What hath #MeToo wrought?

The New Neo Posted on by

During the recent accusations by Christine Blasey Ford against Kavanaugh, we heard a lot—even from the right—about how “we have to hear her story” whether there is evidence to back it up or not.

But you know what? I don’t want to “hear her story” (or his, if it’s a male accuser) except in one or all of these forums: a therapist’s office, a work of fiction without the use of real names, and/or a courtroom. Those are the only forums in which it would be appropriate to hear them, and most such accusations would never get to the latter forum—the courtroom—because of the lack of evidence other than the accuser’s unadorned say-so.

However, feminism and the #MeToo movement has enshrined the idea of listening to women and believing them all. That’s garbage, because that is not the way to determine whether a story is true and to protect the accused. But #MeToo cares not about the accused.

It occurs to me—and certainly not for the first time—that the Weinstein hit that originally got the #MeToo ball really rolling was a calculated move to get to Trump. It hasn’t worked in that particular regard (at least so far), but it did weaponize (purposely) the use of sexual allegations as a political tool. That had already been done many times, particularly against the right (as Clarence Thomas and Herman Cain could tell you), but #MeToo has gone even further in the direction of automatic belief in an accuser showing the right combination of pain and/or anger.

What is needed is belief on the part of the public and our elected officials that the unsupported word of a person is not enough to convince us of its truth. That must be a deeply-held conviction on the part of the vast majority of people in this country and elected officials and judges of both parties. Emotions must not rule in these cases, and not just in the courtroom. A person’s reputation should not be able to be destroyed by an unsupported story. Period.

But we as a society have lost that conviction. It didn’t just start with #MeToo, by any means. It’s been going on for a long time. The foundations of this country depend on it, but they also depend on a very aware public, educated in the background of why those protections were put in place. We have lost that, too, as a result of many years of leftist control of education and media. It is not an accident. And it is not just the loss of religion, although that factors into it as well.

Any accuser’s affect, while of interest, is mostly irrelevant to whether she or he is telling the truth. All affect can tell you is whether the person is good at acting or whether the person deeply believes that he or she is telling the truth. It can be either one, and a person can therefore be emotionally convincing without actually being a truthteller.

That’s the problem with this entire charade. In a courtroom, a witness’s affect (be it accuser, defender, or witness in another role) is part of the way to evaluate truth or falsehood. But in a trial it’s a much smaller part than in a situation such as the Kavanaugh hearing or the accusations against other public personalities and/or politicians, because of the need for corroborating evidence and the availability of cross-examination and all the rest of the process and rules of a trial.

People often mock that process or distrust it or point out that it can be unfair, and trials certainly don’t always end up with the right verdict IMHO. But the process involved is the best we can figure out, and it is a thousand times better than a trial in the court of public opinion and the MSM.

Overactive spam filter?

The New Neo Posted on by

Lately my spam filter seems to have occasionally been classifying perfectly normal comments from regular commenters as spam, for no apparent reason. It doesn’t happen often, but it’s been happening slightly more than usual. I try to catch it, but I don’t always succeed.

So if you have a comment that doesn’t appear after you post it, please let me know so I can rescue it.

Reports on the pipe bomb suspect so far

The New Neo Posted on by

I said in the previous post that we don’t know much yet about the pipe bomber or his motives, although we may learn more in a press conference that’s supposed to happen later today. But till then, we have this information, which may or may not be true, or may be partly true (note, by the way, the Trump-tie-in headline that characterizes all the targets of the bombs as “Trump critics”):

The suspect in the bombs sent to opponents of President Trump was identified as Cesar Sayoc Jr., 56, of Aventura…

A registered Republican, Sayoc has been arrested at least 10 times according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, once in 2002 for making a bomb threat and most recently in 2015 for a probation violation.

That registration was current as of Sept. 30, 2018, according to state voter files.

State corporation filings show him as an owner or manager of two businesses, Native American Catering and Vending and Ver Tech AG.

So if this information is correct we have a very typical “petty criminal person who’s been unbalanced and making trouble for a long long time”—way before Trump’s presidency, by the way, and in ways that have little to do with Trump. Also, Sayoc’s many previous run-ins with the law include a bomb threat as early as 2002.

Sayoc’s name indicates some sort of possible foreign origins, and here it says that Sayoc has claimed that “his grandfather, Col. Baltazar Zook Sayoc, was a martial arts practitioner who developed his own style of fighting, Sayoc Kali. Sayoc says that style was used to fight the Communist Party of the Philippines.”

