Caution: Long Post
The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is without doubt and still is to this day one of the most influential, powerful, and iconic figures in American history due to his steadfast and nonviolent commitment in the fight for Civil Rights, Equality, and Justice during Jim Crow Segregation in the United States. The highlight of his career as an activist came in 1963 in which he delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech in front of Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. in which he envisioned a nation in which his children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. This resulted in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to be passed. Even after his assassination in 1968, his legacy inspired many similar Civil Rights Movements around the world.
Today, Martin Luther King, Jr. is hailed by both sides of the American Political Sphere as a Beacon of Hope on how to fight for Justice and Equality for all during turbulent times. But it's the Conservatives who constantly claim that they truly support him and follow his dream, especially in modern times and they've expressed it in a rather whitewashed and partisan fashion. The most obvious being their use of his "I Have a Dream" speech by quoting the one line that has often been cherry-picked and misinterpreted quite a lot in which they judge people not by skin but by their character. The main reason they do this is to give them the appearance that they are colorblind as their way of opposing racism. And in doing so, they consistently criticize Liberals of trying to divide the country into special interest groups and promote favoritism. As a result, they always claim that Dr. King is a Republican, let alone would've been one in this era given his views, along with the fact that he was a Christian. His niece, Alveda King even emphasized it herself.
Some of the ways that Conservatives try to supposedly live up to Dr. King's "Colorblind" Dream is by opposing supposed "Wokeness", Critical Race Theory, and the practice of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion everywhere. They also express it by opposing Affirmative Action and the use of Racial Quotas when it comes to applying for schools, universities, and jobs because they believe it causes Reverse Discrimination. In terms of nonviolence, Conservatives express their disapproval of the Black Lives Matter movement. On the basis of Christianity, Conservatives believe that Dr. King supported a fixed moral code as indicated in his Letters from Birmingham Jail since he led with love and not racial hatred by changing the lives of people and not the laws itself, along with the notion of self-sufficiency. Seeing all this, it seems like Conservatives are really desperate to prove how much America has progressed in this post-racial world in order to debunk accusations that it isn't a racist country and that's why they always prop up Dr. King by claiming that they follow his dream and will continue to do so. Well.....up until now.
During this year's Martin Luther King Day, a string of prominent Conservative activists and organizations suddenly turned on him. Starting off with Charlie Kirk of the Youth Conservative Movement Turning Point USA, who launched a blistering anti-MLK campaign in which he supposedly dispelled the alleged myths surrounding his popularity. He accused Dr. King of being a "Bad Person" and that his "Sainthood will cause Black voters to realize it's being used against them to suppress the individual." He even went further by stating that "we made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s" accusing it as "a way to get rid of the First Amendment". A while ago, the organization marketed the Conservative image of Dr. King when they sold $55 T-Shirts with his name as well as stickers of him with the words "Let Freedom Ring". Kirk was later joined by the Daily Wire's Matt Walsh who accused him of being a "communist". In fact, he railed against Dr. King a few years ago by accusing him of being a Womanizer, Adulterer, Plagiarizer, etc. Coming after Walsh was Human Events editor, conspiracy theorist, and fellow Turning Point USA alumna Jack Posobiec, who labeled Dr. King "a God of the Left" and stating that "the real legacy of the 1960s was enshrining Racial Discrimination and Race Consciousness into the Federal Bureaucracy." And finally, a popular Conservative Twitter account called "EndWokeness" called Dr. King "a Racial Marxist" because he "did not support a Colorblind Meritocracy" after it cited his quote on Wealth Distribution. What's even worse is that even non-White Conservatives hate him. Two examples include a commentator named Vince Everett Ellison and former football player and sports columnist, Jason Whitlock. The latest editions to the lineup of Black Guilt Conservatives, they railed against Dr. King and the passing of the Civil Rights by stating that they worsened the Black community by drifting them away from God into "Democratic Dependency". They even accused him of the same crimes as Walsh did.
