Do You Like Getting Honked At?

Driving home while listening to a talk on the Fourth Step, I came to a halt at a four-way intersection. I arrived behind the car on my left, but when the car in front of me drove through the intersection on his way to passing me, I decided it would be more efficient if I jumped the queue and drove straight ahead. As I did so, I realized that the traffic was piled up in front of me and I was stuck in the middle of intersection blocking traffic. The driver on my left honked at me as he had arrived at the intersection before me and had the right of way. I was indignant that this man would dare honk at me but then I realized he was in the right. Still, it took a few minutes for my indignation to completely fade away.

When we let our natural instincts get out of place, when we step on others, they naturally react and we rarely like those consequences. On the other hand, when we go through life observing the common courtesies, we rarely get honked at. Life is tranquil.

I have a friend who’s never had a ticket (neither a parking ticket nor a moving violation). I admire him. I want to be more like him. Over the course of my life, I’ve had about $2,000 in parking tickets (all in Los Angeles) and about five moving violations.

Posted in Addiction | Comments Off on Do You Like Getting Honked At?

The Case Against Suicide

I am in five 12-step programs and sometimes I meet people who ask me why they should not commit suicide.

I usually share from my experience. From 1988 to 1993, I was bedridden about 20 hours a day on average with a mysterious disease that was eventually given the name Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. For most of this time, I despaired about ever getting well and I sometimes wished I would die (I never allowed myself to take any steps to bringing this about or contemplating a plan to do this). About four years into this nightmare, I became convinced that not only could I and my current doctors not figure a way out of this mess, neither could anyone in my circle find me a way out. But I was convinced there were people out there who could help me and that meeting as many people as possible was the way to go.

So I made an effort to connect with old friends, tried to form new ones, and I placed a ton of singles ads, talked to a ton of women, and some of them were interested in me and drove and flew to me. One took me back to Orlando, Florida with her in August of 1993 and took me to her psychiatrist who eventually gave me a medication (nardil) that set me on the path towards two-thirds of a recovery.

I am sure there are things that I could do right now that would significantly improve my life. I just have to meet more people, whether in real life or online, who might have useful suggestions for me (or I need to deepen my connection with people I’m already acquainted with who can show me a path out of what is normal for me).

From my first meeting in various 12-step programs I saw there was a path out of a problem I was having. I saw there were things I could do right now to improve my lot. For instance, I could give up some bad habits and take up some good habits. I could clean and organize my room, vacuum my car, wash it, track my spending and earning, become clear on the parts of my life that were unmanageable, and any time I needed to, there were either face-to-face meetings or 12-step meetings or inspiring recovery talks that I could tune into and experience God. To me, 12-step meetings are God with skin. I go to a meeting and from the most unlikely people, I hear the voice of God. I hear what I need. And I see a way forward.

Is there anything that makes you feel good? Such as cleaning your room, going to work, reading a book, exercise, yoga, attendance at church or synagogue, hanging out with friends, going to a meeting, etc? By stacking good things on top of each other and reducing the things that make us feel bad we can move ahead. We all have things we can do that are healthy and make us feel good.

From 2002 to 2009, the most common thing I said to myself was, “I’m f***ed.” I never speak to myself that way anymore. There’s nothing that haunts me from my past. I rarely have drama and never feel hysterical.

I meet people who are haunted by mistakes from their past. I used to be the same way. But all those things that used to haunt me, they don’t haunt me anymore. When I did a resentment inventory and a fear inventory in Step Four, I discovered that the people I feared the most were the people I resented the most, and they were invariably people I had wronged and so I had a rational reason to fear them. As I cleaned up the wreckage from my past, my fears and resentments went away and so did that haunted feeling.

If you have the strength to clean your room, you have the strength to progress in the 12 Steps. If you can get to a meeting, you can get to recovery, and most of the time, a meeting is only a phone call away. God is only a phone call away. Most people don’t know that, but if you have 12 Step experience, you know that. You can access God in ways that normies don’t know. Addicts are ahead of the game. We know that we either access God or we’ll die.

The case against suicide? There is so much more in the universe than we know right now. The common factor in our trauma is our consciousness. That’s the common denominator in all of our suffering. So how can we move beyond our limits? How can we connect with the transcendent? In my experience, problems we can’t solve on our own power are taken away when we connect with other people, with our true selves, and with God. And with a 12-step program, there are detailed instructions on how to do this.

Posted in Addiction, CFS | Comments Off on The Case Against Suicide

When Was I The Victim? When Was I The Perpetrator?

My mind naturally inclines to thinking one thousand times about when I have been the victim for every time it naturally inclines to thinking about when I was the perpetrator. I don’t like thinking about when I was a perpetrator. It’s hard for me to face when I have acted unethically. I just want to block that out.

When I work the Fourth Step, I list everybody I resent. Then in column two, I list the harms they have done me. In column three, I list what parts of my life they hurt (my self-esteem, my pocket book, my sex life, my standing in the community, etc). In column four, I think about how much I was responsible for these painful interactions.

If I want to be sane about things, I have to expect that half of my negative interactions with others had a great deal to do with my choices. But what about the rest? What about when others weren’t rational? Weren’t fair? Weren’t nice? What about when others don’t operate according to my rules that others should be rational, fair and nice? The reality is that many people are irrational, unfair and not nice. My belief system is delusional. My tendency to get angry when people act irrationally, unfairly and nastily is irrational. I don’t get to dictate how other people should operate. I don’t get to dictate reality. I get to react to reality, notes HerbK. I can’t change reality. I can’t control it.

“I’m the center of the universe and I get to make the rules. It is ludicrous for me to think the world should revolve around my value system.” (HerbK)

I often misbehaved to reduce the tension around me. That didn’t tend to work. I felt uncomfortable so I acted out. I couldn’t handle how I felt, so I acted the fool.

Posted in Addiction, Personal | Comments Off on When Was I The Victim? When Was I The Perpetrator?

Are Non-Jews Human?

Israel Shamir is a relentless Jewish critic of Jews and of the Jewish state.

