Treason, Up Close and Personal

According to a forthcoming book, "Peril" by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made two secret phone calls to the Chinese military stating that he would give the People's Liberation Army, and hence the Chinese Communist Party, advance warning of any US attack against them.

These calls were made during the end of Trump's time in office, when Milley believed that "the president had suffered a mental decline after the election" and that Trump would use nuclear weapons against them.

During the first call, on October 30, 2020 - before Trump's supposed decline, Milley is quoted as telling his Chinese counterpart:

"I want to assure you that the American government is stable and everything is going to be okay... We are not going to attack or conduct any kinetic operations against you. If we’re going to attack, I’m going to call you ahead of time. It's not going to be a surprise."

Parts of this book were released by the Washington Post, which states:

"[Milley] called the admiral overseeing the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, the military unit responsible for Asia and the Pacific region, and recommended postponing the military exercises, according to the book. The admiral complied."

It gets worse:

"Milley also summoned senior officers to review the procedures for launching nuclear weapons, saying the president alone could give the order — but, crucially, that he, Milley, also had to be involved. Looking each in the eye, Milley asked the officers to affirm that they had understood, the authors write, in what he considered an “oath.”"

The second call was made on January 8th - two days after the protest on the Capitol - when China doubted US stability. Milley calmed them down, stating

"We are 100 percent steady. Everything's fine. But democracy can be sloppy sometimes."

None of this was communicated to Trump, but Milley did discuss this with Nancy Pelosi.

Woodward and Costa used only unnamed sources, according to the WaPo, but Milley has just released a statement affirming that he did indeed make those calls.

When asked about Milley's actions, Biden said, "I have great confidence in Gen. Milley." The cycle of incompetence thus continues with this ringing endorsement.

 

Excusing the Inexcusable

Defenders of Milley's actions would say that Trump was "squirrelly", and that this somehow necessitated communication between Milley and the CCP. But what evidence is used to justify claims of squirrellyness? That Trump required NATO members to pay their dues? That he called mass illegal immigration for what it is - an invasion? That he put terrorists on notice that there would be swift retribution for their attacks? That he pissed off the left-wing media?

Well, Trump did indeed piss off the left-wing media. Milley saw this, stuck his finger in the air to determine which way the wind was blowing, and acted accordingly. He started by apologizing for inspecting the damage done by Antifa and BLM rioters while standing next to Trump. Then came his House Armed Services Committee testimony in which he was offended that people would call the military "woke" while simultaneously stating that he wants to understand critical race theory and the roots of "white rage":

"I want to understand white rage, and I’m white, and I want to understand it. What is it that caused thousands of people to assault this building and try to overturn the Constitution of the United States of America? I want to find that out."

Now, we find that he has been working with at least one enemy. His actions were based on political expediency and nothing more.

Imagine that the United States did indeed choose to attack China - how would the Chinese use the information that Milley would provide? Further, did Milley actually believe that his tango with the Chinese would end with Trump being out of office? His naiveté is staggering.

 

The Context

Milley was not acting in a vacuum.

Even before the disastrous exit from Afghanistan, you had a West Point cadet advocating for communism, former high ranking officials making disparaging remarks about their Commander-in-Chief like Mister James Mattis and his inexcusable "bone spurs" comment, and the National Guard being used to protect the Capitol against "insurrectionists and violent extremists" - while not providing them with any ammunition.

And of course there's the woke Army recruiting video.

Then during and immediately after the loss of the Kabul airport you have Defense Department spokesman John Kirby admitting that he doesn't know how many Americans are still in Afghanistan, and General Kenneth McKenzie Jr. stating that he was sharing information with and relying on the Taliban to provide security.

At the highest level there is Joe Biden. He admitted that lists of Americans and American sympathizers were given to the Taliban so that they can expedite their exit (presumably from Afghanistan, not from this mortal coil). Biden stated that he accepts responsibility for the exit, then immediately lays blame for the Taliban takeover on the Afghan National Army and on the left's perpetual whipping-boy, Donald Trump.

