in all the world is more dangerous, than sincere ignorance and
-- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
from June 10, 2019
This is a
Nederlog of Monday,
There will be more about computers and Ubuntu in Nederlog soon, but I
am happy to announce that Ubuntu 16.04 LTS, that I installed in 2017,
works again as it did before on May 24, and after 24 hours of misery.
And on May 23 I also got a working computer with 18.04 LTS
worse than 16.04 LTS because its Firefox also is a menuless
horror that I refuse to use, but
happily SeaMonkey is not, for it still has it menus and can be
installed on 18.04), so I
present - and after two weeks of struggling - in the possession of two
more or less, though not yet quite decently working computers.
So today there is a more or less common Nederlog, where "common" is the
style I developed in 2013.
This is a crisis
log but it is a bit different from how it was until 2013:
I have been
writing about the crisis since September
1, 2008 (in Dutch, but
since 2010 in English) and about
the enormous dangers of
surveillance (by secret services and
by many rich commercial entities) since June 10, 2013, and I will
continue with it.
moment and since more than three years
problems with the company that is
supposed to take care that my site is visible 
and with my health, but I am still writing a Nederlog every day and
I shall continue.
2. Crisis Files
four crisis files
that are mostly well worth reading:
A. Selections from June 10, 2019:
1. Hidden Plot
The items 1 - 4 are today's
selections from the 35 sites that I look at
every morning. The indented text under each link is quoted from the
link that starts the item. Unindented text is by me:
2. How to
Counter Medical/ Health Care/ Public Health Disinformation
Democrats in the shadow of chronic Trump lies
4. "This Is What Fascists Do"
This article is by Glenn Greenwald and Victor Pougy on The
Intercept. I probably - see below - shortened the title. The article
starts as follows:
In fact, this is the beginning
of one file on The Intercept on the corruptions in Brazil,
while there are three files on the corruptions in Brazil, all
published on June 9, that are collectively called ¨Secret Brazil
An enormous trove of secret
documents reveals that Brazil’s most powerful prosecutors, who have
spent years insisting they are apolitical, instead plotted to prevent
the Workers’ Party (PT) from winning the 2018 presidential election by
blocking or weakening a pre-election interview with former President
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva with the explicit purpose of affecting the
outcome of the election.
The massive archive,
provided exclusively to The Intercept, shows multiple examples of
politicized abuse of prosecutorial powers by those who led
the country’s sweeping Operation Car Wash corruption probe since 2014.
It also reveals a long-denied political and ideological agenda.
One glaring example occurred 10 days before the first round of
presidential voting last year, when a Supreme Court justice granted a
petition from the country’s largest newspaper, Folha de São Paulo, to
interview Lula, who was in prison on corruption charges brought by the
Car Wash task force.
Immediately upon learning
of that decision on September 28, 2018, the team of prosecutors who
handled Lula’s corruption case — who spent years vehemently denying
that they were driven by political motives of any kind — began
discussing in a private Telegram chat group how to block, subvert, or
undermine the Supreme Court decision. This was based on their expressed
fear that the decision would help the PT — Lula’s party — win the
election. Based on their stated desire to prevent the PT’s return to
power, they spent hours debating strategies to prevent or dilute the
political impact of Lula’s interview.
I think all of this is
quite interesting, but I am ill, tired and working in haste, so I jump
now to another file about the corruptions in Brazil, which is the
first of the three just mentioned, that has the longer title ¨How
and Why The Intercept Is Reporting on a Vast Trove of Materials About
Brazil’s Operation Car Wash and Justice Minister Sergio Moro¨.
This one starts as follows:
As I said, I consider all
of this quite interesting, but so far have read little of the three
files. Possibly more tomorrow, and here is a link to the
last mentioned file. And this article is strongly
The Intercept Brasil today
showing highly controversial, politicized, and legally dubious internal
discussions and secret actions by the Operation Car Wash
anti-corruption task force of prosecutors, led by the chief prosecutor
Deltan Dallagnol, along with then-Judge Sergio Moro, now the powerful
celebrated justice minister for Brazilian President Jair
These stories are based on
a massive archive of previously undisclosed materials — including
private chats, audio recordings, videos, photos, court proceedings, and
other documentation — provided to us by an anonymous source. They
reveal serious wrongdoing, unethical behavior, and systematic deceit
about which the public, both in Brazil and internationally, has the
right to know.