Paul Gottfried writes: “As someone who studied some of the same texts more than fifty years ago, I am amazed by Israel Shamir’s erudition. He’s obviously studied the original Talmudic passages in Hebrew and Eastern Aramaic. Contrary to what some bloggers suggest, I think it’s culturally and socially important that some Jewish communities, mostly in Eastern Europe, studied such texts and from what I can tell from my exposure to those who did, took the views of gentiles that they encountered quite seriously. Sephardic Jews were less likely to have been exposed to such views. They generally did not study Talmud in the same depth as Eastern European Jews and confined their religious studies to learning compendiums of Rabbinic law, which determined their ritual practice.
It’s not a question of whether other groups also taught ideas of racial superiority to their young. What is striking in this case is the claim to stand for universal justice from a group that has been saturated with anti-gentile prejudice for many generations. But in this respect hypocritical Jewish universalists may be no different from spokesmen for the Third World, who drag their own ethnic baggage into the court of manufactured world opinion.”

Israel Shamir writes July 17:

An age-long discussion of Jewish attitudes to non-Jews had been pushed out of the central stage by the counter-discussion of goyim’s attitudes to Jews (beastly, anti-Semitic, prejudiced, leading to Holocaust, denying humanity). In the still uncensored corners and nooks of the Web, one still can find references to Jewish holy books and what do they allegedly say about non-Jews. All these references are soundly trashed and refuted by a plethora of Jewish sites robustly defending Talmud and later texts. The defenders of Jewish faith say that the quotes mean something completely different, they are taken out of context and the translation is wrong anyway. Or, often, they say that such a quote can’t be found in the mentioned book, or even the book can’t be found.

Without aiming to reverse the trend or to bring the discussion to a conclusion, we shall amuse you by a funny tidbit of Jewish lore, which is usually flatly denied by Jewish defenders. It is a reference to Midrash Talpiyot that had been known to debunkers of Judaism, saying that gentiles (goyim, or non-Jews) are beasts in human shape.

Midrash Talpiyot (or Talpiot, Talpiyoth) is a once-widely-popular and still-entertaining collection of Jewish lore assembled by a leading personality of XVIII c. Rabbi Eliyahu HaCohen of Izmir (or Elijah ben Solomon Abraham Ha-Kohen of Smyrna) (d. 1729). We shall call him RES. He is better known as the author of Shevet Musar (published in Constantinople 1712, and numerous editions afterwards), a collection of his sermons, one of the most popular books on ethics of his time. He was a brilliant and knowledgeable man, able to deliver a sermon on unusual subjects. I love his discussion of superiority of dogs over cats – dogs kept quiet when sons of Israel escaped Egypt with stolen loot, and thus acquired merit. (It was translated into English and makes a delightful and non-controversial reading). He was a great believer in harmony, in divine justice, in merit as the reason for any achievement.

In modern American Jewish sites, he is somewhat disparagingly called “a Turkish Jew”. In his days, Jews lived in Ottoman Empire and in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth; so it is a Polish Jew or a Turkish Jew. Smyrna (Izmir) was a great centre of Jewish learning, and books of RES were translated into Yiddisch for the Polish Jews. They say he was a member of the heretical Sabbatean sect, and therefore all he wrote is of no value. He indeed flirted with Sabbateans for a while, like a good orthodox Communist would flirt with ideas of Trotsky or even Bogdanov. RES reverted to orthodoxy when it became necessary, and anyway his writing, including Talpiyot, had received imprimatur of leading rabbis of his time.

He was well versed in Kabbala, and this particular text from Talpiyot is based on Kabbalistic teachings. The author refers to “sod” (secret), the deepest level of exegetics.

It is a midrash, a search for deeper (often esoteric) meaning hidden in a normative text. Midrash is often quirky, usually entertaining and unexpected conclusion of delving into a text. It is located on the moot border between sheer fantasy and homiletics. For instance, Bible )Gn 24:1) says Abraham had been blessed “in all things” (בכל), and a midrash explains it as “Abraham had a daughter called Bakol, “In all things”. It is a part of Jewish reading and understanding, but it is often read with a grain of salt.

The normative text interpreted by this midrash is a well-known sentence from Talmud, uttered by the great sage R Shimon Bar Yohai, (Simeon bar Yochai), or RaSHBI. He discussed a technical question of impurity (or levitical uncleanness) caused by dead body in certain conditions. Apparently he had to explain why a dead body of non-Jew does not cause impurity. He did it by the way of midrash: he said that the biblical verse (Num 19:14) regarding impurity contains the word “adam”. Impurity has been caused by dead body of adam, while, he says, the word “adam” in the Bible never refers to a non-Jew. In his words, You (Jews) are called adam [in the Bible], while the non-Jews aren’t called adam. This was the beginning of a long dispute whether non-Jews are indeed human, and whether Jews consider non-Jews human. It will be dealt later, just bear in mind that RaSHBI was a great goy-hater of rather extreme kind…

RES asks a good question: who cares whether the Bible uses the word ‘adam’ for Jews only, for we know that non-Jews are also human and they are the same as Jews in their appearance. And he answers this question disclosing a cabbalistic ‘secret’, that is the deepest meaning of the text. The Gentiles are actually non-human but beasts created to serve Jews. They have human shape for two very different reasons. One, it is more pleasant and respectable for a Jew to be served by a beast in human shape, than by a beast in a beast’s shape. Two, a non-Jew may join Jews, while if he were in the shape of beast, he wouldn’t be able to.

I am not appalled that some Jewish thinkers have doubted the humanity of non-Jews. This is a universal tendency during times of stress — to doubt the humanity of those you are in a life and death competition with. This type of extreme thinking could even be an evolutionary advantage in times of extreme conflict. I doubt that Jews are more prone to thinking ill of out-groups than other people.

If you grow up in an insular community, you might be five, six, seven years old before you realize that there are people outside of your own group.

It is not wise to see texts in a victim. All texts are read by particular people with a particular culture. Jews, for example, have a low rate of criminal violence. I’ve never encountered Jews who doubt the humanity of non-Jews. I’ve never encountered a rabbi who taught that non-Jews are animals.

The more negative the circumstance for any group, including Jews, the more likely they are to produce sentiments that out-groups lack humanity. When Jews are tolerated or even welcomed by the goyim, Jews correspondingly raise their opinion of the goyim. For example, most Jews from America and Western Europe have a positive view of their fellow citizens, while Jews from Eastern Europe and Arab lands do not.

