I write about the things that matter to me. All opinions are my own.

Search This Blog

Monday, June 18, 2018

I believe that #QAnon is getting paid by the government to carry out a communication campaign on behalf of the White House. The communication is far too complex, comprehensive and synchronized with the President’s own actions and statements. (See QAnon.pub, QMap.pub, and Qproofs.com). 

I am not alone in taking this phenomenon seriously. Writes Martin Geddes:
  • "#QAnon will destroy the mainstream media as follows. Obama's cabinet were all provably using private emails to communicate, and OIG report already factually demonstrates that Obama lied. The data from Google will provide irrefutable evidence. MSM complicit in cover-up of treason."
  • "What many people don't grasp is that 8chan is filled with highly professional information gatherers and analysts working anonymously on their own dime; this isn't a bunch of rabid teens. If you get your data from MSM and ignore "autist army", prepare for humility training. #QAnon
  • "For those actually paying attention and engaging their critical thinking, #QAnon has gone WAY past proving beyond reasonable doubt that it is the Trump administration building a back door to communicate with the public (and scare #DeepState), bypassing the corrupt & criminal MSM." 
If that’s true, the campaign costs nothing but the salary of #QAnon, because untold numbers of people are reading the cryptic posts on free message boards and then sharing them through secondary websites such as qanon.pub, qmap.pub, qproofs.com & more. (Unless somehow the communicator, individually or as part of a team, is creating these sites anonymously.)

On October 5, 2016, the Government Accountability Office (@USGAO) released a report stating that the federal government spent, on average, $1,00,000,000 on ad & public relations contracts per year for a decade + $430,000,000 for gov comms salaries:

“Public Relations Spending: Reported Data on Related Federal Activities”

GAO notes its data UNDERCOUNTS:
“We used data on employees in the Public Affairs occupational series to describe public relations employment & salaries. It is likely that employees classified under other occupational series also perform public relations activities.” (p.9)

To translate, in the government every job is part of a “series.” Public Affairs specialists are in Series 1035. Those are the salaries GAO counted.

Who did they leave out?

Series 1082, “Writer-Editor” was left out of GAO’s calculations. Even though writer-editors are normally hired to write things on behalf of the government for public consumption.

They also left out the entire Senior Executive Service. Even though the SES is the top leadership cadre of the Federal government and normally communication on behalf of an agency (internally or externally) is a major part of executives’ jobs.

They left out the Technical Writing Series, 1083. Technical writers produce some very important stuff, like:
“research findings; scientific or technical articles, news releases, & periodicals; regulations in technical areas; technical manuals, specifications, brochures, & pamphlets; or speeches or scripts on scientific or technical subjects.”

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Federal government spent $215 billion on 2.2 million civil service personnel alone in fiscal year 2016.

Meanwhile about 25% of the DoD budget, or $1.75 billion, goes to its employees, which include ~750K civilian personnel (See here, here and here).

Someone from another country, who recently moved to D.C., said to me: “I never saw a desk job before.”

I didn’t quite understand, and had to ask: “What do you mean?”

The person literally didn’t know what a desk job is.

Meanwhile, I couldn’t comprehend the question because all we have in D.C. are desk jobs!

How much money does the Federal government really spend on communication?

To get the true figure, add up the official figure of $1.5 billion, and then add everything that got left out of the GAO report. This includes —

Salaries for all the Federal employees who were hired to write, but who aren’t called “Public Affairs Specialists” plus figure 1/2–3/4 of all the salaries for the civil servants who do nothing but “push paper” (i.e. develop knowledge and communicate it) all day.

Now add in all the money that goes to communication at the state and local levels. In all job series.

Add all the money spent on Federal grants to people who also basically generate paper.

Add in all the money spent on Federal contracts that were not counted in the GAO report because they didn’t exactly fit the methodology.

Any contract that is essentially about communication should be counted.

You don’t think “pushing paper” is communication?
What is an Inspector General Report?
What is a Special Counsel investigation if not an effort to find facts and communicate them to law enforcement and the public? (Politifact: ~$8.2 million price tag.)

According to the Census Bureau, as of 2016 about 18% of children, or nearly 1 in 5, lived in poverty.

What if we took all the money that the government wastes on communication…and used it to plant gardens to feed them?

To be clear, I work for the government (all opinions are my own), I am active in the federal communication community, and I respect my peers tremendously. They are not the problem.

In fact, the government runs its own communication school (the Defense Information School) and the General Services Administration has for many years been teaching feds best practices — free.

Civil servants are an overeducated group.

The problem, unfortunately, is that the Federal government does not enforce any across-the-board quality standards for its own communication products.

This is not rocket science, folks.

In England, government communication is evaluated according to specific criteria. In England, there is also an annual Government Communications Plan.

A plan.

It’s not rocket science.

The problem, of course, is occurring at the glacial layer of organizational culture that nobody can really see, but everybody can feel the effects of.

If the government does not plan or evaluate its communications — it’s intentional.

And please don’t tell me that Google Analytics, e.g. measuring the number of visits to a website, or how long someone stayed on a page, is the same thing as actually measuring effectiveness.

Don’t tell me that we should count the number of followers or retweets, or even (God help me) the number of “positive comments.”

The absence of a will-to-plan (because people in power want to say what they want to say, unfettered) results in a colossal amount of not just wasted money but also enormous amounts of money wasted trying to correct the results of the poor communication.

The hilarious series “Yes, Prime Minister” out of England highlights the dilemma. Lots of clips on YouTube.

Perhaps the biggest misperception when it comes to Federal communications is that communicators are hired to “tell a good news story.”


Federal communication is fundamentally an accountability mechanism. “Information should be recorded and communicated…to carry out…internal control and other responsibilities.” (GAO.gov, 1999)

Information in and of itself is not political and should not be political. It should not be politicized. It also should not be shared or omitted to make an agency look good.