Between the exit from Afghanistan and the woke military, the latter is the most damaging to us, for it indicates the criteria used to measure the worthiness of any military action. Potential actions will not be judged upon whether they further America's safety and security, or on the possibility of success. No. Instead, actions will be judged on whether they act against the cis-normative hegemony and deliver a blow against the patriarchy, all while being culturally sensitive and minimizing our carbon footprint. To quote Trump, "everything woke turns to shit." You, gentle reader, can complete the syllogism.

 

Signs of Hope

All is not lost, however, for there are dissenting voices. One of them belongs to USMC Lt. Col. Stuart Scheller who, following the Kabul airport terrorist attack that killed 13 service members including 11 Marines, released a video in which he absolutely excoriated the higher-ups for their shortage of accountability over the events in Afghanistan:

"I’m not saying we’ve got to be in Afghanistan forever, but I am saying: Did any of you throw your rank on the table and say ‘hey, it’s a bad idea to evacuate Bagram Airfield, a strategic airbase, before we evacuate everyone. Did anyone do that? And when you didn’t think to do that, did anyone raise their hand and say 'we completely messed this up.'

That one man with his one video has proven that there are some men with a spine left in the US military. Hence the importance of dissent - it allows us to separate the institution from some very rotten apples.

And Scheller's not alone: others have come out against the leadership vacuum.

And they're not alone, either: those of us with friends who are either active duty or retired military cannot help but see the courage and patriotism in their eyes.

 

The Fallout

Both Milley and Scheller should be concerned for their future (as should we all), but notice the difference between them: Milley, in his "desire to understand white rage" comments, expressed his opinion without concern for personal repercussions. This could mean that either politicians would accept those comments as obsequious bromides, or more likely that the expression of those sentiments was the goal itself, consequences be damned. That's called virtue signaling, the sine qua non of wokeness.

Scheller explicitly acknowledges the personal consequences that would befall him after his video goes public. There is nothing wrong with doing so. It does not prove that he has a martyr complex; rather it shows a man who is fully aware that opinions and actions have consequences, the opposite of wokeness.

Shortly after the release of that video, Scheller announced that "I have been relieved for cause based on a lack of trust and confidence." Whose trust? Whose confidence? No one of any merit.

Popular opinion holds that only tragedy awaits those with principle. This is incorrect - those with principle are resilient, and that resiliency comes from having a spine. Those with principle understand that an individual must stand up one more time than he is knocked down. Men with principle can move the world; those without merely stand with their fingers in the air, waiting for the winds to change.

Scheller is a man of principle, hence he will land on his feet.

For Milley, the wind is shifting against him. Christopher Miller, the Secretary of Defense during the time Milley made at least one of his calls with the Chinese military, stated that he did not and would never authorize such calls. Supposedly, several Pentagon officers present in Milley’s secret meeting are willing to testify against him under oath. He even lost the support of never-Trumper Alexander Vindman.

So, what of Milley? Biden, in his quest to accept responsibility, is looking for a new whipping boy, and Milley just moved to the front of the line.

No Burka, No Hijab, No Service

The recent pandemic and rioting has lead me to frequently ask the following question: "Is there no shit you will not eat?" It is sort of a line out of an e e cummings' poem, and I'm not the only one asking this.
 

Rise of the Karens

State and local governments’ responses to the China Flu have led to the rise of the “Karens.” These are people who have gorged mightily the propaganda coming from media, politicians, and supposedly credible medical organizations, and who aren’t afraid to impose their will on those of us who realize that the China Flu is nothing but a sham pandemic – a shamdemic.

These Karens are to be derided not only for their uncritical acceptance of the details and timing of the shamdemic but also their unwillingness to let others act according to their own best judgement.

Karens are nothing new. In previous times they were called by the more accurate term: collaborators. But we are living in an age where honesty is seen as aggression, and truth must be sugared over or else be rejected as hate speech.
 

Narrative Collapse

What fuels the Karens' control freak binge is not only the relentless social programming coming from the media and left-wing politicians, but also the gaping holes in the stories. Inconsistencies and absurdities became clear very early in the shamdemic - and these weren't just the usual "fog of war" uncertainties but ongoing narrative revisions and obvious political jockeying made by people wishing to frighten a nation and who assume Americans have no memory beyond the immediate now. Not only history being rewritten, but current events are being reworked in a feverish quest to find something that sticks.

