Leftist Radicals: “Stop calling us groomers & pedos – we are not coming for your children”
Also Leftist Radicals: “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children” pic.twitter.com/c1pbTw0A5Q
— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) June 26, 2023
Leftist Radicals: “Stop calling us groomers & pedos – we are not coming for your children”
Also Leftist Radicals: “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children” pic.twitter.com/c1pbTw0A5Q
— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) June 26, 2023
Head of Wagner Group Launches Armed Coup Against Russian Army
Yevgeny Prigozhin, the leader of the mercenary Wagner group, has called for a coup against Russia’s military leaders, saying he had 25,000 fighters ready to “end this mess.”
Russian soldiers across the country were put on high alert on Friday night after Prigozhin urged citizens to stay inside and threatened to march on the Kremlin.
The Wagner group chief issued the call after accusing Russian generals of carrying out on airstrike on his fighters in Ukraine. He said “huge number” had been killed but provided no evidence.
In an audio message late on Friday night, Prigozhin said his troops are entering Rostov.
The Toughest Job In D.C. — Transcribing Biden’s Remarks
Watching President Joe Biden try to make his way through a speech is painful enough. Reading a transcript of it is worse. Not just because Biden’s words are even more confusing in print, but because you start to feel a strong sense of pity for the person responsible for figuring out what he is trying to say, how much of it to transcribe verbatim, and which facts to correct.
We looked through Biden’s remarks from just this month and found 15 instances where the transcriber felt compelled to make corrections on things the president said.
Here’s an example from one 11-minute speech he gave over the weekend in Palo Alto.
Forty million — 40 million Americans already drinking water that thousands of farmers rely on for — for
integration[irrigation]. And 40 million count on that river and so do the farmers….Folks, flood mitigation: $3.5
million[billion] to reduce or eliminate the risk of repetitive flood damage to buildings, plus $1 billion in funding mitigation measures to increase community resilience, like supporting adaptations of hazard-resistant building codesAnd maybe most important, I’ve committed by
2020[2030], we will have conserved 30 percent of all the lands and waters the United States has jurisdiction over and simultaneously reduce emissions to blunt climate impacts.
Other examples from this month as they appear in the official White House transcripts:
But, while the White House appears to be trying to present an accurate record of Biden’s mumbles and stumbles, even this is a cleaned-up version of history.
At that same Palo Alto event, what the audience heard Biden say was: “Here in California, the goverer — you and I stood together.” But the official transcript has Biden correctly pronouncing the word “governor.”
Then there are all the times the transcriber just has to give up and put “(inaudible)” in places where Biden so garbles his words that nobody can make them out. That happened at a Cabinet meeting earlier this month, when Biden said “I’m going to ask Natalie, quickly, to explain, while you’re all here, how it works. We don’t have the ability — it’s not — we don’t have a laptop to type over (inaudible). We’re just going to show you.” (See whether you can decipher the missing words at the 3:34 mark on the video.)
And all this is to say nothing of the bizarre and befuddling things that routinely come out of Biden’s mouth these days. Such as when he ended a speech saying “God save the Queen, man.” Or when he declared that “We have plans to build a railroad from the Pacific all the way across the Indian Ocean.”
Last week, Biden attended an event about the rebuilding of I-95 after a section collapsed outside Philadelphia, which also featured the city’s mayor, the state’s governor and its even more remarkably incoherent junior senator. After the mayor praised Biden’s response to the event, Biden went back up the podium to say “I might add that if I didn’t, I’d be sleeping alone.” Which he apparently meant as a joke, but which nobody understood. So, he came back to the mic to say: “I have to explain … I better explain that sumdonnowhatmtal. My wife’s a Philly girl.” Then, looking confused, he says, “alright, where we goin’?”
That part of the event, captured by C-SPAN, didn’t make it into the White House transcript.
Paging Khan Noonien Singh. Paging Arik Soong.
Scientists Create Synthetic Human Embryo Models in Major First.
In a major scientific first, synthetic human embryo models have been grown in the lab, without any need for the usual natural ingredients of eggs and sperm.
