The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

False Dilemmas and Real Binaries: Patterns of Error in Logic and Rhetoric

Posted on | January 25, 2020 | 1 Comment

 

In his book SJWs Always Lie, Vox Day makes the important distinction between logic (the mental process by which we seek truth) and rhetoric (the language of persuasion). Both logic and rhetoric are skills necessary to statesmanship, because the political leader must first analyze the problems of public policy (logic), then explain the problem and convince others to support his proposed solution (rhetoric). As any student of history knows, it is often the case that there are good arguments on both sides of any public-policy controversy. The classic example of this is the Athenian expedition to Sicily during the Peloponnesian War. Thucydides in his famous History presents the argument made for the expedition by Alcibiades, and the opposing argument by Nicias. Alcibiades “won” the debate — in the sense that he persuaded the Athenian assembly to approve the expedition — but as the subsequent disaster proved, Nicias was entirely correct in arguing against the expedition.

This shows how persuasive rhetoric can triumph over sound logic, and one might think that statesmen would have learned something from this lesson, yet over and over, we see politicians leading their nations to disaster through similar errors. One of the most common tools of demagoguery, by which people are persuaded to support bad policy, is what students of logic recognize as the false dilemma fallacy:

A false dilemma (or sometimes called false dichotomy) is a type of informal fallacy in which something is falsely claimed to be an “either/or” situation, when in fact there is at least one additional option.

In the case of the Sicilian expedition, the debate in Athens was focused on the either/or notion that they must send military aide to their Ionian allies immediately, or else suffer the lost opportunity for what Alcibiades assured them would be an easy victory against their Spartan rivals. Yet the fact was that their allies had brought them a false report, exaggerating the situation in Sicily, and the wise thing to do would have been to send a small party to scout out the situation and report back, so that the assembly might be fully informed before undertaking such an expensive and risk endeavor. Because Alcibiades was ambitious for military glory, however, he derogated the arguments made for a cautious wait-and-see approach, and thus his demagoguery carried the debate.

Creating a sense of now-or-never urgency — “We must do something!” — when there is in fact plenty of time to examine the situation and consider alternatives to drastic action, is where deceptive rhetoric so often becomes outright propaganda. Thomas Sowell examines these propaganda methods in some detail in his excellent book The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy. Because we associate the word “propaganda” with totalitarian regimes, there is a tendency in democratic polities to ignore the ways in which dishonest methods of persuasion are employed in our own societies. However it can be shown, for example, that Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s presidential campaign in 1932 was one of the first modern propaganda campaigns, engaging in character assassination against Herbert Hoover, demonizing him as the scapegoat to blame for the Depression (a) which was not his fault, and (b) which Hoover was doing everything he knew to relieve. Hoover was portrayed as a wicked servant of wealthy exploiters, and cruelly indifferent to the suffering of the poor. Subsequently, FDR was credited with having rescued the country from disaster, although it can be argued (as Amity Schlaes has done in The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression) that Roosevelt’s New Deal programs actually impeded recovery and made the Depression worse.

The causes of the Great Depression were complex, and there were many possible ways to deal with the economic problems of the 1930s, but FDR’s 1932 campaign (which for the first time employed a full-time director for the Democratic National Committee, with an emphasis on what would now be called “messaging,” i.e., propaganda) painted the choice as a false dilemma between the alleged cruel indifference of the GOP and the determination of Democrats to do something for “the forgotten man.” And this theme, endlessly reiterated, was carried over in successive campaigns over the next two decades into the Truman era, until finally Republicans were able to win back the White House by nominating the war hero Dwight Eisenhower in 1952. To this day, however, the Democrats continue to attract voters with the same dishonest rhetoric that elected FDR in 1932: Republicans are “the party of the rich,” and the only way to help the poor is to vote Democrat.

