ItsJustMe2162

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

"You may not seek out cognitive warfare, but it targets you.

In cognitive warfare, a person who has been substantially misinformed is not merely at risk of being mistaken or appearing foolish—they are at risk of being weaponized.

The trolls in the comments, the sarcastic posts, the baiting questions, the fake news headlines, and the misleading pull quotes from articles are like drive-by assaults or guerrilla attacks on your perception of information, of reality.

These cognitive conflicts—between memes, speculation, facts, and reality—are not mere thought exercises or games to see who can be the most pithy contrarian in the comments. They are critical engagements in an information war that none of us can escape."

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Je vais partir du principe que tu es de bonne foi, parce que ton raisonnement est intuitif et que 90% des gens le partagent. Mais il repose sur trois erreurs factuelles, et ça vaut le coup de les regarder calmement.

Erreur 1 : la fortune d'Elon n'est pas un tas d'argent. C'est de la propriété d'usines, de fusées et de satellites. "Prendre la moitié de sa tune", concrètement, ça veut dire forcer la vente de la moitié de SpaceX et Tesla. L'argent ne sort pas d'un coffre, il sort des entreprises elles-mêmes, qui passent sous contrôle de fonds étrangers ou d'États. Tu ne redistribues pas du cash, tu démantèles un outil de production. C'est la différence entre récolter des pommes et découper le pommier.

Erreur 2 : "ça résout énormément de problèmes dans le monde". Cette expérience a déjà été tentée, en vrai. En 2021, le directeur du Programme Alimentaire Mondial de l'ONU a affirmé que 6 milliards de Musk pouvaient "résoudre la faim dans le monde". Réponse d'Elon : décrivez-moi exactement comment, comptabilité publique à l'appui, et je vends mes actions Tesla immédiatement. Le PAM a publié son plan. Verdict : ce n'était pas "résoudre la faim", c'était nourrir 42 millions de personnes pendant un an. Un an. Puis il faut re-payer, pour toujours. Le PAM avait d'ailleurs levé 8,4 milliards l'année précédente, et la faim était toujours là. Les ONG traitent les symptômes en boucle, jamais les causes, parce que leur financement dépend de l'existence du problème.

Erreur 3, la plus importante : tu cherches ce qui sort vraiment les gens de la pauvreté. Bonne nouvelle, on a la réponse, et elle est massive. En 1990, 36% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Plus d'un milliard de personnes sorties de la misère en 30 ans. Par quoi ? Pas par la charité ni par l'aide internationale (plus de 1 000 milliards versés à l'Afrique en 60 ans pour un résultat à peu près nul). Par l'ouverture des marchés, l'industrialisation, le commerce. La Chine seule a sorti 800 millions de personnes de la pauvreté en abandonnant le collectivisme, pas en taxant ses entrepreneurs.

Donc fais le calcul complet. Option A : tu confisques 500 milliards, tu finances quelques années de programmes, l'argent est consommé, et tu as détruit la machine qui produisait les fusées, les voitures électriques et l'internet des zones rurales. Option B : tu laisses le meilleur allocateur de capital de sa génération réinvestir 100% de sa fortune dans des industries qui baissent les coûts pour tout le monde et emploient des centaines de milliers de personnes. L'option A soulage ta morale pendant 18 mois. L'option B sort des populations entières de la pauvreté pour toujours.

La pauvreté ne se redistribue pas. Elle se résout par la création. C'est contre-intuitif, c'est frustrant, mais c'est ce que disent 200 ans de données.

[Pascal Najadi (USSF)🇺🇸 @JfkPascalNajadX]

.@POTUS: "It helps when you know that borders are not racist, speech is not violence, America is good, terrorists are bad, men can never become women, police are not criminals, and criminals are not victims." 🔥

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

Just Cases Issue #9 briefs you on the latest developments in the first of its kind terrorism indictment against an Antifa cell, a federal prosecutor stealing and concealing DOJ documents in cake recipes (including Jack Smith's court-sealed report), the indictment of a top architect of the Covid origin cover-up, and the DOJ's damning case against the SPLC.