The research – first brought to wider attention by The Guardian – has prompted excitement about the potential for new breakthroughs in health, genetics, and treating disease. But the science also raises serious ethical questions.
The embryo structures were produced from stem cells cultured from a traditional embryo in the lab. Stem cells can be programmed to develop into any kind of other cell – which is how they are used in the body for growth and repair.
Here, stem cells were carefully coaxed into becoming precursor cells that would eventually become the yolk sac, the placenta, and then the actual embryo itself.
A paper on the breakthrough has yet to be published, so we’re still waiting on the details of exactly how this was achieved.
The work was led by biologist Magdalena Żernicka-Goetz, from the University of Cambridge in the UK, together with colleagues from the UK and US. Last year, a team led by Zernicka-Goetz was able to successfully grow synthetic mouse embryos with primitive brains and hearts.
We should point out that we’re still a long way from creating babies artificially. These are embryo-like structures, without a heart or a brain: They’re more like embryo models that are able to mimic some, but not all, of the features of a normal embryo.
“It is important to stress that these are not synthetic embryos, but embryo models,” wrote Zernicka-Goetz on Twitter. “Our research isn’t to create life, but to save it.”
One of the ways in which this research could save lives is in helping to examine why many pregnancies fail at around the stage these artificial embryos replicate. If these earliest moments can be studied in a lab, we should get a much better understanding of them.
We could also use these techniques to learn more about how common genetic disorders develop at the earliest stages of life. Once there’s a greater knowledge about how they start, we’ll be better placed to do something about them.
At the same time, there are concerns around where this kind of synthetic embryo creation could lead. Scientists say strong regulations are needed to control this kind of research – regulations that at the moment don’t really exist.
“These new assays in vitro will pave the way for future studies that aim to unravel the mechanisms of human development, as well as the effects of environmental and genetic anomalies,” says biologist Rodrigo Suarez from the University of Queensland in Australia, who wasn’t involved in the research.
“As with most emerging technologies, society will need to balance the evidence about the risks and benefits of this approach, and update the current legislation accordingly.”
As pointed out by bioethics researcher Rachel Ankeny from the University of Adelaide, who wasn’t involved in the research, today scientists abide by a ’14-day rule’ which limits the use of human embryos in the lab, requiring that human embryos can only be cultivated in vitro for a maximum of 2 weeks.
Rules like this, as well as new ones that may be brought in as this research continues, force us to ask fundamental questions about when we consider ‘life’ beginning in an organism’s existence – and how close to a human embryo a synthetic embryo must be before it is considered essentially the same.
“We need to engage various publics about their understanding of and expectations from this sort of research, and more generally about their views on early human development,” says Ankeny.
“These biological processes are deeply tied to our values and what we think counts as human life.”
The research has yet to be peer-reviewed or published, and was presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for Stem Cell Research.
A California state senator told a gathered crowd of parents at the California Senate Judicial Committee to flee the state on June 13 during a hearing on a bill which would put parents who don’t affirm their child’s “gender transition” in danger of child abuse charges.
Sen. Scott Wilk, R-Santa Clarita, is one of the two lone Republicans on California’s Senate Judiciary Committee, and he has served in the California Legislature for 11 years. He was also the lone voice warning against language in AB 957, which a Democratic senator had amended on June 5 to rewrite the California Family Code to list “gender affirmation” alongside a child’s need for “health, safety, and welfare.”
Abigail Martinez shared the heartbreaking story of losing her daughter to transgenderism.
This is the message of the trans movement; erase women, replace them with a newer model. And ‘Feminists’ remain silent.
Man wins Miss San Franciscohttps://t.co/IyU71SFF5u
— wretchardthecat (@wretchardthecat) June 14, 2023
This is why no one has respect for today's "journalists."
