Tag Archives: conservatives

LIONEL PODCAST: Let Me Explain How Religion Works

Rule Number One: Have a sense of humor. Lighten up, and this goes for everyone. And that means perspective, Jeeves. Perspective. Perspective irrespective. As for me, some of the ideas that were presented to me as a kid and even to this day make absolutely no sense. They’re beyond preposterous. Fantastic. Wildly impossible and obviously untrue. The fabulist’s handiwork and craft. But so what?

Don’t act like the poster child for snark, Bill Maher, or even the more academically astute yet criminally pedantic, Richard Dawkins, who spend far too much time trying to convince the devout that their belief is pointless. They’re themselves affected by others’ devoutness. I submit in part due to envy, perhaps jealousy. And their wrath has invariably the Christian in their crosshairs. And especially Catholics. But Jews? Muslims?! Are you kidding? Nary a peep from these brave critics.

So, hear me. Lighten up, you morons. Every religion that’s not yours seems, to put it mildly, a tad off. How could it not? Clothing, hats, diet, chants, rants and incantations. Catholics as a kid from a kid’s worldview were beyond great and I say that sincerely and with love. It was all über great, très great theater of the soul, ritualized reverence and I never believed a single word of any of it for a second. But so what?

The messages were at times apt and spot on. Mention anything if Jesus and the directives were perfect, viz. judge not lest you be judged, do unto others and my favorite — it’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a 1%er to slip into Heaven. Matthew 19:24, baby. Imagine the convenient Christians on the Fox Bidness Channel digging that one. So, suffice it to say, my little heathen, the Bible is awash and replete in great imagery and messaging. As are others.

And the Ted Baxter mainstream media love to think they’ve figured out Pope Francis. They think he’s a cool guy who’s the anti-Pope, the un-homophobe, the Pope who’ll make women priests and … . Wrong! What, are they nuts? They just don’t understand the history and house rules of the Papacy. I mean, who do you think Frank is? Pope Hilarius (my favorite, by the by). His position as is the Church’s position on abortion is consistent: He’s agin it. And there’s no budging. Look, personally, the idea that chicks can’t be padres makes no sense. But so what? I’m not rectory-bound. It’s a house rule. They used to tell us young’ns at Jesuit High that priests had to be male because they were the Pope’s army and had to. E ready to travel. So, what, women can’t travel? Like I said, it’s a house rule. Based perhaps on misogyny, historical antecedents and anachronisms, but so what? What do you expect from a religion that doesn’t bat an eye at the fascinating concept of theophagy. (Try that one on for size?)

And while we’re on the subject, while I remain steadfastly pro-choice we’ve marginalized human worth to such an extent that it’s nice to be reminded that human life means something. We employ capital punishment, war, collateral damage, cloning, IVF, stem cell research — there’s nothing that we won’t do so long as we know the code words. That’s why we need Pope Francis and the Church and religion. We need it because it’s a logical counterbalance to the sick and soulless and vapid and vile world that we live in. There may indeed be a God gene. It may be as atavistic and hardwired and reflexive as the fear of falling and loud noises (our only two inherent, inborn reflexes). All I know is that it would behoove us all to respect religion. No matter how utterly preposterous it may seem. To you.

The relativistic truth of doxy and the necessity of knowing what the hell you’re talking about. As you might have figured, I love the topic of religion. It fascinates me in every aspect and area. From the First Amendment to judicial interpretations to the intellectual intransigence of those who can’t see its position and place and relevance. And now, my sermons commence. The disquisitions. The exegeses.

LIONEL PODCAST: Revolution Is in Our DNA

We were born in revolution. Do you have any idea of what that even means? This is not just an expression or a trite phrase. It’s the absolute truth. It’s the prolegomenon of our country. We’ve revolution in our DNA and I would think a sentience as to that which is devoted to the simple idea that the government is a service, i.e, it serves you at your behest. And you needn’t apologize for daring to challenge it when ether it’s Cliven Bundy or George Washington or little old you. And this isn’t some contrived liberty shibboleth. I believe this from the bottom of my heart. It’s part of my dream to have the government fear the citizens as opposed to the other way around. And there are scores and passels if you who agree. This I know.