Should, should, should.

Absent a champion for nonpartisan, excellent communication, federal communicators are left to focus primarily on the “how,” not the “what” or the “why.”

And that they’ve done a good job at.

My belief: The fact that the “what” of government communication is normally so poor, or lacking nowadays (think: big picture. think: what are our priorities. think: why did we make that decision?) means that people are ripe for all sorts of “fake news.”

It is into this vaccuum that #Qanon has stepped — and delivered the single most valuable government communication campaign of all time — the most informative, the most engaging, the most impactful.

A handful of clues are issued, a bit at a time, and citizens do all the work, analyzing, researching, and cross-checking what is in the end a highly coherent narrative.

But here’s the problem: #QAnon is a ghost. A totally unaccountable ghost.

Who, at this point, could say just about anything and some people would believe it. Turning the messenger into some kind of false god.

This isn’t a way to do business. A transformation is necessary.

We must restore the essential functioning of our Nation’s civil service communication function.

Such that it is uniformly nonpartisan, high-level, accurate, comprehensive and accountable.


Posted June 18, 2018 by Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal. This post is hereby released into the public domain. All opinions are the author’s own. Creative Commons photo via Pixabay.

Sunday, June 17, 2018

Happy Father’s Day Weekend.

On Sunday mornings in DC there are various radio programs dedicated to sermons. This morning on 94.7 FM, at about 6:50 AM EST, there was a pastor speaking about the importance of being involved with your kids at the play-on-the-floor-with-toys “boring” level (this got a laugh from me and his audience.)

He jokingly said that his little daughter preferred another lady (maybe not even a relative, I didn’t hear enough to tell exactly) to him, because he just wasn’t comfortable playing with her at the day-to-day level. This was his way of urging fathers to spend quality time with their kids because in the end that is what builds the relationship and it’s all that matters.

I listened to this and a lightbulb went off in my head. It was this one sentence he kept dwelling on.

Kids interpret involvement as love.

In that instant, I realized the reason that many children have trouble reporting the fact that they are being molested.

The molester is highly involved with the child.

The brain says “involvement is love.”

This brings me to #pedogate and #pizzagate, two terms I never liked, regardless of the fact that pizza actually is a code word, and regardless of the fact that child sex trafficking is a true worldwide crisis involving sickos at very high levels.

The truth of the matter is that #pizzagate was politicized in the beginning. The scandal emerged from the leaked John Podesta emails. Citizen researchers focused on all the ways that the Democrats were sick sex-with-children freaks. (And therefore should not be elected.)

Regardless of how true this may be — and numerous specifics fully convinced me the Dems are sick freaks (Obama’s “hotdog party,” the pizza bracelet with Biden, Biden on numerous “creepy Joe Biden” videos) — but so are Republicans.

After all, the Bush years gave us the Franklin scandal.

And Liz Crokin, in her fantastic book Malice (which felt very real), introduced us to a conservative politician character, very convincing, who was, lets just say, quirky — he liked a good “pee-tini.”

The pizzagate community tried to say that their research was apolitical, and that of course both Democrats and Republicans were guilty of pedophilia, but at the same time any mention of “their candidate” (the candidate I supported too, Donald Trump) was quickly silenced.

I continue to believe he is the single best president this country has ever had. But I also believe that he is not above scrutiny. And has a past, and has issues where women are concerned. And it’s valid to talk about that.

We aren’t going to eliminate child sex trafficking unless we are truly nonpartisan. (And I agree with Sarah Ashcraft that this is the correct and precise term, and we should use it rather than the broader and vague, desexualized “human trafficking” label).

We aren’t going to eliminate it unless we study and expose all its aspects, its historical roots and social contexts, and the political, military, intelligence ground cover that enable it to flourish.

Recommended reading: Pedophilia and Empire by Joachim Hagopian; anything by Yoichi Shimatsu on Pizzagate; and Epidemic by Lori Handrahan.

We have to read widely about this topic and remove the political lens when we do it, because the fact of the matter is that “children in cages” has a lot to do with the growth of the military intelligence complex post-Nazi era and we don’t talk nearly enough about that.

We don’t talk nearly enough about Allen Dulles (CIA), Josef Mengele and Operation Paperclip. Brainwashing kids to serve as operatives of the state.

If you want to get rid of child sex trafficking you have to go to the root, and not the branches.

Now back to Father’s Day, and the distinction between a real father and “I AM YOUR FATHER.”

Why did this man scream at a terrified child as he whipped him as the child begged for mercy that “I am your father”?

Sarah Ashcraft asks her father: “How about when I was 10 and you sent me, alone, across country” … “a human hunting party while I was naked and locked in a cage, made to witness murder of a young blonde boy. Should I talk about that now, Dad?”

A good father protects his children against predators.

A bad father (“father”) IS the predator.

How does the predator (male or female, Democrat or Republican or Libertarian or Green Party, etc.; priest or rabbi or Imam or monk) — how does the predator access the child?

Well you could say that some children, even many children, are born into it — as part of intergenerational cults, as children of Hollywood parent-pimps, as children of evil poor people who sell them.

You could say that the predator accesses the child roaming the streets of Baltimore in a car with a driver, and the child is a homeless teenage runaway and they have a colored handkerchief in their back jeans pocket to signify what they will do.

And you could say that the predator accesses the child because the mother is too deaf blind dumb and tired to notice her boyfriend is molesting her child.

But often enough — and we saw this with Jerry Sandusky — predators simply play the “lovable goofball.” They become part and parcel of the child’s life.

They’re involved.

Reports The New Yorker: Sandusky was known as “a hugger and a grabber and a cutup.”

Reports The New Yorker: “A pedophile…is someone adept not just at preying on children but at confusing, deceiving, and charming the adults responsible for those children.”