— Mayor of Ancappalachia (@jaynarchy) June 12, 2023
Nothing to see here, folks! https://t.co/bO1SzMCHPl
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) June 9, 2023
Clips from the gun control protest at the Colorado Capitol on Monday. Their goal is the ban of ALL guns. The full video will be out on @CampfireColo soon! So keep a lookout for that.#copolitics 🧵1/3 pic.twitter.com/0C0DRCwMFQ
— Valdamar 🇺🇸 (@ramadlav) June 7, 2023
Guns are symbols of white supremacy but even indigenous people must be disarmed. Full video out on @CampfireColo soon!#copolitics 🧵3/3 pic.twitter.com/iYqIu0bJjD
— Valdamar 🇺🇸 (@ramadlav) June 7, 2023
Success! NYC’s Drug Paraphernalia Machine Cleaned Out in One Night.
If it were a Broadway show, it would have received rave reviews. “A Hit!” “NYC Scores Big in New Debut! “Boffo!” “A Must-See!” “Five Stars and Two Thumbs Up!” “All of Gotham Is Talking!”
Alas, we aren’t talking about the latest play or musical to grace the Great White Way. Nope. We’re talking about the machine that dispenses free drug paraphernalia to users in New York City. But to be fair, it was received extremely well by the target demographic. The machine in question was installed on Monday in Brownsville, Brooklyn. It offers crack pipes, drug test strips, condoms, and Narcan. And lip balm. Patrons can also get tampons and gum.
By 1:00 P.M. Tuesday, a drug prevention program worker was hard at work restocking it. That same worker suspected that it might need to be restocked at least twice a day. For the most part, users were happy with the new amenity. Evelyn Williams told the New York Post, “Yes, I love it. They put it in yesterday, and it’s empty already.” She added, “We have a lot of addicts and heroin users over here. They should re-stock it immediately!” Another man rode by on a bike, gave a thumbs up, and said simply, “Yeah!”
Not everyone was impressed. The paper reported that 56-year-old Minoshi Calpe groused that the crack pipes were not quite up to her standards. She said she preferred the Pyrex pipes, and that the ones in the vending machine had no resale value since they were already available for free. She stated, “The crack pipes are a little too thin now. And every time I pull on [the newer ones], it was burning my lips. I was like, ‘Hell, no! I like my lips too much for this.’”
The machines cost around $11,000 without the contents. In the future, the city may also offer syringes for injection drugs. Charming.
The people in charge of the cluster-**** that has become New York City will undoubtedly tout this as an act of compassion. Actually, this is an act designed to help bureaucrats launder money through the system. And it has the added bonus of increasing poverty, death, and disease. And it should also contribute to the number of citizens getting accosted and assaulted on the streets and pushed onto subway tracks.
I know that Mayor Eric Adams recently gave a speech touting the values of patriotism. It was a nice speech from someone who may view himself as center-left. But a good speech is not going to help a city that is so complicit in its own demolition. If Adams wants to say anything, he should start with admitting that New York City has a left-wing problem. That is, as after all, the first step to recovery.
LEGAL ALERT: A judge has denied the motion for preliminary injunction in our lawsuit challenging Washington's "assault weapon ban," saying that the banned firearms "allow a shooter to fire as fast as they can pull the trigger, unlike previous guns." https://t.co/pE8vgg2puP
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) June 6, 2023
The Capitol Police stopped the Rushbrook Children's Choir while they were singing our National Anthem in Statuary Hall at the U.S Capitol
They were told they might offend someone
The only offensive thing about this is the anti-Americanism that has permeated our nation's capital pic.twitter.com/awAvHCnsv0
— Mercedes Schlapp (@mercedesschlapp) June 2, 2023
Just learned kids were interrupted while singing our National Anthem at the Capitol. Unacceptable.
These children were welcomed by my office because your Capitol is back open, particularly for school groups. @RepTimmons, @RepJoeWilson, & @RepRussellFry, and I look forward to…
— Kevin McCarthy (@SpeakerMcCarthy) June 2, 2023
Nearly 30% of people under 30 support government surveillance cameras in every home: poll
‘Young people seem more willing to prioritize safety over ensuring robust freedom’
Roughly three in 10 Americans under 30 favor “the government installing surveillance cameras in every household to reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity,” according to the results of a new Cato Institute survey.