In a two-party system, our political choices tend to be binary, but Republicans ought not allow Democrats to distort this real binary into a logically invalid false dilemma. Conservatives have duty to point out, for example, that the general pro-business policies of the GOP do not mean that poor people — especially including minorities — will suffer economic harm. This is where the use of the false dilemma fallacy feeds into the zero-sum-game mentality: Poor people are repeatedly told by Democrats that “big business” and Republicans are to blame for their suffering, and that black people especially victimized because Republicans are “racist.” This rhetoric suggests a series of either/or choices: One is either for business (Republican) or against business (Democrat); either for black people (Democrat) or against them (Republican); and so forth through a series of choices between different sides in antagonistic conflicts. Twenty or 30 years ago, for example, Democrats railed relentlessly against “the Religious Right” as the dangerous force behind the GOP. Fifteen years ago, “neoconservatives” were the great Republican enemy, and 10 years ago, it was the Koch brothers. Nowadays, we hear about “white nationalists” and the “alt-right.” Despite all these shifts in Democrat propaganda, the general base of support for the Republican Party and the GOP’s general policy direction haven’t really changed much since 1990; the shifting nature of attack rhetoric from Democrats merely shows an opportunistic search for right-wing bogeymen with which frighten the emotional masses into voting Democrat.

Which brings us, of course, to Orange Man Bad and the impeachment saga. Nancy Pelosi insisted last fall that this was an urgent matter, but after ramming through the House impeachment vote, a long holiday ensued before she was willing to bring the case to trial in the Senate. Now we have Adam Schiff and his colleagues using now-or-never rhetoric to insist that President Trump must be removed from office or else . . .

Or else what, really? We are barely nine months away from the next election and, if Democrats can win in November, a new president will be in office by this time next year. Perhaps someone who paid close attention to last week’s Senate trial — a tedious rehash of arguments Democrats have been making for the past several month — can explain to me the great menace from which Schiff & Co. propose to save us. Those of us who were not persuaded in December, when House Republicans voted as a bloc against impeachment, as not likely to be persuaded by having the same argument reiterated now. What then is the urgent crisis which prompts Democrats to insist that the Senate must either (a) vote to convict and remove the president from office or (b) allow Russia to subvert our democracy by secretly controlling our policy toward Ukraine. This either/or choice requires us to accept as a basic premise that Trump is a puppet of the Kremlin, and it also requires us to ignore the fact that four of the House impeachment managers voted against U.S. military assistance to Ukraine. If they really do care so damned much about Ukraine, why didn’t they vote that way when they had the chance?

You didn’t hear any of this pointed out last week if you were watching CNN or MSNBC or news coverage on any of the Big Three broadcast networks. Our liberal media have embraced the Democrats’ claim that anyone who argues against impeachment is an agent of Russian influence, in the same way that all 62.9 million Americans who voted for Trump in 2016 are believed by the media to be white supremacists.

It’s always either/or with them: Unless you support Democrats, you will be demonized in some way — you’re a Religious Right homophobe, a Kremlin stooge, or whatever. And you either believe this Democrat propaganda, or you don’t. Well, then: I don’t believe it, and I don’t think anyone else should believe it, either. This is the real binary choice.

You might be surprised at how easy it is to just ignore the Democrats, ignore the media, and live your life as if you don’t care what they say.

I, for one, have long since ceased to give a damn.


 

Category: History, Intellectuals, Media Bias

Probably Not a Trump Voter

Posted on | January 25, 2020 | 1 Comment

 

Wild guess. Just going out on a limb here:

A man who had been watching the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump on Tuesday allegedly choked and punched his girlfriend in a Pennsylvania motel room when she wanted to watch something else, according to charging documents.
Lonnie D. Clark, 53, who lives at the northern York County motel, faces charges of strangulation, simple assault and harassment.
Police responded to the Scottish Inn at about 7:45 p.m. Tuesday after Clark’s girlfriend called 911. The woman reported that Clark had assaulted her and that she had left the room, documents state.
Once Fairview Township Police officers arrived, they spoke with Clark’s girlfriend, noting that she had red marks on her neck and right cheek.
The woman told police that Clark had been drinking alcohol all day while watching the impeachment trial and “was upset,” although documents do not state what caused his anger.
When the woman told Clark she “would like to watch something else,” Clark began to curse at her and called her “dumb” and “stupid.”
She tried to talk to Clark while seated on his lap, but he began to choke her with his hands, causing her to have trouble breathing, documents state.
The woman broke free and tried to leave, but Clark punched her twice and pushed her several times. Clark grabbed her around the neck again and punched her when she attempted to leave a second time, according to documents.
She eventually was able to get to the bathroom, where she hid until Clark left. She then ran out of the room and reached the motel’s main office, where she called 911.
“She advised that she was scared to come back to the room until police arrived,” documents state. . . .
Clark was arraigned on the charges and was released on $5,000 unsecured bail. He has a preliminary hearing before District Judge Scott J. Gross scheduled for Feb. 24, according to online court dockets.