So we learn that apparently Sayoc’s origins are in the Philipines. The site also says that he claims to have gone to college in the US, but there is no information there about whether he was born in the US—or, if not, at what point he arrived here and under what program.

More about that 2002 threat and other assorted offenses:

Sayoc has been arrested several times in Broward County, Florida, dating back to 1991, court records show. His most recent arrest in Broward was in 2014. In 2002, he was charged with making a bomb threat in Dade County, Florida. He was sentenced to one year of probation. Prosecutors agreed to withhold adjudication of the felony charge, meaning it was dismissed after he completed the probation in 2003.

In 1991, Sayoc was charged with third-degree grand theft, a felony. He pleaded guilty that same year and was sentenced to two years of probation. In 1994, his mother sought a domestic violence injunction against Sayoc, court records show.

Sayoc was arrested on drug charges in 2004. He was accused of possession and sale of steroids, along with possession of a controlled substance without a prescription, tampering with evidence, filing fraudulent tax returns, criminal use of personal ID info and possession or unlawful issue of a driver’s license. He pleaded guilty that same year and was sentenced to 18 months of probation.

In 2013, Sayoc was charged with battery and third-degree grand theft, a felony. He pleaded guilty in 2014 and was sentenced to probation. In 2009, Sayoc was charged with operating without a valid license, not having insurance and not having a tag light and was fined after pleading guilty to the misdemeanor charges. In 2014, Sayoc was arrested on a petit theft charge and violation of probation. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail.

Sayoc filed for bankruptcy in 2012 and was not married at the time. He was working as a store manager at a supermarket in Hollywood, Florida, at the time. He was also arrested on theft charges in Dade and Palm Beach counties in 1992 and 2015.

That’s quite a history. This guy seems to have been trouble in so many ways that it’s hard to count them. And yet note that, until now, Sayoc has only spent 30 days in jail—at least, that’s what his sentence was in 2014; we can’t be sure he actually served it.

“Known wolf” indeed.

And yet mark my words: if all of this pans out as being true, Sayoc will be held up by the left as the quintessential and typical Trump supporter, as well as being a person who was “triggered” into violent action by Trump.

Maybe Trump was even the cause of Sayoc’s bomb threat in 2002—after all, Trump’s been in the public eye for a long time.

Why would anyone send fake bombs to political targets?

The New Neo Posted on by

In about two hours, there apparently will be a press conference to discuss the Florida man who has been apprehended in connection with the pipe “bomb” mail case, in which fake bombs were sent to various political targets on the Democratic side.

No doubt we’ll know more in a few hours. But that doesn’t mean we’ll know all that much. We may learn something about his politics, although if recent cases of political perps are an example, much of what we learn may not be true and will later need to be corrected. We may learn more about his mental state and motives, with that same caveat.

Whatever we learn, I think it’s safe to bet that the MSM and the left will blame Donald Trump.

But before that press conference occurs (and I may be away from my computer by the time it does), I’d like to advance a few reasons why a person might send fake bombs through the mail at political targets.

(1) The person is politically opposed to the recipients of the packages, but is so incompetent that he doesn’t even know the rudiments of bomb-building and unable to look them up and execute them. He constructs a cartoon bomb that conforms to his idea of a bomb, and assumes it will explode.

(2) The person is politically opposed to the recipients of the packages, but is merely trying to scare them and not to hurt them.

(3) The person is trying to test the system to see whether packages with what look like bombs can get through to their supposed targets. The goal might be to point out flaws in the system.

(4) The person is mentally unbalanced and wants notoriety.

(5) The person is politically allied with his targets and wants to create a situation in which there is no actual danger to them but there is the appearance and danger that will be blamed on the opposition and will hurt them politically. This is the “false flag” scenario.

(6) The person is merely trying to wreak havoc and confusion (for example, this was the supposed motive for the actions of Russia during out 2016 election).

These five possibilities are not mutually exclusive. Number 4, for example, can coexist with any of them. And although I’ve used the singular “person” and the male “he,” it’s possible that it could be “people” and that a woman or women could be involved. And perhaps I’ve left out some possibilities without realizing it.

In a little while we might learn more.

[NOTE: See also this, based on preliminary information about the Florida suspect.]

Boehner: evolving on grass

The New Neo Posted on by

From John Boehner [emphasis mine]:

Boehner predicted that national cannabis legalization is going to happen in less than five years.

“That sound bite about being ‘unalterably opposed’ to cannabis is almost a decade old. Back then, like a lot of folks, I was getting faulty information,” Boehner said of his 2011 remark during today’s American Cannabis Summit online seminar organized by the National Institute for Cannabis Investors.

