I liked Trump's speech. It came off almost totally like a campaign speech, with Trump talking about America's success, but he hit enough policy and foreign policy points to make it interesting.
Thursday, September 24, 2026
Wednesday, September 23, 2026
Is the "Dancing Israelis" a Myth?
AI Overview
Yes, the "dancing Israelis" narrative is an antisemitic conspiracy theory and a baseless myth that claims Israel or Jewish people had foreknowledge of or involvement in the September 11 terrorist attacks. [1, 2, 3]
Origin of the Myth
- The Arrests: On 9/11, police detained five young Israeli men in New Jersey after a witness reported seeing them acting jovial and taking photos while watching the World Trade Center burn. [1, 2, 3]
- The Investigation: The FBI detained and thoroughly investigated the men, conducting multiple background checks and polygraph tests. [1]
How it Became a Conspiracy Theory
Israel Right to Exist
All these genocide arguments are BS.
Historically, there was never a Palestinian state. The land was owned by the Ottoman Empire and then by Britain, which had the authority to allocate it as it saw fit. Many national boundaries were redrawn after World War II, including those involving Palestine.
The land was sparsely populated, with room for two peoples. The Arabs could have had a state from the beginning, but instead, they engaged in multiple wars of extermination against Israel. None of this would have happened if the Arabs had accepted the original partition, as did the Israelis. The Palestinians have refused every peace offer, including some that gave them almost everything they wanted, and have responded to every peace proposal with acts of aggression and the stated goals of wiping out Israel and the Jews. The Hamas charter calls for the destruction of Israel, and the killing of Jews.
Historically, there was never a Palestinian state. The land was owned by the Ottoman Empire and then by Britain, which had the authority to allocate it as it saw fit. Many national boundaries were redrawn after World War II, including those involving Palestine.
The land was sparsely populated, with room for two peoples. The Arabs could have had a state from the beginning, but instead, they engaged in multiple wars of extermination against Israel. None of this would have happened if the Arabs had accepted the original partition, as did the Israelis. The Palestinians have refused every peace offer, including some that gave them almost everything they wanted, and have responded to every peace proposal with acts of aggression and the stated goals of wiping out Israel and the Jews. The Hamas charter calls for the destruction of Israel, and the killing of Jews.
When you wage wars of aggression, you risk losing territory as a result. I don't necessarily think that Israel should have taken as much territory as it did, but this is a case of FAFO. Most national boundaries in the world came about because of war. The United States, for example, gained territory as a result of its war and border dispute with Mexico.
The Arabs have repeatedly engaged in terrorism and acts of war and then claimed victimhood when Israel goes to war with them. In fact, this is part of their strategy to gain international support.
People die in war. It would be unreasonable for Israel not to go to war in response to the atrocities of October 7th, and if a similar attack had happened against any other powerful country, such as the United States, a disproportionate number of the attacking people would have been killed in the response. Israel has tried to avoid civilian casualties, but Hamas has hid behind civilian structures to provoke civilian casualties. So who is really at fault here?
Gaza has effectively had its own government since 2005. Israel wanted nothing to do with Gaza, which could have chosen to live in peace rather than commit acts of war. This is true of multiple Arab aggressions going back to before 1948.
Some Muslims are peaceful, and Israel would gladly coexist with peaceful Muslims, but many are not. Fundamental to the teachings of Islam is political violence and a desire to conquer the world. Islam does not respect human rights or the autonomy of other peoples. A Palestinian state would not respect human rights, such as the rights of women or gays. The truth is that Islam is a fascist political movement disguised as a religion.
The Arabs living under Israel rule are far better off and have more rights than the Arabs living under Palestinian rule.
If somehow Israel ceased to exist, there would not be peace in the Middle East. Hamas and the Palestinian Authority would be at perpetual war with each other.
If the Palestinians chose to lay down their arms, there would be peace. However, if Israel chose to lay down its arms, they would be exterminated. Although the issues are complicated, it is mostly clear who the aggressors are. It is also clear who really wants to commit genocide.
Of course, I want peace in the Middle East. So does Israel, which would rather not be embroiled in these conflicts. However, when one side is repeatedly the aggressor and calls for the destruction of the other side, there can be no peace.
The Palestinians have not demonstrated the capacity to peacefully self-rule in a competent way. The Palestinian Authority operates as a deeply dysfunctional government plagued by institutional collapse, severe financial crisis, and a total lack of democratic accountability. President Mahmoud Abbas has been in power for two decades, even though his original four-year term expired long ago. The Palestinian Legislative Council has not met in many years.
After World War II, there were many displaced Jews who needed a home, especially after Arab nations expelled large numbers of Jews living within their borders. This is one reason why I support Israel's right to exist and to defend itself. Israel is also the only country in the Middle East that respects human rights, including those of its Arab citizens.
Conspiracy Theories
S,
We don't have to agree, but I don't buy into any of these conspiracy theories.
I have been a little frustrated by the number of people I know who appear to believe things that aren't true. Close friends. Two of my closest friends in Utah, both anti-vaxxers, separately claim that Bill Gates wants to kill us all and that there is a conspiracy among billionaires to wipe out 90% of the human race. They believe these things as if they were gospel truth.