You see, the pedophile is very much involved and aims to substitute his “affection” for that of the good father (or mother).

Reports The New Yorker: “On the afternoon of May 3, 1998, Sandusky called the home of an eleven-year-old boy he had met through the Second Mile and invited him to a Penn State athletic facility.” It went on from there.

What do you think happens when a pedophile ingrains himself in a religious community that runs schools, and camps, and synagogues?

What happens is that the pedophile has the full force and weight of the community, because he is a trusted father figure.

The child, the victim, becomes the “problem.”

Vicki Polin, who appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show in 1989 to talk about being ritually abused by her family, started a site in 1999 2 bring awareness of the problem of child sexual abuse to the Jewish community. It closed in 2014 but is still there. The registry of “alleged and convicted offenders” is enormous and it is still live.

Jewish Community Watch also has a “Wall of Shame”: “If you touch a child inappropriately or sexually exploit a child in any way, you will be listed on this page to warn our community about the potential danger you represent to our children.”

For speaking out, Jewish activists got a “reputation.” For example, Shmarya Rosenberg: “a journalistic watchdog and whistle blower…has broken news about sexual misconduct, smear campaigns & dubious business practices conducted by or on behalf of stringently religious Jews.”

Just like with Hillary Clinton and the IG Report — which shows how the law enforcement community treated her with kid gloves — in the Jewish community nobody wanted to challenge people who were literally considered parental figures to all. (The case of Malka Leifer highlights issues surrounding female abuse by a school authority.)

Right now nobody in the Jewish community is calling it human trafficking (child sex trafficking) but that’s exactly what it is when you help pedophiles to prey on child after child: “the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labour, sexual slavery, or commercial sexual exploitation for the trafficker or others.”

I tell you all this about the Jewish community because this is my world. I love being Jewish but do you know what? These horrible people messed with my life, and they gave me and my husband enough trauma to last a lifetime.

And in the grand scheme of things, what we went through would be considered minuscule.

The only way pedophiles are able to offend with a child who volunteers to go with them, at least initially, is because the pedophile is very very involved with the child’s life.

And that is why pedophiles arrange to serve in any capacity where they can gain access to children — anything.

Fairfax County (VA) Public Schools made an excellent documentary on how girls are recruited from school into sex trafficking and it’s worth watching to see the former recruiter say how easy it is to get them with just a little love and affection.

On social media, one father has started a campaign to rescue his daughter, saying how he is desperate to get his daughter out of the foster care group home where other girls groom kids for trafficking because they’ve run away and been trafficked on the street.

This Father’s Day weekend I really have to ask myself what has happened that child sex trafficking has become so rampant, how have so many sick pedophiles substituted their “love” for that of good parents, and how have fathers in particular been elbowed out of the way.

And as a sociologist it takes me about two seconds to answer that question.
The role of mothers fulfilling their (our) natural nurturing role, as is biologically built into their systems, has been totally mocked, devalued, and nearly destroyed. Don’t even get me started about the class and race inequalities that leave some children so desperate and vulnerable.
While paying lip service to fathers, the intelligentsia has all but decimated masculinity even though, again, its capacities are biologically inborn for the male. Instead of taking young men and training they to fight and protect their loved ones, society criminalizes this natural instinct and seeks to collect all the guns in the name of taming male aggression.
Instead of promoting the primacy of the closely knit nuclear family, society mocks and scorns marriage and promotes an extended period of childhood where you will find twenty-somethings sleeping around in dorms then “finding themselves” for a decade rather than committing.
Instead of following known principles of psychology which tell us how children cannot handle adult sexual relationships, Hollywood bombards us with stories about “young love” to the point where nine and ten year olds think they need “serious boyfriends.”
Meanwhile the schools, instead of teaching critical thinking and literature and art and STEM, and how to budget and cook, spends loads of time teaching kids that it’s okay to explore your sexuality and here’s a book with step by step diagrams.

Do you know where self esteem comes from?

It comes from having a mother who loves you and a father who protects you — and vice versa.

In contrast, your self esteem goes into the toilet when your father is never around. How is it that Hillary Clinton can sell out America’s deepest secrets to the world, but one hungry Black man steals a Snickers from 7–11 and is jailed? Where are all the Black fathers?

Your self-esteem goes into the toilet when your entire country, or region, is subject to random drone killing with no consequences. When you’re held hostage by radical fanatics on the take from the “Deep State.” When your very real life is treated like…a video game.

When you have a world full of intentionally homeless “refugees,” what you have is a world without fathers.

And when so-called feminists whine about people like me, who supposedly support the President because of a “Daddy complex,” I really have to ask the question: Why do you want a world without men?

And on this Father’s Day weekend I have to ask the question: How did we get so far down a path that nearly succeeded in bringing down America, by elevating the state and bringing down both its moms and its dads?

For it is in the parental vacuum created by an all-powerful state that the child is vulnerable to numerous pedophiles.

And is forced to interpret their “involvement” — as their loving father’s hands are tied behind his back, and mom is fully “leaning in” to her own career— as a form of “love.”

Copyright 2018 by Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal. All opinions are the author’s own. Cover photo by ljcor via Pixabay (Creative Commons). Marker drawings by the author.

Saturday, June 16, 2018

Let’s start by diagramming knowledge.

This circle represents all the things you could potentially know — if you knew everything.

But there’s a catch.

For many reasons, what we think we know is usually fairly limited as compared with the potential evidence.

The truth is, only God truly knows everything.

To be concise about it, here is a list of reasons why certain kinds of knowledge will forever be obscured from our view: 
  • Our brains can’t comprehend everything. 
  • Our emotions give us blinders. 
  • Our spiritual level is debased. 
  • We don’t have direct experience. 
  • Someone is lying to us.
  • Information is omitted from our view.
In a world of limited knowledge, ethnomethodology is the study of how people try to normalize abnormal situations. 