“I realized I was wrong and, let me tell you, I’ve been having more and more meetings with my friends and colleagues on the Hill about this – some of the most conservative politicians around and their views are evolving on cannabis, too, just like the American people,” he added.

I have a theory. It’s a little bit tongue-in-cheek but also somewhat serious. You know how incompetent and strange so many things have gotten? Whether it be rude customer service, or obscure and confusing instructions on a gadget you buy, or things that immediately break down, or those 2/3 of Americans who can’t name the three branches of the US federal government, it often seems like “Idiocracy” wasn’t just a movie. My theory is that most of America has now smoked grass at one point or another, and a surprising number of people smoke it regularly, including old Boomers (there are no young Boomers anymore, are there?) like Boehner.

Makes them mellow. Ultimately, though, it fries a lot of brains, particularly developing ones, but brains of all ages.

Grammar’s a funny thing. I assume that, when Boehner said that conservatives’ and the American people’s “views are evolving on cannabis,” he actually meant that their views on cannabis are evolving. But that’s not what he said.

Grammar’s another thing that’s fallen by the wayside. Pity.

And just for fun, here’s the trailer from the most un-PC—and one of the funniest—movies in the world:

It’s become more dangerous for gay people in Western Europe

The New Neo Posted on by

As soon as I saw the headline—“Violence Against Gays on the Rise in Europe”—I figured I could guess why that might be occurring.

What group is also “on the rise” in Europe, that has a problem with gay people? Yes, it’s Muslims, who are apparently responsible for most of these attacks on gay people in Western Europe, although the media there doesn’t like to say so:

I looked at several news stories (in several languages) about these incidents – and about that October 22 rally. None of them included the words Muslim or Islam, even though the Religion of Peace is, to put it mildly, a major part of the problem – not just in Paris, of course, but all over Western Europe. Everybody knows this, even though virtually nobody feels comfortable talking about it. In most media reports of such incidents, indeed, the Islamic factor can only be discerned through exceedingly careful reading.

Western Europe is proud of its accepting attitude towards gay people, and until this point most of its leaders have been proud of their welcome to Muslims from all over the world. But the two values cannot co-exist very well at all. The author of the linked piece writes about his own experience:

Even as the growing Muslim population in Dutch cities has driven gays into the provinces and reduced Amsterdam’s gay scene to a shadow of its former self, Dutch gay activists have backed off entirely from truth-telling about this topic, not only insisting that Muslims pose no threat to gays but anathematizing the likes of Geert Wilders for daring to suggest otherwise.

…[L]iving in the Netherlands and Norway for the past twenty years, my partner and I, between the two of us, have experienced five encounters with Muslims that I think it’s fair to call assaults. (Two involved knives; two involved attempted beatings; I don’t include nasty sidewalk shoving, spitting, and name-calling.) I’ve lost track of the number of friends and acquaintances in Western Europe who’ve been gay-bashed by Muslims; the number of gay people I know who have been killed by Muslims in Western Europe stands, so far, at one. (That murder, a knifing, occurred in the victim’s office in the center of Oslo.)

Gay people and Jews are the canaries in the European mine. Both groups have seen their safety (and their liberty to act as they wish while in public) decline as the Muslim immigrant population has increased there. To a certain extent, the same is true for women, whose Western freedoms of mobility and dress face the increased risk of violence (especially sexual violence) as well, also mostly at the hands of the Muslims of Western Europe (particularly the recent arrivals [see *NOTE below]).

It is difficult to acknowledge these truths without sounding bigoted. And it is definitely true that the vast majority of European Muslims are not beating gay people up or raping women. But it also must be acknowledged that the vast majority of people who are doing just that are Muslim immigrants, and that so far Western Europe has seemed powerless and/or unwilling to do much about it.

[*NOTE: I tried to find some statistics on whether it’s just the recent arrivals from Muslim countries who participate in the violence, or whether their European-born and/or raised offspring are heavily involved as well. I had difficulty finding any information on that in the short time I had to research this post, but the linked article points out that Bulgaria has a lot of Muslims who’ve been living there for generations, and the rates of sexual violence in Bulgaria are low. I would guess that rates may also have something to do with which Muslim countries furnish the immigrants, because there may be differences between Muslim countries on that score.]