This seems to originate, at least in part, with John D. Rockefeller III, who argued in the 1950s that we needed to reduce the size of the human population. His views were likely influenced by Thomas Malthus's book on population growth, published in 1798, and later supported by The Population Bomb, published in 1968. Bill Gates inadvertently exacerbated this conspiracy theory by saying that better health care and vaccines could reduce population growth. This is a well-known phenomenon: when medical care improves and child mortality decreases, people in developing countries generally have fewer children because they no longer expect some of their children to die.
That doesn't mean that there haven't been conspiracies, but most of them eventually get exposed. The definition of a conspiracy theory that I am using is a claim for which we don't have good evidence but that people nevertheless believe. I think people can become emotionally tied to their beliefs, much as they can with religion, and make those beliefs part of their identity. At that point, they can lose their objectivity, and it becomes extremely difficult to change their minds.
I share people's frustration with the political system, but that frustration can lead people to believe that everything is a lie and/or a conspiracy.
When possible, we can determine what is true by looking at scientific studies and other evidence. I have looked at many studies regarding the COVID-19 virus, its origin, vaccine safety and efficacy, and the partial effectiveness of masks.
I have not done the same level of research on 9/11, but I think the basic facts are clear.
I think the following two videos are relevant:
https://politics4thought.blogspot.com/2026/09/1400-years-of-war-911-conspiracy.html
https://politics4thought.blogspot.com/2026/09/joe-rogan-is-falling-for-charlie-kirk.html
I believed in George Washington's idea that we shouldn't get involved in foreign entanglements. Apparently, this is what Thomas Jefferson wanted as well, but he sent the Navy to defeat the barbary pirates. I wanted to be isolationist, but I don't see the world now as a safe place where we can be isolationist. At least not in the short term.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 9:19 PM S. wrote:
There are lots of conspiracy claims which are bogus. Chem trails, flat earth, religion etc.
The lone gunman in the Kennedy murder has the state proposing the magic bullet theory. Clearly absurd among other things. The state will not show the public their evidence, also just like the Epstein files. What we do know about the deep state and have verified, makes the simple explanation work quite well.
I never ask people to outright believe what I'm saying but instead that they look for evidence and keep an open mind.
911 presentations by Brett Weinstein have shown conclusively that the states story is childish and there is no scientific credence to their pasted together story. That the 2 towers went down is bad enough but building 7 Can not be explained outside of an internal detonation. The state knows that all it has to do is to provide a farcical explanation to give cover to people wishing to side with their story, a story designed to get them off the hook. The evidence is available.
Charlie Kirks murder is more obvious than even that. So this kid is supposed to have killed him with just a tiny amount of time to set up and then from that distance the bullet didn't have an exit wound?
Some people have a very hard time grasping how evil the people who run the country internally are.
After seeing them murder children and destroy countries across the globe I can't understand how anyone would trust them in any way.
We're still murdering children in Gaza today. It's appalling and most disgusting is that the corporate mediz is complicite in hiding the truth.
The media is still telling us that Ukraine is winning when Russian is gaining ground every day and they are shutting off avenues into the country in a larger scale. It is unlikely that the war will go on more than another 8 months.
Of course, a deep understanding of the region and its history as well as a clear demonstration of US Being the prime mover in getting that war started and continued can be found in the brilliant book Provoked by Scott Horton. I don't recommend it to most people because it is very demanding of a person's intellect. I've seen you take the battle against Global Warming histeria so I know you can do research.
A book showing the absurdity of the Covid histeria is by Tom Woods, Diary of a psychosis.
I like conversations about all important issues and invite Challenges to anything in the public forum of ideas.
Good luck to you!
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 4:50 PM
Subject: Re:
To: S.
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 4:50 PM
Subject: Re:
To: S.
S.
To paraphrase your comments about Jordan Peterson, some of these theories are bat-shit crazy. I'm not saying that you are crazy, but I think that you have been misled by a culture that values clicks and attention over truth.
BTW, I have admired Jordan Peterson's defense of free speech, but his recent comments on COVID-19 vaccines hit every COVD-vaccine-conspiracy theory out there. He is among the many who claim that the vaccines kill people.
Some of the people you mention are people that I have grown to dislike because of their conspiracy theories and absurd positions.
Tucker Carlsen is most certainly bat-shit crazy. Initially, he espoused ideas that seemed reasonable, but I noticed how conspiratorial he was getting, and it got so bad I couldn't listen to him anymore. He promoted a conspiracy theory about Dominion Voting Machines, which cost Fox 787 million in a lawsuit, and he was subsequently fired. Since then, he has rebounded his career by going more extreme, selling his crap to anyone who will listen. He blames the Jews and Israel for everything, including Charlie Kirk's murder.
The magic bullet theory has long since been debunked. From Google AI: Official Scientific ConsensusSupported. Modern 3D laser scanning, computer modeling, and forensic ballistics (such as studies featured on PBS Nova) have repeatedly validated the trajectory. They note the "magic" zigzag path is a myth because Governor Connally was sitting lower and further to the left than Kennedy, creating a straight path for the bullet.