For it is a fact that people try very hard to “go on as normal” even in insanely abnormal situations. Not only that, but people violently resist (emotional or physical violence) if you force them to confront the fact that things aren’t normal at all.

Ethnomethodology helps us understand things like why are we supposed to say “fine” when people say “how are you” or “great” when they ask “how was your weekend.”

Ethnomethodology is the social production of order from complete chaos. For people need to think everything is okay--and that limits their knowledge, too.

A sociologist named Harold Garfinkel pioneered the concept that we force everyday life to be normal, even when it’s not. He used something called “breaching experiments.”

Husbands and wives will relate. Quoting:
Case 3: “On Friday night my husband and I were watching television. My husband remarked that he was tired. I asked, ‘How are you tired? Physically, mentally, or just bored?’”
S: I don’t know, I guess physically, mainly.
E: You mean that your muscles ache or your bones?
S: I guess so. Don’t be so technical.
(After more watching)
S: All these old movies have the same kind of old iron bedstead in them.
E: What do you mean? Do you mean all old movies, or some of them, or just the ones you have seen?
S: What’s the matter with you? You know what I mean.
E: I wish you would be more specific.
S: You know what I mean! Drop dead!”
In this experiment one romantic partner intentionally “breached” the other person’s expectations of reality and the result was violence.

I sort of dragged out that example to make a point about the political climate in which the 2016 campaign took place. Because it was totally and completely abnormal, by any measure:
  • Insanely, egregiously biased coverage.
  • A political candidate who literally had everybody in power “in the bag.” Nationally and internationally.
  • Her opponent a total outsider to politics, and on top of it hostile to the Establishment.
  • Both of the candidates known or suspected to have a personal knowledge of the underworld.
  • Both of them suspected of mistreating people sexually.
  • One of them known to have misused classified information.
It was a campaign that was not supposed to be a competition. Even though we live in a democracy. 

More, it was a campaign where the mere mention of the non-favored candidate could get you punched in the face. And did.

No — it was not a normal situation at all. And I know this from direct experience because I was vilified for supporting Donald Trump. In fact, we all (meaning all of us who supported him) knew that to say anything in his favor meant a deluge of hateful, hateful attacks.

There was an insane phenomenon where people had to secretly support him, meaning they voted for him but would never tell a soul.

I lived through this and I still live through it. And I observed how the media went insane over any issue that seemed to benefit him and hurt her. 

That’s how I know that #Russiagate is a total joke and a horrible waste of money.

Even the way Bernie Sanders folded to Hillary when she stole the primary was insane.

But no matter what happened, it was CNN’s job to pretend everything was normal; generally the media’s job was to wring its hands at “the rise of the alt-right movement.”

Thank God, He put me in a sociology program (scholarship out of nowhere) and gave me experience in marketing and government. So I can tell you all of this with confidence: much of what has passed for "knowledge" production in the public sphere over these past two years is total bullshit.

Obama, a great marketer but also a very evil man, fooled many of us very well. Like Bill Clinton did.

The collusion was not between Trump and Russia. It was between these presidents, and earlier ones, and the machines that propped them up and sold us soda and candy for breakfast.
  • This is the machine that gave us war after war after war, when all we want is peace.
  • This is the machine that sends Black people to jail en masse, when White people are the ones committing the crimes.
  • This is the machine that tells me I am a heartless pig for wanting a safe and secure border. And just like Hamas, they hold up children as human shields. (If you don’t want to be separated from your children at the border, don’t try to cross here illegally!)
  • This is the machine that flooded America with MS-13 to the point where they rape an eighth grader and nobody is willing to follow up on that aggressively because guess why.
  • This is the machine that gives us a gang that stabs a man more times than anyone can count and then they rip his heart out of his body.
  • This is the machine that looks away as children are placed into foster care group homes where they are groomed by other children to be trafficked.
But in the machine’s production of “normal” we don’t talk about all this. And we don’t talk about a Hollywood that bastardizes its own entertainment events to insert messages promoting violent hate of the President combined with wanton murder and sex with anything that moves.

In the production of “normal” nobody from the Today show is doing a segment on the many, many, many indications of occult worship, pedophilia and mind control in “the industry.” Noooooooooooo.

And so now we can talk about the Department of Justice Inspector General's Report about the investigation into the Hillary Clinton emails, a.k.a. the "Midyear" investigation (section-by-section Word export here), because now we understand that many things interfere with the production of knowledge.

It goes without saying that many things also interfere with the conduct of an investigation.
  • Most broadly, and invisibly, institutions have a survival instinct just like people do. So there is bias to avoid any activity that will put the agency in danger of being dismantled.
  • There is the bias that the agency is a good place and its culture and rules make sense. That the governing laws are sufficient. Those matters are supposed to be accepted without question.
  • There is the bias that an agent is there to simply do their job which pays the mortgage. And the agent naturally does not want to see their finances or their family suffer because of something they did on the job in the name of keeping an investigation pure.
So they are biased toward picking investigatory tactics that can be defended later on, but which also don’t create headaches in the short term.

Or — and this is frequently discounted — they simply do what they are told.
In the federal government your job is assessed on performance, meaning how well you do your job. But you can get in trouble for conduct, meaning how you do your job — your behavior. And you’re expected to avoid conflicts of interest, and to keep politics totally out.

The central question of the report is not what happened in this specific investigation. It is whether the institutions called “DOJ” and its subsidiary “FBI” are set up to do the job right.

A prime example of the reality, which is that they are not set up properly (either functionally or from an accountability standpoint) is that there was no public information shared about any images found on Anthony Weiner's computer.