Examples of the inconsistencies include:

• Early overestimations of the virulence and fatality of the Bat Soup Flu based on models formulated without the input of empirical evidence
• Requiring masks, even if the masks are useless at best and harmful at worst
• Requiring masks, but only for certain races
• Allowing certain businesses to provide curbside service whereas others must be completely closed
• Hospitals inflating the number of Covid-19 cases in order to get increased government funding. Meanwhile, the Navy hospital ships sent to New York City and Los Angeles were mainly unoccupied, as were field hospitals.
• Drive-through clinics were even caught on video inflating the number of clients.

The public policies based on these inconsistencies and ordained by our representatives have done nothing but reveal their incompetency and expose their contempt and malevolence towards those that elected them.

Prisoners were released under the excuse that keeping them confined would increase their risk of becoming infected. Masks apparently don't work inside prisons. As can be expected, many of these released prisoners immediately repeated the kinds offenses for which they were originally being held.

Companies that were deemed "inessential" were ordered closed, unless, say, a governor had a personal stake in the business, for example a "life-sustaining" cabinet supply company.

Most damning of all was the decision by several states to move patients with China Flu into nursing homes, senior care centers, and similar facilities. One nurse at a nursing home in Illinois said, "our patients are dropping like flies." New York's Governor Andrew Cuomo understood the danger, stating that illness would go through elderly patients like "fire through dry glass." He ordered nursing homes to accept China Flu patients anyway. Nationally, the number of nursing home deaths has been reported to be 16,000.

Of course, putting China Flu patients into nursing homes is acceptable for us commoners but not for the ruling class - Pennsylvania's secretary of health Rachel Levine (formerly Richard) moved his mother from a nursing home into a hotel as the death toll rose. Richard was the one that allowed nursing homes to accept China Flu patients in the first place. Stunning and brave, Richard, stunning and brave.

These acts are criminal, and hopefully the governors and secretaries of health who implemented all this will receive the swift and severe retribution that they are due.
 

The Magical Virus

Meanwhile the magical powers of the virus causing Szechuan Sickness continue to expand!

The virus is attracted to small businesses, churches, weddings, and funerals... unless the deceased was a black man killed by a white police officer. Then multiple nationally televised funerals with dancing pallbearers and horse-drawn carriages are safe, because the church doors are marked with the blood of a fentanyl user who also tested positive for the Mandarin Malady.

The virus knows not to infect people who "social distance" (what an oxymoron!) by standing 6 feet apart (not 5'11"), except at certain types of protests. The Asian Affliction is attracted to shutdown protests and Trump rallies, and it is able to be detected without waiting for the usual 14-day incubation period to elapse. BLM and Antifa riots, however, have the Cantonese Contagion's approval, as well as the approval of least 1000 health professionals.

In fact, BLM protests actually may have slowed the overall spread of the virus. All hail the woke virus!
 

The Timing

Then there is the timing. The governors and mayors who are most adamant about keeping their states in lockdown or who devise the most circuitous staged reopening plans are Democrats. Amazing, isn’t it, that the China Flu began getting press almost immediately after the impeachment proceedings against President Trump fizzled. Then the George Floyd riots began just as the press realized that people were experiencing Covid-19 “burn out.” Now that the riots have mostly stopped, Covid-19 coverage has increased, with a focus on squaring away the importance of “social distancing” with the proximity of the rioters to each other.
 

But Back to the Karens

All of this – the narrative inconsistencies, the stupid policy decisions, the timings, as well as the fact that not many people directly know anyone who has had the China Flu – should give people reason to be just a little skeptical, and everybody should be outraged at the nursing home deaths. The Karens aren’t, for Karens don’t have time for suspicions, common sense, logic, the evidence of the senses, or for outrage beyond their own indignation – they’ve got religion, and they are oftentimes the same people who believe in global warming cooling climate change, a theory that has not produced one accurate prediction over all the decades it has been in existence.

For everybody else, all of this is a bill of particulars.

Some people would excuse the Karens by claiming that they are just exercising their freedom of speech. Notice that these apologists only allow Karens to use their First Amendment rights, and when the Karens do so, it frequently is in the form of either muttered insults or explicit threats directed at the no-mask wearing people and their families.