If you start from the premise that the government is evil and lying about most things then your conclusions seem possibly logical. I think that this is the perspective that most conspiracy theorists come from. Some of them seem to live in fear that the government is going to come in the middle of the night and take us away in chains, as one person asked me if I was going to wait till I was in chains to wake up to the truth. However, I just see the government as inefficient and corrupt, and not as some great cabal with some deeper agenda trying to pull the wool over our eyes.
Civilians get killed in war. If we can't accept people being killed in war, then we should never go to war, ever. However, I fundamentally disagree with this perspective. Iran and its proxies have killed Americans multiple times over the last forty years, and have done equally bad things to the Israelis. I think that it is far better to stand up to evil bullies than it is to take a pacifist position that only encourages them to do more evil things.
I do not think that we are the root cause of these evil things. Islam has been at war with the West for 1400 years. It is a conquering Fascist political system disguised as a religion, calling itself peaceful with much blood on its hands. The longer we ignore this the worse it will be for us.
If you start with the premise that we should have an isolationist foreign policy, then it means that any action we take looks evil. This might have worked in 1790, but I think that we have way too many enemies who literally say that they want to destroy us. I think that it is unfortunate that we just can't withdraw to our corner of the world and declare peace, but I think that we need a strong military and a strong foreign policy to protect us.
I don't agree with the tariffs, nor Trump's recent action on vaccines, but I think that Trump has been a net positive. I support his foreign policy because I see the world as a dangerous place.
It is very reasonable that Tyler Robinson could have shot Charlie Kirk. The evidence is overwhelming. He will go to trial and be found guilty because he is the one who did it. The fact that the bullet did not have an exit wound means nothing, as the bullet shattered upon hitting a bone and then lodged beneath the skin.
The collapse of building 7 has been extremely well studied and well understood. I don't think that there is a conspiracy to hide the truth.
I don't think that we will agree on much of anything, except that the government is spending us into the poorhouse. All I can do is wish you well and say that I am sorry that we disagree.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: S.
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: must see
To: John Coffey
From: S.
Date: Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: must see
To: John Coffey
You must be careful not to be overconfident in your current position when you aren't fully apprised of the whole story. I held similar feelings before, until many very reliable persons delivered new information. Calling Carlson and others crazy to the bat shit degree does not establish anything one way or another. All things are subject dependent. I disagree with Tucker when it comes to religion, drug stupidity, cultural dislike of "pornography" (define that?) and so much more. But people who get all of their information from the corporate media tend to be *very* weak on geopolitical affairs and the history attached to them.
The trouble with all of this is that there is a lot of work to be done on every topic and I've seldom meet fully informed people on most topics, understandable because there's only so much time in the day and human emotion inhibits challenging comfortable narratives. You mention COVID, and I'm not really sure of what you think on this, it sounds like you support the so called vaccine. This one was not a vaccine, it neither prevented getting the disease nor stopped transmission. Many top-notch microbiologists have written about its negatives. Hundreds of proteins are transmitted with this so called vaccine, proteins that scientists have never seen and do not understand. I won't go off on a lot of information here, but I would say: NEVER reject people. I dislike a lot of people but I listen to all ideas and claims—the path of a true scientist. " If you start from the premise that the government is evil and lying about most things then your conclusions seem possibly logical." I am not sure that I agree with this assumption. All things are topic-specific, and the facts need to be assembled and examined. Stalin was pure evil but you would still have to examine each of his actions independently.
Your explanation of government incompetence, etc., is a good one. What you leave out however, is that interests of the various factions frequently merge. I would recommend that you extend your reading on what the deep state has already provably done; it's quite extensive and well documented. I view people who trust the media and a criminal state as being as delusional as the worst of "conspiracy" lovers. There is a comfort which is almost religious in nature in all of the mountains of
evil done by the state are just rare accidents. What happened under Biden is a severe evil, creating a war in Ukraine that has murdered millions, the murder of children in Gaza and beyond.... Conspiracy is a bad word here, its called proven truth.
" Civilians get killed in war. If we can't accept people being killed in war, then we should never go to war, ever. However, I fundamentally disagree with this perspective. Iran and its proxies have killed Americans multiple times over the last forty years, and have done equally bad things to the Israelis."Certainly, Israeli propaganda supports this image but reality tells another story. Who has Iran ever attacked in a war? America at the prompting of Israel has attacked Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria (its amusing that Biden installed Al Qaeda operatives who are killing Christians while Assad, a bad actor to be sure, kept Christians safe) Sudan, Somalia, Libya and other nations, killing millions and destroying whole societies. And after this people can complain about Iran with a straight face? Israel set a precedent of murdering the leadership of Iran. At least it wasn't their usual targets: children, whom they were killing.
" I do not think that we are the root cause of these evil things. Islam has been at war with the West for 1400 years. It is a conquering Fascist political system disguised as a religion, calling itself peaceful with much blood on its hands. The longer we ignore this the worse it will be for us."