(Hat-tip: Ace of Spades.)

You beat up your girlfriend because she doesn’t want to watch the impeachment hearing. Also, you’re living in a $44-a-night motel room. You might want to reconsider you life choices. Just sayin’ . . .

The ratings for the hearings have not been very impressive.


 

Category: Violence Against Women

In The Mailbox: 01.24.20

Posted on | January 24, 2020 | 3 Comments

– compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
357 Magnum: Even In The Peoples’ Republic Of Illinois
EBL: Obama Administration’s Fraudulent FISA Warrants – How Is This Not A Bigger Story?
Twitchy: Just When You Thought The Dems’ Impeachment Trial Arguments Couldn’t Get More Desperate & Unhinged
Louder With Crowder: President Trump Speaks To The 2020 March For Life
According To Hoyt: Turning Us Inside Out, also, More Prizes For Good Girls
Vox Popoli: Dr. Who Has The Cancer, also, Never Going To Happen

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Friday Hawt Chicks & Links – The Dalrock Edition
American Conservative: How Washington Is Ramming REAL ID Down Our Throats
American Greatness: Biden Claims DACA Recipients Are “More American Than Americans”
American Thinker: Sharyl Atkisson Speaks Out
Animal Magnetism: Rule Five Second Secession Friday
Babalu Blog: Cuba, Nicaragua, & Venezuela Round Out The Bottom Of Latin America’s Democracy Index
BattleSwarm: LinkSwarm For January 24
Cafe Hayek: Some Links
CDR Salamander: Fullbore Friday
Da Tech Guy: It’s Time To Play “Name That Speaker”
Don Surber: The Fourth Anniversary Of National Review‘s Suicide, also, NYT Rushes To Save Quid Pro Joe
The Geller Report: CORONAVIRUS – Reports Of 10,000 Dead In Wuhan, also, Photos Of Infected People Dead In The Streets Of Red China, Death Toll Spikes
Hogewash: Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day, also, Hygiea, Vesta, & Ceres
Hollywood In Toto: The Gentlemen – Ritchie Delivers A Bleepin’ Good Time
Joe For America: NY Post Reports Giuliani To Go Public With Biden Corruption Evidence
JustOneMinute: No City For Old Men, also, Send Better Investigators – Or Newer Clowns
Legal Insurrection: Warren Promises To Fill Her Cabinet With “Women & Non-Binary People”, also, TDS Fatigue Continues – Impeachment Ratings Weak & Dropping
Megan McArdle: That “Emerging Democratic Majority”? It May Always Be Just Over The Horizon
The PanAm Post: Socialist Pol’s New Bid For Colombia’s Presidency, also, Brazil Fosters Economic Growth In Latin America
Power Line: Warren’s “Joe The Plumber” Moment, also, WaPo Columnist Blames Chief Justice Roberts For “Impeachment Mess”
Shark Tank: Rick Scott Invites Secretary Wilkie To Address Veterans’ Issues
Shot In The Dark: Hang Onto Your Plumbing
The Political Hat: Firing Line Friday – Implications Of Watergate
This Ain’t Hell: After 18 Years Of Service, Officer Discovered To Be A Phony, also, Valor Friday
Victory Girls: Cancel Culture Targets Super Bowl QB Patrick Mahomes
Volokh Conspiracy: The BIA Is Acting Badly, And Judge Easterbrook Is Not Amused
Weasel Zippers: Glenn Beck Reads Letter From Biden Campaign Demanding Press Toe The Biden Line On Hunter, Ukraine, also, This Is What Media Bias Looks Like, Starring George Stephanopoulos
Mark Steyn: Sole Speck On A Ghostly Waste

Amazon Warehouse Deals




Category: Linkagery

Why Does @Victoria_Spratt Hate Men?

