Israel and Adelson are Trump's Achilles heel. His legacy of effective business management will be undone by his association with megalomaniacs with too much money and influence in American politics. As much as I hate the court's interventionism in preventing implementation of common sense policies and actions, they seem the only barrier to elitist barbarism.
Yes. I have come to believe this is the truth. And I strongly suspect the outlandish claim of Israel 'wagging' the dog: America, may in fact be true because of this truth. For if a preponderance or even just the actively interested billionaires are zionist then it's done. A done deal.
You can't find anything about Trump and his regime to contradict the idea, I think, can you?
And note the usa controls europe. And the world reacts to europe, in fact, especially via the Russia aspect.
So we're quickly at where we see this 'handful' of malignant billionaires control the planet in fact.
I believe the people could and should begin to gain agency and a voice, a venue, via something as simple as a properly designed app. As set out here and expanded upon:
how do we best keep a copy of these posts? saving from the browser gives a 'messy' html save with an html and an associated folder. We just want the text. Yep, select and copy, paste into something. Yes. I mean anything quicker, slicker, nicer, more convenient? Would be good.
Save an article at archive.is which is the best archiving service for htmls. Whereas archive.org is better for saving pdfs and youtubes. Never save an article without first archiving it, because then a few years later it will be gone UNLESS it was archived.
I will take your advice. I just did. I archived this article. But what I"m after in the first instance is simply a copy of your text. Some sites (like perhaps dances with bears) offer a 'print' version which we can then save as a pdf via MS 'print to pdf'. That's nice and convenient. I like that. Yes, that loses all embedded videos if any but that's okay most of the time. They're usually illustrative, not strictly necessary. I don't suppose you have any control over that aspect. It'd be a question of whether or not substack offers the facility. And I doubt they do. Mcddd had problems with that. He wanted his material freely available and could not make it so.
I too would want that. I'm 'a substacker', have an account, but never use it and that's maybe the main reason. I go to my blogs or sites instead. Forsake the presumed opportunity of exposure to untold thousands of viewer in the interests of maintaining sole control. :)
"The Court’s 1976 Buckley v. Valeo ruling said that the existing political-campaign-expenditure ceiling imposed “direct and substantial restraints on the quantity of political speech” and so the Court invalidated three expenditure limitations as violating the First Amendment."
Here is a short history of the SCOTUS bullshit: The SCOTUS has passed down egregious decisions that abridge the First Amendment and show contempt for the concept of representative democracy. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1976 and exacerbated by continuing stupid SCOTUS decisions First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission.
These decisions have codified that money is free speech, thereby giving entities of wealth and power total influence in elections.
A layman aussie observer I've often been astounded by what I see as egregious flouting of all sense of justice and adherence to law in your american courts.
But I'm confounded by States and their courts/laws as against Federal. I never quite know what I'm observing.
And conscious all the time of that apparent strong custom for incoming presidents to 'stack' the Supreme Court with their own appointments. Presumably, clearly, because they can be relied upon to rule in the favour of the president and his party's wishes. Seems to be an inbuilt and yet accepted and traditional miscarriage of justice, a major malfeasance.
So I don't really know what's going on and would like to know.
You appear to have some facts at your fingertips.
I would appreciate any further information you'd care to give, lists, references, quotes....
"So I don't really know what's going on and would like to know."
So would I. But seriously, Our founding fathers had a pretty good handle on what would constitute a working democratic republic. But power corrupts, and it didn't take long before those seeking elected office began to connive for power to their benefit. In the ensuing 248 years, thanks to the insouciance of the U.S. populace, our constitution has been bastardized to the extent that it no longer functions as originally intended. That is a very short synopsis.
Yep, and I just posted what I think might be a good step towards remedying that troubling insouciance because easy to participate and reliable and, hopefully the greatest driving force of all, it will be: fashionable. :)
It is hard to bring about a condition of souciance in a population. Sadly, it usually takes extreme conditions to turn a population to being concerned.
I can see how we might think that. Because we want awareness, concern, over the things that we think matter - and we don't see any of that.
But I think the population is well capable of extreme attention and concern without any extreme conditions. I asked gpt to give me a list to illustrate what I mean:
The Death of Princess Diana (1997): As you mentioned, the tragic death of Princess Diana in a car crash sparked an overwhelming, global outpouring of grief and media coverage. This event dominated the news cycle for weeks, overshadowing other pressing geopolitical issues of the time, such as the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East or Africa.
The Y2K Panic (Late 1990s - Early 2000s): As the year 2000 approached, there was widespread fear that computers would fail to recognize the change in the date (from "99" to "00"), leading to catastrophic failures in global systems. While the panic turned out to be mostly unfounded, it dominated media coverage and public concern, diverting attention from real issues like financial instability or political corruption.