" Civilians get killed in war. If we can't accept people being killed in war, then we should never go to war, ever. However, I fundamentally disagree with this perspective. Iran and its proxies have killed Americans multiple times over the last forty years, and have done equally bad things to the Israelis."Certainly, Israeli propaganda supports this image but reality tells another story. Who has Iran ever attacked in a war? America at the prompting of Israel has attacked Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria (its amusing that Biden installed Al Qaeda operatives who are killing Christians while Assad, a bad actor to be sure, kept Christians safe) Sudan, Somalia, Libya and other nations, killing millions and destroying whole societies. And after this people can complain about Iran with a straight face? Israel set a precedent of murdering the leadership of Iran. At least it wasn't their usual targets: children, whom they were killing.
" I do not think that we are the root cause of these evil things. Islam has been at war with the West for 1400 years. It is a conquering Fascist political system disguised as a religion, calling itself peaceful with much blood on its hands. The longer we ignore this the worse it will be for us."
Just a pile of history books would conclusively prove that the US is the source of many evil things and has a long track record of murdering leaders and installing dictators. Iran has experienced this first hand. This is another Israeli talking point, the 1400 year war. Do you somehow think that we are connected to pope Gregory and his inquisition? Christian nations have created world wars! And while you rightfully point out the terrible history of Islam, Its funny that the US has funded Islamic radicals for decades. We (our leaders) created ISIS, Al Qaeda and dozens of other terrorist groups (Chechens, Shabab, etc.). Now, why do you think they do that? Why did Netanyahu know about the Hamas attacks and do nothing to stop them? Why did Bibi say, "This is very good."" when he was told of 9/11? All of this has been established, no one opposes it.
" If you start with the premise that we should have an isolationist foreign policy, then it means that any action we take looks evil. This might have worked in 1790, but I think that we have way too many enemies who literally say that want to destroy us. I think that it is unfortunate that we just can't withdraw to our corner of the world and declare peace, but I think that we need a strong military and a strong foreign policy to protect us."
" If you start with the premise that we should have an isolationist foreign policy, then it means that any action we take looks evil. This might have worked in 1790, but I think that we have way too many enemies who literally say that want to destroy us. I think that it is unfortunate that we just can't withdraw to our corner of the world and declare peace, but I think that we need a strong military and a strong foreign policy to protect us."
Your first sentence is an assumption and it is improper. All actions are detail specific. The use of the word Isolationist is an embarrassing trope that neocons invented to support their evil murderous wars which have bankrupted our nation. Tell me ONE war after World War II that was a good war. No nation in the world is trying to destroy us, we are destroying other nations. If the slimy neocons would go away we would likely live at peace with the world.
" I don't agree with the tariffs, nor Trump's recent action on vaccines, but I think that Trump has been a net positive. I support his foreign policy because I see the world as a dangerous place."
" I don't agree with the tariffs, nor Trump's recent action on vaccines, but I think that Trump has been a net positive. I support his foreign policy because I see the world as a dangerous place."
Trump ran claiming he would end the Ukraine war on day one and that he'd end all of the stupid wars. He betrayed everyone and this is why his poll numbers are horrible. Some foolish Libertarians even voted for him and they deeply regret this now. The list of terrible things he's done is vast. He only looks good by comparison to Biden and his ilk. Inflation is extreme thanks to his policies. He Started well with DOGE but then he hung Musk out to dry. If you want, I'll make an extensive list of his vast failures, he really is a neocon Democrat deep down. But one saving grace is that none of these terrible policies is really his. The deep state is running everything.
His foreign policy is not just bad; it's catastrophic.
His foreign policy is not just bad; it's catastrophic.
" The collapse of building 7 has been extremely well studied and well understood. I don't think that there is a conspiracy to hide the truth."
You can do better than this. Explain why Building 7 fell. Or for that matter the other two. An understanding of high school physics would prove the state's narrative was just a filler to get them off the hook. Please, in your words explain why Building 7 fell down. There is a litany of well documented discussions about this.
" I don't think that we will agree on much of anything, except that the government is spending us into the poorhouse. All I can do is wish you well and say that I am sorry that we disagree."
" I don't think that we will agree on much of anything, except that the government is spending us into the poorhouse. All I can do is wish you well and say that I am sorry that we disagree."
Two people can agree on 5000 things but if they discuss the 6 on which they disagree, emotionally they feel like polar opposites.
Trust me, if you froze time and talked to everyone in this country, you'd figure out that I'm one person you agree with A LOT more than all the others.
If you stopped waching corporate media we'd agree on a lot more. If you want to up your game about history of all this, read Provoked. I just ask that one favor.
It's been great talking to you! Good luck and may you crush everyone at chess!
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 3:05 PM
Subject: Our Discussion
To: S.
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 3:05 PM
Subject: Our Discussion
To: S.
S,
As a side note, I have suffered from a sinus infection for about five weeks. It made me feel very sick at first, and it has taken some strong medicine to get me to the point where I am almost recovered.
This debate will take more time than I feel I have, and I don't think it is worth hashing out, because I don't think that we can convince each other.
The term "isolationist" is just shorthand for saying that we should not get involved in foreign wars. I wish that we didn't have to.