Posted on | January 24, 2020 | 1 Comment

 

We could laugh at the recent headline — “The Dangerous Rise Of Men Who Won’t Date ‘Woke’ Women” — if the sense of panic weren’t indicative of a larger social problem, but there are probably a lot of women as worried as British journalist Vicky Spratt. They have been in a condition of despair for at least the past three years, ever since Hillary Clinton lost the election, and everywhere they look, they see more reasons to worry. It’s not merely the rise of nationalism, the elections of right-wing populists like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, the Brexit vote, etc. As the feminist slogan says, “the personal is political,” and a new generation of “empowered” young women is struggling to come to grips with a simple fact: Men generally don’t like feminists.

What set Miss Spratt’s alarm bells to ringing? An actor named Laurence Fox appeared on a BBC panel show called “Question Time,” where audience members ask questions of the panelists, and was dismissive of a woman’s claim that Megan Markle has been a victim of racism:

One audience member sparked the debate, and said: “The problem we’ve got with his is that Meghan has agreed to be Harry’s wife and then the press has torn her to pieces.
“Lets be really clear about what this is, lets call it by its name: it’s racism.”
Many members of the crowd applauded this, with equally as many booing.
The audience member continued: “She’s a black woman and she has been torn to pieces.”
Laurence Fox, an actor most known for his appearance in the series, Inspector Lewis, exclaimed: “It’s not racist!”
The audience member continued: “She has been torn to pieces and it absolutely is racism.”
Mr Fox replied: “It’s not racism, we’re the most tolerant and lovely country in Europe — you can’t just be throwing the charge of racism at everybody and its really starting to get boring now.”
The slanging match continued, as the audience member said: “Says a white privileged man, what worries me about your comment is you’re a white privileged male.” . . .
He said: “I can’t help what I am, I was born like this, it’s an immutable characteristic: to call me a white privileged male is to be racist – you’re being racist.”

As to the substance of that controversy, the problem was never Markle’s race, but her graceless reaction to the way she was treated by the British press. Even if the tabloid coverage of her marriage to Harry was racist, and even if some of the royal family disapproved of Harry’s choice, the Duchess of Sussex might have won over her critics if her reaction had been appropriately aristocratic. A true aristocrat is sufficiently conscious of his superiority that his self-esteem is not dependent upon his popularity. Think about how Winston Churchill endured his “wilderness years” in the 1930s, refusing to cede anything to the architects of appeasement, even though this meant he was smeared in the press as a warmonger. When, exactly as he had predicted, appeasement led to disaster, Churchill did not retaliate against those who had frozen him out of power for so long, but graciously credited Chamberlain with having acted with good intentions, however mistaken his policy had been.

That is what an aristocratic temperament looks like, and Markle alienated the British public by her failure to display such a temperament. But what caused Vicky Pratt to push the panic button was Laurence Fox’s further discussion of the problem of “woke” attitudes. He has said he couldn’t date a woman under 35 for that reason:

[H]e said he no longer dates younger ladies because they are “too woke” and many of them are “absolutely bonkers.”
He said women under 35 are “primed to believe they are victims.”
Fox then revealed he had broken up with an ex when she praised a Gillette advert which highlighted “toxic masculinity.”
He said: “I don’t know how we ended up together. It was a very short relationship.
“We were walking down the road together and she was talking about how good the Gillette advert was. I just looked at her and went, ‘Bye. Sorry I can’t do this with you.'”
Asked what his ex-girlfriend would think of him discussing their break-up in public, he said: “She will probably sit there and say, ‘See I told you he was patriarchal. He’s abusing me and I’m offended.'”

Indeed, a man would be better off alone than to be forced to surrender his intellectual independence for fear that his opinions might be deemed “offensive” to a politically correct girlfriend. Leftists never acknowledge the totalitarian tendency of their intolerance for dissent. It’s not conservatives, after all, who are forever trying to get their opponents banned from YouTube or Facebook for expressing unpopular opinions.

We might note that, for Laurence Fox, the personal is also political, as he endured a divorce and custody battle in 2016 that he says drained his bank account and nearly cost him his sanity. If he isn’t exactly enthusiastic about the feminist agenda, who can blame him?