The Ice Bucket Challenge (2014): The viral trend where people poured buckets of ice water over their heads to raise awareness for ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis) became a global phenomenon. While it raised millions for research, some critics argued it was more about the social media spectacle and the "look-at-me" aspect rather than genuine action on behalf of ALS sufferers or systemic health care reforms.
The "Dress" Debate (2015): A viral debate about the color of a dress that appeared on the internet (was it blue and black, or white and gold?) sparked worldwide discussions and intense media coverage. This bizarre fashion-driven viral moment took over social media, eclipsing more significant issues such as growing income inequality or the refugee crisis at the time.
The "Avocado Toast" Trend (2016-2017): A meme-turned-cultural critique that suggested young people were financially irresponsible for spending money on items like avocado toast. The issue became a global talking point, overshadowing discussions about the real economic challenges faced by younger generations, such as housing affordability and stagnant wages.
The "Tide Pod Challenge" (2018): A dangerous viral challenge where teenagers filmed themselves eating Tide laundry pods. While it sparked widespread concern among parents and authorities, it also distracted from more serious public health issues, such as the opioid crisis or mental health awareness.
The "Black Lives Matter" Movement (2013-Present, particularly in 2020): While the movement itself addresses systemic racism, some aspects of the media focus, particularly the coverage of riots, looting, or social media "performances" of solidarity, became a momentary obsession. This sometimes diverted from deeper and ongoing structural issues like criminal justice reform or long-term policy change.
The #MeToo Movement (2017-2018): While the #MeToo movement was a significant and necessary conversation about sexual harassment, at times, some specific cases dominated the news, often leading to a focus on individual celebrity scandals rather than addressing the larger, systemic issues of gender inequality, workplace dynamics, or institutional failures.
The 2016 "Pokemon Go" Craze: The global popularity of the augmented reality game sparked a temporary obsession with catching virtual creatures in real-world locations. It generated a massive public response and media buzz, briefly diverting attention from issues like political unrest, economic downturns, or climate change.
"Brexit" (2016-2019): While undeniably important for the UK and Europe, the obsessive focus on Brexit negotiations, the drama surrounding the referendum, and the media's portrayal of it dominated global discussions for years. At times, it overshadowed other significant issues within the EU or global concerns like refugee crises, trade wars, or environmental degradation.
The "Kylie Jenner Billionaire" Narrative (2019): The news of Kylie Jenner being declared the youngest self-made billionaire, largely due to her cosmetics company, captured massive media attention. While it sparked debate over definitions of wealth and success, it also seemed to focus more on celebrity culture rather than broader issues such as wealth inequality, tax policies, or corporate monopolies.
The "Fyre Festival" Fiasco (2017): The disastrous Fyre Festival, a luxury music festival in the Bahamas that turned out to be a scam, became a media sensation, with documentaries and news stories about its failure. While it exposed issues in event planning, fraud, and social media marketing, the media attention was disproportionately focused on the spectacle, rather than larger issues such as corporate accountability, tourism industry ethics, or systemic failures in regulation.
These are examples of events or "fashionable" concerns that, at least in their immediate aftermath, captured widespread global attention but, in some cases, detracted from or overshadowed more enduring geopolitical, social, or economic issues that arguably required more urgent focus.
p.s. and let me add: while we are talking about something that is universally recognised as totally important it is very, very, noticeable that none of the 'lamenters' ever seem to make any effort whatever to energise that apathetic population.
I constantly return to the covid debacle in this kind of context. From start to finish (except it hasn't finished) not one attempt I ever saw to properly reach out to the people. All preaching to the converted. All expressions of whatever, huffing and puffing, culminating in nothing, see you next week, same time, same place.
Instance: Sunetra Gupta. Scientist. Intellectual. To inform the populace. Our of concern for what she perceived as bad science, bad governance, to the point of actually harming to the point of death some people. So she put up a website. Guess what is was called? Remember it is trying to get the truth of the covid madness out to the populace to enable them to protect themselves and maybe fight back.
Take a guess. Think of some good names. Take your time. Think of a hundred.
Israel and Adelson are Trump's Achilles heel. His legacy of effective business management will be undone by his association with megalomaniacs with too much money and influence in American politics. As much as I hate the court's interventionism in preventing implementation of common sense policies and actions, they seem the only barrier to elitist barbarism.
Yes. I have come to believe this is the truth. And I strongly suspect the outlandish claim of Israel 'wagging' the dog: America, may in fact be true because of this truth. For if a preponderance or even just the actively interested billionaires are zionist then it's done. A done deal.