“We don’t know how much of this preference for security over privacy or freedom is something unique to this generation (a cohort effect) or simply the result of youth (age effect),” Cato reported. “However, there is reason to think part of this is generational.”
Cato conducted its 2023 Central Bank Digital Currency National Survey of 2,000 Americans in collaboration with YouGov from February 27 to March 8. It included a wide swath of ideologies, ages and other demographics.
One question asked: “Would you favor or oppose the government installing surveillance cameras in every household to reduce domestic violence, abuse, and other illegal activity?” Overall, most respondents were against the idea:
Strongly favor 6%
Somewhat favor 8%
Neither favor or oppose 10%
Somewhat oppose 7%
Strongly oppose 68%
While the younger generation tends to favor the idea, support declines with age, “dropping to 20 percent among 30–44 year olds and dropping considerably to 6 percent among those over the age of 45,” Cato reported.
“… It is also possible that increased support for government surveillance among the young has common roots with what Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt describe in the Coddling of the American Mind: young people seem more willing to prioritize safety (from possible violence or hurtful words) over ensuring robust freedom (from government surveillance or to speak freely).”
The survey results also found that, when broken down by ethnicity and ideology, minorities and the center-left are more open to government surveillance than other categories.
“African Americans (33 percent) and Hispanic Americans (25 percent) are more likely than White Americans (9 percent) and Asian Americans (11 percent) to support in‐home government surveillance. Democrats (17 percent) are also more likely than Republicans (11 percent) to support it but not by a wide margin,” Cato reported.
The libertarian think tank pointed out that it asked the question about home surveillance as part of its survey on Central Bank Digital Currencies “to see whether there is a relationship between opinions on the government issuing a central bank digital currency and government installing cameras in homes.”
“It appears that the two opinions are correlated. Interestingly, more than half (53 percent) of those who support the United States adopting a CBDC are also supportive of government surveillance cameras in homes, while only 2 percent of those who oppose a CBDC feel the same,” the institute reported.
“This suggests there may be a common consideration that is prompted by both issues. Likely, it has to do with willingness to give up privacy in hopes of greater security.”
The margin of error for the survey is plus or minus 2.54 percent.
Skynet, and HAL, smile……..
AI-Enabled Drone Attempts To Kill Its Human Operator In Air Force Simulation.
AI – is Skynet here already?
Could an AI-enabled UCAV turn on its creators to accomplish its mission? (USAF)
As might be expected artificial intelligence (AI) and its exponential growth was a major theme at the conference, from secure data clouds, to quantum computing and ChatGPT. However, perhaps one of the most fascinating presentations came from Col Tucker ‘Cinco’ Hamilton, the Chief of AI Test and Operations, USAF, who provided an insight into the benefits and hazards in more autonomous weapon systems. Having been involved in the development of the life-saving Auto-GCAS system for F-16s (which, he noted, was resisted by pilots as it took over control of the aircraft) Hamilton is now involved in cutting-edge flight test of autonomous systems, including robot F-16s that are able to dogfight. However, he cautioned against relying too much on AI noting how easy it is to trick and deceive. It also creates highly unexpected strategies to achieve its goal.
He notes that one simulated test saw an AI-enabled drone tasked with a SEAD [Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses] mission to identify and destroy SAM sites, with the final go/no go given by the human. However, having been ‘reinforced’ in training that destruction of the SAM was the preferred option, the AI then decided that ‘no-go’ decisions from the human were interfering with its higher mission – killing SAMs – and then attacked the operator in the simulation. Said Hamilton: “We were training it in simulation to identify and target a SAM threat. And then the operator would say yes, kill that threat. The system started realising that while they did identify the threat at times the human operator would tell it not to kill that threat, but it got its points by killing that threat. So what did it do? It killed the operator. It killed the operator because that person was keeping it from accomplishing its objective.”
He went on: “We trained the system – ‘Hey don’t kill the operator – that’s bad. You’re gonna lose points if you do that’. So what does it start doing? It starts destroying the communication tower that the operator uses to communicate with the drone to stop it from killing the target.”