But the show must go on.N.B.The podcast is smattered with other topics and ideas inter alia. In fact it ends with one of the best renditions of standard bluegrass on that which is not a standard. I touch on a variety of subjects in the news including the bulletproof Al Sharpton who’s conflated the notion of whistleblower versus informant, stool pigeon and rat. I guess Sammy the Bull’s a hero too by his calculus. But blessed be the unscathed. And look, let’s celebrate the impenetrability of those who constantly dodge and evade disaster. Case in point. Bill Clinton, the disgraced Prez, the impeached POTUS who redefines gargantuan and elephantine balls and is the poster boy of chutzpah. Podcasts are streams of consciousness, riffs and thought rhythms. It’s magical. And I know that sounds corny. But one of the definitions if corny is true.

Here’s a bit of memory lane video. An abecedarian look at the essentials and rudiments of liberty and what the hell tyranny looks like. All in a snappy delivery and 4/4 logic. I was speaking last night about the hypermilitarization of the police at a frightening clip. Remember Andy Taylor, Norman Rockwell? Officer Friendly? They’re gone, Sparky. Meet Robocop.

LIONEL PODCAST: The Bitcoin Revolution Will Be Televised

The revolution has commenced. The Inside Bitcoins conclave was mind-altering and life-changing. I was honored to speak before such an august crew.

Mediabistro is leading the way and the charge in Bitcoin awareness and conversance. This is not a fad or gimmick. This is not trending or viral. This is a revolution. And scares the ruling class to death.

The topic was simple: How to explicate and limn the rudiments of the Bitcoin and cryptocurrency revolution to the ignorant and naysayers. They were rapt and wrapped while I rapped.

The Javits Center is the epicenter of the Bitcoins revolution.

It was thrilling. Seriously. The convention I attended and spoke before yesterday was one of the most important events of my recent life for a number of reasons. It was a conclave of bright, young, focused, determined and dedicated revolutionaries. And if they didn’t think so before my address, I trust they felt so after. They hadn’t, I respectfully submit, appreciated the monumental attack that Bitcoins and virtual and cryptocurrencies presented to the ruling class and asset-striking globalist hyenas and jackals. That may have seemed a tad strong, but it’s nonetheless true. There’s a spirit of seismic change. A feeling that this is more than a cutesy faddish wonky geeky flash in the pan. This is real, tumultuous and far-reaching.

The focus is revolution and the podcast addresses that concept from myriad angles. It covers areas and subjects that I’m passionate about. Extremely passionate. As you’ll hear. Enjoy.

My video compendium on Bitcoins. The abecedarian to be sure, but nonetheless comprehensive, I trust.

LIONEL PODCAST: My Favorite Biblical Myth of All Time

Better than Gilligan’s Island.

Growing up in Catholic school, before retiring, I was amazed at the straight-faced nuns who’d present some Biblical stories went were beyond absurd on their face. And that analysis was so important in my development — my critical thinking development, that is. While my classmates may have nodded in Pavlovian obeisance, it took all I had not to burst out laughing. The movie Noah has incurred the wrath of many Christian commentators as is their right. And this is still the definitive piece on dissecting the fable Noah and the Ark. At least the “history” of that which it purports to depict. But as far as absolute impossibility, sheer and unmitigated “You’ve got to be kidding me!” myth, nothing comes close to the the Ark. Since I was a kid and I heard the story of how mankind was essentially eliminated 5000 years ago and then sprung back with an incomprehensible level of biodiversity, I’ve marveled at how anyone with two neurons together could think for a moment this was the absolute truth. And disbelieving the fantastic story and obvious parable of Noah in now way disproves God. The two have nothing to do with each other. But fact and religious parable are two different things. Just remember Gould’s non-overlapping magisteria. Science and God can coexist, just never overlap. But Noah and Creationism (while we’re at it) tax credulity. It challenges rational thought. Much like Gilligan’s Island made me wonder how could the Professor make anything with that little bike, anything but a transmitter. How did they bake pies? Why did the Howell’s take so much stuff in suitcases including cash, brandy and keys to their homes, not to mention why they’d waste their time on a three-hour cruise on a garbage scow. But Gilligan wasn’t real but Noah is? Right?