He writes July 17:

COMMENTS AT UNZ.COM:

* Just because one jewish priest thought so, doesnt mean every jewish priest or every jewish person thought/thinks the same.

Also, remember in olden times almost every culture/leaders of cultures in varying degrees called ‘outsiders’ as barbarians or beasts. It doesnt mean the people of those cultures nor all books of the culture/religion thought they were barbarian.

* Aristotle taught all nations, Jews included, were created to be slaves to the Hellenes.

Hitler tried to pull a similar scam for the Germanics; did not work.

* Sorry, but pulling out a few passages from the Talmud (which is huge and notoriously difficult to interpret), doesn’t really say anything. Sorry, but the luminous intellects of unz.com are not up to the task of interpreting ancient texts.

You could find equivalent passages in Greek (Aristotle and his treatment of barbarians), Sanskrit (look at the laws of Manu and how they deal with people outside the caste system), Chinese (middle kingdom – enough said), Arabic, or Christian theology.

People like to think they’re special, and that their group and nation is special. This isn’t really news.

* The moral systems of all human societies are fundamentally oriented around ingroup-outgroup distinctions. However while ethnocentrism is by no means an exclusively Jewish trait, Jews do tend to greater ethnocentrism then most European gentile groups.

* The defining characteristic of Jews everywhere and throughout history is that they always have 1 set of laws or standards for Jews and another set of laws or standards for everyone else (the goyim).

This double standard is seen all the time everywhere. They practice the anti-golden rule.

This is why this article is so important, because it explains how Jewish power is derived from seeing others as cattle just like the mafia does.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Are Non-Jews Human?

Staying Free Of Crippling Pain Requires The Maintenance Of My Spiritual/Physical/Psychological Condition

About six months ago, my back went out on me and I was bedridden for three days. During the first two days, I almost called 9-1-1 several times because it was a herculean task to stand up and to seat myself on the toilet. For several hours on the first night, I couldn’t get up. Luckily, I did not need to relieve myself during this time. I dreaded soiling myself.

My collapse was particularly embarrassing because I teach the Alexander Technique, an educational approach to moving freely. I can usually Alexander my way out of these problems, but not this time. My best thinking just made my problem worse.

From about age 23, my back has gone out on me a couple of times a year. The first time it happened, circa 1993, I rolled out of bed about 2 am and my back went out for the first time I remember and I couldn’t get up. I was alone in my parents’ home and the closest neighbors outside my window were about a mile away. I cried and cried for help but nobody could hear me. After about an hour, I was able to get up on my own, relieve myself, and go back to bed.

Usually a chiropractor can pop me back into place when my back goes out and I can immediately go on with my life. Otherwise, I just have to rest for a couple of days and the problem goes away.

Practicing the Alexander Technique reduced my problem but did not eliminate it.

After my last collapse, a friend suggested strain-counter strain therapy (positional release) with Gadi Kaufman (GadiBody.com) in Santa Monica. He provided immediate freedom from my crippling muscle spasms. I read his book and practiced his daily releases and bought a standing desk and I have been pain free ever since. (I also bought an activator for $150 and a $140 textbook on how to use it and that has, so far, eliminated my need for conventional physical therapy, which I used to get every few months because my wrists would get stiff and I’d start to develop symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome, a problem I’ve had on and off for about 12 years.)

I’ve found that living pain-free requires the maintenance of my physical, psychological and spiritual condition. By practicing the things I’ve learned from Gadi and company, I do well. When I don’t do my daily practices, I start experiencing pain (physical, psychological, and spiritual).

If I’m getting hysterical or struggling with dramatic problems, I am going to tighten my muscles and this will inevitably lead to pain, reduced functioning and possible collapse. I learned in 12-Step rooms that if it is hysterical, it is historical. If it is dramatic, it is traumatic. As I haven’t experiencing hysteria in years nor painful drama in months, I think I’m walking the path of recovery and in doing so, I’ve healed many childhood wounds. Maybe an unexpected one will jump up today and slay me. Who knows. Humility means living in reality. Humiliation means getting caught ignoring reality. Distress comes from refusing to accept reality.

I love to do Gadi’s ten basic positional releases every morning. That takes about an hour. I usually listen to a 12-Step phone meeting or some inspiring lecture when I do them and I tend to emerge refreshed, flexible and ready to tackle my day. If I’m rushed and don’t get to do the releases, I can feel the increased body tension I’m lugging around. To operate with maximum freedom, I have to release my unnecessary tension. I have to release my habitual selfish thinking to operate with maximum spiritual and psychological freedom and I find 12-Step meetings and literature help me do this more effectively than anything else I know.

If you have an unhealthy addiction, you have a sword above your head. If you have destructive compulsions that you can’t always control, then your life can go off the rails at any time if you aren’t maintaining a healthy spiritual condition. If you have certain muscular tension patterns (for instance, I find my right hip naturally tends to torque from driving, etc, unless I take time to release particular muscles such as psoas), they can collapse you unless you release the strain on a regular basis. If you tend to grandiosity or self-pity or boredom, these tendencies can push you in unhealthy directions and even destroy your life.

On the other hand, if I maintain a healthy regime, my life flows smoothly. It’s been months since I’ve had a serious problem. I feel like I am flowing from strength to strength.

Posted in Addiction, Alexander Technique | Comments Off on Staying Free Of Crippling Pain Requires The Maintenance Of My Spiritual/Physical/Psychological Condition

Steve Sailer: ‘Washington Post Runs 1200 Words on Minneapolis Police Shooting, But No Mention of Shooter’s Name, Immigrant Status, Color, Ethnicity, or Affirmative Action Pokemon Points’

Steve Sailer writes: “A blonde lady in her pajamas explaining to the police car driver about suspicious noises she’d heard was shot dead by Mohamed Noor, a black Muslim Somali immigrant diversity role model cop with a bad record, who was sitting in the passenger seat of the police cruiser. The Washington Post runs 1200 words on the incident without mentioning anything about the shooter cop’s identity.

Instead, it’s a screed about how they have gun control in Australia.”