The kind of “intersectional” feminism that Vicky Spratt embraces means that white heterosexual males have no rights — not even the right to their own opinions — and yet she cannot seem to understand why the men she hates so much don’t want to date women like her:

Not wanting to date “woke” women, far from being laughable, is actually one of the more insidious aspects of it. Spend an afternoon on any major dating app and you’ll come across (generally white) men saying openly sexist and misogynistic things. They might say “no psychos” or that they “f–king hate big eyebrows” in their bios. And, by and large, they also tend to hold extremely right-wing views and see themselves as victims of liberal thinking.
In fact, as I was writing this, a dear friend sent me a screenshot of a guy she’s just matched with who describes Jordan B Peterson as his “dream dinner guest”. Yes, the same Jordan B Peterson who thinks that white privilege is a “Marxist lie” and wants millennials to drop their obsession with “social justice”.
I, meanwhile, recently had to block someone who after matching with me launched into a vile rant about how women are “evil”, “only want sex” and treat men as though they are “disposable”. When I asked him if he hated women he replied that he had “only moderate disdain” for us before asking me whether I didn’t want to date him because I’m actually “pretty rough”.
All of this, of course, speaks not only to the presence of the very active online communities of anti-feminist incels but to the prevalence of the hideous and incorrect ideas they promote. It doesn’t take magical thinking to see how men are radicalised by anti-feminism. . . .

You can read the whole thing but — spoiler alert! — Miss Spratt goes off into the paranoid everything-is-connected kind of “intersectionality” in which (a) some guy saying rude things on Tinder is linked to (b) violent extremists with AK-47s committing mass murder. By that kind of logic, of course, every socialist is responsible for the Khmer Rouge, every Muslim is implicated in 9/11, and all Germans are to blame for the Holocaust. Only by such a collective blame-game mentality can Miss Spratt make this leap of logic to accuse Laurence Fox of endorsing “insidious” ideas merely because he’s not interested in dating “woke” women. As for the type of men Miss Spratt is meeting via dating apps, well, what does she expect? At age 31, she is past her prime, and the quality of choices available to her reflects her diminished SMV.

Online dating is for losers. How many times do I have to repeat this? If nobody who actually knows you in real life wants to date you, why do you imagine the Internet will magically solve your problem? And doesn’t she understand that the guy who “launched into a vile rant” might have been just giving her the brush-off or, perhaps, just being typical of the kind of loser who can’t get a date from any who actually knows him? If losers on Tinder are the standard by which all men are to be judged, then I must be a veritable prince among men! Never once have I asserted that women “only want sex,” or told a stranger she looked “pretty rough.”

Also, if a guy says “no psychos” on his Tinder profile — well, he’s been dealing with the kind of women who use Tinder, OK? Emotionally dysfunctional women who can’t get a date with anyone who knows them in real life? Yeah, they’re a dime a dozen on Tinder, which is why I advise guys against using Tinder or any other dating app.

 

Speaking of emotional dysfunction, Vicky Spratt wasted seven years of her life — her peak SMV years — on a guy who recently dumped her. “Two months earlier,” she wrote in December, “I closed the door on a seven-year relationship both literally and metaphorically after the person I owned a home with left”:

Had I thought I would marry them? I guess so. . . .
My long-term relationship fell apart in slow motion. By the time I’d got a grip on the situation I realised I didn’t want to hold it together anymore.

People never ask for my advice, and when I volunteer advice, people seldom seem to listen, but I’ll try it once again. Ladies, never let a man string you along in a “relationship.” Notice I put that word inside quotation marks? That’s because having a “relationship” has become synonymous with what used to be called fornication. There is a reason why the Bible condemns fornication, and there is also a reason why people who fornicate nowadays use the euphemism “relationship,” i.e., because they don’t want to admit they’re doing something wrong.

When you do bad things, bad consequences are to be expected, and yet women like Vicky Spratt always seem surprised to discover that fornication — which is what “long-term relationship” means — ultimately results in unhappiness. You’re 24, you move in with your boyfriend, then seven years later, after it “fell apart in slow motion,” you’re having to block creeps on a dating app because you’re 31 and basically the only guys available and/or interested are creeps on dating apps.