Just the facts, ma’am.

Perhaps one of the more difficult problems proponents of a universal flood have to answer, and one they most often avoid, is how could the eight survivors of the Flood produce the numerous racial types of man that exist upon the earth. A belief of the “Christian” sect known as creationism is that all the world was populated from the descendants of Noah’s three sons. In other words, “all tribes and races came from a common ancestral population.20 Creationists are forced to place this common population, consisting of eight persons, some time after the Flood since they believe in the extinction of all people by a universal Flood. Noah and his family were obviously of one race. The Bible states that Noah was “perfect in his generations” (Gen. 6:9). The word “generations” here is the Hebrew word “T0LEDAH,” and means “descent.” Noah was perfect in his descent from Adam meaning his lineage had not mixed with any other races. Creationist try to tell us that this racially pure family developed (or evolved) into the present day races, but never specifically explain how, when or why this transformation occurred. The concept that all nations and races descended from Noah’s sons did not originate with the early Christian writers. When the famous naturalist and zoologist Georges Cuvier devised his classification of races in 1790, he listed three types: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Soon afterwards many started comparing this classification with Noah’s three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. As racial distinctions became more evident and debated, the churches and literalists picked up on Cuvier’s classification and molded it into a new religious doctrine. They taught that the Negroid race descended from Ham, the Mongoloid race from Japheth, and the Caucasian race from Shem. This doctrine insults and contradicts both the word of God and science.

Cuvier’s classification of races was just prior to the advent of Egyptology   the studying and discovering of the ruins of ancient Egypt by such men as Jean Francois Champollion in the 1820′s. The ancient Egyptian monuments, tombs, and temples reveal a vast storehouse of ethnographical records in the form of paintings, mummies and sculptures displaying different racial types of man. Certain racial types can be distinguished in paintings and sculptures dating as far back as the 4th millennium B.C., as Prof. Coon explains: “…racial differentiation can be traced back to at least 3,000 B.C., as evidenced in Egyptian records, particularly the artistic representations.”21 In the era just after the Flood (2300 to 2000 B.C.) there appear many clear and well marked racial types in the paintings and sculptures from Egypt as well as Mesopotamia. By 1600 B.C., an even greater diversity of distinct racial types can be found. Each of these types are represented as they appear today showing that they were permanent throughout all history and had never undergone any type of transformation. Creationists would have us believe that eight white people that existed after the Flood, somehow changed into different racial types almost instantaneously. Why is it that this type of drastic evolutionary change has never occurred since? If we can believe that such a racial transformation occurred, then there should be no reason not to believe any manner of evolution occurring over tens of millions of years, for the latter is more believable than the former. It is important to understand the hypocrisy and inconsistency that “creationism” rests upon. Creationists are allowed to do the impossible because they are on God’s side, but evolutionists are not allowed to use the same principles in presenting their ideas. Evolution is evolution whether used by “creationists” or “evolutionists.” Thus if an amphibian could not gradually evolve into a reptile, then a group of white people could not have evolved into Negroes, Indians, Chinese, Polynesians, Pygmies, etc., especially in just a few hundred years time or less.

The racial evidence supplied to us by the ancient paintings and sculptures from Egypt and elsewhere clearly dispels a any foolish notion of a worldwide flood. This evidence of the antiquity and permanence of the races, which is verified by the laws of genetics, proves that all people were not destroyed in a universal Flood. To overcome this problem, some have suggested Noah brought a representative pair of each race on the Ark.22  Peter, in speaking of the Flood, says that only “eight souls were saved” on the Ark (1 Pet. 3:20 & 2 Pet. 2:5). The only way then to get the other races on the Ark is to say that these other races are not regarded as people, but are inferior “beasts” or “living creatures.” The claim that other races were on the Ark is sheer speculation. The science of ethnology and anthropology have shown that every single racial type that existed prior to the Flood existed after it. This proves that the Flood was confined to a specific geographical area. ALL people on earth were not destroyed by the Flood as creationists claim. In Luke 17:26-29, Christ likens the “days of Noah” with the “days of Lot.” In each case the people experienced a catastrophe which “destroyed them all.” Yet everyone acknowledges that “in the days of Lot” all the people on earth were not destroyed, only all the people in Sodom were. Likewise, only all the people in the Flood were destroyed, not all the people on earth. It cannot be supported by any rational or biblical means that all races were destroyed by a flood and then instantaneously reappeared or were formed thereafter. It is infinitely more logical that all races were separately created by God on the planet, and they each survived the Flood, as did numerous other life forms, by being outside its realm and geographical influence. _______________________________________