The Just Cases newsletter gives you the story of intriguing and important cases alongside the crucial info you need to track them.

More granular coverage of these cases and the documents that back them can be found in my threads and videos.

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

🧵Fulton County 2020 Election Probe Update

The usual suspects are gearing up to fight the DOJ probe into Fulton County, this time as regards the grand jury subpoena for records of employees and volunteers who worked the 2020 election.

Norm Eisen, Abbe Lowell, et al

[Eric Garland @ericgarland]

A grand jury just returned a superseding indictment against the SPLC, bringing us back to the question: Who trained their spies? https://t.co/K7eSAUWzch

[Peter Girnus 🦅 @gothburz]

I am the Senior Vice President of Late Night Strategy at CBS. I am the person who turned a comedian into a priest and charged advertisers to watch the congregation.

I want to be precise about what I built. Not a comedy show. A permission structure. For eleven years, six million Americans tuned in every night to find out what they were allowed to believe by morning. We didn't sell jokes. We sold certainty. Certainty costs nothing to produce. People will pay anything for it. We charged $50 million a year and still lost money because it turns out permission is even cheaper than we thought.

In 2014, we had a genuinely dangerous comedian. A man who once testified before Congress in character as a fictional conservative pundit and made the entire chamber look like they'd been pantsed on C-SPAN. His fake persona was the most brilliant satire on television. Layered. Ironic. Unpredictable. The character could say anything because nothing was real. The character was the art. The character was the comedian.

We killed the character and put the real man on stage. The real man was a lecturer. Earnest. Thoughtful. Correct about everything. Correct is not funny. Correct is not dangerous. Correct is the absence of danger. We promoted the absence of danger and called it growth. His character could make a Senate committee squirm. The real him makes an audience nod. Nodding pays the same as squirming. Nodding is easier to produce.

His final words on air were "We love doing this show for you, but what we really, really love is doing this show with you." The audience wept. I wrote that line. Not the words. The architecture that made those words feel true. For eleven years, the audience believed they were participants. They were not participants. They were the product. "With you" is what you say to a congregation. A comedian says "at you." We hadn't said "at you" since 2015.

Our internal metric was called Affirm Rate. It measured the percentage of monologue segments that generated applause instead of laughter. I invented this metric. I also invented the bonus structure tied to it. In 2015, our Affirm Rate was 34%. By 2022, it was 94%. I received a raise every year. We are crushing it. At the things I made up. That's performance management.

But I need to tell you about the real discovery. The one I put in a deck called "Content Strategy 2019-2024." The one that got me promoted.

Agreement gets applause. I knew that early. But correction — telling the audience their vocabulary is slightly outdated, their outrage is aimed two degrees off-center, their feelings are valid but their phrasing needs work — correction gets them back tomorrow. Agreement is a transaction. Correction is a subscription. We converted a comedy show into a nightly software update for moral vocabulary. Churn was near zero. They couldn't afford to miss an episode. Missing an episode meant using last week's words in this week's meeting. That's social death. We monetized the fear of social death and called it entertainment.

I want to be honest about something. The content was not bipartisan. We chose a side. But I need you to understand: we did not choose it because we believed in it. We chose it because that side's audience is more responsive to correction. They want to be updated. They want to be told their language is outdated. They experience correction as care. The other side does not respond to correction. They respond to provocation. Provocation is harder to monetize. You can't build a subscription on provocation because the audience doesn't come back to learn — they come back to fight. Fighting is unpredictable. Correction is scheduled. We optimized for the audience that wants to be told what to think. That audience leaned one direction. That's not ideology. That's market segmentation.

The writers' room had a whiteboard. In 2015 it said "What's funny?" In 2018 it said "What should they feel?" By 2021 it said "What are they still saying wrong?" I watched that whiteboard evolve like a finch beak and I never intervened. The market was speaking. We listened. Listening to the market is the same as leading the audience. They can't tell the difference.

A writer named Marcus raised his hand in 2019. "What if we just tried to make them laugh again?" I thanked him for his passion and scheduled a creative alignment conversation. He transferred to streaming development within the month. The Affirm Rate the week he left was 91%. Laughter would have brought it down. That's risk management.