“Pride: This picture dates from 2015 and shows Officer Noor being inducted into the Somali American Police Association”

This is an infuriating story from Minnesota that will justify Australian’s worst instincts about America — that it is a dangerous place filled with out of control cops. Most Australians who see the story will take their cues from the media — that this atrocity is all about gun control and America’s lack thereof.

I remember a mate of mine in Australia telling me self-righteously that when an Australian cop discharges his firearm on duty, he’s placed on paid administrative leave pending an investigation. He was stunned when I said that is the policy in America too (and around the First World).

It is easy to be self-righteous about policing when you have an 85% white, 15% asian population as Australia does. America, by contrast, has a 14% black population who commit about half of the country’s murders.

When seen in a world perspective, there is nothing unique about America’s race problems. Every country with a large black underclass has the same problems.

Most of LA’s corrupt and incompetent cop problem comes from its black and latino affirmative action hires.



“Community leader: Officer Noor (center) met with Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges (not pictured) in 2016 where she praised him for joining the police force …”

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* This is almost the perfect test for what you value in a society. Freedom for individual citizens and immigration control vs. multiculturalism and gun control.

We know which side the media is on.

* Forget it, Steve. It’s Narrativetown.

* Sooner or later Minneapolis will have to release the school and police academy records of Noor. Remember the iSteve moment during the George Zimmerman manslaughter trial when Trayvon’s girlfriend testified? Now we get to see how someone with a 70 IQ performed in a bottom tier business school.

* Australian cops all carry (and use) guns, so the gun-control angle is even more of a red herring than usual.

(Australia was never an unarmed-bobby sort of place. Australian police culture hearkens back to prison-colony, sheep-camp, and mining-town roots, sort of like Canadian police culture looks to the RCMP on the Northwest frontier.)

* …he posed and smiled really well in a police uniform and in casual clothes with only his badge showing. He was basically a cardboard cutout for AA policies.

* Seattle had a Somali Police Officer, but not for long.

* At the time of the Jeff Bezos purchase of the WAPO, our local Indiana ultra Zionist/Neo-Con talk radio media mogul and other Jeff, Jeff Smulyan the founder and owner of EMMIS(means ultimate truth in Hebrew) Communications was telling everyone that his good buddy “Jeff B.” would move the WAPO to the right and make it once again a serious publication.

The only thing Bezos has done for the WAPO is make it a screaming kill all of Israeli’s enemies even if it means WW III with Russia insane asylum. On all other matters it has moved even farther to the left.

But than again Jeff Smulyan was telling everyone that his other BFF and fellow Jeff, Jeff Zucker over at CNN would move it to the right when he took over in 2013. Instead like WAPO, CNN is a fully anti-Trump ultra Zionist clown show and yet on all other issues at least as far left as MSNBC.

Jeff Smulyan is not that well known as far as Jewish media moguls go but has been a major figure in developing controlled opposition ultra Zionist boomer conservative talk radio figures like Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, Dana Loesch, etc.

Smulyan was also the brains behind giving Alex Jones his start when Jones was useful in serving as an escape valve for conspiracy theory enthusiasts who otherwise might have stumbled onto becoming “Red Pilled” over the Jewish domination of the media.

Now as one might say Alex Jones after his brutal divorce from his Jewish wife is becoming increasingly hip to Jewish issues. And yesterday’s Alex Jones followers and acolytes are increasingly today’s Andrew Anglins.

MORE COMMENTS:

* I think that there might be a real story here regarding how this Somali qualified to be on the police force. I read that his presence was a big deal with the mayor and other politicians. Were strings pulled, was he the most qualified candidate?

How many White women have to be executed by Somalis with a badge to make PC and virtue signaling high cost events for politicians and liberals?

I wonder if this is another instance of sudden jihad syndrome. Pilots have been known to crash planes on purpose, so why would cops be immune from SJS?

* It’s pretty funny to see news.com.au’s take on this. On the one hand they want to blame it on America’s gun culture and trigger-happy police (BLM yo!). On the other hand, they can’t help but report that it was a police officer with only two years experience on the force from Somalia, (a skinny in Aussie parlance,) that shot her. They tend to take the Australian side in reporting when events happen overseas, even when obviously criminals and deserve what’s happening to them. (E.g. Schapelle Corby – the MSM here are strangely bigoted like that. I guess the US media did the same with Michael Fay, if you remember him.) So there is a level of truth in reporting so far that is unlike how they normally are (e.g. only showing 12 year old Trayvon). In this case they are conflicted.

http://www.rsdb.org/race/somalians

There is a new article about Trump every day on news.com.au and about 99/100 articles are anti-Trump. And maybe that 1/100 article was when he bombed Syria. Murdoch’s news.com.au is a smidgen to the right of Huffpo, but the commentors are mostly /ourguys.

Posted in America, Australia | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: ‘Washington Post Runs 1200 Words on Minneapolis Police Shooting, But No Mention of Shooter’s Name, Immigrant Status, Color, Ethnicity, or Affirmative Action Pokemon Points’

Meeting Stars On Set

In 1994, I was working as an extra on a film or TV show. Martin Landau was one of the stars of the production. We sat next to each other at lunch one day and had a nice chat. He got bored with me, however, when I told him how much I loved his performance in Woody Allen’s 1989 movie Crimes and Misdemeanors. He thanked me and then I made the mistake of asking him what he thought of the idea in the film that there is no objective good and evil without a transcendent God as the source of morality. He said he didn’t want to get into that. And that was the end of our conversation.

I learned from that experience (and also from telling Robert DuVall one evening how much I liked his movie The Apostle) that stars don’t usually want to hear about how much you like their work. It makes you an annoying fan. If you drop that shtick, however, you can usually talk to TV and movie stars just like anyone else. You can talk about books or sports or politics no problem.

Part of the routine directions you got as an extra was not to make eye contact with the stars, but you’d usually meet them at the crafts service table and could often have a chat.

I found Liza Minnelli more fun than any other star I met. I think I was portraying an Orthodox Jew with long sidelocks and we sat on the sidewalk and had multiple laughs for about 20 minutes. Perhaps I reminded her of Peter Allen, her former husband.

Many extras complained about mistreatment on set but I found we were usually treated like gold. One day was hot and I was in this heavy furry uniform on Babylon Five and I started swaying and the stars on the show pointed me out and I was rushed to the side, had my uniform removed, cold water brought to me, and I got my final SAG voucher that day so I could join the union.