With the sudden change in tone and emphasis from the Right against Dr. King, you have to ask yourself why they're doing this and what caused them to believe this way. And this is not an extremist fringe of the Right that some would expect to hear from. All of these are Mainstream Right-Wing Figures who have direct lineage to the GOP, including the current presidential nominee, Donald Trump. That's as Establishment you can get. Their remarks have been criticized by a lot of people from both sides and surprisingly by some Black Conservatives. One of them was Pastor Darrell Scott, a former faith advisor of Trump, who these days, is one of a few Black Conservatives who has been calling out other Black Conservatives for tearing down their own race in order to elevate their status among others, a very notorious habit of them. He criticized Kirk for inspiring a Hitler Youth. Another was Kimberly Klacik, who in 2020, gained viral for her campaign video stating that Black Lives don't matter to Democrats when she was running for Maryland's 7th Congressional District following the death of Civil Rights Leader, Elijah Cummings, who was the incumbent. She criticized Kirk for his remarks stating that his rhetoric will prevent Blacks from voting Republican. Even with that said, there have been instances in which Conservatives themselves have questioned the Civil Rights Act and many of them have been pretty negative. If you check out other Conservative websites and especially here on Reddit, many of their criticisms echo the same sentiments as those Pundits stating that it was unconstitutional and that in infringed on the First Amendment, particularly the Notion of Freedom of Association.
That being said, there is some silver lining to this. Now, that they exposed themselves for what they really of think Dr. King, I think it's time for them to admit that they never really liked him in the first place, let alone understood who he really was and what he really stood for. In fact, they never really liked him at all. All they did was whitewash him and cherry-pick his ideas and speech for own Partisan Agenda. Dr. King constantly talked about the notion of Black Pride and campaigned about the need for Reparations. He also supported Affirmative Action stating in 1965 that "a Society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro. Dr. King realized that our society was created in a way that managed to disadvantage the many for the benefit the few, and that America's Racial Hierarchy was connected to its Class Hierarchy. He also had political beliefs that manifested through both Racial Reconciliation and Concrete Policy Changes that could help restructure and benefit a divided and unequal nation. This is the reason why he referred to himself as a Democratic Socialist as he wanted a "Radical Redistribution of Economic and Political Power". In fact, he argued that true Equality can only be achieved, not just through legal rights, but through an equal distribution of resources. This is evident when he said “Call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all God’s children.” This is the exact vision that Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders believed in. After all, he did participate in the March on Washington in 1963. In regards to Police Brutality, while Dr. King opposed violent protest, he did acknowledge that a Riot is the language of the Unheard and that it came from a place of Desperation. In fact, in his "I Have a Dream" Speech, he stated that Blacks could "never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the Victim of the Unspeakable Horrors of Police Brutality." After all, he was hounded by the FBI, was called a Communist, broke the law in protest of race-based Segregation and Violence, was thrown in jail, advocated Protests and Sit-Ins, opposed White Rule of Society, and was assassinated for his Race and his views on Race. Regarding the quote about the Content of Character from said speech, Dr. King's daughter, Bernice King stated that using solely that quote diminishes the purpose of the entire speech because her father's dream and work included "eradicating Racism, not ignoring it."
If anything, this goes to show that is Dr. King were around today, he would be heavily criticized for being Woke, politically correct, a Communist, a Race Hustler, and a member of the Radical Left. And we all know that the Right hates those ideologies passionately. But here's the thing, he never considered himself a Democrat, let alone a Republican. He was an Independent as he felt that both parties are the same. And reducing his legacy to a single quote diminishes the gains that he fought for and believed in. This especially goes to a lot of Conservatives out there who claim to follow his lead using that quote because they interpret them in a way that benefits them today than how he meant them back then. For you to claim that he didn't care about Skin Color is like saying Susan B. Anthony didn't care about Gender. And to those Conservatives who now hate him, including Black, I hope you're OK with people getting treated unfairly, including your own. Who knew being seen as an Equal is a Negative in your eyes.