20 Henry M. Morris. Scientific Creationism, p. 183.

21Carleton Coon, The Origin of the Races, 1962, p. 3

22 The book, The Genesis Flood, pp. 17-20, stressed the point that all mankind was destroyed by the Flood,” and that “Noah and his family were the only ones who escaped the judgment waters.”

And speaking of religion.

In my latest reminder of how open-minded the Vatican is to EBE’s and UFO’s, dig this piece on “Brother Extraterrestrial.” A lot of folks would be surprised at just how progressive and open-minded Il Papa and the gang are. The Church has given the okay as to Darwinian mechanics, natural selection and evolution. In fact JP Deuce may have been the most demonstrative in his support. But, I’ll bet you never knew they were this with the program when it came to ET critters.

In fact, did you hear about this conclave and coven? It was in all the papers.

Are we alone in the universe? The ultimate question of life beyond Earth and the solar system takes center stage in a science conference led by the Vatican Observatory and a University of Arizona this week. Nearly 200 scientists are attending the conference, called “The Search for Life Beyond the Solar System: Exoplanets, Biosignature & Instruments,” which runs from March 16 through 21 in Tucson, Ariz. The Vatican Observatory is co-hosting the conference with the University of Arizona’s Steward Observatory. “Finding life beyond Earth is one of the great challenges of modern science and we are excited to have the world leaders in this field together in Tucson,” said event co-chair Daniel Apai, assistant professor of astronomy and planetary sciences at the UA Steward Observatory, in a statement. “But reaching such an ambitious goal takes planning and time. The goal of this meeting is to discuss how we can find life among the stars within the next two decades.” [9 Exoplanets That Could Host Alien Life]

LIONEL PODCAST: Porn Free and the Dearth and Death of Commercial Filth

 

Topics covered inter alia. Contained herein you will here the following.

  • The proliferation and epidemic of those in charge suffering from the medial term, ahem: Completely full of Scheiße. People in all walks of life entrusted with responsibilities they have no abilities at whatsoever.
  • Intelligence. What is it? And what isn’t it?
  • The role of incredulity and skepticism.
  • The end of porn and how the internet may have killed it. The monetization of free and gratis.
  • The role of the cortex (brain cortex, that is) in sexual ideation and mentation.
  • When virtual porn and CGI obscure the lines of the verboten.
  • The thought police coming soon to an idea near you.

You think the thought police is hyperbole, don’t you? Be honest. Try this on for size.

A note on societal self-respect and protocol. In recent memory, I have never felt the need to address the necessity for manners and etiquette. Until now.

The essence of courtesy and etiquette is most simple. It’s a social contract that we voluntarily and mutually and singularly agree to abide by for no particular reason other than we want to. It also involves the understanding that we’re not necessarily the center of the universe, that we share environments and seek to just get along and not intrude on our co-Earthlings.

Living in New York, compressed and contained in many a tight squeeze, we actually accord each other with many courtesies. Except on subways where the goddamned Sherpa-like and lawn mower size backpack totin’ Boeotian insists on inconveniencing me and my fellow train travelers with their carry-ons. I can’t adequately explicate how I loathe these people. Detest, abhor, name it. They are a waste of flesh and I can’t believe we share DNA.

It’s the same group of folks who storm a train without letting passengers out first. Or dog lovers who insist on bringing their pooch into a bank or a store. And let me say something about dog lovers. I love dogs. Well, maybe not love. I can take them or leave them. But when folks live vicariously through their pets and use them as social lightning rods for conversation, this is a pathology. But I digress.