There was usually tremendous sexual energy on set. The good looking women were constantly on the prowl to connect with the powerful men and the powerful men were equally on the prowl to nail the hot chicks. Sometimes this hot slutty wife I knew who worked as a stripper on weekends in Las Vegas would take multiple guys home with her after a shoot. In that hothouse atmosphere, if you weren’t getting it, you felt like a real loser, and a moderate amount was never enough. You always wanted more and more and more.

I always brought books with me on set to while away the down time, and I was surprised how few people did likewise. On a typical 12-hour work day, you were only required for a couple of hours.

I had this fantasy I’d be discovered and become a big star with lots of sexual access to women. One day my hijinks amused the assistant director on 1995’s Strange Days and I heard him discussing whether they could give me lines but ultimately they decided no. I never got a speaking part in anything that paid.

Posted in Hollywood, Personal | Comments Off on Meeting Stars On Set

Clarity Creates Energy And Strength

I receive many outreach calls from my various 12-step programs, but I have to be careful of my time and my energy because most calls I get are from people who want to share the mess, not the message, and after a few minutes, I find them draining. They want to go on and on about their problems, and then make a perfunctory inquiry about my life, but they don’t want to work the program. Work means freedom, but they aren’t working the 12 Steps and so they’re not free. They’re just a whirlpool going down and they’ll take me with them if I let them.

I got a ton of clarity from tackling various step one work sheets. When I wrote out my answers to dozens of questions about how my addictions had hurt my life, I saw things like never before. I could see my compulsions hovering over me like eagles ready to strike. When I then shared my answers with my sponsor, I got even more clarity because his presence and his questions helped me to see things I couldn’t see on my own. We excavated so we could renovate and build me a new life.

Clarity for me came well before the strength of character to live out my truth. I sometimes see things I need to do, people I need to block from my life, well before I have the inner resources to act.

Still, despite my frailties, the more clear I am, the more decisively I tend to act, and to let people know quickly that I’m available to talk about the message but not the mess.

The more clarity I have, the more energy I have. The more recovery I have, the more clarity I have. The more clarity, energy and recovery I have, the less I have to agonize about things. People are less of a mystery to me. If I don’t understand someone, I know the odds are that they are either lying to me or manipulating me (often unconsciously).

When you have clarity, you naturally tend to cut through life like a hot knife through warm butter. Clarity naturally leads to productivity and away from dissolution. Clarity doesn’t make you good but it sure helps you accomplish your goals. Clarity may not make you strong, but it sure feels that way. Your life feels like you are skating on ice. Swoosh! You get up every day and you launch and things come much easier than when you were muddled.

I love watching the way successful people walk and talk. I love watching how they keep their desks. Because they have clarity and strength, they tend to give a quick yes or no or I’ll get back to you later. They don’t get sucked into other people’s problems where they have no control. They don’t get distracted from their vision. The more intelligent they are, the more clearly they see the future and the more focused they are on putting first things first.

My desire to be nice often hinders me from living my vision. I have clarity but lack the strength of character to always live my clarity. I often see that I want to avoid a person but lack the balls to tell them bluntly that I can’t help. About half the people I encounter are toxic and just like you don’t want to put toxic food in your cupboard, you don’t want to allow toxic people into your life. Sometimes they are unavoidable, but when I am clear about my vision, I can smile at everyone and keep moving away from trouble and towards my goals. Clarity is energy. Vision is energy. Humility equals living in reality. Humiliation is being caught avoiding reality. Upset is what happens when I deny some aspect of reality. Resentment blocks me off from the sunlight of the spirit.

If you are an addict like me, you know there’s a sword dangling above your head at all times, and it is only through developing your spiritual life, your transcendent purpose of service to others, that you can avoid the catastrophes that come from untreated compulsions. On the other hand, if you are working your program, there’s no place you can’t go so long as you have a good reason for being there.

Posted in Addiction, Personal | Comments Off on Clarity Creates Energy And Strength

Forward: ‘Laura Loomer Is The Jewish Voice Of The Far Right. Can She Tame Jew Haters?’

Ari Feldman writes:

Loomer’s performance was another notch on the belt in a budding career of far-right provocation. It earned her a spot on Hannity, instant “alt-right” cachet online and the admiration of her arresting officers. (She was charged with misdemeanor trespassing and disorderly conduct. Loomer reported that at the station the officers told her that her mugshot was “the nicest mugshot they’ve ever seen.”)

“Most people don’t really have the balls to get onstage and protest,” said Loomer, who is 24. “But the fact that I’m a conservative, and I’m a woman, and I’m nonviolent, and I’m just a New York resident, it makes a statement.”

Loomer is one of the few women — and one of only a handful of Jews — in the far right’s cast of characters. She is styling herself as a media voice that trumpets Jewish causes in one breath and decries “Muslim “refugee” predators” in the next. Just don’t slot her into the “alt-right,” the catch-all term for far-right Trump supporters steeped in internet culture. She’s part of a Twitter-savvy crew of Trump fans that are trying to use the tactics of the “alt-right” — memes, social media targeting and aggressive misinformation — to purge the far right of pervasive anti-Semitism while upholding the sanctity of white European culture.

In the backlash to the protest, people on Twitter from both the far left and the far right attacked Loomer on the basis of her Jewish identity. David Duke, former leader of the Klu Klux Klan, called her “classic controlled opposition.”

“They’ll say, ‘Oh, this stupid kike who stormed the stage of ‘Julius Caesar,’ ‘Oh, the Jews are always up to dirty tricks,’” Loomer said. “The only reason they’re attacking me is because I’m Jewish.”

Though the “alt-right” has never claimed unity, anti-Semitism has frequently proved a divisive issue for its biggest personalities, who have clashed numerous times over allegations of anti-Semitism and counter-allegations of philo-Semitism. In December, the meme wiz known on the internet as Baked Alaska was barred from the DeploraBall, a far-right inauguration party, for his history of anti-Semitic tweets. More recently, Loomer and a friend backed out of appearances at an “alt-right” rally in Washington in June, after Richard Spencer, the white nationalist icon and lover of Nazi salutes, was added to the list of speakers.