I see America as a net-positive force in the world, rather than as the great evil-doer. I have to admit to feeling some mild patriotism, despite whatever problems and mistakes the government has made. I'll look into the book Provoked and decide if I want to read it. However, I don't like the position that we are the bad guys who started these problems when I think that the opposite is true. It is like all the people, such as Tucker Carlson, who now claim that Winston Churchill was the bad guy and the real warmonger in World War II.
I do not agree with this narrative on Israel at all. I support Israel's right to exist, and I think that this post I wrote a few weeks ago is relevant:
https://politics4thought.
The conspiracy theorists use many terms that are designed to evoke an emotional response but lack specifics, such as "deep state," "corporate media," "genocide," and "neocons." I especially dislike this last term because I think it is an inaccurate description of people who want to defend ourselves against aggression.
Conspiracy theories in general are founded on the idea that we are victims of evil forces plotting against us, and I rarely think that this is true. I see people who have agendas that are against either my interests or our national interests, but I see this simply as their agenda.
I still recommend the following video because it reflects my views. This is not the same as saying that we should be the aggressors or that we should be neocons, but I believe in going to war against those who attack us. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, when Iran was attacking us, even my left-leaning father believed that we should respond to Iran with force. He was a product of the World War II generation. During the 1979 Iran hostage crisis, I felt that the threat of war, if not actual war, was the proper response to get our hostages back, and most Americans at the time felt the same way. However, Jimmy Carter was a particularly weak president who did not act.
https://politics4thought.
Iran has engaged in multiple acts of war against the United States, either directly or through its proxies, including:
1979: Iran hostage crisis
1983: Beirut Embassy and Marine Barracks bombings
1982–1992: Lebanon hostage crisis
1996: Khobar Towers bombing, which killed 19 Americans
2003–2011: Iraqi militia attacks. The U.S. Department of Defense assessed that Iran and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) were responsible for the deaths of more than 600 American service members in Iraq, supplying lethal weapons such as explosively formed penetrators (EFPs) to Shiite insurgents.
I think that war or the threat of war would have been the proper response to all of these.
Iran is the number-one sponsor of terrorism. The country is run by an extremist religious regime that feels that terrorism toward the West is its duty.
When it comes to objectivity, I think of myself as much more objective than most because I try to back my beliefs with research and facts. This is especially true regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines, where I have tried to read as many research papers as I could find. This led me to take certain positions, but if the research had pointed in a different direction, then so would I. At least once a week, I hear people, especially political commentators, say things about the pandemic or the vaccines that are not supported by the evidence.
Rand Paul has promoted a conspiracy theory that Anthony Fauci funded the EcoHealth Alliance, which in turn funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, which then created the COVID-19 virus, which subsequently leaked from the lab and infected the whole world. However, I think this misunderstands the events and how they played out. I read the EcoHealth Alliance grant to the Wuhan lab, which was a relatively small grant intended to just catalog bat viruses and, as I understand it, had nothing to do with gain-of-function research. EcoHealth Alliance was an environmental organization that became concerned with preventing pandemics.
At first, I thought that the lab-leak theory was plausible, mainly because I don't trust the CCP and what they might be up to. However, I think the evidence for a zoonotic origin has been overwhelming across multiple lines of evidence, and the international consensus is that the virus evolved from an animal origin. I think Rand Paul is using Fauci as a political punching bag to score political points in an election year. Rand Paul's behavior makes me think that he is an asshole. Fauci has not helped himself at times, appearing to be arrogant, but I see him mostly as a dedicated public servant who tried to deal with a difficult crisis.
People forget that the initial death rate from COVID-19 was 5%. This was true in both the United States and China. Doctors got that down to 1%, or perhaps the death rate dropped because the most vulnerable people had already died. I was in a position where I felt a need to protect my sweet mother, who eventually died from cancer. Her health was very fragile, and I could not see her for a year until I got vaccinated. I also closed down my chess club and did not play in a chess club for 53 weeks until I could get vaccinated. I got really tired of playing online. I think it is much more fun to play in person.
The vaccines have kept me mostly protected, compared with many of my friends, who have been more relaxed about taking the vaccines and boosters and have had COVID-19 multiple times.
In February 2024, I caught the JN.1 variant, which had not yet been covered by the vaccines. I've tried to tell people that COVID-19 is not a normal virus because it reportedly attacks every organ in the body, possibly leading to long-COVID symptoms in some people. I not only had bad cold symptoms for a whole month, but this was followed by another month of fatigue that made me feel terrible.
COVID-19 is tied as the most infectious disease ever. I got this story secondhand, so I am not 100% sure of its accuracy, but reportedly one of my former coworkers went to a family reunion in the summer of 2021. The two people out of 40 who had been vaccinated were fine, but everybody else got COVID-19. Two people had to be hospitalized, and one older person died.
There was a YouTuber I liked to watch named "Physics Girl" because I like discussions about science, but she developed long COVID, causing her to lose all physical strength, and has been mostly bedridden for three to four years. Fortunately, her condition has improved somewhat, but she has been dependent upon charity from her viewers to support herself.