Caution: Long Post
The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is without doubt and still is to this day one of the most influential, powerful, and iconic figures in American history due to his steadfast and nonviolent commitment in the fight for Civil Rights, Equality, and Justice during Jim Crow Segregation in the United States. The highlight of his career as an activist came in 1963 in which he delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech in front of Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. in which he envisioned a nation in which his children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. This resulted in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to be passed. Even after his assassination in 1968, his legacy inspired many similar Civil Rights Movements around the world.
Today, Martin Luther King, Jr. is hailed by both sides of the American political sphere as a beacon of hope on how to fight for justice and equality for all during turbulent times. But it's the Conservatives who constantly claim that they truly support him and follow his dream, especially in modern times and they've expressed it in a rather whitewashed and partisan fashion. The most obvious being their use of his "I Have a Dream" speech by quoting the one line that has often been cherry-picked and misinterpreted quite a lot in which they judge people not by skin but by their character. The main reason they do this is to give them the appearance that they are colorblind as their way of opposing racism. And in doing so, they consistently criticize Liberals of trying to divide the country into special interest groups and promote favoritism. As a result, they always claim that Dr. King is a Republican, let alone would've been one in this era given his views, along with the fact that he was a Christian. His niece, Alveda King even emphasized it herself.
Some of the ways that Conservatives try to supposedly live up to Dr. King's "Colorblind" Dream is by opposing supposed "Wokeness", Critical Race Theory, and the practice of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion everywhere. They also express it by opposing Affirmative Action and the use of Racial Quotas when it comes to applying for schools, universities, and jobs because they believe it causes Reverse Discrimination. In terms of nonviolence, Conservatives express their disapproval of the Black Lives Matter movement. On the basis of Christianity, Conservatives believe that Dr. King supported a Fixed Moral Code as indicated in his Letters from Birmingham Jail since he led with love and not racial hatred by changing the lives of people and not the laws itself, along with the notion of self-sufficiency. Seeing all this, it seems like Conservatives are really desperate to prove how much America has progressed in this post-racial world in order to debunk accusations that it isn't a racist country and that's why they always prop up Dr. King by claiming that they follow his dream and will continue to do so. Well.....up until now.
During this year's Martin Luther King Day, a string of prominent Conservative activists and organizations suddenly turned on him. Starting off with Charlie Kirk of the Youth Conservative Movement Turning Point USA, who launched a blistering anti-MLK campaign in which he supposedly dispelled the alleged myths surrounding his popularity. He accused Dr. King of being a "Bad Person" and that his "Sainthood will cause Black voters to realize it's being used against them to suppress the individual." He even went further by stating that "we made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s" accusing it as "a way to get rid of the First Amendment". A while ago, the organization marketed the Conservative image of Dr. King when they sold $55 T-Shirts with his name as well as stickers of him with the words "Let Freedom Ring". Kirk was later joined by the Daily Wire's Matt Walsh who accused him of being a "communist". In fact, he railed against Dr. King a few years ago by accusing him of being a Womanizer, Adulterer, Plagiarizer, etc. Coming after Walsh was Human Events Editor, Conspiracy Theorist, and fellow Turning Point USA Alumna Jack Posobiec, who labeled Dr. King "a God of the Left" and stating that "the real legacy of the 1960s was enshrining Racial Discrimination and Race Consciousness into the Federal Bureaucracy." And finally, a popular Conservative Twitter account called "EndWokeness" called Dr. King "a Racial Marxist" because he "did not support a Colorblind Meritocracy" after it cited his quote on Wealth Distribution. What's even worse is that even non-White Conservatives hate him. Two examples include a commentator named Vince Everett Ellison and former football player and sports columnist, Jason Whitlock. The latest editions to the lineup of Black Guilt Conservatives, they railed against Dr. King and the passing of the Civil Rights by stating that they worsened the Black community by drifting them away from God into "Democratic Dependency". They even accused him of the same crimes as Walsh did.