The Department of Justice and the FBI are who we look to when it comes to prosecuting such matters, and in the IG report the reference to “crimes against children” is limited to mention of an agent’s notes on p. 294. Subsequently, pages 295-331 of the report are essentially a series of excuses as to why the laptop was not properly reviewed.

This is an absurd and evil omission and it is not normal.

This is not about politics, it’s not about garden variety trash talk, it’s not about text messages between lovers. It’s none of that.

The people who care about the contents of that laptop do not care about how its discovery compromises the reputation of an adult. They (we) aren’t reducible to a stereotype from an elitist trope about “deplorables.”

The people who care about the contents of that laptop are everybody. They are grandmothers and grandfathers. They are Black and White and every color on the spectrum. They are believers in God and atheists.

That’s the truth.

If our current government setup is ultimately failed and corrupt when it comes to protecting kids, its partner is most certainly the media, which aids and abets this.

It is disgusting. It is wrong.

And everyone with a functioning mind and heart and soul knows it.


Copyright 2018 by Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal. All opinions are the author’s own. This post is hereby released by the author into the public domain. Coffee photo and black-and-white drawings, by the author, are also released into the public domain. Cover photo by Counselling via Pixabay (Creative Commons).

Friday, June 15, 2018

1) More thoughts on the #IGReport and the role #QAnon plays. (Insert generic ☕️ image here.)
2) The inspector general of an agency makes recommendations to which management responds. It is an accountability mechanism but not a totally third party method of evaluation because both work for the same agency and Gov. Not typically an avenue of prosecution.
3) In an environment where everything is not only politicized, but weaponized, the IG becomes a topic of partisan discussion. It shouldn’t be.
4) @POTUS is a complete outsider to Washington but he is an insider when it comes to power. He has an uncanny ability to understand where power lies and how to work the game to his advantage. 

The Art of the Deal.
5) Meanwhile DC was for 8 years stymied by all the schemes Obama pulled, starting with Fast and Furious.
6) @SharylAttkisson spied on by Obama who politicized DOJ 4 gun control, interfering with ATF, defying lawmakers (Grassley and Chaffetz) to hide documents, and Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was murdered b/c Obama’s DHS made him use fake bullets in self defense.
7) The list of scandals for which Obama went unaccountable grew and grew. Gang members and refugees flooded the country. The debt piled up. There was this constant odd extreme agenda around transgender rights.
8) I don’t believe @POTUS wanted to get into the race. I remember watching him on TV totally frustrated about Obama’s “junior varsity” ISIS. “I wouldn’t tell you how they’d be gone, but they’d be gone.”
9) I believe @POTUS entered the race with a plan and a set of partners, namely military intelligence. @StevePieczenik had a number of videos on this.
10) From the beginning I believe the plan was to use the military to take back control from a shadowy network of powerful people who had an anti-American agenda to enrich themselves.
11) Ever the master communicator, @POTUSknew he would need someone to bring the people along.
12) During the campaign a white paper leaked from Joel Benenson that outlined D communication strategy around a supposed alien event. I don’t know if it was real but even if it wasn’t, that plus other docs suggested knowledge of 8Chan and Reddit as useful places to be.
13) Also during the campaign an “FBI anon” sprang up who told us what was going on (supposedly) and it was bad. It was never proven whether the person was authentic.
14) There were other anons who gave “interviews” to alternative media and their info frequently sounded like it could be credible.
15) Meanwhile Reddit became controversial over pizzagate, so clearly the use of anons freaked out *someone.*
16) @realDonaldTrump walks into this situation which included people on the D side who clearly were out there trolling for her. (To be fair we have to assume that all sides had their trolls.)
17) He knew that popular opinion was and is the key to his success and enlisted the only people he could trust to communicate - military intelligence.
18) Thus was born #QAnon. Who never tells us anything truly new or classified. Who doesn’t want any money. Who continuously shows how the President endorsed his/her work (through @POTUS signals. Who also talks in military code.
19) Nobody understands this code because we aren’t military.
20) The campaign begins by telling us how it is going to end: military tribunals.
21) Websites like qmap.pub and QAnon.puband qproofs.com spring up and it’s not clear who made them.
22) Because this strategy is fundamentally about partnering with the anons who deeply influence public opinion.
23) @POTUS speaks to them and they scream for more. They do all the work by deciphering the puzzle for the rest of us, who follow as if we were watching a secret soap opera.
24) Not only is the President a master of communication, he fundamentally understands the most undervalued properties of social media - Twitter and the boards. Twitter had no value before he made it interesting.
25) This is the reality. A strategy of desperation. A strategy that works.

If I were the bad guys, I wouldn’t waste my time trashing Q.

By Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal. The author hereby releases this post into the public domain. All opinions are the author’s own.

This is a good moment to talk about what a customer-centric government report should look like.

In 2010 then-President Obama signed the Plain Writing Act (not sure if this is the exact title) into law. It mandated federal agencies do exactly what that sounds like.

Before that the government issued best practice guidelines for the management of agencies which included quality communication for accountability.

The problem is that bureaucrats are punished for coloring outside the lines, and Presidents want to say what they want to say, and so nobody has really pushed hard for optimal communication with citizens.

Although there has been significant forward movement on the customer service front - both President Trump and President Obama have championed this.

As a federal communicator (all opinions my own) I helped write a white paper for the Federal Communicators Network arguing for standards in gov comm similar to what the UK has.

A good first start would be to assess which topics people want to know more about. Prioritize and deliver.

A good first start would be to assess which topics people want to know more about. Prioritize and deliver.

A 538 page IG report on a topic of significant public interests needs to be broken down into sections and subsections. In printable searchable HTML. With tags. And tables and charts and pull quotes.

A report like this needs to be offered with not just an executive summary but also a list of noteworthy stories for coverage and links to other information that can be used as a reference. Noteworthy means that the FBI IG thinks they will inform and educate.