The definition of a vaccine is open to interpretation, but I think the mRNA vaccines certainly qualify. They introduce a foreign substance to increase our resistance to a particular disease. The early research is clear, with the first vaccines being about 99% effective against the original strain. As the disease mutated, the vaccines became less effective, but they were still beneficial. There is ample evidence that the vaccines reduce the severity, lethality, and transmissibility of the disease, as well as the risk of long COVID. The fact that they are not perfect has led many people to claim that they do not work or do not prevent transmission of the disease, but those claims are false. It is a question of degree.
I've seen many "experts" who aren't really experts in the issues they are addressing make claims about COVID-19 and other issues that are mere speculation presented as fact.
I have watched more documentaries than most about the events of 9/11 because I feel that it is one of the most important events to happen in my lifetime. It also affected me directly because I worked for a major military contractor, and not surprisingly, our business vastly expanded after 9/11. I trust the narrative about Building 7, but let me see what I can find regarding this subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Everyone engages in some degree of confirmation bias, if not a great deal of it. I certainly have in regard to Climate Alarmism, but I rarely approach anything with absolute certainty because issues are complicated. I usually ask myself, "What evidence would make the other side right?"
In general, I try not to take absolute positions, but rather to take the position that I think is most likely to be correct.
I have enjoyed corresponding with you, but it is not something that I want to spend much more time on. Time spent on politics, although interesting, doesn't improve my life at all, and I have other priorities that are important to me.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
P.S.
Tyler Robinson basically made a confession: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
As a side note, I have suffered from a sinus infection for about five weeks. It made me feel very sick at first, and it has taken some strong medicine to get me to the point where I am almost recovered.
This debate will take more time than I feel I have, and I don't think it is worth hashing out, because I don't think that we can convince each other.
I have a fundamentally different perspective about the level of cabal that exists within the government and about what our foreign policy should be. I wanted to be a pure libertarian, but I view the world as a dangerous place with many enemies. When people attack us, I think it is better to confront those enemies than to hide and hope that they won't attack us again, which is essentially what we did in many of the events leading up to 9/11.
The term "isolationist" is just shorthand for saying that we should not get involved in foreign wars. I wish that we didn't have to.
I see America as a net-positive force in the world, rather than as the great evil-doer. I have to admit to feeling some mild patriotism, despite whatever problems and mistakes the government has made. I'll look into the book Provoked and decide if I want to read it. However, I don't like the position that we are the bad guys who started these problems when I think that the opposite is true. It is like all the people, such as Tucker Carlson, who now claim that Winston Churchill was the bad guy and the real warmonger in World War II.
I do not agree with this narrative on Israel at all. I support Israel's right to exist, and I think that this post I wrote a few weeks ago is relevant:
https://politics4thought.
The conspiracy theorists use many terms that are designed to evoke an emotional response but lack specifics, such as "deep state," "corporate media," "genocide," and "neocons." I especially dislike this last term because I think it is an inaccurate description of people who want to defend ourselves against aggression.
Conspiracy theories in general are founded on the idea that we are victims of evil forces plotting against us, and I rarely think that this is true. I see people who have agendas that are against either my interests or our national interests, but I see this simply as their agenda.
I still recommend the following video because it reflects my views. This is not the same as saying that we should be the aggressors or that we should be neocons, but I believe in going to war against those who attack us. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, when Iran was attacking us, even my left-leaning father believed that we should respond to Iran with force. He was a product of the World War II generation. During the 1979 Iran hostage crisis, I felt that the threat of war, if not actual war, was the proper response to get our hostages back, and most Americans at the time felt the same way. However, Jimmy Carter was a particularly weak president who did not act.
https://politics4thought.
Iran has engaged in multiple acts of war against the United States, either directly or through its proxies, including:
1979: Iran hostage crisis
1983: Beirut Embassy and Marine Barracks bombings
1982–1992: Lebanon hostage crisis
1996: Khobar Towers bombing, which killed 19 Americans
2003–2011: Iraqi militia attacks. The U.S. Department of Defense assessed that Iran and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) were responsible for the deaths of more than 600 American service members in Iraq, supplying lethal weapons such as explosively formed penetrators (EFPs) to Shiite insurgents.
I think that war or the threat of war would have been the proper response to all of these.
Iran is the number-one sponsor of terrorism. The country is run by an extremist religious regime that feels that terrorism toward the West is its duty.
When it comes to objectivity, I think of myself as much more objective than most because I try to back my beliefs with research and facts. This is especially true regarding the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines, where I have tried to read as many research papers as I could find. This led me to take certain positions, but if the research had pointed in a different direction, then so would I. At least once a week, I hear people, especially political commentators, say things about the pandemic or the vaccines that are not supported by the evidence.
Rand Paul has promoted a conspiracy theory that Anthony Fauci funded the EcoHealth Alliance, which in turn funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, which then created the COVID-19 virus, which subsequently leaked from the lab and infected the whole world. However, I think this misunderstands the events and how they played out. I read the EcoHealth Alliance grant to the Wuhan lab, which was a relatively small grant intended to just catalog bat viruses and, as I understand it, had nothing to do with gain-of-function research. EcoHealth Alliance was an environmental organization that became concerned with preventing pandemics.