That, my friends, is the answer to the question in the headline: Why does Vicky Spratt hate men? Because she wasted her youth on a guy who dumped her, and she has a right to be bitter about her experience, just as Laurence Fox has a right to be bitter about his divorce.


 

Category: Great Britain, Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox: 01.23.20

Posted on | January 23, 2020 | Comments Off on In The Mailbox: 01.23.20

– compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
Knowledge Buffet: What Was The Point Of The Richmond 2A Protest
EBL: About That Adam Schiff/Ed Buck Salacious Photo Reason
Twitchy: Occasional Cortex Lashing Out At “Haters” For Claiming Her Economics Degree Is Illegitmate Backfires Bigly
Louder With Crowder: This Father Just Pwned Elizabeth Warren On Her Socialist Economic Policies

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Men Should Avoid Intelligent Women
American Conservative: Bankruptcy Could Help Millions Struggling Under Student Debt
American Greatness: When Will Conservatives Understand It’s Not A Battle of Ideas? also, The Untalented Mr. Schiff & His Unwatchable Vanity
American Thinker: The Rage Of The Democrats
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily Lady Stalin News
Babalu Blog: Bolivia’s Government Confirms Morales Hid Illegal Payments To Cuba For “Fake Doctors”
BattleSwarm: Suleimani Ally Whacked In Iran
Cafe Hayek: Let’s Really Have Political Realism
CDR Salamander: Losing Sleep Over Hypersonics
Da Tech Guy: Greta’s Not In Red China For The Same Reason Human Shields Aren’t In Israel Or Hong Kong, also, Hey Hey Ho Ho This Cultural Marxism’s Got To Go
Don Surber: The Impeachment We Need
The Geller Report: French Prosecutor Investigating 16-Year-Old After she Said “Islam Is A Religion Of Hate”, also, Islamic Group Beheads Kidnapped Pastor Who Refused To Renounce Christ
Hogewash: Team Kimberlin Post Of The Day, also, Gabbard v. Clinton
Hollywood In Toto: Cage’s Colour Out Of Space Isn’t Unhinged Enough, also, Jon Stewart Joins Hollywood’s Open Borders Push
JustOneMinute: Don’t Know Much About History
Legal Insurrection: UK Parliament Passes EU Withdrawal Bill – Brexit To Happen January 31, also, Warren Promises To Launch Investigation Into Trump On Day One If Elected
The PanAm Post: Uruguay’s Secret Ties To Maduro Could Be Exposed
Power Line: Impeachment Unites Republicans, also, All The President’s Men, Continued
Shark Tank: Ilhan Omar Facing Tough Reelection Challenge From Fellow Muslima
Shot In The Dark: Service Of Convenience
STUMP: French Pension Protests – State Of Play, January 22
The Political Hat: California Madness – Genderless Graduates, Preteen Polyamory, & Liquidating Kulaks As A Class
This Ain’t Hell: Thursday FGS, also, Invaders At The Richmond Rights Rally
Victory Girls: Virginia Democrats’ Continued Assault On The Constitution
Volokh Conspiracy: Does An Impeachment Overturn An Election?
Weasel Zippers: WZ Semi-Annual Fundraiser, also, CNN Analyst/Clintonista Joe Lockhart Makes Up Fake Conversation Between GOP Senators
Mark Steyn: Objection – Sad!

Amazon Warehouse Deals




Category: Linkagery

Hint: They’re Not ‘Supreme’

Posted on | January 23, 2020 | 2 Comments

 

These three losers — Luke Austin Lane, 21, Jacob Kaderli, 19, and Michael Helterbrand, 25 — decided that what they needed to do was to overthrow the government and start a race war:

Police have arrested three men in northern Georgia who are suspected of belonging to a violent white supremacist group called The Base, saying that they were plotting to commit murder and that they belonged to a criminal street gang.
They’re the second trio of suspected Base members to be arrested this week; the FBI announced [Jan. 16] that it arrested three other men in Maryland.
A fourth man, from Wisconsin, also accused of being a member of the group, was charged on Friday with conspiracy in connection with vandalism of a synagogue as part of a nationwide series of attacks on minority-owned properties.
The Floyd County, Ga., Police Department says Luke Austin Lane, 21, Michael John Helterbrand, 25, and Jacob Kaderli, 19, were “allegedly involved in a white supremacist group with plans to overthrow the government” and to kill a married couple whom they identified as having high-profile roles in the far-left group Antifa.
The FBI’s Atlanta office “conducted the bulk of the preliminary investigation” into the group, police say. They add that while other arrests have been made across the U.S., the Georgia case is important because a “training camp and leadership was based at a home” in the town of Silver Creek in Floyd County.
The Base was founded in mid-2018 and “seeks to accelerate the downfall of the United States (US) government, incite a race war, and establish a white ethno-state,” according to an affidavit prepared by local law enforcement.
The FBI successfully placed an undercover federal agent within The Base’s membership in Georgia, and the agent also came to know Yousef Omar Barasneh of Oak Creek, Wis.
Barasneh apparently joined the group under the name Joseph or Josef, according to an affidavit filed in federal court. He is accused of painting swastikas and The Base’s symbol at the Beth Israel Sinai Congregation in Racine, Wis.
The undercover agent interviewed online with Lane last July to gain access to the members-only chat room, the affidavit states. The next month, the agent was invited to meet with Lane and Kaderli. They searched him to make sure he was not carrying any recording devices and then asked him to follow them to a 105-acre lot owned by Lane and his father.
There, the agent was welcomed as a member. The affidavit alleges that Lane gave him “a black Balaklava hood and a Velcro Base logo patch to welcome [him] as a new member of The Base.”
Lane and Kaderli allegedly then told the agent that the next day’s training would “include ‘retreating under fire’ drills and moving-and-shooting drills,” the affidavit states. The stated purpose of the drills was allegedly to prepare The Base’s members for the “Boogaloo” – a name its members use to refer to what they see as the inevitable “collapse of the United States and subsequent race war.”

Did you ever notice that the kind of people attracted to this stuff are not usually very “supreme”? I mean, if you’re an absolute winner — a Nietzchean übermensch, a natural-born specimen of Nordic genetic superiority — you don’t need any kind of “movement” to succeed in life. However, if you did decide to organize a putsch, so that you and your neo-Nazi buddies could “establish a white ethno-state,” wouldn’t your superior Aryan mind enable you to avoid allowing an undercover FBI agent to infiltrate your ranks? What I’m trying to get across here is that, if you’re going to prison because you were too stupid to spot a cop, you’re probably not qualified for world domination anyway.

You might think that some of these would-be führers would have sought my advice, given that I’ve been hate-listed by the SPLC, but despite my alleged status as a racist menace to society, my advice — “Don’t Be Hitler” — continues to be ignored by these amateur dimwits.

By the way, according to the FBI, Luke Lane posted an autobiographical sketch on a neo-fascist website, in which he described how he “started out as a Republican because that is all I knew but I was mostly libertarian in nature,” but “quickly switched to libertarianism later in life” — he’s only 21, remember? — “and then realized that was dysfunctional and wrong as well.” So next he “switched to being an AnCap” (anarcho-capitalist) “because I viewed libertarianism as putting weak men who would not stand for what they should be standing for but realized the massive hole in that belief system.” Keep in mind, this guy’s just four years past his senior year of high school, but he’s already had enough time to change ideologies three times before, of course, ending up as a Nazi.

Which is not where you want to end up. Maybe just stick with being a plain old Republican? They’ll call you a Nazi anyway, but it’s better than, say, going to prison because you’re too dumb to spot a cop.


 

Category: Crime, Racism

Jonathan ‘Jessica’ Yaniv in Jail?

