in all the world is more dangerous, than sincere ignorance and
-- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
from June 15, 2019
This is a
Nederlog of Saturday,
I realize that I did not commemorate the fact that I am writing
Crisis files for six years now,
started to do so after June 10, 2013,
which taught me about Snowden.
I am registering it now, and may write about it the coming days, but I
am also somewhat worse at present than I was for a long time.
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 15, 2019:
1. Facebook Blames Users for Destroying
Their Own Right to Privacy
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:
Stores, Secret Surveillance Tracks Your Every Move
3. The Mainstream Media Is Marching Us Into War With Iran
4. Yale psychiatrist
Bandy Lee: Trump’s mental health an
Blames Users for Destroying Their Own Right to Privacy
This article is by Sam Biddle on The Intercept. I
abbreviated the title. It starts as follows:
Well... in my opinion, if
you believe anything whatsoever Zuckerberg says about Facebook,
which made him one of the richest persons on earth in a few years by
frauding over 2 billion people to use his stinking spyware (see
e.g. the next article and Nederlog), you must be an
In April 2018, Facebook CEO
Mark Zuckerberg sat before members of both houses of Congress and told
them his company respected the privacy of the roughly two billion
people who use it. “Privacy” remained largely undefined throughout
Zuckerberg’s televised flagellations, but he mentioned the concept more
than two dozen times, including when he told
the Senate’s Judiciary and Commerce committees, “We have a broader
responsibility to protect people’s privacy even beyond” a consent
decree from federal privacy regulators, and when he told
the House Energy and Commerce Committee, “We believe that everyone
around the world deserves good privacy controls.” A year later,
Zuckerberg claimed in interviews
and essays to have discovered the religion of personal privacy and
vowed to rebuild the company in its image.
But only months after
Zuckerberg first outlined his “privacy-focused vision for social
networking” in a 3,000-word post
on the social network he founded, his lawyers were explaining to a
California judge that privacy on Facebook is nonexistent.
Here is a lawyer of Facebook that defends Facebook's neofascist fraudulence as
Yes, I agree with
Biddle's interpretation, and I also want to draw your attention to the
fact that the legal arguments underlying Facebook's neofascism
are (i) very long and quite complicated; (ii) are in fact
read by extremely few members of Facebook, because (iii) they
are far too complicated and legalese by most to read them with any
degree of comprehension, while also (iv) all of the code of
Facebook is hidden code, that no one except a few at Facebook people
will ever see.
before U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria was Orin Snyder of Gibson
Dunn & Crutcher, who claimed that the plaintiffs’ charges of
privacy invasion were invalid because Facebook users have no
expectation of privacy on Facebook. The simple act of using Facebook,
Snyder claimed, negated any user’s expectation of privacy:
There is no privacy
interest, because by sharing with a hundred friends on a social media
platform, which is an affirmative social act to publish, to disclose,
to share ostensibly private information with a hundred people, you have
just, under centuries of common law, under the judgment of Congress,
under the SCA, negated any reasonable expectation of privacy.
An outside party can’t
what you yourself destroyed, Snyder seemed to suggest.
So not only is it Facebook’s legal position that you’re not entitled to
any expectation of privacy, but it’s your fault that the expectation
went poof the moment you started using the site (or at least once you
connected with 100 Facebook “friends”).
Also, none of these four points are specific to Facebook. In
fact, I believe all four points are true of the vast majority of
programs with hidden software (which again is the vast majority of
Here is more by Snyder:
Well... he is consistent but he
is lying, and what
he effectively says is this:
At one point Chhabria
asked, seemingly unable to believe Snyder’s argument himself, “If
Facebook promises not to disseminate anything that you send to your
hundred friends, and Facebook breaks that promise and disseminates your
photographs to a thousand corporations, that would not be a serious
Snyder didn’t blink:
“Facebook does not consider that to be actionable, as a matter of law
under California law.”
If you talk about anything to anyone on any
internet computer, it means you are publishing
these things to your friends; "therefore" none of your talk
or acts to friends can ever be private;
and "therefore" what you say may be
published by Facebook to its two billion users, and sold to advertisers to lie to you to exploit you as
well as possible (and thus Zuckerberg made over 100 billion
In fact, here is Snyder again, and this is the last bit I quote from
He says himself what I
just spelled out:
Once you go to friends,
gig is over because you’ve just gone — taken a hundred people and
pronounced your personal likes and dislikes. In fact, the very act of
liking something and showing your friends that you like something is a
non-private act. It’s the whole premise of Facebook and social media,
is to render not private your likes, your dislikes, your expressions.