Loomer and the friend, the conspiracy theorist Jack Posobiec, organized a counter-rally at the exact same time in front of the White House. Many saw the dueling rallies as a sign that the “alt-right” as it was once known is now dead.

“They’re allowed to think the way they do,” Loomer said of Spencer and Baked Alaska. “I respected their right to say what they want to say, even if it’s anti-Jewish. But I’m not going to participate in it.”

Since June, people in Loomer’s circle — which includes Posobiec, the “meme mastermind” Mike Cernovich and the White House Press Corps “troll” Lucian Wintrich — have tried to rebrand in order to distance themselves from the “alt-right.” Loomer personally favors “New Right,” a term suggested by Cernovich.

Spencer said that the divide between the “alt-right” and Loomer’s so-called “New Right” is “a very serious divide that is ideological and political” — and nothing new.

“This divide was probably masked in 2016 because we were all on the Trump train,” Spencer said. “After the campaign ended,this very stark division has emerged.”

Posted in Alt Right, Jews | Comments Off on Forward: ‘Laura Loomer Is The Jewish Voice Of The Far Right. Can She Tame Jew Haters?’

“The People vs. O.J. Simpson”

Steve Sailer writes: “One theme of the series is spelled out in a derisive comment by Marcia Clark, who points out that the prosecution’s secret weapon is that all the alpha male egos on the Dream Team will cause the defense to implode.

Like virtually every single thing Marcia says in the show, this sounds reasonable and intelligent under the current conventional wisdom (after all, diversity is our strength, and whoever has heard of a team of highly competitive males ever sorting out their differences, establishing a functional hierarchy, and buckling down to win anything?), but turns out to be wrong. The seemingly chaotic defense team managed, if barely, to battle out their differences and adjust to circumstances, most notably in the internal coup in which Cochran replaced Shapiro at the top. In contrast, the more hierarchical prosecution was doomed by boss lady Marcia’s self-confidence in her own bad judgment, most notably about blacks, women, and, especially, black women.”

Comments at Steve Sailer’s blog:

* The Juice answered the age-old question: “Who do I have to kill to avoid traffic on the 405?”

* Marcia Clark was raped at the age of 17 while visiting Israel:

When Clark was 17 years old, she was raped on a trip to Eilat, Israel.[9] She has said it was an experience she did not deal with until much later, and that it informed much of why she became a prosecutor.[9]”

However, the show has her say that the rape happened in Italy:

“Maybe you have to have something inside you already when you get here, something that you have to make right. Something you have to avenge. When I was 17, I was raped. I was raped in Italy by a waiter and I buried it. I didn’t forget it… I just sort of stuffed it. When I had my first rape case, what happened to me, of course, came flying out from whatever rock I’d jammed it under and I had to deal with it. It was hell all over again, in a way. But it made something very, very clear to me. I have something, this thing in me, that wants vengeance. Vengeance for victims. That’s what justice is to me. And I’ve always, always had faith that when I look at a jury, we have that in common. Everyone wants justice for victims, right? I never doubted that. Until this.”

* At the time, Marcia Clark’s jewishness was never fully front and center, say, in the way it was for Robert Shapiro and Barry Shreck. (Or the Ron Goldman family). Now that it’s been made into a mini-series, it’s not hard to see why a personal anecdote is moved to a European nation rather than Israel.

* Only a feminist could be so stupid. Men do have ego battles, of course, but male-only groups will, if given enough time, coalesce into a hierarchy, and will follow along with that hierarchy to achieve a group goal. The length of the entire O.J. ordeal gave the defense team enough time to sort out who was top dog and who was going to run the show, and then attack the prosecution full force.

Clark, being a feminazi, had no concept of how men actually behaved, since her delusional feminist religion didn’t allow her to think it. If she’d been smart, she’d have pushed very hard for a quick trial, to keep the men from consolidating, or maybe done some open whining to the press about how the O.J. team wasn’t “diverse” because it had no women, thereby getting a token female lawyer on board with O.J.’s squad and having her presence cause trouble (the presence of women, even unattractive ones, has long been noted to reduce male-group cohesion, since men invariably either seek to protect her or dismiss her, causing male conflict).

But then again, if Clark’d been smart, she would have recused herself when she realized she was over her head.

* It’s really strange that a prosecutor would make the decision to move a case to where acquittal was almost certain. Was he taking orders from higher up that this case had to be lost (a second riot in LA in three years could not be contemplated), or someone would see to it that his career would be ruined?

* The black preachers, politicians, activists told the mayor and DA Garcetti that if Simpson was not acquitted they would riot again..

The venue was moved from the court district where the murder was committed and the defendant lived to the big courthouse downtown. That courthouse district had the biggest percentage of blacks in the city.

Clark and every other White woman who worked or works with black women knows all to well the hatred of black woman.

Had it been any other case Judge Ito would have been censored by the judicial council for the way he ran his courtroom.

Clark was an excellent prosecutor with a great win record. She lost but got a big reward. She and a ghostwriter got a book out soon after the trial. She got a 3 million dollar advance, quit the DA’s office, bought a million dollar home and settled down to enjoy mothering her boys.

The entire thing was arranged well in advance by the black leadership, the mayor and DA Garcetti. The black jurors got rid of a White and a Hispanic juror with charges of racism.

The king riots and the OJ trial were the last hurrah of Los Angeles blacks. Decisions were made at the highest level, the business, community, not politicians to blast the blacks out of Los Angeles with Hispanics.

* Before the murders, the walls were filled with photos of OJ and his famous friends, nearly all of them rich white men and beautiful white women. On the nightstand by his bed he had a framed nude photo of the latest Playboy slut he was dating, Paula Barbieri. Practically the only black person in any of the photos was OJ. But after Cochran got done, all the white people were gone, replaced with pictures of his family members, black kids helped by some of his fundraising efforts, etc. The nude photo of his white girlfriend beside his bed was swapped out for a picture of his mother (hopefully fully clothed). Portraits of people like MLK were put up, African art was moved in, and to top it all off, a huge print of Norman Rockwell’s The Problem We All Live With, the painting of the little black girl surrounded by federal marshals as she enters a formerly all-white school in 1960. Behind her, “the N word” has been sprayed on a wall, and a tomato has splattered, clearly meant for her. The painting dominated the room, and sent the jury a clear message that OJ was a true Race Man.