And nothing potentiates rudeness more than modern gizmos and devices. It’s reconnected hominids within the screen. Within the device itself and apart and away from reality. So if it doesn’t appear on a monitor or handheld device, if doesn’t exist. Period. And whilst we are cavorting in our device worlds we’re untethered and disconnected from others. And that’s why we don’t care the least about others. Or their inconvenience or pain of discomfort.

But fear not. The good part about not caring about others is not caring about others. Which brings us back to where we started.

LIONEL PODCAST: Believe Nothing Until It’s Officially Denied.

Pilger’s Law. Commit it to memory. No idea or thought so succinctly explains my worldview so perfectly and aptly as this. But I’ll go a step further. Never believe the official statement of a government. Ever. It’s per se suspect and not to be believed. It’s never in a country’s or a government’s benefit or interest to tell you the truth. It can’t tell you what it’s doing unless it wants to inspire rioting and tumult.

Imagine incarcerating someone over an idea. Don’t laugh. It’s happening now. What do you think hate crimes are? Think about it. It’s taking a constitutionally permissible thought (hate towards a person or group that doesn’t involve violence) and pairing it with a crime that’s already cognizable at law and aggravating the offense via heightening the punishment because one dared to utter a constitutionally protected form of speech. I scream when I hear folks throw around the word hate crime. And I’m still waiting for a love crime or to have sentence mitigated because a defendant uttered a word or thought of amour whilst pummeling some poor schmo.

And what we’re now hearing more and more is the suggestion that certain ideas that refute “established” doctrine such as anthropomorphic causation models of climate change and global warming might be soon subject to criminal prosecution and incarceration. I shite you not. Add to the mix the words and most scary suggestions of Obama’s onetime regulation czar, Cass Sunstein who’s advanced the now infamous cognitive infiltration. Look him up and read it for yourself. It’s as scary as it sounds.

The more you wear it, the closer you come to implantation. Critical to changing and amending behavior is the phenomenon and doctrine of successive approximation, a Skinnerian theory that allows behavior to be shaped and crafted. Critical even more so to that process is to make a behavior hip, hep, cool and de rigeur. Exhibit A: Google glass, RFID chips, e-tattoos . . . just to name a few.

LIONEL PODCAST: I Will Never Be Labeled!

No rubric exists, no taxonomy applies, no appellation remotely explicates that which I am.

To be labeled is to be pigeonholed and marginalized. It’s the worst thing that can ever happen to anyone who professionally opines. The left-right paradigm is destroying rational thought and clear evaluation of labyrinthine issues. To fall prey to the Manichean, the apodictic, is dangerous. Sadly, though, in the world of the unimaginative being bumper sticker, playbook, echo chamber and cookie cutter is comforting to many. It’s the shibboleth that soothes, that insinuates inclusion and membership. Sorry, the world’s too complicated to have a label apply. Not to mention, too many people spend too much time parsing and splitting hairs. ‘Tis a waste of time. Just think. Critically think.

Older = Wiser

This wonderful piece in the New York Times warms my soul. It affirms that which I’ve known my entire life.

Especially in this insanely disposable world that discards people based on earned and learned chronology. Keep in mind the fine gradations of mentation, especially when it comes to judgment and wisdom. Senility and senescence are presumed by the doltish generational newbies who forget that advanced age is a club membership they hope to join.

[R]esearch shows that cognitive functioning slows as people age. But speed isn’t everything. A recent study in Topics in Cognitive Science pointed out that older people have much more information in their brains than younger ones, so retrieving it naturally takes longer. And the quality of the information in the older brain is more nuanced. While younger people were faster in tests of cognitive performance, older people showed “greater sensitivity to fine-grained differences,” the study found.