Here is what nobody will say out loud. I will say it because I am proud of it.

We made our audience worse at politics.

Not better. Worse. Every night for eleven years, we expressed their outrage for them. Professionally. With a band and good lighting. And because the outrage had been expressed — because a man in a suit had furrowed his brow with the precise calibrated degree of indignation — they didn't need to express it themselves. They watched. They clapped. They felt the catharsis of resistance without resisting anything. They went to bed having done nothing and feeling like they'd done something. That's the product. Not comedy. Not information. Catharsis. Catharsis is the enemy of action. A man who has screamed into a pillow does not then also scream in the street. We were the pillow. A $50 million pillow with a house band.

If you feel the outrage has been expressed for you, you will not march. You will not organize. You will not call your representative. You will tune in tomorrow to feel it expressed again. That's retention. Our retention was extraordinary.

I want to talk about the comedy-to-catechism pipeline because I think people underestimate what we achieved.

Stage one: comedian makes jokes about the powerful. Audience laughs because the powerful are absurd. This is the Carlin model. The jester punches up. Everyone below feels relief.

Stage two: comedian makes jokes about people who disagree with the audience. Audience laughs because disagreement is stupid. The jester has turned around. He's still on the stage but now he's facing the crowd with a pointer.

Stage three: comedian stops making jokes. Comedian identifies incorrect beliefs and explains why they're dangerous. Audience does not laugh. Audience claps. The jester is gone. In his place: a hall monitor with a desk and a band.

Stage four: audience watches not for entertainment but for certification. Having seen last night's episode means you know which words are current. Not having seen it means you might use yesterday's vocabulary in today's meeting. The show is no longer comedy. It is a credential. Watching it means you are educated. Not watching means you are the person being discussed. We made a show that you watch to prove you're not the kind of person who doesn't watch it. That's a closed loop. Closed loops don't need content. They need continuity. We provided continuity for $50 million a year.

A comedian — whose entire historical function was to say things too dangerous for anyone else to say — became the person who decides which things are too dangerous for anyone to say. And the audience applauded. Every night. For 2,500 nights. Because being told what is forbidden feels exactly like being told what you already knew. Prohibition performed as validation. I put that in the deck too.

Our audience was correct about everything. I know this because they applauded everything we said. The applause proved the correctness. The correctness justified the applause. We called this audience research. The methodology was peer-reviewed by the audience. They approved unanimously. Every night.

The actually funny comedians left. They went to podcasts. To clubs. To rooms where the audience doesn't know what's coming and that uncertainty is the point. They took the laughter with them. We kept the applause. We called those spaces problematic. That's market differentiation. The problematic spaces are funnier. But funny is not our product.

We lost $40 million a year. We didn't lose it because the show failed. We lost it because we spent $50 million producing what a podcast host in his garage gives away between mattress ads. The podcast is funnier. The podcast is more dangerous. The podcast has an audience that laughs instead of claps. But we had the Ed Sullivan Theater. We had 461 seats. We had a former Beatle play the farewell episode. Paul McCartney, Elvis Costello, Jon Batiste, and Louis Cato playing "Hello, Goodbye" like it was a benediction. I booked a Beatle for a funeral. The Beatles played that stage in 1964 and the audience screamed so loud you couldn't hear the music. Our audience didn't scream. They wept politely. That's the difference between entertainment and church. We ran a church.

Jon Stewart showed up to the finale and did a bit where he pretended to deliver a corporate statement from Paramount about the cancellation. The audience laughed. It was the first time they laughed in a way I didn't recognize. Involuntary. Surprised. Dangerous. For ninety seconds, a comedian was in that building. Then it was over.

John Oliver said "At some point, this may come for all of our shows" and then added "but Stephen, what's important to remember is that tonight, it is going to eat you." The audience laughed again. Involuntary again. Two moments of actual comedy in a three-hour farewell. Both of them about death.