Photos should be offered along with any report. Where are the images of the mountains of evidence, the agents at work, the debates and discussions? This is how government works - it is an optimal opportunity to educate people.

Why not have a “myth vs. fact” pullout? How about an FAQ?

Why not have a section of the website where the public can ask and answer questions? And official answers are marked with a star?

Please don’t tell me that the government can’t afford to communicate well about a subject they’ve spent so much time and money on.

Consider the unbelievable and unacceptable cost of poor government communication — anger, fear, confusion, distortion, manipulation, and hatred.

If you don’t want people relying on #QAnon, then do a better job communicating.

Thursday, June 14, 2018

Ever since my encounter with a creepy rabbi in fifth grade, I always had bad self-esteem and especially as a Jew.

I remember that I felt so guilty for my encounter with this rabbi that I literally wore black for most of my life.

You may be thinking what could have happened to her that she had such a strong reaction and the truth is I cannot remember it well, even when I close my eyes and try.

The furthest I can get is that I'm standing in a dark basement, and this man is hugging me.

But regardless of what happened there, it left me with a tremendous sense of guilt.

No matter how angry my mother got on my behalf, it didn't matter.

One time I ran into this rabbi in Monsey, in a pizza store. I had gone there with my father and he was just standing there.

I remember he turned around, and he looked at me with the creepiest, creepiest smile.

Setting me back yet again.

I have family in Monsey and it was around this time that I visited them, and someone I looked up to told me that I looked somewhat heavy.

Well that was all I needed: Now I could focus squarely on losing the offensive weight.

But I never forgot that feeling that the rabbi gave me, that feeling that I was subhuman.

It followed me, and it followed me for a long time.

As you can imagine I became a somewhat angry person.

Even now, when I ask my husband what he thinks my "brand" is, he answers with just one word: "angry."

And it's funny because if you know me in real life, you don't see the anger come out at all.

Except if I see somebody bullying somebody else.

Then my anger really comes out. I can feel it. It's like a cauldron of hot rage boiling and boiling inside of me.

God is merciful and He has blessed me to be surrounded by people who understand me. Not everyone does, but enough.

One of these people, who unfortunately is no longer with us, is my Zayde olov hashalom (may he rest in peace).

We used to visit him and my Bubbie up in Canada.

And you know how it is, the family is all caught up in itself, because there are parental dynamics, and parental with the grandparent dynamics, and Holocaust dynamics, and Chasidish dynamics, and the dynamics of a Chosid marrying someone who is not Chasidish, and then there's sibling dynamics, and the dynamics of me with each parent.

The dynamics of Shabbos, the dynamics of that long car ride up to Toronto.

The only consolation amid all these dynamics was the way my Zayde talked to me.

"Nice girl," he used to say, in that Hungarian accent. "You are a very nice girl."

He didn't have to say very much.

In those few words, my Zayde said everything.

Copyright 2018 by Dr. Dannielle (Dossy) Blumenthal. All opinions are Dr. Blumenthal's own. This post is hereby released into the public domain. Photo by Shai Barzilay (Creative Commons/Flickr).

Wednesday, June 13, 2018

In yeshiva there was this one teacher, Mrs. Kaisman, who really shaped my hashkafa, meaning my framework of thinking as a Jew. (Check out some of her lectures, online.)

You have to know that in Bruriah I was a smart-mouth and delighted in asking smart-mouth questions. Mainly because I was bored, but also because I was just, generally angry at having to sit in class for so many hours a day, when I didn't feel like I was really learning anything.

Yes, a typical kid.

I remember saying to Mrs. Kaisman something like, "How do we know the Torah is valid?" Which is of course an impossible question, it's one of those questions where you ask it and the teacher has license to smack you across the face for your impunity.

And she smiled at me, with that Lakewood-teacher-smile she had (and I mean this in a good way - there was no question she wouldn't field) and said:
"Look, Dossy. It's a 50-50 chance. You can keep the Torah and you'll go up there (at this she motioned to heaven, meaning she was referring to what happens after you die) and everything will be fine for you with HaShem. Or (and here she gestured broadly) you can do the opposite, and see what happens. See how HaShem takes His hands off the steering wheel."
What a brilliant way to keep me in line. It's up to you if you want to go to hell, Dossy.

Over the more than 30 years since my high school graduation, I've thought of Mrs. Kaisman a lot. I know that in somebody else's mouth, those words would have been manipulative, mindf--ing, brain control. But in hers -- and I've always known this -- the words were only intended to help a rebellious teenager step back from the rebellion and really think about the deeper consequences of her words.

Mrs. Kaisman taught me other things, too. It may have been her who said this, but it really doesn't matter, because the words are so true:
"Those who know, don't tell. And those who tell, don't know."
After fifteen years of working in government, I can attest to that.

The public has all kinds of ideas about what is going on in "the swamp." And what they don't know, pundits are only too happy to tell them on TV.

But the truth is, you can only understand the civil service by...actually being a civil servant, or spending a significant amount of time among us.

And as far as I know, most civil servants take it for granted that what happens at work, really stays there.

In much the same way, some people seem to think they know a lot about Jews and Judaism. And the funny thing is, they not only aren't Jewish, but they don't even know any Jews! The evidence of that is that they will bring a lot of "proofs" of Jewish bad behavior from newspaper articles, or extremist types of books, or the one scholar who says X while everybody else says Y, or even -- God help us -- the omnipresent picture of Neturai Karta chasidim rallying against Israel.

And then if pressed, they will say: "Well that isn't anti-Semitic. I had a boss once who was Jewish and he was very nice."

As a Jew myself, raised among Jews, fully immersed in the world of Jews, I can confidently say we have enough genuine problems without people making stuff up that they don't know anything about. And how I wish we would hear more from religious Jews who do know something about yiddishkeit, and can speak to both the good and the bad things that happen among us. (Fortunately, this does seem to be happening.)