On these pipe bombs

The New Neo Posted on by

Andrew C. McCarthy has this to say on the reportage about the apparent pipe bombs sent to various Democrats and CNN:

At this point, there is no evidence whatsoever that provocative words from the president had anything to do with the sending of bombs. Indeed, there is as yet no known evidence of who is behind these possible attacks. And speaking of “attacks,” why, in light of the context of a possible bombing spree, is the Times asserting that Secretary Clinton, President Obama, and Mr. Soros have “figured prominently in conservative political attacks”? They have not been subjected to “attacks” in the sense conveyed by this report; they have been on the receiving end of mere political criticism, not the subjects of attempted political assassinations.

There is plenty of media commentary at the moment about incivility, in the form of incendiary rhetoric and actions. This is entirely appropriate. But I’m at a loss to understand how the climate is improved by spicing up reports with thinly veiled suggestions that President Trump may have triggered a series of potentially murderous attacks on political opponents. When Bernie Sanders supporter James Hodgkinson opened fire on the Republicans he targeted and nearly killed Representative Steve Scalise, I don’t recall much Times speculation about whether he could have been set him off by Democrats urging their supporters to get aggressive — “get in their face”; “if they bring a knife, we bring a gun” — when dealing with political adversaries.

The press is very happy about this story. The timing could hardly be better. It appears to contain many elements they consider very helpful: attempted violence against Democrats (including themselves) that doesn’t succeed and which can be blamed (rightly or wrongly) on the right and particularly on Trump. The logic of that—and the fact that the MSM fails to do anything of the sort when the roles are reversed, and the violence or threatened violence is against the right—doesn’t matter. If they can sell it and they think it will help the left and hurt the right, it doesn’t have to be correct and it certainly doesn’t have to be evenhanded; au contraire.

As none other than Donald Trump Jr. points out here:

And speaking of what’s “correct” or not, much of the speculation on the right has to do with the composition of these pipe bombs and whether they were ever intended to go off or not. That is speculation at this point, in no small part because the MSM is unreliable and much of what is printed about things like this is later discovered to have been false.

But I present this as an example of what’s out there:

Photos of the device show a cylindrical object, about six inches long, wrapped in black electrical tape and with wires emerging from either end.

The wires — one red and one black — lead to a digital clock or timer taped to the middle of the tube.

A senior law-enforcement official told The New York Times that it resembled the others, saying, “Same package. Same device.”

The FBI described the devices as “potentially destructive,” and law-enforcement sources told The Post that the first one discovered — in a mailbox outside the Katonah home of billionaire George Soros Monday — had black powder on it.

But a source briefed on that device and the one sent to CNN told The Post on Wednesday that they couldn’t actually have blown up because neither was equipped with a blasting cap or other means of detonating explosive material.

“There was nothing to ignite it,” the source said. “There was nothing there.”

The source also said an envelope of unidentified powder contained in the CNN package was too small to create a radiological or biological “dirty bomb.”

The fact that none of the bombs blew up suggests they were built by an amateur, former FBI Agent Steve Gomez told ABC News.

Or by someone who didn’t want them to blow up.

Take your pick.

It’s less than two weeks to the election. I very much doubt whether we’ll know who did this and why until after the election. Maybe not even then.

[NOTE: The MSM is also positing a false equivalence between words that actually incite violence and words that criticize the press. Pointing out the flaws of the press and the fact that some of their stories are fake or wrong is not even remotely equivalent to telling people to send them bombs or hurt them. But the MSM would like you to make that connection, and keep themselves safe from all criticism as a result.]

You want speed? I’ll give you speed—“Theme and Variations”

The New Neo Posted on by

I’ve written about the wonderful Balanchine ballet “Theme and “Variations” before, here. But this time I want to concentrate on a different aspect of it: speed. Here’s a short solo portion from 1978 in which the ballerina’s part emphasizes that quality. I’ve noticed that, in recent years, the ability to dance extremely fast has become less valued and that dancers now have more and more trouble with it.

Of course, dancing ballet really fast was never easy, and some people were much better at it than others. This video is an example of someone—Gelsey Kirkland—who was one of the champs of speed (in more ways than one; she ended up having quite a drug problem).

This clip features Kirkland and Barishnikov in their heyday (1978). I saw them do it live—not this particular performance, but another similar one. This video shows the actual speed of the performance. It’s blurry but well worth watching. You can see the whole thing if you click on the “YouTube” logo, but I’ve cued it up here for Kirkland’s solo lasting less than a minute—about forty seconds, actually. But boy, there are a lot of steps in that forty seconds!:

This is the New York City Ballet with Merrill Ashley, I would estimate during the late 1980s. Like Kirkland, Ashley was known for speed and her sharp, precise technique. Ashley is tall, Kirkland small. A tall dancer often finds allegro work more difficult because it’s harder to pull the body together quickly. You’ll see that although she’s very fast and quite sharp, she’s not as fast and sharp as Kirkland:

There are a couple of other videos on YouTube of the same passage with different companies and dancers, but they’re not in the same league.