Posted on | January 23, 2020 | 1 Comment

 

When last we checked in with this wax-my-balls Canadian freak, he/“she” had assaulted a reporter outside a courthouse in Surrey, British Columbia. Now it seems the freak has spent time behind bars:

Jessica Yaniv was arrested for the assault of a Canadian journalist on over the weekend. According to Keean Bexte, the journalist who was assaulted by Yaniv on camera outside of the B.C. courts on January 14, 2020, Yaniv spent time behind bars on the charge of assault. She may face up to five years for the assault.
That same day, Yaniv falsely accused TPM‘s own Amy Eileen Hamm of sexual assault while at the courtroom. Hamm is suing Yaniv for defamation.
There was widespread speculation that Yaniv was arrested over the weekend, but The Post Millennial and other outlets were unable to verify the claims at the time. Bexte, being the alleged victim in this particular case, was able to confirm the arrest Wednesday afternoon.
When reached for comment, Bexte said, “Yaniv has been ordered to cease all contact with me, both directly and indirectly. I can’t wait for the day when Yaniv is put away for the long haul. He is dangerous and unpredictable.”
Even if Yaniv is behind bars, the civil litigations brought by Bexte and Hamm against Yaniv for assault and defamation respectively can proceed. According to Bexte, Yaniv would be court-ordered to appear for the civil litigations as planned.
Yaniv was released back into the community after the arrest and will appear in court in February. She will also appear in court in February for two prohibited weapons charges.

Oh, “Jessica” would be very popular in prison, I’m sure.



 

Category: Canada, Crime, The Transgender Cult

McCain Killed in Shootout

Posted on | January 23, 2020 | 1 Comment

 

No, not me — Keenan McCain of Gary, Indiana:

The man killed in Monday’s shootout with Gary police officers was wanted for open cases in Marion County, including strangulation and intimidation with a firearm. This happened after Keenan McCain, 29, was wanted in connection to the murder of his girlfriend at a Merrillville Hampton Inn on Sunday.
“He was the only suspect in this case at this point,” Det. Cmdr. Aaron Ridgway of the Merrillville Police Department.
Merrillville Police said they were called to the hotel on Sunday afternoon and found the body of Betty Jean Claudio, with whom police said he had a romantic relationship lasting about a month. They said the Lake County Coroner’s Office confirmed she died by strangulation.
McCain was charged on August 31, 2019, for strangulation, intimidation with a firearm, pointing a firearm at someone and domestic battery. Court records show he never went to jail for these crimes, and a Marion County judge issued a warrant for his arrest after opening a new case in September.
“He had a protection order from a female we’re not going to be identifying out of Marion County,” Cmdr. Aaron Ridgway said. “He also had an active warrant for intimidation, strangulation and it was intimidation with a firearm.”
The victim from the Merrillville case is not the same victim as the Marion County case, police said.
McCain also has an open 2018 case for drug and illegal firearm charges. That case was combined with the 2019 case, according to court documents. A judge ordered him to community corrections for home detention supervision and GPS monitoring. . . .

More background on his history of violence against women:

The ABC7 I-Team spoke exclusively with a former girlfriend of McCain who shared her story of surviving the violence, raising questions about why he wasn’t locked up.
Until the I-Team called, Brittany Luster hadn’t heard about what her ex-boyfriend did in northwest Indiana, but says Keenan McCain should have been locked up for what he did to her last summer — something that might have prevented what happened on Monday night.
The I-Team uncovered ceaseless charges of gun violence and brutality against McCain and a jarring story of survival from his previous girlfriend.
“He had jumped on me, he had choked me and he put a gun in my face. Threatened to kill me,” Luster said. “Yeah, he was serious. He ended up pulling a gun out on my father.”
In an interview Tuesday afternoon, Brittany Luster said she met Keenan McCain online when both of them were living in Indianapolis last year. . . .

(How many times have I warned against online dating?)

The relationship was troubled from the start. According to a police affidavit obtained by the I-Team, last summer on various occasions McCain “pulled a black handgun and pointed it at her face… began punching her in the right side of her head.” He put his 40 cal “pistol in her mouth and said he would kill her” and was “stompkicking her legs.” McCain hit the “top of her head…in a hammer fist motion” and asked “do you want your brain to bleed?” then “got atop of her and began choking her.”
“Yeah, he choked me many times and made me black out,” Luster said. “He’s never actually shot at me. He’s pulled a gun out on me several times and he put it in my mouth maybe a couple times.”
Luster said she wasn’t surprised to learn that he killed his girlfriend and was in a shootout with police.

What has gone wrong with our criminal justice system, that dangerous monsters like this are being turned loose on the streets?

(Hat-tip: Kirby McCain on Twitter.)



 

Category: Crime, Indiana
« go back — keep looking »