Sometimes I hear people say things like: "Am I the only person who goes through this type of thing?"

And each time I have to smile. I am getting older and each smile adds three wrinkles to my face.

Each time, I think to myself: "No, you're not the only one at all. Not at all."

For every single thing you're going through, a million other people have been through some variation of the same. It's just that as a rule, people who go through stuff choose not to talk about it.

Take everything you hear with a large grain of salt.

Copyright 2017 by Dr. Dannielle (Dossy) Blumenthal. All opinions are Dr. Blumenthal's own. This post is hereby released into the public domain. Creative Commons photo via Pixabay.

Today’s Drudge Report has this (somewhat frightening) headline: Pentagon Seeks to Store Data in Human DNA...

Clicking on the link takes you to a story at NextGov about how the government is exploring putting massive amounts of data on DNA.

The story links to FedBizOpps (I don’t see a direct announcement linked there) and to a “proposer’s day” PowerPoint in which IARPA (Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity, part of the Director of National Intelligence) “outlined its vision” for what this is. (This is an unclassified briefing.)

Trying to find out what this means, I went to Slide 17 to find an “Overview” of “MIST,” for Molecular Information Storage, that said:
“The program seeks to develop deployable storage technologies that can eventually scale into the exabyte regime and beyond with reduced physical footprint, power and cost requirements relative to conventional storage technologies. MIST seeks to accomplish this by using sequence-controlled polymers as a data storage medium, and by building the necessary devices and information systems to interface with this medium.”
Wanting to know more about this new technology I searched briefly and found a 2013 article in USA Today which clarified that the DNA we're talking about here is synthetic. Not what the headline implied. Helpfully, the article also clarifies that we are not talking about "consider storing information in a living creature, because the error rate would be too high and the storage less secure."

And yet the mind cannot help to wander. Is there the possibility that human DNA could be used to store data? And if so, how might that technology be harnessed, by anyone?

The answer, says tech entrepreneur Nova Spivack, is, yes it can. A review of the various possibilities includes: eyes, teeth, hair, skin, nails, and even the blood. As long-term solutions, most of these methods are not practical. But it is theoretically possible to store memory in "junk DNA regions which presumably are less involved in critical functions of the DNA" (still problematic); under the skin, in a device; and even in a "benign virus" engineered to be harmless to the body.

Now how frightening is that?

Encoding information on DNA, synthetic or human, is just one example of the kind of complex, sensitive, potentially controversial topics that all organizations must face every single day. The challenge is to talk about it directly, without being overly simplistic or overly technical, as proponents of both strategies are essentially trying to avoid having to confront legitimate and serious stakeholder concerns.

We are no longer entering the brave new world of technology, we're fully enveloped within it, and the Internet has empowered people to do a great deal of meaningful research on their own.

Therefore, when you generate a document for public consumption, consider the multiple audiences who may be interested in it.

You may have intended it narrowly, for a technical audience, but sharing it absent a clear and comprehensive explanation, and optimally an FAQ, can also raise alarm bells for the general public.

This article is released into the public domain by its author, Dr. Dannielle Blumenthal. Opinions are the author's own. Image by Guillaume Duchenne via Wikipedia (public domain).

Tuesday, June 12, 2018

The #MeToo movement is a manipulation of women’s suffering by political activists who are literally waging war on men.

There, I said it. 

I am a feminist and I broke rank with the ruling clique.

Just yesterday I had a different opinion, writing in response to social commentator Candace Owens, who had posted the following comment to Twitter:
"The entire premise of #metoo is that women are stupid, weak & inconsequential. Too stupid to know what men might want if you come to their hotel room late at night. Too weak to turn around and tell someone not to touch your ass again. Too inconsequential to realize this."
Just yesterday, I wrote
"No. #MeToo is about the fact that so many women and girls suffer sexual abuse without telling." 
 Because I thought that her comment was cruel and cutting to women.

But Candace Owens understands the manipulations of the sick radical Leftist communist Marxist anti-Americans who create political campaigns much better than I do.

To get a sense of the power of this woman’s mind, and the reason why the leftists hate her, check out this brief clip “Off the Plantation” if you haven’t already. In it, a young Black man talks about realizing how White liberals care absolutely nothing for him or Black families at all.

And somewhere here Owens talks about how good they (liberals) are at manipulating you with words, like: How could anyone disagree that Black Lives Matter?

It’s funny, if you think about it, because haven’t there been a few “movements” that sounded good but which somehow arose and disappeared sort of artificially?

Remember Occupy Wall Street?

Come to think of it, how about those pink hats at the "Women's March?"
How about how I feared going to the inauguration (which they said didn't have any people) because of those black-robed Antifa activists, who were going to, I feared, smash heads and smash windows. 

I remember that around DC, not long ago, there used to be these fliers, like “Smash the Fash” (saying to commit violence against fascists which the President and his supporters supposedly are).

It’s like, I’m not a rocket scientist but this is all so faked and faked up. But when you’re in it, in the moment, you can’t necessarily see it.

Back to #MeToo.

This one is very close to my emotional triggers, as I am sure it is for many people. How long has abuse gone on and been covered up? 

A movement like this seems timely, and strong, and empowering.

But ha-ha, as usual the joke is on me. Because I let my emotional blinders stop me from reviewing all the evidence.

Because the #1 characteristic of this movement seems to be stopping men, not stopping abuse.

Abuse is perpetrated by women and men alike. It happens to boys and girls alike. Yet from the perspective of this movement, everything seems to be about how men are bad, and how we must stop them.