No competent judge would ever allowed such a thing to occur. Lance Ito was a starstruck buffoon, and let the defense get away will all sorts of outrageous behavior.

* Ever thought about the possibility that black women now loved him because he killed his white wife?

* DA Garcetti wanted the jury to have lots of blacks on it. He could have held the trial in Santa Monica. Going by where the murders took place, and where the suspect lived, it should’ve been held there. Garcetti came up with all kinds of excuses for moving the trial downtown, but everyone knows he did so because a Santa Monica jury would’ve been overwhelmingly white, while a downtown jury was going to have very few whites and lots of blacks. Being just two years after the riots of the beating of the Rev. Dr. Rodney Luther King, Garcetti was afraid that if a white jury convicted a black supercelebrity of murder, all hell would break loose.

In her book, Marcia Clark defends her idiotic feminist (and clearly racist) idea that she should gets lots of black women on the jury because black women suffer lots of domestic violence and would sympathize with Nicole. However, she says at several points in the book that it didn’t matter who wound up getting picked, a downtown jury was never going to convict OJ Simpson. In the section of her book describing the jury selection process, at the end, she says she then knew that this jury was never going to find Simpson, and that the case was doomed the moment Garcetti moved it from Santa Monica to downtown.

White men are producers and breadwinners, and few can afford to spend months on a jury with no income. The white men who are successful enough that they could afford to so don’t want to – they’ve got stuff to do, and sitting on a jury for months listening to lawyers isn’t one of them. Plus, defense lawyers know that normal white Gentile males are the prosecution’s best friend,and they will do whatever it takes to keep as many as they can off the jury.

* One of OJ’s defense attorneys, Carl Douglas, in the 30 for 30 documentary from last year: “If we had had a Latin jury, we would have had a picture of him in a sombrero! There would have been a mariachi band out front! We would have had a piñata at the top of the staircase!”

* It wasn’t just that Marcia Clark “misunderestimated” the loyalty black women would have in standing by their man, but just as importantly, California law at the time would only allow DNA evidence if the party presenting it actually first proved its scientific merits to the jury.

Clark’s mistake in allowing so many black women on the jury was compounded by the fact that they found the testimony of scientific experts boring and largely irrelevant. The jurors just flat out didn’t have the intelligence to comprehend what they were being told or what relevance it may have had for determining OJ’s innocence or guilt.

It is impossible to overstate how stupid black people are. White people literally can’t fathom it because they are so much smarter.

* The part of the OJ saga that sticks in my head is when the verdict was read: Robert Kardashian, sitting at the defense table, has this unmistakable gut-punched-sick-to-his-stomach, I-can’t-believe-he-got-away-with-it expression on his face and accompanying body language. Check out the video; it’s obvious he’s in real distress. Kardashian clearly knew that OJ was stone guilty; it’s highly plausible that OJ confessed to him early on before Shapiro came on board, when it seemed that Simpson was going to give up or possibly even commit suicide.

* Race trumps gender. Clark still doesn’t get that fact about human nature, and probably would’ve done the same thing if faced with the same decision today.

For her to have won the case, she would’ve had to

1. NOT agree to move the case downtown, but keep it in West LA.
2. NOT agree to a jury composed largely of black women
3. Attempt to stack the jury with mostly middle class white men
4. Step down from leading the prosecution and bring in an A-list prosecutor from out of town.

Still don’t fully understand the reasoning behind “Let’s move the trial from where the crime occurred to downtown”. Makes no sense whatsoever. With that reasoning, why not move it to Cupertino? Makes no sense. That ace in her hand was thrown away, she didn’t have to agree to that at all. The crime didn’t occur downtown, duh.

* My spotty recollection of the trial is that the case swung strongly to O.J.’s favor when tapes of “racist cop” Mark Fuhrman spouting the n-word were played in court. Suddenly all the police-gathered evidence implicating O.J.’s guilt lost credibility in the eyes of the black jurors. The story got reframed as racist cops wanting to bring down a too successful black man.

* The miniseries version of Clark may be depicted as advancing reasonable-sounding but doomed strategies, but in real life Clark seemed unreasonable even at the time. The prosecution had a mock trial in Arizona and the mock jurors who were being monitored hated Clark in real life – in particular the black women. Their reactions to her were quite negative – “Bitch. White bitch. Jew bitch.” She was totally unshaken. She blew it all off and insisted that black women would identify with a blonde woman who had been abused and then murdered by a black man. Nothing Darden or anyone said could get her to rethink that.

Clark was a liberal Jewish divorcee with a messy background and weird ideas about men due to her own bad experience. Her ex-husband was a sleazy backgammon shark and sometime chess shark, I think maybe Israeli, who ended up dead in suspicious circumstances. She thought all women thought the way she did about controlling, abusive husbands. Johnnie Cochran was only too happy to help Clark pack the jury with black women.

Even at the end of the trial Clark had no idea how badly she had whiffed. Her closing statement ended by replaying Nicole’s old 911 call from when OJ was beating on her. She thought she had won the war or something. The jury just sat there stonefaced.

Clark and her colleagues were indeed way out of their depth. They’re the sort of people who end up working in the prosecutors office while others like Cochran and Bailey are earning seven-figure fees. As I recall Darden’s annual salary was $40,000.

The reality is that it would have been almost impossible for even a competent prosecution to succeed any better than earning a hung jury. Once DA Gil Garcetti moved the trial from Brentwood to downtown it became impossible to get a prosecution jury. The best they could have done was mixed, but Clark blew that. Garcetti was so scared of another riot he threw away any realistic chance of a conviction for peace at any price.

* The most striking thing for me was that immediately after the acquittal, one of the black female jurors, as she left the courthouse, made a sweeping motion with her hand over her head:

“All that DNA stuff? Right over my head.” Completely dismissing hundreds of hours of DNA evidence.

Stacking a jury with LOW IQ scientifically illiterate black women was also catastrophic for the prosecution, especially when there was so much circumstantial evidence.