When I tag someone in a photo, it’s to tell people, not keep private,
that I’m sitting on a park bench with John Smith. So it’s the opposite
of private when you do that.
"In fact, the very act of
liking something and showing your friends that you like something is a
non-private act" - which means that anything you say to anyone else
makes what you said completely non-private (and "therefore"
recoverable by Facebook, that "therefore: may sell everything
whatsoever that your share with anyone).
"It’s the whole premise
of Facebook and social media, is to render not private your likes, your
dislikes, your expressions." Note that this also applies to
any secret whatsoever you share with any of your friends on an internet
computer: By telling it to someone else, it ceases to be
private, and therefore can be copied by Facebook and sold to
advertisers to lie you so they can exploit you better.
For me, this is neofascism
pure and simple, and should be completely forbidden, as should
Facebook be. And this is a strongly recommended article.
Stores, Secret Surveillance Tracks Your Every Move
This article is by Michael Kwet on The New York Times. It
starts as follows - and this can be taken as one example of what I said
in the previous article:
Yes, for these are the
present facts, and I regard them as utterly neofascistic.
Also, I refuse and have refused to use any of these neofascist
smart phones that deal with you as if you are their slave by sending
absolutely everything you do or say on them to some advertisers.
are shopping in your favorite grocery store. As you approach the dairy
aisle, you are sent a push notification in your phone: “10 percent off
your favorite yogurt! Click here to redeem your coupon.” You considered
buying yogurt on your last trip to the store, but you decided against
it. How did your phone know?
smartphone was tracking you. The grocery store got your location data
and paid a shadowy group of marketers to use that information to target
you with ads. Recent reports have noted
how companies use data gathered from cell towers, ambient
Wi-Fi, and GPS. But the location data industry has a much more precise,
and unobtrusive, tool: Bluetooth beacons.
beacons are small, inobtrusive electronic devices that are hidden
throughout the grocery store; an app on your phone that communicates
with them informed the company not only that you had entered the
building, but that you had lingered for two minutes in front of the
Here is some more (and this article is quite long and quite
interesting, which means I have to repress a lot in a review in
aren’t aware they are being watched with beacons, but the “beacosystem”
tracks millions of people every day. Beacons are placed at airports,
and even on billboards.
In order to
track you or trigger an action like a coupon or message to your phone,
companies need you to install an app on your phone that will recognize
the beacon in the store. Retailers (like Target and Walmart) that use
Bluetooth beacons typically build tracking into their own apps. But
retailers want to make sure most of their customers can be tracked —
not just the ones that download their own particular app.
So a hidden
industry of third-party location-marketing firms has proliferated in
response. These companies take their beacon tracking code and bundle it
into a toolkit developers can use.
of many popular apps, such as those for news or weather updates, insert
these toolkits into their apps.
While most of the millions who use smartphones have little or no ideas
that these neofascistic tools are used to track everything they do
and sell that to advertisers (and also possibly give it to the
NSA), they are tracked in absolutely everything they do with their
smartphones, including sending you advertisements very briefly
before you took a decision to buy something.
And order to assure that, many of the tools you use include code
(that you will never see, and only be "told" about in reams and reams
of legalistic prose few can understand and fewer read at all) that will
track whatever you do, wherever you are, in order to sell what they
track to advertisers so they can lie to you.
Here is some more about this:
For me, all these
companies engage in neofascism I
do not want anything to do with. (And
no, I have no smartphone and will never owe one, and I also only
use email and a browser on the computer I do use - and I am rather
sure I as well am being followed since I got ADSL in 2009.)
data companies often collect additional data provided by apps. A
location company called Pulsate, for example, encourages
app developers to pass them customer email addresses and names.
like Reveal Mobile collect data from software development kits inside hundreds
of frequently used apps. In the United States, another company,
inMarket, covers 38 percent of millennial
moms and about one-quarter
of all smartphones, and tracks 50
million people each month. Other
have similar reach.
data companies have other disturbing tricks up their sleeve. For
example, inMarket developed “mindset
targeting” techniques that predict when individuals are most
receptive to ads.
Here is the last bit I reproduce from this article:
[I]n 2017, Google
introduced Project Beacon and began sending beacons to businesses for
use with Google Ads services. Google uses the beacons to send the
businesses’ visitors notifications that ask them to leave photos and
reviews, among other features. And last year, investigators at Quartz
found that Google Android can track you using Bluetooth beacons even
when you turn Bluetooth off in your phone.