The finale drew 6.74 million viewers. Biggest weeknight audience in our history. More people came to the funeral than ever visited the patient. I know what they were mourning. Not comedy. The comedy died in 2016. Not the man. The man is fine. He's wealthy. What they mourned was the permission structure. Starting today, they have to decide what to believe on their own. They have to form an opinion without waiting for a man behind a desk to form it first and deliver it with a knowing look. Some of them haven't done that since 2015. The funeral wasn't for the show. It was for the certainty.

He joked about the Peanuts theme music licensing cost on his last night. "Oh no! I hope this doesn't cost CBS any money!" The audience laughed. It was a joke about money. About the network losing money. The last joke was about money. Not about truth. Not about power. About a licensing fee for a cartoon piano riff. Eleven years and the final joke was about accounting. I think that's perfect. The show was always about accounting. We just dressed it up as conscience.

The President of the United States — the man we spent eleven years explaining was dangerous to an audience that already believed he was dangerous — posted an AI-generated video of our host being thrown into a dumpster on the Late Show set. Then Trump danced to "YMCA" in the clip. Viewed more times in four hours than our farewell managed in a week. His production cost: zero. Ours: negative $50 million a year. We manufactured his relevance every night at 11:35 for eleven years and he never paid us a dime. We were his marketing department. He turned our funeral into content. His ROI was infinite. Ours required a write-off and a farewell concert.

The Strike Force Five — Fallon, Kimmel, Meyers, Oliver — appeared in a segment about late-night losing "one middle-aged white man who makes jokes about the news." They were joking about their own obsolescence. All of them know. None of them will say it. The format is dead. The audience moved to phones. The phones don't have desks or bands. The phones have men in garages who are allowed to be wrong, allowed to be surprised, allowed to say something their audience hasn't already approved. That's comedy. We stopped doing that a decade ago. We did approval. Approval looks like comedy from a distance. Up close it's church.

I do not feel guilt. Guilt would require me to believe I took something from them. I didn't take anything. They came to us. Every night. They chose the catechism over the comedy. They preferred correction over surprise. Certainty over danger. Instruction over laughter. They wanted to be told. Not challenged. Not shocked. Not made to laugh against their will at something they didn't see coming. They wanted to see it coming. They wanted to mouth along. That's not comedy. That's karaoke. We ran the most expensive karaoke bar in television history and the only miscalculation was charging a cover when the songs are free on every phone.

We turned a jester into a priest. We turned an audience into a congregation. We turned laughter into obedience. We turned political engagement into passive consumption. We turned a comedy show into a permission structure and charged $50 million a year to tell people what they already believed in a voice slightly nicer than their own.

They were so grateful they showed up to mourn us. 6.74 million of them. Weeping. For the certainty.

Applause is more reliable than laughter. I proved it. The proof cost $450 million, one character, one comedian's capacity for danger, and one audience's willingness to act.

The metric went up.

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

Of course, the way things appear is simply that.

I do think it's of note that the theme or primary takeaway from all of these events and rumors that preceded Gabbard's resignation is essentially CIA = BAD.

Two groups that maintain an interest in pumping that theme/narrative of CIA = BAD are 1) America's adversaries and 2) grifters. Two groups that often work hand in glove.

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

In retrospect, the faux CIA whistleblower Erdman, the hearing Sen. Paul organized, the rumors Rep. Luna spread, and the online amplification of sensational claims (such as that the CIA had “raided” the DNI, that the CIA was spying on or investigating the DNI’s DIG group) look more like a malign operation designed to sow turmoil inside the Intelligence Community.

Gabbard's resignation would have been discussed internally in the lead-up to the announcement. Members of the IC would have known it was coming or at least considered it probable. The timing of those preceding events and rumors that came with them appears intentional.

There’s smoke here and a fire somewhere in the IC. The investigation into Joe Kent that led to his resignation and his subsequent podcast-circuit appearances stands out as a possible ignition point.

[James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames]

I don't know if you have noticed that Western Europe is falling, and the Commonwealth is about as Woke as it gets. Where does that leave the Western Alliance? How about the United States? What say ye, America Firsters?