* In a culture where racism isn’t the summum mallum think what a compelling story the life of Mark Fuhrman could have been. Literally the only cop that took Nicole’s domestic abuses accusations seriously who then becomes a focal point of the OJ murderer trial with a final denouement of his solving that Kennedy cousin murder cold case.

Clearly the guy is a little bit off but that is an interesting life arch and I think the series- which I thought was great- would have benefitted from a rounder depiction of him. Marcia Clarke presents herself as Nicole’s avenger, but really the only person who tried to avert the tragedy as it unfolded was Fuhrman.

* I saw the series when it aired last year and then read the book by Jeffrey Toobin.

The mini series script closely follows that book. Toobin, a young recent Harvard Law graduate at the time gave up law and became a journalist. He was working for the New Yorker magazine during the time of the OJ trial and was assigned to cover the trial.

I agree about Cuba Gooding not resembling OJ but his likable on screen presence helps suspend disbelief after a while.

OJ’s Bronco was a perk of his Hertz job. By that time he was a sort of brand ambassador for hertz, playing golf and doing meet and greets for Hertz. The trip to Chicago after the murders was related to that.

Travolta was instrumental in putting the mini-series together; it was something of a vanity project for him. That explains his inflated role. He overacts but is still quite good. The actors playing Marcia Clarke and Darden are also very good with the portrayal of Darden being the highlight of the film.

Toobin’s book lays much of the blame for the verdict on Marcia Clarke and her notion that black women would be angry about domestic violence. He also makes the point that Gil Garcetti, the LA DA at the time, was the one who really sealed the deal for a not guilty verdict: He moved the venue from Brentwood/Santa Monica to downtown LA guaranteeing a majority AA jury. Acting under political pressure and worried about riots Garcetti also took the death penalty off the table from the very beginning. Toobin implies that Garcetti and LA politicians were quite willing to let OJ get away with it as long as they could avoid a repeat of the 92 riots.

* Judge Ito also let OJ “make a statement” to the court without being on the witness stand. This was unbelievably outrageous. If a defendant wants to “make a statement” he can go under oath and answer the questions his lawyers designed to send whatever message he wants. But the prosecution also gets to ask questions, and from what I understand, once a defendant answers a single question about a crime, he has waived his 5A privilege against self-incrimination. You can’t answer some questions, but not others. But Ito essentially let Simpson testify to his innocence without losing his right not to have to answer questions about the crime.

* The thing that has surprised me these years is why O.J. wasn’t the subject of a revenge-killing by someone in the victims’ families. I mean it in all seriousness – it isn’t exactly like O.J. has been laying low these years. I think the temptation to get even and dare a jury to convict me would be significant. But perhaps the Goldmans and Browns are not exactly the McCoys.

* I was running a derivatives desk in Sodom on Hudson at that time. We were therefore in a trading room with TV’s all over the place.

When it was announced that a decision had been made the room filled up with all the affirmative action hires.

Without exception every black in the room cheered.

Many relationships were irredeemably changed that day as white people realised the amount of racial hatred that blacks they worked with every day harbored for them.

* I remember some wag saying, as the OJ jury began its deliberations, “Los Angeles authorities are bracing for rioting by Jews and suburban white women in the event of an acquittal.”

* Whites psychology–open, cooperative, altruistic–is highly beneficial. In fact, it’s the outcome of the great social achievement of the West–breaking down primitive tribalism and building “one people/one nation” societies with trust-at-scale, allowing the great nations and achievements of the West, and the incredible peace and prosperity we have today.

However, this open, trusting, altruism makes it pathetically easy for tribal peoples to roll trusting Westerners. And doubly, triply–an order of magnitude easier–after the West politically empowered women.

This is what we see in the West. Clueless Westerners welcoming “refugees” and other immigrants with their “diversity!” addled brains thinking these folks will behave just like Westerners once they are properly taught. While these tribal (non-trusting, non-altruistic, non-cooperative) foreigners are thinking “these folks are suckers” and taking them for everything they are worth.

~~~

The OJ trial with a black jury freeing an obviously guilty man, and blacks everywhere cheering wildly over it, *should* have been a little ‘window into reality’, for white people–a little “wakeup call” about what’s in store.

And indeed it had that effect on some (probably me to some extent). But TPTB made sure that narrative was quickly pulled, and the “story” was Mark Furhman had said “nigger”–the worst crime imaginable. (Not some trivial shit, like slicing a couple of people’s throats.)

* I don’t believe any part of the trial itself was the result of any conspiracy. It played out naturally. The twists and turns weren’t caused by government interference; they were due to the confluence of race, political correctness, incompetence, and other factors.

The idea that it was all a scripted TV production between the media and the government is so idiotic it’s hard to believe anyone could believe it. But more and more right wingers are a fan of the lunatic/con artist Miles Mathis, who says that very thing – the OJ murders were fake, a scripted production between the media and the government. So were the Manson murders. And the John Lennon murder. And the JFK assassination. And the Lincoln assassination. And a whole bunch of other stuff.

* “What it was all about,” of course, is that O.J. was guilty of cutting off his ex-wife’s head and torturing Ron Goldman to death with a butcher knife, guilty not only “beyond a reasonable doubt” but any doubt, so transparently guilty that no honest and rational person could believe, even as a remote possibility, that he was innocent, or even that he wasn’t “proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” I sure that most of the jurors, even the blacks, knew he was guilty, beyond any doubt.

“What it was all about” is that a jury, dominated by blacks, freed a murderer they knew was guilty beyond any doubt, not so much because he was rich and famous but because he was a black man who murdered and tortured and mutilated two whites; blatant nullification as racial vengeance and tribalism/solidarity, a corruption of justice that is routine but was/is only infamous in this specific case, unavoidably exposed rather than suppressed by the left-liberal MSM, because of Simpson’s fame.

* The infamous Lazer Kaganovitch, had not 2 victim’s families, but hundreds of thousands of victim’s families with ample reason to kill him, Yet he lived well into his nineties in the middle of Moscow with no police protection.

* I am old enough to remember when you could use the fire stairs to walk from floor to floor in an office building if you did not want to wait for the elevator. Now you don’t get out of the stairwell until you get to the ground floor. Wonder why?

Posted in Blacks, Jews, Los Angeles | Comments Off on “The People vs. O.J. Simpson”