At first, I thought that the lab-leak theory was plausible, mainly because I don't trust the CCP and what they might be up to. However, I think the evidence for a zoonotic origin has been overwhelming across multiple lines of evidence, and the international consensus is that the virus evolved from an animal origin. I think Rand Paul is using Fauci as a political punching bag to score political points in an election year. Rand Paul's behavior makes me think that he is an asshole. Fauci has not helped himself at times, appearing to be arrogant, but I see him mostly as a dedicated public servant who tried to deal with a difficult crisis.
People forget that the initial death rate from COVID-19 was 5%. This was true in both the United States and China. Doctors got that down to 1%, or perhaps the death rate dropped because the most vulnerable people had already died. I was in a position where I felt a need to protect my sweet mother, who eventually died from cancer. Her health was very fragile, and I could not see her for a year until I got vaccinated. I also closed down my chess club and did not play in a chess club for 53 weeks until I could get vaccinated. I got really tired of playing online. I think it is much more fun to play in person.
The vaccines have kept me mostly protected, compared with many of my friends, who have been more relaxed about taking the vaccines and boosters and have had COVID-19 multiple times.
In February 2024, I caught the JN.1 variant, which had not yet been covered by the vaccines. I've tried to tell people that COVID-19 is not a normal virus because it reportedly attacks every organ in the body, possibly leading to long-COVID symptoms in some people. I not only had bad cold symptoms for a whole month, but this was followed by another month of fatigue that made me feel terrible.
COVID-19 is tied as the most infectious disease ever. I got this story secondhand, so I am not 100% sure of its accuracy, but reportedly one of my former coworkers went to a family reunion in the summer of 2021. The two people out of 40 who had been vaccinated were fine, but everybody else got COVID-19. Two people had to be hospitalized, and one older person died.
There was a YouTuber I liked to watch named "Physics Girl" because I like discussions about science, but she developed long COVID, causing her to lose all physical strength, and has been mostly bedridden for three to four years. Fortunately, her condition has improved somewhat, but she has been dependent upon charity from her viewers to support herself.
The definition of a vaccine is open to interpretation, but I think the mRNA vaccines certainly qualify. They introduce a foreign substance to increase our resistance to a particular disease. The early research is clear, with the first vaccines being about 99% effective against the original strain. As the disease mutated, the vaccines became less effective, but they were still beneficial. There is ample evidence that the vaccines reduce the severity, lethality, and transmissibility of the disease, as well as the risk of long COVID. The fact that they are not perfect has led many people to claim that they do not work or do not prevent transmission of the disease, but those claims are false. It is a question of degree.
I've seen many "experts" who aren't really experts in the issues they are addressing make claims about COVID-19 and other issues that are mere speculation presented as fact.
I have watched more documentaries than most about the events of 9/11 because I feel that it is one of the most important events to happen in my lifetime. It also affected me directly because I worked for a major military contractor, and not surprisingly, our business vastly expanded after 9/11. I trust the narrative about Building 7, but let me see what I can find regarding this subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Everyone engages in some degree of confirmation bias, if not a great deal of it. I certainly have in regard to Climate Alarmism, but I rarely approach anything with absolute certainty because issues are complicated. I usually ask myself, "What evidence would make the other side right?"
In general, I try not to take absolute positions, but rather to take the position that I think is most likely to be correct.
I have enjoyed corresponding with you, but it is not something that I want to spend much more time on. Time spent on politics, although interesting, doesn't improve my life at all, and I have other priorities that are important to me.
Best wishes,
John Coffey
P.S.
Tyler Robinson basically made a confession: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Monday, September 21, 2026
Sunday, September 20, 2026
Thoughts on the Election
People who are happy have no real need for politics. However, no such creature exists. People are always unhappy about something, and they want the government to either fix it or stop fixing whatever it is that they don't want the government fixing.
If you ask people what they are for, they are more likely to tell you what they are against. People are much less united about what they want, but they will unite in lockstep against something they oppose. However, there is a danger that, in their opposition, people will vote for something just as bad or worse.
This is why politics is so negative. There are distortions where politicians describe the other side as evil, far beyond any actual reality, because that is how they unite voters behind them. It might not matter that their side is also flawed, just as long as the other side appears worse.
So politics is primarily reactionary.
I repeatedly think to myself that nobody will believe the rhetoric that is being thrown around, but apparently they do. The roughly 10 to 20% of voters in the middle can be persuaded to one side or the other, mostly by things that they don't like about the current government. This middle group has the power to decide elections because everyone else is already committed to their side.
Of course, turnout is vital to an election. Often, a flawed candidate will simply not motivate their voters to show up at the polls.
I think that the political left is more united in its goals. If you ask 20 people on the right what they are for, you might get 10 different answers. However, even though the left doesn't always admit it, they seem more united in their goal of establishing some kind of socialism. They have kept their eye on the prize, and everything they say they want is just another incremental step in that direction.
Individual voters have no power to decide elections. Whether or not you show up to the polls will have zero effect on the election. For this reason, I feel that politics has become a spectator sport, where both sides hope their team wins and the other team loses.