With the sudden change in tone and emphasis from the Right against Dr. King, you have to ask yourself why they're doing this and what caused them to believe this way. And this is not an extremist fringe of the Right that some would expect to hear from. All of these are Mainstream Right-Wing Figures who have direct lineage to the GOP, including the current presidential nominee, Donald Trump. That's as Establishment you can get. Their remarks have been criticized by a lot of people from both sides and surprisingly by some Black Conservatives. One of them was Pastor Darrell Scott, a former faith advisor of Trump, who these days, is one of a few Black Conservatives who has been calling out other Black Conservatives for tearing down their own race in order to elevate their status among others, a very notorious habit of them. He criticized Kirk for inspiring a Hitler Youth. Another was Kimberly Klacik, who in 2020, gained viral for her campaign video stating that Black Lives don't matter to Democrats when she was running for Maryland's 7th Congressional District following the death of Civil Rights Leader, Elijah Cummings, who was the Incumbent. She criticized Kirk for his remarks stating that his rhetoric will prevent Blacks from voting Republican. Even with that said, there have been instances in which Conservatives themselves have questioned the Civil Rights Act and many of them have been pretty negative. If you check out other Conservative websites and especially here on Reddit, many of their criticisms echo the same sentiments as those Pundits stating that it was unconstitutional and that in infringed on the First Amendment, particularly the Notion of Freedom of Association.
That being said, there is some silver lining to this. Now, that they exposed themselves for what they really of think Dr. King, I think it's time for them to admit that they never really liked him in the first place, let alone understood who he really was and what he really stood for. In fact, they never really liked him at all. All they did was whitewash him and cherry-pick his ideas and speech for own Partisan Agenda. Dr. King constantly talked about the notion of Black Pride and campaigned about the need for Reparations. He also supported Affirmative Action stating in 1965 that "a Society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro. Dr. King realized that our society was created in a way that managed to disadvantage the many for the benefit the few, and that America's Racial Hierarchy was connected to its Class Hierarchy. He also had political beliefs that manifested through both Racial Reconciliation and Concrete Policy Changes that could help restructure and benefit a divided and unequal nation. This is the reason why he referred to himself as a Democratic Socialist as he wanted a "Radical Redistribution of Economic and Political Power". In fact, he argued that true Equality can only be achieved, not just through legal rights, but through an equal distribution of resources. This is evident when he said “Call it Democracy, or call it Democratic Socialism, but there must be a better Distribution of Wealth within this Country for all God’s Children.” This is the exact vision that Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders believed in. After all, he did participate in the March on Washington in 1963. In regards to Police Brutality, while Dr. King opposed violent protest, he did acknowledge that a riot is the language of the Unheard and that it came from a place of Desperation. In fact, in his "I Have a Dream" Speech, he stated that Blacks could "never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the Victim of the Unspeakable Horrors of Police Brutality." After all, he was hounded by the FBI, was called a Communist, broke the law in protest of race-based Segregation and Violence, was thrown in jail, advocated Protests and Sit-Ins, opposed White Rule of Society, and was assassinated for his Race and his views on Race. Regarding the quote about the Content of Character from said speech, Dr. King's daughter, Bernice King stated that using solely that quote diminishes the purpose of the entire speech because her father's dream and work included "eradicating Racism, not ignoring it."
If anything, this goes to show that is Dr. King were around today, he would be heavily criticized for being Woke, politically correct, a Communist, a Race Hustler, and a Member of the Radical Left. And we all know that the Right hates those ideologies passionately. But here's the thing, he never considered himself a Democrat, let alone a Republican. He was an Independent as he felt that both parties are the same. And reducing his legacy to a single quote diminishes the gains that he fought for and believed in. This especially goes to a lot of Conservatives out there who claim to follow his lead using that quote because they interpret them in a way that benefits them today than how he meant them back then. For you to claim that he didn't care about Skin Color is like saying Susan B. Anthony didn't care about Gender. And to those Conservatives who now hate him, including Black, I hope you're OK with people getting treated unfairly, including your own. Who knew being seen as an Equal is a Negative in your eyes.