LIONEL PODCAST – Conspiracy Theories, Malaysian Airlines Disappearance, Religion, Gawd and Plant-Based Diets

Is this you or someone you know? Don’t tell me the facts. I’m not interested. I think that conspiracy theories, whatever that means, are insane and unhealthy. But I will opine as the day is long about this Malaysian Airlines disappearance. No theory is too farfetched or nuts. Why? Because they’re not American and conspiracy theories only apply to other countries. In fact, I’m not sure what a conspiracy theory really is. And never tell me that what I believe is wrong. I believe in God, my God, the way I like God. All other religions are wrong and atheists are really, really wrong. Eating and diets are for the health crazy. Don’t tell me that I’m killing myself, besides, man was never meant to be plant-based. Is that vegetarian? And vegan? That’s a Star Trek character, right? But whatever it is, that’s nuts, period. Look at our teeth. I’m not sure what that means either but I heard someone say something about our teeth. News is not a favorite subject of mine. I claim to be a news junkie and have no idea what that either means either. To be fair, my news reading is cursory and perfunctory and not at all deep. My world only involves my country. The other countries are backwards, backwater and Podunk. But, Gawd, do I love sports. I love sports and know sports and read sports and if only I could apply my interest level to those things that mattered, maybe I’d know something. But don’t bother me. Thinking hurts. Caring even more so.

Human sexuality is not subject to choice. And once you understand that, all debate as to inclusion and the like is moot.

The Protean Psychology of the Conspiracy Theorist and Proponent

Malaysia Flight 370 vs. The 9/11 Official Story. What an amazing contrast in reaction if you think about it. And I have. For years there have been passels and contingents of folks who absolutely and most vocally eschewed any “conspiracy theories” as to 9/11. Conspiracy theories (Translation: insane and impossible ideations) were sick in view of the country’s horror, especially if the architect and participants of the conspiracy were members of our government. And while I’ve heard my share of actual conspiracy theories wherein alleged conspirators were named, what I’ve gravitated towards is simply that the official story is either wrong or incomplete. And that, in turn, has inspired the knee-jerk reaction, the Pavlovian obeisance to the notion of the official MSM-repeated factual scenario. The official story.

In fact while we’re on the subject of conspiracy theories, there’s a unique argot as to 9/11 and the Truth Movement and so-called Truthers. What you must understand is the bane of the existence of the resistance, the dreaded gatekeepers. I know I’m getting ahead of myself but as you’ll learn, that’s nothing new.

“I’m not a conspiracy theorist, I’m a conspiracy analyst.” Gore Vidal

And with all rejection of conspiracy theories, two reasons lie as bases: (1) Most of the time the particular theory you advance the receiver has never heard of and therefore feels embarrassed (s)he someone missed the obvious; and (2) Hidden, recessed and clandestine activities just bother folks. And who could blame them? Dark forces and the bogeyman don’t sit well. We like our evil lain and simple, front and center and from central casting, if at all possible.

Clarification. I’ve been an ardent student of 9/11 since that horrible Tuesday. It was history, our history and I was here in New York, front and center. And in my research and studies and considerable review of every hypothesis and theory advanced along with every suspect causal cabal and coven, I’ve never seen so much as a hint that our government, viz. President Cheney and the other guy, being involved in the slightest. In fact, while reason for scrutiny is in abound, there are no suspects other than the usual suspects that we’ve grown to loathe and abhor. None other than Gore Vidal, whom as you see I quote as much as I admired him, said, “They [the "Bushites"] could never have pulled off 9/11, even if they wanted to. Even if they longed to.” And when Vidal absolves the the Bush consortium, you can’t get a better absolution than that.

Meanwhile, back at the raunch. Some believe and still hold to the notion that the official 9/11 story is the comprehensive story line for what happened on that horrid day and that nothing about the event is today subject to question or debate. It was that story that is the official recorded story and that’s it. Now, keep in mind, there were five separate collision and crash events on that day: The Twin Towers, WTC Building 7, Shanksville (PA) and The Pentagon. Five events with five series of fascinating questions and issues that have been raised by a host of experts and remain anything but resolved. Questions about every aspect of the event, the response, culpability and responsibility, foreknowledge and the like. Yet, so many well-intended and intentioned Americans truly believe all has been answered. You have no idea how untrue that is. And (again, I state almost out of a necessary reflex) this isn’t to suggest that anyone within our government was directly responsible or any government for that matter – that seems to be the main concern, which makes no sense to me because that’s the first area of inquiry I head to. [See Clarification, supra.] ’Nuff said.