Unmentioned by the apologists is the harm that Karens do: some states maintain "snitch" websites that allows Karens to report individuals and businesses to state authorities for violating the dictates, or for companies to report employees for unemployment fraud. The state authorities can then take action, especially against small businesses.

On several occasions the snitch lists have been published. The Karens were incensed - how dare the businesses and individuals they reported have the right to face their accusers!

After she was exposed for using Missouri's snitch website, one sniveled "I'm not only worried about COVID, I'm worried about someone showing up at my door, showing up at my workplace or me getting fired for doing what is right." Welcome to the club, Karen. One would hope that the level of fear implied by that individual would lead to just a little character improvement. It won't, for when Karens get called on their bullshit, they turn all Manga eyed like that one did, and if you turn your back on them for one minute, they will revert to their old informant ways.

Never asked about these informants is whether they have ulterior motives: it is easy to foresee situations where one business owner may snitch on another, thereby using the power of the state to gain a competitive advantage that the informant's ability and determination never will provide.
 

Corporate Karens and the Problem with Masks

Karens aren't limited to being individuals - there are corporate Karens, too. These are businesses that not only meekly cooperate with the dictates coming from local and state governments, but are enforcing them on their customers and employees as well. And the companies insist of calling these dictates "laws" instead of what they are: orders.

This happens in particular with the mask orders.

The most common defense of businesses that require their customers and employees to wear masks is this: "No shirt, no shoes, no service wasn't affecting your rights. Neither does no mask, no service." When you call these apologists on their bullshit, the response is always "well that's very progressive of you, it is their private property after all." They no doubt say this while sipping the Libertarian equivalent of a Starbucks Vanilla Bean Mocha Frappuccino.

This is not only the most common defense, it is also the most disappointing, for they might as well be saying "no burka, no hijab, no service." Companies wield powerful economic and social forces and are in some ways and some situations as powerful as armies. To insist that we wear rose-colored blindfolds to this fact is criminal, and it is a gateway to innumerable abuses.

One has to wonder how far these apologists would go with this excuse: should government or semi-government offices have the same right to refuse you service? What if all private businesses of a certain type all decide to deny service? Are your rights still not being infringed?

And there's this: some cities and states, like New Orleans, are requiring companies to have their customers and employees participate in contact tracing. Logically, the apologists must still excuse this by saying "they're private companies, they aren't infringing your rights."

Again I ask: is there no shit you will not eat?

Perhaps these apologists may have good (though not well reasoned) intentions, or they may be "going along to get along," or they may just be cowards. Regardless, the result is inaction on their part and criticism of those who refuse to be inactive.

Let's analyze the "private companies get a pass" remark: the ownership of a particular business is not in question. What is in question is the propriety and overall wisdom of their enforcement of Peking Plague ordinance.

It is not a company's job to enforce dictates on their customers or employees - a business doesn't come with a badge. Law enforcement is and must solely be the responsibility of the police, and the China Flu dictates are orders, not laws.

"But, but, but... does that mean Christians should be forced into baking wedding cakes for gays?" Nope, for they (the Christian bakers) aren't acting as collaborators or dictate enforcers.
 

What to Do?

What responses are warranted by those denied entrance or service for not wearing a mask, not maintaining "social distance," etc.? Are we to simply fold like one of Ron Paul's cheap suits?

One proper reaction is to use "the power of the purse," but it must be done in an effective manner, not merely as lip service.

Do not simply go to another store. Make sure that the store denying you entrance or service knows that you are not going to be purchasing from them because they are in bed with fools. If you make it to the cash register and are denied service, make them understand that it is they who will be the ones returning the stock to the shelves, and why they will be doing so.

This is the real power of the purse: you have to make sure the business not only knows they are losing money, but why they are losing money. Otherwise all they see is a small downtick in revenue when they do their books, and they can easily explain it away as random.

Another approach is to protest outside the homes of health officials, or to dox them. According to one report, these actions have caused some officials to resign their posts out of fear for their safety. Good.

Coordinated actions are possible too: go mask-less shopping with friends, participate in boycotts and class-action lawsuits, etc. Coordinated actions can fail, but individual actions will always result in at least a small victory.