Here I am referring to 3 interrelated political aims: 
  • Eliminating gender polarity and substitute gender fluidity (turn boys into girls and girls into boys.) 
  • Criminalizing male sexuality and stigmatize testosterone. 
  • Criminalizing gun ownership.
By “stopping men” I am referring to the substitution of female dictators for men. Like here is Oprah explicitly saying we are entering the age of matriarchy. Not the good, nurturing, loving and cooperative kind but simply controlling of human freedom in a different way. 

And if you watch the kind of stuff that passes for entertainment right now you see the entire agenda at work -- the television series The Handmaid’s Tale for example.

What was actor Robert DeNiro saying at the Tony Awards when he said “f— Trump?” Essentially, from a certain vantage point, he was giving voice to  #MeToo activists who see things in gender terms only, and from the perspective of women in particular. Who are furious that a "man’s man" is actually more successful or effective than they are, because they literally hate men, and are enraged at even the remotest concept that men could possess power legitimately.

This is reverse sexism to the core.

I think about abuse and it boils my blood. The emotion blinds me sometimes to what is actually happening. But this video about Rose McGowan and Asia Argento really woke me up. This medium-length analysis (about 15 minutes) by Paul Romano is worth watching, because it pulls together three social institutions at once (feminism, the entertainment industry, and religion or anti-religion) and shows how they work in concert. 

Romano points out that the two most prominent faces associated with #MeToo are Hollywood stars Rose McGowan and Asia Argento. And that both are associated with witchcraft in some way. (I am not going to pretend to know how much of it is real versus symbolic.)
  • For example, Rose McGowan has said: "I am a witch and I will hunt wrongdoers."
  • Asia Argento has said: "I miss this holy whore and white witch."
  • On the recent death of Argento's boyfriend Anthony Bourdain, fellow actress Amber Tamblyn said: “Witches: please prepare the strongest protection spell you have for our sister Asia Argento today. Please lift her up with all the love and light your conjuring is capable of casting. #AnthonyBourdain."
Thinking more deeply about witchcraft: The thing about it is, on the one hand you have this kind of New-Agey version which is a mishmash of ideas about women’s empowerment.

But in Judaism we learn that they should be put to death. In Exodus 22:17, the Torah says: "You shall not allow a sorceress to live." 

The Jewish concern of course is not whether witchcraft offers women a "safe space" to be "bitches." We care about worshiping God and not misdirecting people to draw on demonic energies.

The Bible in fact is soaked in references to witches, sorcerers, child sacrifice, and specifically passing infants through the fire of Moloch—all ways of defying God and seeking power elsewhere.

And the Bible does in fact acknowledge that occult ceremonies do have power by harnessing the forces of evil. For example, in Genesis Rebecca stole her father Laban's idols because he used them to practice divination, and she feared that he would use this power to chase down her family and harm them. 

That the dark arts "work" is not because God lacks power of course. It is because God gives us free will. And as such there are angels of light and angels of darkness. He gives power to the dark side so that we will choose light.

From the perspective of #MeToo, the point is that I believe Rose McGowan and Asia Argento have effectively tricked people into following the powers of darkness. Because they stand there and they give speeches and they make some sort of weird power sign ("power fist") intended to rile people up. They carry the mantle of victim. And as such, nobody can question them.

If you watch Romano’s video, it contains a segment about modern day witches and how they seriously view today’s politics as an opportunity. (Hillary Clinton of course recently was inducted into a witches’ group, The Wing, but of course they are elite-looking so it doesn't count.)

Romano points out that all religions have a bad controlling element to them and that simply having an alternative way of life is not the issue. It is the deliberate misdirection of people to worship the anti-God, or Satan that is the problem. 

To misdirect people, of course, you wouldn't directly say “Let’s go worship Satan.” 

You would say, “Men are pigs and they have always been pigs. Trust women.”

Romano draws our attention to a movie that Asia Argento co-wrote and starred in (it’s based on someone else’s book) called The Heart Is Deceitful Above All Things. In this movie (trigger warning), Argento’s young son is not only sodomized by her boyfriend — but the son is also dressed up as a girl, complete with makeup, and “seduces” another adult male.

Based on her choice to not only star in but actually create a movie like this, I think that Argento is disturbed. Maybe it’s because of what happened to her. Maybe it’s because she made a choice to cross over into the dark side. Or both.
The point is, we should be very suspicious of the dynamics at play here. Suspicious of who is invested in promoting the #MeToo narrative. Suspicious of what is presented to us as “real,” such as the McGowan vs. Alyssa Milano catfight

On Twitter, @OpenThePrimary points out that #MeToo is also a distraction tactic: "The #MeToo movement is sucking all the oxygen in Hollywood away from systemic sexual abuse of children." 

It's sort of like saying: "Pay attention the adult women getting raped...not at the children getting trafficked by guess who...Hollywood." 

And when it comes to sexual misconduct, Hollywood will not talk at all about pedophilia, a point that Corey Feldman has made repeatedly but which there is so much anonymous discussion about that it's reached the level of a deafening roar. Former music journalist Thomas Wictor describes it thus:

Regarding Hollywood's abuse of adults, the industry has all sorts of defenses for itself, including, shockingly, two that have come up in relation to Harvey Weinstein. One is the notion that it wasn't trafficking because "no one was paid." The other is the idea that the casting couch is an old and well-known system that should not be considered criminal.

Look: At the end of the day I am just a simple person thinking simple things. I don’t pretend to understand everything. But I know enough to know that much craftier people take advantage of people like me. 

I know that crafty propagandists don’t want simple people — the “dummies,” the ones they think they can easily manipulate — asking questions.

The answer to this one is simple. 

Ask - ask a lot - and speak your mind.

There is no shame in being a simple person with a brain.

Copyright 2017 by Dr. Dannielle (Dossy) Blumenthal. All opinions are Dr. Blumenthal's own. This post is hereby released into the public domain. Photo Credit: susanlee828 / Flickr (Creative Commons)