These three articles were
published today in The Intercept Brasil in
Portuguese, and we have synthesized them into two
for The Intercept. Given the size and global influence of
Brazil under the new Bolsonaro government, these stories are of
great significance to an international audience.
This is merely the
beginning of what we intend to be an ongoing journalistic
investigation, using this massive archive of material, into
the Car Wash corruption probe; Moro’s actions when he was a
judge and those of the prosecutor Dallagnol; and the conduct
of numerous individuals who continue to wield great political and
economic power both inside Brazil and in other countries.
2. How to Counter Medical/ Health
Care/ Public Health Disinformation
This article is by Roger M. Poses MD on Health Care Renewal.
It starts as follows:
Yes, I agree and here is
It used to be so simple.
Yes, we had to cope with deception
Commercial sponsors of clinical research were known to manipulate
the research, and even suppress
research with results unfavorable to them. Key
opinion leaders spun medical education and the media. But it
was all releatively straightforward in some senses. It was all at
least mostly based on medical knowledge and clinical research.
The purposes of the spin and deception were commercial: the goal was
selling more products or services. With some digging, the conflicts
of interest sometimes could be discovered.
But that was before stealth
health policy advocacy morphed into propaganda and disinformation
Disinformation campaigns were everywhere, and even in one case, were
supercharged by a disinformation campaign run by a hostile foreign
power, apparently meant to destabilize western democracies (look here).
We are now drowning in a sea of propaganda
What can health care professionals do before we go under?
First, about myself and my ex:
We are both of us ill now for more than forty years, but our
illness has been systematically denied by 90% of the Dutch medics
we turned to for help, for 90% insisted that we were either
psychosomatizers (which is utter medical bullshit) or else
neurasthenics, which is at best quite old-fashioned medical science
that has been removed from medicine since 40 or 50 years.
We got no help whatsoever from almost any Dutch medic, in spite
of the facts that we both had become ill in the first year
of our university studies (on loans); in spite of the fact that we
both - in the end - did succeed in getting excellent M.A.´s in
psychology; and in spite of the fact that our health became
much worse because we did not get any help whatsoever. (Instead, we
were regularly offended by Dutch medics.)
Finally, since March 2018 we both have - quite suddenly, after 39+
years of serious and sometimes excessive difficulties because we were
and are both ill and had not been declared to be ill - the current
medical diagnosis that ME/CFS is ¨a serious chronic disease¨, but we
also got no excuse whatsoever for 39+ years of chronic medical and -
consequential - bureaucratic and polical discrimination.
Next, about medicine:
I have reviewed several articles by Roy M. Poses MD on Nederlog,
because he is a sensible American medical doctor, who indeed is
one of the few American doctors I know about who is honest and
rational. In fact, there are or were a couple more - 1boringoldman (dr. Mickey Nardo,
Bernard Carroll - but the last two recently died.
Also, Poses is quite correct in the first paragraph I quoted, and in
fact also in the second paragraph, which he continues to
explain as follows:
Well... I completely
agree, but I also insist that this is one of the things about the
internet - the best means towards neofascism I
know - that very probably cannot be undone:
A May, 2019, MedPage
article entitled "a prescription for treating fake health news," noted
how the rise of social media enabled disinformation:
patients' misconceptions, lack of logic, and superstitions have
complicated the work of doctors since the first doctors existed, the
advent of social media has taken the problem to a new dimension.
With social media, patients can more easily find misinformation,
says Dominique Brossard, PhD, chair of the University of
Wisconsin-Madison Department of Life Sciences Communication. They can
also share that misinformation more easily.
Over 2 billion people are members of (merely) Facebook; the vast
majority of them are not scientists and not intelligent
but all got to be ¨publishers¨ thanks to Facebook, while the majority only
listen to their own kind on Facebook:
I fear all of this is
quite correct. Here is the last bit I quote from this article:
In addition, social media
enhances repitition of false messages:
wide dissemination means that some patients may receive the same
false messages repetitively. In another study, Yale researchers
found that the more often people receive the same message, the more
likely they are to believe it, even when the message is labeled as
disputed by social media fact checkers.