Whatever the approach, make it expensive for them not to accept your money. Make those businesses understand in concrete terms that your patronage is not a given, and that their actions will come at a cost.
 

Conclusion

The immediate goal of the scamdemic is to cause division.

In day-to-day terms, ask yourself how many calm and rational in-person debates have you had with people who hold the opposite views on the China Flu? Before the shutdowns and the masks, it was an almost daily thing with me. The last one I had was with a dental technician whose office was shut down and who now works at a convenience store. With the coming of the masks, every interaction - if interaction was even possible - has become either an enforcement act or a shouting match instead of a healthy debate.

How much of the unemployment, the business closures, the economic suffering, and most importantly the level of political animosity and vitriol would we have now if companies didn't blindly follow these orders? Animosity and vitriol are the thing we should be most concerned about because we are now much closer to mass civil disorder or even civil war than we ever were over the last 12 years. Masks are just one more wedge issue used to divide and conquer us.

A second goal is to swing the 2020 election. The one accomplishment that even leftists cannot deny is the incredible economic prosperity that resulted when Trump began to roll-back policies of the previous several administrations. The shutdowns have thrown millions of people out of work (the "inessentials") and have forced the shuttering of thousands of small businesses - some forever, thus ending this prosperity.

The ultimate goal of the masks, the shutdowns, and all the rest is to normalize fear and instill control. The concrete symbol of the control is the mask, and it signifies submission. The enforcers of the control are collaborating companies, their employees, and the Karens.

That is to be the new normal, something that must be resisted at all costs.

On Ammon Bundy and the Events in Oregon

The occupation started over the Hammonds. You remember the Hammonds, don't you? Dwight Hammond, Jr., and Steve Hammond are two ranchers from Oregon who, in 2006, were charged under the 1996 Antiterrorism & Effective Death Penalty Act (!) for accidentally burning 140 acres of BLM land adjacent to their own. They served a year in prison and paid $400,000 in fines. The federal government thought that this wasn’t sufficient, so in October 2015 the Hammonds were re-arrested and resentenced to the full 5-year prison terms.

Can you say “double jeopardy”?

The resentencing of the Hammonds was the primary reason for Ammon Bundy and others to occupy a wildlife refuge in Oregon. Ammon Bundy was under the influence of some thugs, or agent provocateurs, when he decided to be a part of this. They did this with no predefined means of communication with the outside world, no clearly defined goals, no exit strategy. It might has well have been done on a whim, as though it were a sit-in by narcissistic 60s-era campus radicals.

Notice that Bundy and the agent provocateurs became the focus of attention, by both mainstream and alternative medias. The Hammonds' plight was forgotten in all this, as were the concerns of other ranchers, as was the fact that the federal government owns most of the land in the western US.

What's the connection between the occupation of the wildlife refuge and the Hammonds, or the occupation and other ranchers, or the occupation and the BLM? There is none, and that's the problem. The occupation was all about grandstanding, and nothing about getting results.

If they had attempted to free the Hammonds, or gone after the judge or prosecutors who resentenced the Hammonds, or took substantive action directly against the BLM, that would have been different. Instead, Ammon Bundy is in custody, one of the occupiers is dead, and an opportunity has been lost.

There are three lessons to be learned here:

1. Never, ever, trust a man who is willing to die in glory but is unable to live with pride. Ammon Bundy's first mistake was trusting in such men.

2. We must remember our place: we are the flea, and we had better start using that to our advantage. Forget about strut and swagger, this is about taking effective action to regain our rights. Forget any visions of a surrender ceremony on the USS Missouri, it isn't that kind of war. We are surrounded on all sides, politically, economically, and culturally. The situation is dire, and we must give no quarter and take no captives. This doesn't mean that our situation is hopeless: do not forget what Chesty Puller said about similar circumstances.

3. No revolution, no political change, is ever born from immaculate conception. We idolize the Founding Fathers as much as the Left idolizes Che Guevara and Chairman Mao, but those idolizations are possible only because they are historical figures. The events in Oregon are here in the present, and we must act in the present, and we don't have the comfort of hindsight.

We still have time to make a difference, but not much time. We must act with resolve, not react in haste. We can make a difference, individual actions still matter in this time before the storm, but know this: once the thunderstorm starts, raindrops can no longer vote.