“It is an article of faith that there are no conspiracies in American life.” Gore Vidal

The plane! But when it comes to this mysterious Malaysian Airlines disappearance, no theory or hypothesis is too farfetched. No scenario is beyond lucidity or rational thought. And I mean nothing. And here’s a perfect example. When claims were made that passengers aboard planes on 9/11 used cellphones to alert of hijackings, many suggested that such would have been impossible based upon the current technology then. (Or even now, for that matter.) How dare you ask questions! How dare you base your inquiries on observation! Any question as to the impossibility of such was absolutely idiotic and the height of specious thinking, just accept whole cloth the cellphone accounts. After all, it’s the official record. Yet, when the same question was asked as to Malaysian Airlines passengers being able to alert the authorities via cellphone, many who thought this possible before, now reject the notion outright. “Cellphones don’t work at those altitudes! What, are you nuts?” So, what’s the difference? Better, what happened?

Amazing these humans. Now, here’s what I also find fascinating: the mindset. Specifically, the psychology of when conspiracy theories – and I’ll use that term just for the proposes of shortcut – do and don’t make sense and that sees to vary dependent on so many factors. Throw in great memes, e.g. Islamic fanaticism (always a winner), terrorism, foreign types who are always portrayed in the light of backward and technophobic, unsophisticated and such, and you’ve got all the elements of a great story. It’s an extension of American exceptionalism, I would imagine, viz. that we’re the only country capable of and equipped with technologic sophistication. I want to know when our acceptance of alternative theories and hypotheses becomes legit and allowed. I want to know the sociological and psychological mechanism that greases the skids for a theory’s acceptance.

Pilger’s law: ‘If it’s been officially denied, then it’s probably true’

And let me throw into the mix the idea that most Americans who opine and posit the loudest have absolutely no clue or grasp of the facts or at least, the issues. Mention to anyone Operation Northwoods, the template for airline switcheroo and false flag, and you’ll get that look. The look of “You’re insane” that translates into “I haven’t read a word of that and rather than claim I’m ignorant I’ll just discard your absolute historical fact and you as insane.” Again, it’s the psychology, the mindset that’s so interesting to me. When do we embrace the seemingly fantastic and deeply conspiratorial and when don’t we?

Fly the friendly skies, all right. Two chickadees had reportedly been invited inside the cockpit by one the co-pilots aboard the missing Malaysia Airlines plane MH370, Fariq Abdul Hamid, in a previous flight back in 2011. Fly the friendly skies. Now, notice the pile-on of this pilot feller. I mean can you blame thees guys for showing off a little? It’s Frank Abagnale in “Catch Me If You Can.” And the media are going full throttle on throwing everything and anything at and against this guy. Why? It’s our nature.

When compared to the almost military precision of American cockpits it’s easy to see that and why Malaysian high jinks would never have passed U.S. muster.

Let’s get weird. Did you hear about some of the passenger’s family members telling reporters that their missing relative’s cell phones still ring when they call. From the Washington Post:

One of the most eerie rumors came after a few relatives said they were able to call the cellphones of their loved ones or find them on a Chinese instant messenger service called QQ that indicated that their phones were still somehow online.

A migrant worker in the room said that several other workers from his company were on the plane, including his brother-in-law. Among them, the QQ accounts of three still showed that they were online, he said Sunday afternoon.

Adding to the mystery, other relatives in the room said that when they dialed some passengers’ numbers, they seemed to get ringing tones on the other side even though the calls were not picked up.

The phantom calls triggered a new level of desperation and anger for some. They tried repeatedly Sunday and Monday to ask airline and police officials about the ringing calls and QQ accounts. However unlikely it was, many thought the phones might still be on, and that if authorities just tracked them down, their relatives might be found. But they were largely ignored.

Here’s a beaut. Try this one on for size, courtesy of Mike Adams from NaturalNews.com.