So these are the neofascists
from Google and Apple, who do the same, and also use Bluetooth
(that I have always refused to use and switch totally off on
any new computer I use: no wifi for me).
For years, Apple and Google
have allowed companies to bury surveillance features inside the apps
offered in their app stores. And both companies conduct their own
beacon surveillance through iOS and Android.
As I said: For me all of the above is plain and obvious neofascism, I
do not want anything to do with. Also, this is a strongly
recommended article in which there is a whole lot more than I quoted.
Mainstream Media Is Marching Us Into War With Iran
This article is by Jake Johnson and Jon Queally on Truthdig
and originally on Common Dreams. It starts as follows:
Yes, indeed - and I must
say this very strongly reminds me of how the Americans got
involved in Vietnam: With a highly similar quasi-attack
(planned and engineered by the USA) on one of the warships of the USA.
If there were any lingering
hopes that the corporate media learned from its role in
perpetuating the lies that led to the 2003 invasion of Iraq
and would never again help start a Middle East war on the basis of
false or flimsy evidence, the headlines that blared across the front
pages of major U.S. news websites Thursday night indicated that such
hopes were badly misplaced.
The U.S. military late
Thursday released blurry, black-and-white video footage that it
claimed—without any underlying analysis or further details—showed an
Iranian patrol boat removing an unexploded limpet mine from the
Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous, one of the oil tankers damaged in
attacks in the Gulf of Oman.
For more information, see the Vietnam War and
of Tonkin Incident.
Here is more from the article:
Yes, I think that is
correct - and in fact there is no evidence whatsoever that Iran did
Independent critics were quick
to call for extreme skepticism in the face of U.S. government
claims, given the quality of the “evidence” and the warmongering track
records of those presenting it.
Here is some more on the present qualities of the vast majority of
In the article the above is
followed by pictures + texts from The Washington Post, The New York
Times, The Guardian and five more - and perhaps I should remind you
that in 2013 and 2014 the three papers I mentioned did publish
Snowden's materials, but meanwhile have moved (once more) to the right,
which means that they simply copy the materials the American
government gives them, and publish that as if it were true, generally
with little or no research of their own.
But the media displayed no
Just taking a random sample
of screenshots after the news broke Thursday night, major outlets
largely did the Pentagon’s dirty work by posting uncritical headlines
that took the claims at face value.
Here is a brief summary:
Yes, I agree and refer
you again to the Vietnam War and
of Tonkin Incident (which again mirrored how many earlier
wars started). And this is
a strongly recommended article, in which there is a lot more
than I quoted.
Though no single headline
could be construed as explicit pro-Pentagon propaganda on its own, the
uncritical nature of the coverage and ensuing echo chamber effect—or
what is sometimes referred to as “propaganda reinforcement”—is one of
the ways that the U.S. government and its intelligence agencies are
empowered to turn a flimsy claim into a pervasive and widely-accepted
psychiatrist Bandy Lee: Trump’s mental health an ’emergency’
This article is by Chauncey DeVega on AlterNet and
originally on Salon. This is from near its beginning:
Well... let me point out three
things that are relevant to me - and I am a psychologist who got his
M.A. degree with only A's):
Dr. Bandy Lee, who is
a professor of psychiatry at the Yale School of Medicine and editor of
the bestselling book “The
Dangerous Case of Donald Trump” convened a panel comprised of
leading mental health experts to evaluate Donald Trump based upon his
behavior as detailed in the Mueller report.
conclusion: Trump is mentally unfit, a threat to the United States and
the world, and as such should have his powers severely restricted while
he is put under a doctor’s care. At the invitation of several
Democratic members of Congress, Lee and other mental health
professionals will present their findings about
Donald Trump’s mental health in a public meeting in Washington next
First of all, I agree with the above: I think Trump is insane, and I also
think Trump is a neofascist. I
will not defend my thesis that he is a neofascist here and now,
but this is because I lack time, space and health, and - especially
- because in 10 years of reading tenthousands of articles I have not met a single person who could define either
fascism or neofascism in any decent way. (I know a lot about
fascism i.a. because bith my father
and my grandfather were arrested in August 1941 for resisting the Nazis
and were committed to concentration camp punishments by collaborating
Dutch judges, which my grandfather did not survive while my father
survived over 3 years and 9 months of them.)