Some questions about the caravan

The New Neo Posted on by

Who organized the caravan?

Who is helping these people along the way?

What will happen when they reach the border?

I could give you links to articles purporting to answer the first two questions, but I think that none of them are worth the paper they’re printed on (which is no paper at all). You can find a lot of links to them in this roundup at Ace’s, however, if you’re interested in seeing some.

I think it’s clear, however, that the caravan is not a group of people that arose spontaneously and organically, and are foraging for food along the way. Someone is helping them.

The Trump administration has said that they will not be allowed into this country:

“You will not be successful in getting into the United States illegally, no matter what,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Tuesday. “I repeat: The caravan will not cross our border into our southern states under any circumstances.”

Pompeo has been working with the Mexican government and the United Nations agency responsible for refugees to arrange for the migrants to be stopped before they reach the Rio Grande. He challenged criticism that the Trump administration has taken a harsh line with refugees by lowering the number of annual admissions, but also defended a zero-tolerance policy for the current caravan.

“We are determined that illegal entry into the United States from this caravan will not be possible,” he said.

The all-important “how?” question has not been answered, however.

As I’ve said before, it seems quite likely that the timing of this is connected with the coming election. However, I’m not at all sure it will come to a head before that.

Political violence, left and right

The New Neo Posted on by

In recent days the left has increasingly been promoting the idea that violence in the service of politics is perfectly okay, even recommended.

When a leftist tried to assassinate a bunch of Republican members of Congress on a baseball field about a year and a half ago, and came very close to succeeding, it was only covered relatively briefly considering the incident’s severity, and the political motivations of the perp were sometimes minimized or denied.

Now there has been a series of what looks like pipe bombs delivered to the homes of various people on the left, mostly in the New York area. We know nothing about the perp or perps, but one can assume it’s someone on the right.

Fortunately, authorities have intercepted the packages and no harm has been done to anyone. They were sent to the homes (or mailboxes) of Soros, Clinton, Obama, as well as the CNN offices. Except for the latter, as far as I know these addresses are rather difficult to come by. It’s a bit puzzling how they were obtained, although no doubt it can be done by a determined person. Also, since I think most people would assume that all the targets have lots of security, it was always highly likely that such devices would not pass security.

Which is exactly what happened:

“The packages were immediately identified during routine mail screening procedures as potential explosive devices and were appropriately handled as such,” the Secret Service said in a statement.

Well, maybe the perp is sort-of-smart (smart enough to get the addresses) and yet sort-of-stupid (stupid enough to think the bombs would actually get to their targets). Or maybe the perp was just trying to frighten people. Maybe—although I doubt it—it’s even a false flag operation, like so many of the racist incidents on college campuses that turn out to be hoaxes.

We don’t know. The timing—two weeks prior to the election—indicates a desire to influence it, but that doesn’t tell us who did this.

At some point, I fear someone is going to get hurt. It could be someone on the left. It could be someone on the right. But there’s a contagion effect that goes on and is very worrisome.

Sad announcement from Sandra Day O’Connor

The New Neo Posted on by

At 88, she writes that she has been diagnosed with dementia, probably Alzheimer’s.

“I will continue living in Phoenix, Arizona surrounded by dear friends and family,” she wrote and added, “While the final chapter of my life with dementia may be trying, nothing has diminished my gratitude and deep appreciation for the countless blessings of my life.”

A dementia diagnosis is one of the most difficult possibilities in later life. I think everyone “of a certain age” is frightened by the prospect. Every time we forget something or do something absent-minded the specter rises. And for someone like O’Connor, whose intellect was a very big part of her nature, the future losses may loom especially hard.

On the other hand, as she says, she is surrounded by family and has lived a rich, full life. This has to help somewhat, although not enough. I wish O’Connor and her family well in dealing with this terribly trying period of her life.

In doing some research on O’Connor, I also came across a website for an organization she founded. The goal is the teaching of civics to young people. I have no idea whether it’s politically neutral or not, but at first glance (and I didn’t spend much time there) the aim appears to be to teach about how government functions without getting into specifically partisan messages.

I happened to see something on the news last night that quoted a survey which found that only about a third of Americans can name the three branches of government. That’s how low the teaching of civics in this country has sunk. Shameful.