It seems to me that maybe the incentives are all wrong. The federal government has become so powerful that I hardly care about or pay attention to local and state elections. For this reason, I like the idea I saw recently that we should go back to having senators appointed by the states. Although it is less "democratic," it would counterbalance having two branches of Congress elected by popular vote by having state interests also considered. It would also incentivize people to pay more attention to local and state elections.
The incentives are wrong because the system rewards people for voting for government spending. However, we are going bankrupt so fast that I see little hope for the future of this country. We are headed toward a situation where fiscal reality is going to hit us upside the head very soon, and we are going to have to contend with the fact that we have run out of money.
I consider it my birthright to live in a free country. I feel that I was promised a government that had constitutional limits to its power, as dictated by Section 1, Article 8 of the Constitution. However, constitutional limits disappeared before I was born, mostly bolstered by liberal Supreme Courts that ruled that the Interstate Commerce Clause gave the federal government nearly unlimited power. As a result, I have no right to freedom beyond what mob rule will allow.
If you ask people what they are for, they are more likely to tell you what they are against. People are much less united about what they want, but they will unite in lockstep against something they oppose. However, there is a danger that, in their opposition, people will vote for something just as bad or worse.
This is why politics is so negative. There are distortions where politicians describe the other side as evil, far beyond any actual reality, because that is how they unite voters behind them. It might not matter that their side is also flawed, just as long as the other side appears worse.
So politics is primarily reactionary.
I repeatedly think to myself that nobody will believe the rhetoric that is being thrown around, but apparently they do. The roughly 10 to 20% of voters in the middle can be persuaded to one side or the other, mostly by things that they don't like about the current government. This middle group has the power to decide elections because everyone else is already committed to their side.
Of course, turnout is vital to an election. Often, a flawed candidate will simply not motivate their voters to show up at the polls.
I think that the political left is more united in its goals. If you ask 20 people on the right what they are for, you might get 10 different answers. However, even though the left doesn't always admit it, they seem more united in their goal of establishing some kind of socialism. They have kept their eye on the prize, and everything they say they want is just another incremental step in that direction.
Individual voters have no power to decide elections. Whether or not you show up to the polls will have zero effect on the election. For this reason, I feel that politics has become a spectator sport, where both sides hope their team wins and the other team loses.
It seems to me that maybe the incentives are all wrong. The federal government has become so powerful that I hardly care about or pay attention to local and state elections. For this reason, I like the idea I saw recently that we should go back to having senators appointed by the states. Although it is less "democratic," it would counterbalance having two branches of Congress elected by popular vote by having state interests also considered. It would also incentivize people to pay more attention to local and state elections.
The incentives are wrong because the system rewards people for voting for government spending. However, we are going bankrupt so fast that I see little hope for the future of this country. We are headed toward a situation where fiscal reality is going to hit us upside the head very soon, and we are going to have to contend with the fact that we have run out of money.
I consider it my birthright to live in a free country. I feel that I was promised a government that had constitutional limits to its power, as dictated by Section 1, Article 8 of the Constitution. However, constitutional limits disappeared before I was born, mostly bolstered by liberal Supreme Courts that ruled that the Interstate Commerce Clause gave the federal government nearly unlimited power. As a result, I have no right to freedom beyond what mob rule will allow.
Trump says some childhood vaccines will be split into separate shots
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZZDSBxKvXo
I'm quite disappointed with Trump. This is an issue that has been very thoroughly studied.
Google AI:
There is no credible scientific evidence demonstrating that vaccines cause autism. Decades of rigorous global research involving millions of children have consistently shown no causal link or association between vaccination and autism spectrum disorders. [1, 2, 3]
The overwhelming scientific and medical consensus is supported by major global public health organizations, including the National Academy of Medicine, the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and the National Medical Association. [1, 2, 3]
The Origin of the Myth
The belief that vaccines cause autism stems from a single 1998 case series published by Andrew Wakefield in The Lancet. The study suggested a link between the Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism based on just 12 cherry-picked children. It was later discovered that the data was fraudulent and methodologically invalid. The Lancet fully retracted the paper, and Wakefield lost his medical license. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Key Scientific Findings
Since then, numerous large-scale epidemiological and cohort studies have definitively debunked the link across three major areas of concern:
- The MMR Vaccine: Massive global studies tracking millions of children across the U.S., Denmark, the U.K., and Japan found absolutely no difference in autism rates between vaccinated and unvaccinated children. [1, 2]
Why the Misconception Persists
The primary driver of the myth is temporal coincidence. The first noticeable signs of autism typically manifest in toddlers around the exact same age that children receive their routine early childhood vaccinations. Because these two events happen around the same time, it can easily lead to the false assumption that one caused the other. [1, 2, 3]
The Actual Causes of Autism
Autism is a complex neurodevelopmental condition that begins well before birth. According to the Autism Science Foundation, the primary causes include: [1, 2]
- Genetics: Strong hereditary factors account for most cases, with single gene variants and familial risk playing massive roles.
Thursday, September 17, 2026
Wednesday, September 16, 2026
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)