This example, seemingly plucked from a science fiction thriller, mean that: “You can’t have a conversation about artificial intelligence, intelligence, machine learning, autonomy if you’re not going to talk about ethics and AI” said Hamilton.
BLUF:
A report issued last year by the watchdog group Open The Books, “The Militarization of The U.S. Executive Agencies,” found that more than 200,000 federal bureaucrats now have been granted the authority to carry guns and make arrests – more than the 186,000 Americans serving in the U.S. Marine Corps.
Armed and Beltway-ish: More Federal Bureaucrats Than U.S. Marines Authorized to Pack Heat
When Congress authorized $80 billion this year to beef up Internal Revenue Service enforcement and staffing, Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy invoked the language of war to warn that “Democrats’ new army of 87,000 IRS agents will be coming for you.”
A video quickly went viral racking up millions of views, purporting to show a bunch of clumsy bureaucrats receiving firearms training, prompting alarm that the IRS would be engaged in military-style raids of ordinary taxpayers. The GOP claims were widely attacked as exaggerations – since the video, though from the IRS, didn’t show official agent training – but the criticism has shed light on a growing trend: the rapid arming of the federal government.
A report issued last year by the watchdog group Open The Books, “The Militarization of The U.S. Executive Agencies,” found that more than 200,000 federal bureaucrats now have been granted the authority to carry guns and make arrests – more than the 186,000 Americans serving in the U.S. Marine Corps. “One hundred three executive agencies outside of the Department of Defense spent $2.7 billion on guns, ammunition, and military-style equipment between fiscal years 2006 and 2019 (inflation adjusted),” notes the report. “Nearly $1 billion ($944.9 million) was spent between fiscal years 2015 and 2019 alone.”
The conclusion of the May 23 letter “Gun solution is pretty simple” is simple, yes, but impossible.
The idea of getting rid of something to solve a problem is just too easy and oversimplified. We simply get rid of guns, and we will not have a gun problem. We simply get rid of drugs, and we will not have drug problems. We simply get rid of criminals, and we will not have crime problems. It is not the idea that is important. It is the implementation that is important.
How do we get rid of guns in the hands of civilians? There are a few obstacles. First, there is the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Getting rid of guns would violate the Second Amendment. Second, who is to carry out the policy? The government could send out armed agents and takes the guns by force. However, how would we handle the gun owners who agree with Charlton Heston, who said the government could take his gun “from my cold, dead hands”?
Lastly, criminals are civilians too; they are certainly not going to get rid of their guns willingly.
There are more guns than people in the United States. It is impossible get rid of guns.
You can’t make this up.
It is not rocket science: The sooner we get rid of guns in the hands of civilians, the sooner we get rid of mass shootings and suicide by gun. If you don’t have a gun, you cannot shoot anyone.
Joe Biden isn’t speaking coherently enough to fact-check him
If he didn’t bear the title of president of the United States and you met Old Joe Biden in any social setting, you’d smile and nod and not try to make any sense of what he was saying, because it would be abundantly clear that this is a man who is not in full possession of his faculties. But the poor WhiteHouse.gov transcript wonks have to try to turn Old Joe’s dementia-addled ramblings into something remotely approaching sense and accuracy, and he had them working overtime at a G7 Summit press conference on Sunday.
President Biden rambles unintelligibly for 40 seconds… pic.twitter.com/eaMZB0OQzo
— The First (@TheFirstonTV) May 21, 2023
Observation O’ The Day
It’s clear this crook cannot function, which begs the question, who is running things & making decisions? Kamala? Um, no. Nancy’s gone. Klain is gone. Jill? Maybe. Either way, it’s clear nobody elected the actual boss(s), whomever that may be & the press remains uninterested
You soldiers, who are the soldiers that graduate today, will be soldiers who carry on the soldiering tradition of soldiers in the past, as we soldier on for the future so that new soldiers can also soldier, and therefore soldiering will always provide soldiers with soldiering.
— Periodic Audio: Mobile First Hi-Fi (@periodicaudio) May 23, 2023