I am an older ape and I have read countless hours of DD since the sneeze. One of the biggest achievements of this sub was to educate people on techniques being used to subvert us and our stock.
A main piece is this:
https://www.reddit.com/Superstonk/s/a6Ju1N8XpM by another ape
Enjoy the read :) I don’t take any credit for this work.
You may remember that a few days back, u/[redacted] put up this post about shills infiltrating /BIZ/ https://www.reddit.com/Superstonk/comments/mscsb5/putting_shills_on_blast_a_concerned_biznessman/
In that post, there was a HUGE image on:
SUPPOSED**methods used by banks and the hedgefunds to dismantle online communities
I had trouble reading that image (definitely NOT phone or text-to-speech friendly), and tried to find the original text version. It turns out that it can be found here: https://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5. I copy-pasta it here for your convenience, and included some markup to make it easier to read. I take no credit for this work.
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.

1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
   
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
   
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
   
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
   
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
   
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
   
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
   
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
   
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
   
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
    
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
    
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
    
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
    
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
    
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
    
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
    
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
    
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
    
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
    
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
    
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
    
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
    
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
    
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
    
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
    

Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.
Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.
With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.
Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.
Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.
The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.
It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.
In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:
"You're dividing the movement."
[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]
This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
The agent will tell the activist:
"You're a leader!"
This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
This is "malignant pseudoidentification." It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.
Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist's self-concepts.
The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally "lose touch with reality."
Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.
Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.
The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.
It can usually be identified by two events, however:
First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS. "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.
Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
Saboteurs
Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
8) Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
Provocateurs
1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
Informants
1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.
Recruiting
Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.
Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.
Surveillance
ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!
Scare Tactics
They use them.
Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.
This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or replaced.
COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.
The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people's civil liberties.
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.

1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
   
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
   
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
   
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
   
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
   
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
   
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
   
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
   
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
   
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
    
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
    
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
    
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
    
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
    
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
    
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
    
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.
    