Also, people attend more to
the immediate source of information than
people are evaluating the reliability of health information shared
online, they care more about who shared the information than they do
about the original source, according to an American Press Institute
There is a lot more, but
I agree with the above, with some qualifications:
Note that while we know
something about how medical/ health care/ public health disinformation
is spread, we still know little about the cause of the plague.
Unlike the old style of deception, it is not obviously based on the
self-interest of companies trying to sell products or services.
Nonetheless, we need to fight disinformation even if we do not fully
understand its causes. And we know a little bit about how that
could be done. The bottom line is that health care professionals need
to use the same social media that is spreading disinformation to
counter it with the truth.
I agree with Poses that responsible and intelligent medics (also a
minority, in my strong personal opinion, having been told for 40 years
that I am a neurasthenic psychosomatizer) should try to
maintain what they think is the medical truth, but I admit I am
very skeptical that they will succeed (except in a few cases, with
patients with considerable intelligence and some academic knowledge),
for the simple reason outlined above:
The vast majority of those who can publish now thanks to
internet are stupid
only listen to their own kind; and since they all have money they may
spend on things advertised,
they all are followed by Facebook and Google and Apple, who also live
and profit enormously from having stolen all the information of almost
anyone on the internet and sold these to advertisers.
This is a strongly recommended article and no: After 40 years
of continuous discrimination (based on total medical bullshit) I cannot
reason other than I did above.
Democrats in the shadow of chronic Trump lies
This article is by Eric Boehlert on AlterNet and originally
on Daily Kos. It starts as follows:
I agree with the first paragraph and disagree with the
second one, and my reason is that Trump´s shamelessness (etc.) has little
to do with identifying him, quite correctly, as the most massive liar
who ever became president, for that identification has to be done by
ordinary people, and ordinary people are not intelligent
and besides - as pointed out in the previous article above - mostly only
read stuff that is produced by their own unintelligent and uninformed
At the outset of his
presidency, several major news outlets eagerly and proudly announced
that they were going to fact-check Donald Trump’s every utterance and
document all the misinformation he was spreading. To their credit, news
organizations set aside considerable
resources to dutifully unpack Trump’s “falsehoods,” as the
press preferred to call them. The unspoken assumption was that as the
detailed fact checks piled up and it became obvious to everyone that
Trump so often wasn’t telling the truth, he would feel shame or
embarrassment and change his ways, and that members of his own party
would likely be unwilling to defend his chronic mendacity.
Boy, that didn’t work out,
did it? It didn’t work because, of course, Trump is utterly shameless.
As a pathological liar, he doesn’t care if he gets fact-checked, and he
doesn’t care if his claims are immediately debunked. He doesn’t care
because he wants to create
an alternate universe where he and his loyalists bask in their
own “facts.” He wants nothing to do with the real world where
agreed-upon facts are the basis for public debate. And rather than
being nauseated by Trump’s lies, the GOP has feasted on them for years
Here is more by Boehlert:
Well... if you wanted to
convince me (and see above) you have totally
failed because you first tell me that lies are classified ¨on a scale of 1 to 10¨ and in the next statement that Trump´s lies as
hovering ¨around 30 or 40¨ - which is about as intelligent as
insisting that someone who says he is 200% or 350% sure is more sure
than someone who insists that he is 100% sure.
Now, as the 2020 campaign
gains momentum and the same news outlets are fact-checking Democratic
candidates, here’s the problem: By setting up this side-by-side
forum where Trump and Democrats are, at least on the surface, treated
as equals when it comes to the veracity of their statements, the
fact-checking exercise creates a huge perception problem. That’s
because, on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being complete truths and 10
being complete untruths, the fact checks of Democratic candidates
suggest they basically operate in the 1-2 range. Trump, on the other
hand, hovers around 30 or 40.