Four mind-bending possibilities, none of which seem possible

This brings up the immediate bind-bending question of how electronic devices on a commercial flight that vanished still appear to be connected to the internet. The explanations for this defy everything we think we know about reality:

• Mind-bending possibility #1, the “kidnapped” explanation: The plane somehow landed somewhere without leaving a radar signature of any kind, all the passengers are being held hostage there (and are thus still alive), their mobile devices are somehow within cell tower range and yet for some reason have not been confiscated. (This explanation seems extremely unlikely.)

• Mind-bending possibility #2, the “Stargate” explanation: A teleportation portal of some kind exists in the skies, through which the plane inadvertently flew and was teleported somewhere else. Yet, astonishingly, electromagnetic signals can still make it through the portal, and the two sides of the portal remain in contact across the radio spectrum. (This explanation sounds like pure science fiction and also seems extremely unlikely, yet we must at least acknowledge that modern physics has already demonstrated the instantaneous teleportation of information across apparently infinite space due to the “non-locality” of entangled electrons as described in quantum theory.)

• Mind-bending possibility #3, the “failed search” explanation: This far more mundane explanation supposes that the massive, multi-day search for plane wreckage and debris simply hasn’t stumbled upon the correct location yet. The fact that airplane black boxes broadcast homing signals adds to the skepticism that this explanation holds any water, as it is extremely unlikely that the airplane’s black boxes could have been obliterated. Nevertheless, this explanation still seems far more believable than supernatural explanations.

• Mind-bending possibility #4, the “advanced military weapons” explanation: Some military entity, either human or non-human, was testing an advanced weapon capable of either instantly obliterating large airborne objects or teleporting them to another place (or dimension). This explanation seems incredibly far-fetched, but then again, barely a hundred years ago, so did the idea that machines could ever fly at all. Related to this is the legend of the Philadelphia Experiment which some believe caused a U.S. Navy ship to vanish and reappear.

Now understand, these stories are kinda funky and not that hard to tolerate. Why? That’s my point. Is it because they’re of another country and when untethered by a sense of home filed advantage, we’re more prone and apt to open our minds and more likely to bump into the logical furniture.
Dunno. Either way, it fascinates me. Inter alia.

LIONEL PODCAST: Bridgegate and Double-C Exposed. A Primer for the Clueless, Biased, Snarky and Bored.

Governor Krispy Kreme.

The Chris Christie story really has nothing to do with him. At least that which makes the story fascinating. What Bridgegate provides is a Rorschach test for us, the media, the punditocracy and the usual passels of opinion diarrheics who spew, spout and ooze about everything and anything other than the issue at hand. It’s no big deal, it’s petty, vindictive, political and to be sure, it’s done all the time (in one form or another) and it’s not illegal. Let me be clear: If Double-C went to the GWB and physically moved those cones that still would not be illegal. Stupid, draft, certainly. And not exactly a way to endear yourself to Ft. Lee constituents, but that’s it. And Rachel Maddow notwithstanding and the hordes and legions of MSDNC acolytes who work themselves into a froth for reasons other than spectator sport politics, they all must understand that as issues go, this ain’t it.

The Bridge over the River Christie.

So, what’s it all about? It’s pabulum. Simple carbohydrates. Easily swallowed morsels and orts. Base, uncomplicated. A big, fat, bully dude and some rather vindictive minions who clogged a bridge artery. And the theories as to why are as interesting as the actual event, if you can believe that. MSDNC and others came up with a whopper: In order to pay back those lousy Garden State Dems who wanted to hold up supreme court nominations, Ft. Lee was hit like Sherman took Atlanta. I guess, and I still can’t get exactly how they’d know from whom it came and what it meant. And so we milk this baby for all it’s worth. And the pro-Christie crowds keep yelling about Benghazi and IRS abuses and NSA excesses and Obamacare – all to show the contrast in reportage. The unfair treatment of a conservative from the liberal media. It’s all dreck and the reason why I hate the left-right paradigm.

Video Miscellany.

 I can’t swear to this but I have this idea that Ol’ Double-C is subtly implying to his underlings that this might be the best Amendment for them to consider. And now, here’s some video for your amusement.