clinton will find some reason within herself to do the right thing by the nation and by humanity.

My calculations for Trump being 'for real' now exceed the 50.0% chance.  Again, the elevation is based very much on the depth and breadth of the attacks against him.

The odds make it perfectly obvious which way to vote.  More importantly, that it is actually worth voting.  Donald Trump seems to be a candidate that I never expected to see in a final, and didn't really think possible at this phase.  Or he is a fraud.  One way or another, for the first time in a long time I feel that voting for POTUS is actually a meaningful thing.  As such, if the election is stolen it will be a theft against me personally of something I actually care about.  And I hate being stolen from, especially if the thief is a powerful entity.  Really pisses me off.

The idea that Trump might be a fraud has gnawed at me from (my own) day one and continues to be a source of angst.  The sentiment driving Brexit and Trump should have easily been picked up by the Bayesian belief networks.  If they were, the natural response would be to create a Trump-ish character.

('Bayesian belief networks' and 'rational agents' are described in minor detail in the interesting new documentary called 'HyperNormalisation' which I recommend to interested parties with an analytical bent.)

As I've mentioned before, the establishment resistance against Trump and the desperation to get Hillary installed, even for a few days, is building my confidence in the guy.  Maybe he pretended early on that he would play ball and may in fact stab them in the back and they got suspicious about this.  Who knows.  In any event, the mainstream media conglomerate has been decimated (in terms of credibiity.)  If/when their lease on life is extended by criminalizing alternate media competition, they will be less effective then Provda ever was even near the end.

As is almost always the case, we'll only really know the answers until after the fact.  Kinda like the now popular and completely ridiculous 'we have to pass the bill to see what is in it' I suppose.


I've started using the ignore feature here for the first time in half a decade.  These are either primitive bots which don't really even qualify as AI, or very pathetic sock-puppets trying to use the board as free advertising.  This zombie army seems to take two sides of a given issue (Trump vs. Hillary, 2nd amendment, 9/11, global warming, etc.)  Thankfully they are at this point fairly easy to spot but unfortunately that won't always be the case.  For now we can focus on identifying the higher budget flesh containing agents working multiple projects from a set of playbooks...and maybe occasionally striking out on their own because of their innate human weaknesses

Apparently not enough.  The ridiculous fear-mongering leveraging the shallow depth of most people's conception of reality in a transparent attempt to artificially inflate Bitcoin at the expense of PMs is a pattern seen in various semi-notorious and/or semi-desperate scammers over the years.  Cypherdoc (aka, Dr. Lowelife) springs to mind.

Perhaps I'll re-visit this thread to flesh things out, but the short story is:  Bitcoin and PM's are effectively the same thing with some modestly different and potentially symbiotic strengths and weaknesses.  In anything approaching a bonafide 'collapse scenario', it would behoove one to have command of both.  In a genuine collapse it could be life and death.

Trump is hated by the establishment Republicans as much as by any group, and they have done amazing things to try to torpedo his candidacy.

A vote for Trump is the biggest rejection of the "2-Party System" that I can think of since Perot...and bigger than that.  Perot was unprepared for the heat.  Trump seems to be as best I can determine.

I'll say again, the Trump phenomenon seems to have the potential to turn the Republican party into something worth supporting for the first time in half a century or more.  If we can 'embrace' the self-segregation of the douche-bag neo-cons and the kept stable workhorses (Bushes, Ryan, McConnell, etc) then this might actually come to pass.  In association with the utter kernel-level corruption of the Dems a fair number of good people might make the switch.  Flynn is a great example of this.

Unlikely from the Bathist Assad wing.  Painted that way by Western intel to help animate the radical Islam proxy mercenaries perhaps.


I was just watching Adam Curtis' "HyperNormalisation" which is thought provoking and worth the time.  He says:

 - Iranians developed suicide bombers in Shia for military use (OK to kill oneself on the battle field instead of waiting for Allah to do it.)

 - H. Assad used them in Beruit to get rid of the U.S. (it worked.)

 - Israel mixed Shia and Sunni in Lebanon where the idea hoped like a virus with some mutation which was:

     - also OK to kill civilians in Israel since women are part of the defense forces.

Something to think about as Obama/Clinton implements a female draft registration here in the U.S. ...

My comments on some of Trump's ideas.  Hopefully we'll get a chance to hash this stuff out under his regime.  Or that of someone like him (or like he claims to be):


I don't like term limits.  It is possible to have a situation where dedicated and honest politicians make a career out of service.  One of the biggest threats is the revolving door problem, and term limits promote this.  Right now, in the current un-holly swamp, we have the worst of both worlds where scumbags don't even have to revolve.  Draining the swamp would help, or completely disapear this problem.  I'm against it as a constitutional amendment in case the swamp draining is successful.