You can't find anything about Trump and his regime to contradict the idea, I think, can you?
And note the usa controls europe. And the world reacts to europe, in fact, especially via the Russia aspect.
So we're quickly at where we see this 'handful' of malignant billionaires control the planet in fact.
I believe the people could and should begin to gain agency and a voice, a venue, via something as simple as a properly designed app. As set out here and expanded upon:
https://abrogard.com/blog/2023/12/25/dont-write-to-congress/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_voting_system
https://abrogard.com/blog/2024/10/14/how-about-this-to-bring-truth-to-the-elections/
how do we best keep a copy of these posts? saving from the browser gives a 'messy' html save with an html and an associated folder. We just want the text. Yep, select and copy, paste into something. Yes. I mean anything quicker, slicker, nicer, more convenient? Would be good.
Save an article at archive.is which is the best archiving service for htmls. Whereas archive.org is better for saving pdfs and youtubes. Never save an article without first archiving it, because then a few years later it will be gone UNLESS it was archived.
I will take your advice. I just did. I archived this article. But what I"m after in the first instance is simply a copy of your text. Some sites (like perhaps dances with bears) offer a 'print' version which we can then save as a pdf via MS 'print to pdf'. That's nice and convenient. I like that. Yes, that loses all embedded videos if any but that's okay most of the time. They're usually illustrative, not strictly necessary. I don't suppose you have any control over that aspect. It'd be a question of whether or not substack offers the facility. And I doubt they do. Mcddd had problems with that. He wanted his material freely available and could not make it so.
I too would want that. I'm 'a substacker', have an account, but never use it and that's maybe the main reason. I go to my blogs or sites instead. Forsake the presumed opportunity of exposure to untold thousands of viewer in the interests of maintaining sole control. :)
👍👍👍🔥🔥🔥!!!
Excellent analysis.
"The Court’s 1976 Buckley v. Valeo ruling said that the existing political-campaign-expenditure ceiling imposed “direct and substantial restraints on the quantity of political speech” and so the Court invalidated three expenditure limitations as violating the First Amendment."
Here is a short history of the SCOTUS bullshit: The SCOTUS has passed down egregious decisions that abridge the First Amendment and show contempt for the concept of representative democracy. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1976 and exacerbated by continuing stupid SCOTUS decisions First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission.
These decisions have codified that money is free speech, thereby giving entities of wealth and power total influence in elections.
A layman aussie observer I've often been astounded by what I see as egregious flouting of all sense of justice and adherence to law in your american courts.
But I'm confounded by States and their courts/laws as against Federal. I never quite know what I'm observing.
And conscious all the time of that apparent strong custom for incoming presidents to 'stack' the Supreme Court with their own appointments. Presumably, clearly, because they can be relied upon to rule in the favour of the president and his party's wishes. Seems to be an inbuilt and yet accepted and traditional miscarriage of justice, a major malfeasance.
So I don't really know what's going on and would like to know.
You appear to have some facts at your fingertips.
I would appreciate any further information you'd care to give, lists, references, quotes....
"So I don't really know what's going on and would like to know."
So would I. But seriously, Our founding fathers had a pretty good handle on what would constitute a working democratic republic. But power corrupts, and it didn't take long before those seeking elected office began to connive for power to their benefit. In the ensuing 248 years, thanks to the insouciance of the U.S. populace, our constitution has been bastardized to the extent that it no longer functions as originally intended. That is a very short synopsis.
Yep, and I just posted what I think might be a good step towards remedying that troubling insouciance because easy to participate and reliable and, hopefully the greatest driving force of all, it will be: fashionable. :)
It is hard to bring about a condition of souciance in a population. Sadly, it usually takes extreme conditions to turn a population to being concerned.
I can see how we might think that. Because we want awareness, concern, over the things that we think matter - and we don't see any of that.
But I think the population is well capable of extreme attention and concern without any extreme conditions. I asked gpt to give me a list to illustrate what I mean:
The Death of Princess Diana (1997): As you mentioned, the tragic death of Princess Diana in a car crash sparked an overwhelming, global outpouring of grief and media coverage. This event dominated the news cycle for weeks, overshadowing other pressing geopolitical issues of the time, such as the ongoing conflicts in the Middle East or Africa.
The Y2K Panic (Late 1990s - Early 2000s): As the year 2000 approached, there was widespread fear that computers would fail to recognize the change in the date (from "99" to "00"), leading to catastrophic failures in global systems. While the panic turned out to be mostly unfounded, it dominated media coverage and public concern, diverting attention from real issues like financial instability or political corruption.