Second, the main reason I agree with the above quoted
bit is that my diagnosis is based on a diagnosis from the DSM-5 (and
before) of a specific kind of insanity, namely narcissism,
of which I am convinced Trump satisfies all 9 criterions (where 5 is
sufficient as a diagnosis, according to the DSM-5). Also, as I said, I
am a psychologist.
Third, the above is about the extent I do agree with psychiatry. My
main reasons to disagree with nearly all the psychiatry I ever
read is that it is not a proper science at all - if you doubt
this, you ought to check out my DSM-5:
Question 1 of "The six
most essential questions in psychiatric diagnosis", and I should add that I am not only a
psychologist but also a philosopher who in fact became
a psychologist after I was denied - completely illegally - the right to
take an M.A. in philosophy very briefly before getting that,
because I had criticized (in a public speech) those who taught me
philosophy, who indeed were nearly all both total incompetents
and utter liars.
Also, while I agree with Lee about Donald Trump, I disagree
with Lee about psychiatry not only for the above reasons but also
because both my ex and myself now are ill for more than 40 years
with ME/CFS, which is a "chronic and serious disease" since ...
2018 (in Holland). And this means that both my ex and I
have been declared insane by 90% - 27 out of 30 - of the Dutch
"medics" we asked for help, indeed not because we were
insane in any sense, but because they simply all said what the
psychiatrists insisted upon, who did not have any rational reason
whatsoever to declare more than 10 million people insane simply because
they said they felt ill, while the medics could find no proof they were
ill. (Apparently the underlying motive was that medicine is
complete: What present medics do not know does not exist, and if people
maintain they are ill without present medicine being able to find it
they must be insane.)
Since I have had 40 years of these experiences, which cost
me tenthousands euros and at least 7 years of very serious troubles
I simply would never have had if my ex and I would have been
described as ill, I dislike psychiatry intensely, indeed quite
apart from my arguments that it is not a proper science at all.
Anyway... I am by now getting quite irritated by Bandy Lee.
Here are some of my reasons:
This is Lee from the
article. In fact, she reasons here precisely as Archie Bunker
did: Since you can name Polacks, Italians, Greeks etc. "it follows"
these exist as individuals, and "therefore" can be treated as
individuals: Thus, Polacks are meatheads etc. etc.
Communities, be they
or other types of social collectives, can function like an individual.
So the same principles that apply to an individual apply to collectives
Here is more:
As mental health
we understand this phenomenon. We see this every day. We know what
happens to patients when they lose their ability to have insight, when
they can no longer see the abnormal as malignant and bad. The patients
are delusional because they believe bad things are good for them. When
this happens a patient succumbs to the disorder and starts being
No, as "mental health
professionals" you know in fact extremely little, whereas the
book on which virtually all of your knowledge is based, the DSM-5,
is a frighteningly unscientific collection of bullshit,
in which the only empirical facts are in fact the percentages
of agreements between (America) psychiatrists on the diagnoses they
Besides, as I have argued, my
ex and myself plus around 17 million (!!) of others who have ME/CFS
were said to be insane ("neurasthenic", "psychosomatic", which are in
fact both diagnosis incompatible with medicine) by virtually all medics
for the last 40 years (which costs us a lot of money and a great lot of
trouble for 40 years).
Here is more:
The health paradigm has
room for politics. This has nothing to do with politics. Our concerns
are purely about public health and safety, and whether or not American
society will choose a destructive route versus a life-affirming,
constructive route. Disease by definition is destructive.
Well, in that case you are bullshitting:
"public health and safety" clearly depend a great lot on
"politics", as does the question "whether
or not American society will choose a destructive route versus a
life-affirming, constructive route".
Then again, I should warn you
that many psychiatrist (who are not - real -
scientists, because present-day psychiatry is not a real
science at all, even if it is the best currently available) are
just as plainly inconsistent as Lee is.
Here is the last bit I quote
from this article (and the bold bit is by DeVega):
Do you think that
Donald Trump should be impeached? What advice would you give Nancy
Pelosi if she reached out to you?
I do not involve myself in
direct discussions about impeachment or the political process because
that is outside of my realm of expertise. My expertise is medical. In
that capacity I can state that unless Donald Trump is contained or
removed, he is posing a danger to public health and safety.
First of all, you are clearly meddling with politics (and in
fact I agree with you on that), and second of all your "expertise" is definitely not
"medical" (even though you may have a B.A. in medicine), for the simple
reason that you are a psychiatrist, and psychiatry is not
Anyway... I think this is my
last review of Bandy Lee's opinions, simply because she is bullshitting
too much about psychiatry.
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 (!!).