The long general (though not total) period of peace we have enjoyed since WWII is broadly known as the Pax Americana, and it is effectively a generally peaceful and secure world order mostly managed under an International Law Agreement known as the United States Navy, backed by the rest of the U.S. Armed Forces.

That peace was facilitated not merely by American peace through strength but also through a network of Western allies throughout Western Europe and the British Commonwealth (including the UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia), plus some others, who provided intelligence sharing and strategic military staging for the United States military (seeing as they never really made real militaries of their own after WWII, for the most part).

Now, in the 21st century, the Commonwealth and Europe have gone Woke, and they're heavily infiltrated with Islamism. They are on the precipice of disaster, and even if they weren't, they're not particularly engaged with American interests anymore. In fact, they're mostly hostile to them since Trump upset the whole little Great Reset, Agenda 2030 program in 2016.

The competing doctrine to that "Postwar Consensus" world, in which Western Europe and the Commonwealth will mostly be slaves, is called the Multipolar World. The idea is simple. The world won't be unipolar (U.S. global hegemony, since 1991) or bipolar (U.S. vs. USSR, 1945-1991). There will be at least three poles, perhaps four (Russia, China, Islamic, Western/US). This is the Russian nutjob Aleksandr Dugin's fantasy, and the World Economic Forum had fully bought into the program too.

It's meant, essentially, to let the People's Republic of China and the Islamic Frankenstein's monster rise, with Russia getting better scraps and big revenge on the West that broke the Soviet Union. It's the "New World Order" program we've all been running from. Of course, a single new hegemon will eventually arise from it, probably the PRC, but the WEF/UN had somewhat different ambitions by the same path, as does the Islamist project.

What if you love America and the American way of life? What if you love life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? What if you love freedom? What if you want the free nations of the world to enjoy something like the Pax Americana?

Well, you can't have that with the Multipolar World model. Western Europe will be slave to the Islamists. Eastern Europe will go to Russia. The Commonwealth, outside of Britain, will be split apart between Islamists and the Chinese. America will be isolated, divided internally, shrunken, and eventually defeated. RIP freedom.

We can have it, though, with a new alliance structure, and if you don't understand this, you don't understand anything about what Trump is doing on the world stage. It isn't just about stopping China or BRICS or securing against terror or grabbing oil or controlling shipping lanes. A whole new world alliance structure (of good guys) is in the works, and the enemies of freedom and prosperity know it and are doing everything possible to stop it.

The first link in this new chain of allies is the U.S.-Israel alliance, and virtually the whole plan depends on this alliance staying strong and accomplishing its initial goals. That's why it's under such heavy attack. It's literally the key to Western values being strong in the 21st and into the 22nd centuries. Nothing less than that.

This alliance could be strengthened immeasurably by being joined by a freed and restored Iran. You must understand this. It isn't just that the IRGC is awful, evil, and on the other side of all of this. It's not just the oil, though that's really important too. It's also that Iran sits geographically at the crucial crossroads of the entire Eastern Hemisphere and the trade circumstances of almost six billion people.

Strategically, at least in certain ways, this growing alliance would likely include India, were it to get off the ground, and Japan as a far-Eastern endcap. It could conceivably include South Korea, though that's dicier now than it was two years ago, and it would likely include Taiwan after a fashion. This alliance would effectively control the Western hemisphere, CENTCOM, and a significant strategic presence in the Pacific Theater.

As a result of this alignment and its consequences, Australia and New Zealand might start rethinking some things in a big way, thus changing the course of some of the Commonwealth. It's definitely in their interests, and they're already starting to realize their current peril, though not strongly enough.

Eastern Europe would want to join as protection against Russia. Western Europe remains a wildcard, but it also stands as largely irrelevant from a strategic perspective save the fact that the European nuclear powers (France and Britain) cannot become Islamist. Canada would resist all of this until it couldn't, which is stupid and oh-so-idiotically Canadian.