The Ice Bucket Challenge (2014): The viral trend where people poured buckets of ice water over their heads to raise awareness for ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis) became a global phenomenon. While it raised millions for research, some critics argued it was more about the social media spectacle and the "look-at-me" aspect rather than genuine action on behalf of ALS sufferers or systemic health care reforms.
The "Dress" Debate (2015): A viral debate about the color of a dress that appeared on the internet (was it blue and black, or white and gold?) sparked worldwide discussions and intense media coverage. This bizarre fashion-driven viral moment took over social media, eclipsing more significant issues such as growing income inequality or the refugee crisis at the time.
The "Avocado Toast" Trend (2016-2017): A meme-turned-cultural critique that suggested young people were financially irresponsible for spending money on items like avocado toast. The issue became a global talking point, overshadowing discussions about the real economic challenges faced by younger generations, such as housing affordability and stagnant wages.
The "Tide Pod Challenge" (2018): A dangerous viral challenge where teenagers filmed themselves eating Tide laundry pods. While it sparked widespread concern among parents and authorities, it also distracted from more serious public health issues, such as the opioid crisis or mental health awareness.
The "Black Lives Matter" Movement (2013-Present, particularly in 2020): While the movement itself addresses systemic racism, some aspects of the media focus, particularly the coverage of riots, looting, or social media "performances" of solidarity, became a momentary obsession. This sometimes diverted from deeper and ongoing structural issues like criminal justice reform or long-term policy change.
The #MeToo Movement (2017-2018): While the #MeToo movement was a significant and necessary conversation about sexual harassment, at times, some specific cases dominated the news, often leading to a focus on individual celebrity scandals rather than addressing the larger, systemic issues of gender inequality, workplace dynamics, or institutional failures.
The 2016 "Pokemon Go" Craze: The global popularity of the augmented reality game sparked a temporary obsession with catching virtual creatures in real-world locations. It generated a massive public response and media buzz, briefly diverting attention from issues like political unrest, economic downturns, or climate change.
"Brexit" (2016-2019): While undeniably important for the UK and Europe, the obsessive focus on Brexit negotiations, the drama surrounding the referendum, and the media's portrayal of it dominated global discussions for years. At times, it overshadowed other significant issues within the EU or global concerns like refugee crises, trade wars, or environmental degradation.
The "Kylie Jenner Billionaire" Narrative (2019): The news of Kylie Jenner being declared the youngest self-made billionaire, largely due to her cosmetics company, captured massive media attention. While it sparked debate over definitions of wealth and success, it also seemed to focus more on celebrity culture rather than broader issues such as wealth inequality, tax policies, or corporate monopolies.
The "Fyre Festival" Fiasco (2017): The disastrous Fyre Festival, a luxury music festival in the Bahamas that turned out to be a scam, became a media sensation, with documentaries and news stories about its failure. While it exposed issues in event planning, fraud, and social media marketing, the media attention was disproportionately focused on the spectacle, rather than larger issues such as corporate accountability, tourism industry ethics, or systemic failures in regulation.
These are examples of events or "fashionable" concerns that, at least in their immediate aftermath, captured widespread global attention but, in some cases, detracted from or overshadowed more enduring geopolitical, social, or economic issues that arguably required more urgent focus.
None of those examples showed a solution to a problem...just a concern. Concern is the first and easiest step; a solution is the hardest step.
p.s. and let me add: while we are talking about something that is universally recognised as totally important it is very, very, noticeable that none of the 'lamenters' ever seem to make any effort whatever to energise that apathetic population.
I constantly return to the covid debacle in this kind of context. From start to finish (except it hasn't finished) not one attempt I ever saw to properly reach out to the people. All preaching to the converted. All expressions of whatever, huffing and puffing, culminating in nothing, see you next week, same time, same place.
Instance: Sunetra Gupta. Scientist. Intellectual. To inform the populace. Our of concern for what she perceived as bad science, bad governance, to the point of actually harming to the point of death some people. So she put up a website. Guess what is was called? Remember it is trying to get the truth of the covid madness out to the populace to enable them to protect themselves and maybe fight back.
Take a guess. Think of some good names. Take your time. Think of a hundred.
Did you think of 'collateralglobal.com' ?
I didn't think so.
It still exists. You can see it.
Pointless coffee table glossy magazine twerpism.
To coin a phrase.
That is all the help the hoi polloi got. AND none of the 'pontiffs', 'intelligentsia' 'activist Youtubers' or whatever ever pointed to it.
And what chance of finding it in your google searches do you think?
I hope I haven't lost you. You see what I mean? I mean no one tries.
No one tries to talk to 'them' ( I am one of 'them'). The people.
But 'everyone' ( i.e. all the punditry and their followers) love to castigate them.
Enough to make you spew really. Excuse the coarse. But that's what life is. In fact.