Here is some more:
In fact, I disagree that
most American papers do not wish to say Trump lies, while he evidently
does so, indeed in a very crude way as well. But then Boehlert should
not have said all lies can be scored on a scale of 1 to 10, except
Trump´s (or so it seems).
Washington Post chimes in with “Trump’s parade of
false claims overseas.”
It’s no exaggeration to say
that an accurate headline for all those entries could have simply
been “Trump lies about everything, again.” Because in those
instances, Trump lied about drug prices, his border wall, international
treaty agreements, MS-13, tariffs, existing trade deals, union support
for trade deals, agricultural data, his approval ratings, the climate,
the Vietnam War, U.S. military drug policy, the Iran nuclear deal, and
attacking John McCain.
Should that type of manic,
Olympic-style lying really be housed under the same roof as Kirsten
Gillibrand incorrectly claiming that the NRA is “largely
funded” by gun manufacturers? Or Bernie Sanders saying he received
“More votes from young African Americans, Latinos, Asian American,
Native Americans than Clinton and Trump combined,” a claim CNN tagged
as being “unclear“?
Here is the ending of this article:
I agree that ¨Trump lies like no other president in
American history¨, but I disagree
that considering Trump´s falsehoods ¨is useless¨ if they are not called
So instead of
pointing out that Trump lies like no other president in American
history, the press puts him in the same fact-checking arena as
Democrats, who often get ticketed for the minor infraction of
embellishing. (The Times claimed Sanders “exaggerated”
his claim that 70% of Americans support Medicare for All, even
though the Times conceded that a Reuters poll found
that 70% of Americans support Medicare for All.) The
point: If Trump fact-checks aren’t going to call out his lies,
then the exercise is useless.
Is What Fascists Do"
This article is by Julia Conley on Common Dreams. I
abbreviated the title. It starts as follows:
agree with the above. Here is some more:
The Trump administration
issued one of its most blatant attacks on climate science this past
week when it tried to stop a State Department employee from testifying
on the climate crisis, reports showed on Saturday.
As the Washington Post
intelligence analyst Rod Schoonover's testimony was submitted to the
White House for approval ahead of his planned appearance before the
House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. His remarks focused
on the national security risks posed by the climate crisis.
The Trump administration
refused to approve the testimony for entry into the congressional
record, noting that the data Schoonover planned to present—drawing from
top government scientists' research and peer-reviewed scientific
reports—did not align with the executive branch's views.
One point one could make
here is that even if Happer thinks so, this is no reason to block
National Security Council
advisers wrote a number of comments on Schoonover's draft, saying the
testimony was "not objective."
The testimony "includes
lots of climate alarm propaganda that is not science at all," wrote
William Happer, a senior member of the National Security Council who
has sought to create a federal task force to challenge the consensus
reached by 97
percent of peer-reviewed climate scientists who say humans are
contributing to the climate crisis.
"I am embarrassed to have
this go out on behalf of the executive branch of the federal
government," Happer added (..)
Anyway... here is the last bit that I quote from this article:
Yes indeed, and this is a strongly
Schoonover was ultimately
permitted to testify before the committee, but his testimony was not
submitted into the record because, the Office of Legislative Affairs
said, it did not "jibe" with the Trump administration's views on the
President Donald Trump and
many of his appointees deny that
human activity like the extraction of fossil fuels are contributing to
the warming of the globe, which scientists warn is already causing
extreme weather events like hurricanes and wildfires, rising sea
levels, and melting glaciers. As Schoonover mentioned in his testimony,
the last five years have been the warmest on record according to NASA.
end of 2015 that
xs4all.nl is systematically
ruining my site by NOT updating it within a few seconds,
as it did between 1996 and 2015, but by updating it between
two to seven days later, that is, if I am lucky.
claimed that my site was wrongly named in html: A lie.
They have claimed that my operating system was out of date: A lie.
just don't care for my site, my interests, my values or my
ideas. They have behaved now for 3 years
as if they are the
eagerly willing instruments of the US's secret services, which I
from now on suppose they are (for truth is dead in Holland).
two reasons I remain with xs4all is that my site has been
there since 1996, and I have no reasons whatsoever to suppose that any
other Dutch provider is any better (!!).