Most of the Arabic Middle East wants to modernize. Many of them are sick of the backwards radicalism and want to participate in the 21st century, whatever other designs and ambitions they have for their own kingdoms. They might not join in as strong allies to this development, but they're likely to be solid partners in such a program, unless BRICS and the "New Silk Road" (Belt and Road Initiative) are better deals. Which side do you want them on with all that?

This is what we're really talking about, guys. This is what's really going on. This is what President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu are actually brokering in the world. If you care about freedom, prosperity, and peace, you're backing this. If you aren't backing this, you're backing evil empires like the People's Republic of China, the Islamist Crescent, and the revenge fantasies of post-Soviet Russia.

The first link in this chain for peace and prosperity over the next century is the U.S.-Israel alliance. That's the key to making the whole project work. That's why there's such a huge push to break that alliance now before this really gets solidified as the core of what what will replace the faltering Western Alliance in this twenty-first century.

You have a choice. You can support and help reinforce this first link in the chain of freedom, peace, and prosperity for the next 100+ years, or you can be on the side that opposes these, not just in the moment but in the future, not just for some people out there somewhere who you don't care about, like in today's Iran or China, but for most of the people in the world for most of the next century.

If you have turned against the U.S.-Israel alliance, or just Israel, or just Jews, as the result of Red-Green-Brown propaganda over the last few years, you are a useful idiot against this freedom, peace, and prosperous future, but you can stop that today. You can understand what's happening in the world beyond your group chats and get on the right side of one of the most important questions and hinges in world history.

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

Thread here 👇

https://t.co/aj8MUCqXCz

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

Thread of highlights from the Virginia Supreme Court's opinion striking down the Dems' gerrymandered map.

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

Just Human Ep. 371: Dems' Map Null, FBI Busy in VA, 2020 Election Probe, New Filings in Allen & SPLC

In this episode, Virginia Dems' plans for a 10-1 map in the Commonwealth have been dashed by the state's Supreme Court; the FBI executes criminal search warrants at properties owned by VA State Senator Louise Lucas; Fulton County loses its bid to stop the DOJ from reviewing 2020 election records, and at the same time a new special counsel hits them with subpoenas for employee and volunteer info; the WHCA Dinner shooter gets a new judge and files to disqualify DC Attorney Pirro; and the DOJ responds to SPLC's motions for grand jury transcripts.

I’m always interested in what y’all have to say on the topics I cover in my videos, so please let me know your thoughts in the comments

And if you like the video, well, hit the LIKE button, hit SHARE, and consider supporting my coffee habit and document addiction.

00:00 Start
05:15 VA Supreme Court strikes down Democrats' dream map
30:05 FBI raids offices and businesses of Senator Louise Lucas
01:32:00 Fulton County fails to stop DOJ from reviewing 2020 election records
01:42:40 DOJ has ANOTHER special counsel working on 2020 election probe and he has sent subpoenas to Fulton County for employee and volunteer records related to 2020 election
01:51:30 WHCA Dinner Shooter Cole Allen indicted, adds new charge
01:59:15 Don't fall for the Magistrate Judge Faruqui rage bait
02:07:00 Allen gets a new judge
02:10:00 Allen files motion to disqualify DC prosecutor.
02:22:00 DOJ responds to SPLC's motions for grand jury disclosures and false statements accusations.

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

🧵This VA Supreme Court Opinion is straight fire for ~30 pages.

[The White House @WhiteHouse]

"I am pleased to announce that there will be a THREE DAY CEASEFIRE (May 9th, 10th, and 11th) in the War between Russia and Ukraine..." - President Donald J. Trump 🇺🇸

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

Just Human Ep. 370: Updates on Cases Against SPLC, WHCA Shooter, and the WaPo Classified Intel Thief

In this episode, I go over updates in the criminal case against the SPLC, including their motions for disclosure of grand jury transcripts and restrictions on statements by the DOJ; provide insight into Cole Tomas Allen's status and hearing before Magistrate Judge Faruqui (and review a couple J6 cases to help neutralize the REEEEEEEEacting so many people are engaging in); and give an update on the case of defense contractor Aurelio Perez-Lugones, who stole classified intelligence related to Venezuela and gave it to WaPo's Hannah Natanson.