Right idea, but I would favor completely flushing the current crop of 'public health' down the toilet from day one and replacing them.  Maybe not quite that radical, but close.



After throwing many entire volumes into the burn-bin to get things started.



Lifetime.  Don't like it? Don't run in the first place.



Lobbying on behalf of anyone.  Don't like it?  Don't take the job in the first place.



Strike the 'for American elections' part.



All good.  I would make FIRST be: If the previous corp/gov power system interferes, WE will remove and replace the entire monetary system before they have a chance to torpedo it.  And the replacement will be favorable to the group who put us in power.  Namely, Joe Sixpack.  We'll also hunt down you slimeballs to wherever you may have fled just as we'll hunt down your ISIS creation.  We're not fucking around here.

The various efforts at citizen poll-watching and such are likely to have some potential and are likely to be countered.  The domestic paramilitaries and foreign 'observers' are likely to interfere with efforts along these lines, and a variety of 'new rules', no matter how absurd, are likely to come into play.  These along the lines of not allowing multi-media documentation or other audit-able capture of various parts of various processes (like voting machines switching votes.)

The 'red clothing' effort seems to be catching some wind.  This will expand the types of documentation available for forensic analysis.  A problem is that it requires a fair degree of planning (by modern standards) by the participants, and what we need is a good 'sample' in order to reduce the error bars.  I mean, people have to find and wear a red shirt.

Here's another more expedient idea along these lines.  Trump voters indicate their disposition by walking straight out of the polling place for a bit then taking a 90-degree turn.  Basically, an unnatural walking path that can be detected in a fairly unambiguous way.  Such behavior can be fairly easily communicated, and can be undertaken by participants quickly with little organization.

Mostly it could be semi-covertly documented by video over the course of the day of poll watching.

'Cheats' on the pro-Trump side would be for a cheater to continuously enter and exit the polling station without voting.  This would, however, be reasonably easy to catch in forensic analysis.

A counter-play from the Democrats (in this case) would be to violently assault anyone caught trying to demonstrate their pro-Trump voting patterns via colors, walk paths, etc.  As the recent past has shown, the Democrats have no qualms about using such tactics in an organized manner, nor is there any pressure from the Obama justice department to restrain them from doing so.  The people in San Jose were violently assaulted exiting a Trump event and the police in that city stood by.  My sense is that in most cities most of the police would not tolerate such behavior even if they had to break orders to stop it.  One way or another, if it is a fair bet that the 'scene' were being captured on video by one or more citizen activist, this would promote some adherence to civilized behavior and fuel the fires of those who won't tolerate uncivilized behavior.

It's not clear to me what, exactly, the mechanics of what they are claiming to be doing might be.  I'll research/wait a bit to figure it out more before using it.

Actually, I'm a registered Democrat (but obviously a fairly outspoken Trump supporter, and not just online either) so I probably could not use it anyway.

Secondly, I don't trust the GOP any farther than I could throw them when it comes to supporting Trump.  Certainly I would not place more than one slightly rotten egg in that basket to do anything real toward getting the man to the WH.  If they end up with any power to potentially swing things, they probably would sell us down the river anyway.  I'd put a lot more confidence in the Trump campaign itself and whatever projects the likes of Roger Stone and Infowars are working on.

It would not surprise me if they never had sex even once.  One glance at the Chelsea/Hubbell photos is enough to be pretty sure of what's going on here, but the various other statements and reactions of the two nail down the coffin.

At this point it is quite clear that Hillary and Bill hate each other, or at the very least that Hillary hates Bill's guts.  I would also if I were her.  She was humiliated publicly by his behavior but stayed with him for business reasons.  Quite a lump to swallow for a woman trying to play the strong feminist act.

Bills world is collapsing around him;  He'll never pull in the same money from the foundation, his string of predatory sexual behaviors is being unraveled, and the body-count shares his name.  It looks like the law itself might finally come knocking even!

On top of these woes, it seems quite possible that there is something to his Danney Williams son thing.  Story is that until Hillary put a stop to it, he was even trying to provide a token of support to the poor kid.  If true, it seems that perhaps there is some kernel of a soul buried deep within the thick shell of malfeasance and corruption.

What would make my day would be if Bill Clinton made one last splash in the world by 'coming out', as it were, and confessing all of his sins and all that he knows and trying to do something genuinely positive for the United States.  Before it is to late...and time is running short.