Grab coffee and a snack for this one.

00:00 Start
04:00 SPLC case update begins
09:25 SPLC's motion to disclose grand jury transcripts
25:15 Did prosecutors cleverly maneuver the SPLC into 1) admitting they didn't destroy records of their work with informants and then 2) getting those records just before obtaining the indictment?
35:00 SPLC's motion to correct false statements made by officials and prohibit further prejudicial statements
38:25 I don't think that, even if the SPLC did share ALL of the info about the informants with law enforcement, it takes anything away from or negates the allegations at issue here.
54:50 Uhhh, but did DOJ know you guys were laundering payments to informants?
55:30 It's the fallacy of composition thing
1:00:00 Allen update begins
1:20:45 Allen gets apology from the judge, and people lose their friggin minds.
1:33:00 Oh wait, the same judge also apologized to a J6 defendant. (Understanding > Reacting)
1:48:30 WaPo Intel Mole update begins
1:50:00 Trial date set for Perez-Lugones
1:57:00 Judge orders review of seized materials to continue.

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

🧵United States v. Southern Poverty Law Center, Inc.

6 Counts of Wire Fraud
4 Counts of False Statements to Fed-Insured Bank
1 Count of Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering

1/n

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.”

― Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow

[Just Human @realjusthuman]

Just Human Ep. 367: Troubleshooting Our Information Systems

In this episode, I talk about human nature, influence ops, conspiracy slop, and the calculated turn against President Trump by what I call Team Centipede.

This isn’t a document-heavy episode. Instead, I walk you through media, posts, events, associations, and observations. I highlight some things I’ve gotten right, some things I’ve gotten wrong, and admit to being fooled myself.

It’s not a particularly positive or negative episode—just a candid one. My hope is that it encourages you to troubleshoot your own information systems and to swap out faulty or unreliable components, no matter how attached you may be to them.

The Just Human Podcast and Just Cases Newsletter are reader-supported publications. Your support makes pulling these court documents and carefully researching them possible. Thank you all so much for that.

I’d love to hear from you: Drop your takes on this episode and the topics covered in the comments.

[Gummi @gummibear737]

Iran was trying to use the North Korean model to get a nuke: create sufficient conventional deterrence so you won’t be challenged in acquiring one (it’s called the Seoul Hostage Problem).

This has been explained over and over since day one.

Everyone claiming shifting goalposts or no imminent threat has been lying.

The reason North Korea was allowed to get nukes is because Seoul (and its 10 million inhabitants) is within artillery and rocket range of North Korea.

During the 1994 nuclear crisis, the Clinton administration seriously considered airstrikes on North Korea’s Yongbyon reactor but backed off precisely because of the artillery threat to Seoul.

Iran was trying to accomplish the same by stockpiling missiles and drones which would have had the same deterrent effect. The proof is what Iran has been doing in the past month: attacking all its neighbors in order to pressure the US to stop attacking it

Beyond this, they were building medium-range ballistic missiles that could reach Paris and London, meaning all of Europe could be held hostage as they built a nuclear bomb.

The reason Iran has not built a nuclear weapon until now is not because it couldn’t, but because it knew it would be attacked and denied this capability.

So by allowing them to continue developing this conventional deterrence, you would be allowing Iran to get a nuclear weapon.

And unlike North Korea, Iran is led by an eschatological death cult

Reagan saw nuclear mutually assured destruction (MAD) as both morally bankrupt (because of the innocent-body-count problem) and dangerously fragile because it assumed flawless rationality between adversaries…this means it only takes one irrational actor to destroy the world.

Working backwards from the conclusion that Iran’s Islamist regime must never have a nuclear weapon, it was necessary for the US to attack Iran to deny it the conventional capacity to hold the entire eastern hemisphere hostage.

Every European leader knows this and behind the scenes praises the US for this action. But they are cowards, held hostage by their own internal Muslim populations, and so adopt these ridiculous public positions.

This was never about Israel. And if your argument is that Iran should be allowed to get a nuclear weapon then you are a fool and a traitor to western civilization…you’re a useful idiot