DISCLAIMER: I'd like to note that I do not consider myself an expert on many of the topics he talks about or even economics in general but a lot of what I'm about to say is pretty easily verifiable and basic, and I'll try to be clear that I'm expressing my opinion and not fact when I'm doing so. Given my lack of expertise, none of what I say here should be considered as the final authority on these topics, it's a reddit post for fucks sake, I encourage everyone to search up the relevant data and information on the topics they are interested in or claims they find dubious. It's really not that hard and all the links and data I'm gonna cite here took me less than five minutes to find for each piece of information. If you're not familiar with where to find this data it might take you longer but I promise that anyone with access to the internet can do the same thing I'm doing. Finally, for those looking for some opinionless, academic argument, that's not what this is, this is gonna sound like a rant because it is, I'm posting this for nothing more than my own satisfaction, take from it what you will.
Ok I'm writing this after I finished the whole thing and I said that I'd try to be clear that I'm expressing my opinion and not fact when I'm doing so and the basically entire second half of this is my opinion and I don't make that very clear so sorry about that.
Honestly I'd love to be wrong because I really do think that younger people are at a disadvantage compared to previous generations at the same age but the arguments he makes and the data he uses throughout his talk just sound like such bullshit to me.
https://www.ted.com/talks/scott\_galloway\_how\_the\_us\_is\_destroying\_young\_people\_s\_future?
https://www.profgalloway.com/war-on-the-young/
Scott Galloway recently did a Ted talk titled "How the US is destroying young people's future", as well as an accompanying blog post. He's made some fair points about how young people have been put at an inherent disadvantage and that they have it harder than previous generations. That's most likely true and I personally support that point of view, but the a lot data and numbers he makes this argument with seem to be cherry picked, misleading, or just straight up wrong. So let's break his talk down. u/JustTaxLandLol made a pretty good post about him comparing median wages to the S&P500 (https://www.reddit.com/badeconomics/comments/1cc3rs8/scott\_galloway\_compares\_median\_wage\_to\_sp500/) but I think that Galloway's mistakes are much more comprehensive than just that particular slide.
The first slide with data makes a claim about how pre-tax income, adjusted for inflation, has decreased across generations from grandparents to parents to kids, and that cost of public colleges and home prices have increased significantly across generations too. First of all, categorising generations by whether they have children or grandchildren is kinda nuts. That's a very wide, overlapping, range of ages. If he has actually fixed age ranges for each generation that don't overlap and just made these categorisations for the sake of understandability to a nonacademic audience, I still think that's the wrong choice but fine. However, his claim that real income has decreased across generations is weak at best. This working paper (https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2024007pap.pdf) from the Fed Reserve was published February 2024, and from the figures that start at page 35, shows that by almost every categorisation they could think of, GenZ earns more at the same age than every previous generation before them. There's some conflict here with Raj Chetty's work but I don't have the time or knowledge to reconcile the two perspectives but at best, the pre-tax income numbers Galloway presents are questionable at best. Furthermore, he doesn't provide anyone a chance at even checking the sources he gets this information from. Not once in his entire talk does he cite a single source. He couldn't even have some tiny text at the bottom of his tables or diagrams saying what organisation he got this data from. Ok so that crossed out bit is wrong, he does have sources they're just very very faint and you can see them if you squint hard enough at the bottom left corner of his graphs. But the source he gives for this slide is a joke. Here's the link https://www.profgalloway.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Table-01.png
His "source" is his own analysis. Ok so by his analysis, the average cost of public college is 56000*0.43 = 24080. I'm gonna use numbers from this US News page (https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/paying-for-college-infographic), which might not be the most reliable source in the world, but it's probably somewhere in the ballpark. So according to US News, average tuition for the 2023-2024 school year for out of state students going to a public school is 23,630 and 10,662 for in state students. If these numbers are anywhere near accurate, the only conclusion I can draw is that Galloway has cherry-picked his data by only including the cost for out of state students in his analysis. First of all, public schools in the US are there to provide affordable access to higher education FOR RESIDENTS OF ITS STATE. Using only out of state numbers is absolutely ridiculous. Secondly, even if he used only the in state numbers, 10662/56000 is approximately equal to 19%. So if I use his very very questionable pre-tax income numbers, cost of public college for in state students has still increased across his categorisation of generations. It's not like his point would have been invalidated if he had used the in-state numbers, a trend of tuition increasing as a percentage of real income across multiple generations is still very bad. This is my opinion but I guess that he just wanted to find a nice shocking number. I didn't catch this but in their post, u/JustTaxLandLol notes that later on Galloway says "real median income from labor is up 40% since 1974" so he's also contradicting himself in the same talk.
I couldn't be bothered to look into the house price to income column he has so I don't have any comments on that.
His next slide is a point about how the percentage of 30 year olds earning more than their parents did at 30 has been decreasing very significantly over time. This is from a paper in 2016 by Raj Chetty (link: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aal4617). I've seen some counterarguments about the methods used in the paper but there are counterarguments for basically every inequality paper in existence so I'd take them with a grain of salt. Those points are more complex than the scope of this post and I lack the expertise to be making them anyways so I believe this slide. I'll admit that Galloway makes a good argument for this slide.
Right after this slide he says "As a result, people over the age of 55 feel pretty good about America, but less than one in five people under the age of 34 feel very good about America. This creates an incendiary, righteous movement...". He supports this with data on the percentage of US adults who feel "extremely proud" to be American.
Before I talk about the data on this slide, I'd like to be a little anal about things and pick apart his wording and causal claims he makes. When Galloway says "as a result" he's making a causal claim about the relationship between a young person's earning ability and their national pride. Leaving aside the econometric issues of making random causal claims, this is a ridiculous marginalisation of all the other critically important issues in the US. It seems pretty clear to me that reduced national pride amongst younger individuals is a combination of a lack of social mobility (or however you want to word your version of the fading American dream), the continued existence of systematic racism and sexism, US response to ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza, bodily autonomy (abortion), and many other issues. Not to say that the economic disadvantages of young people doesn't play a role in causing this lack of national pride but come on. He also says "this creates an incendiary righteous movement...". Ok if the "as a result" from the last sentence could be interpreted as the economic disadvantages of young people play some part in their dissatisfaction with the government, it should be obvious to anyone not living under a rock that many of the political conflicts and movements that have erupted in the US over the past few years have little, if anything, to do with earning ability. In the slide after the poll data he shows three photos, one of a MeToo protest, one of a BLM protest, and another of a pro-Palestine protest. I can only interpret this as him making the claim that the younger generations economic difficulties are causally linked to those movements, which is totally bananas.
Now lets talk about the data. He got this from the Gallup polls (link: https://news.gallup.com/poll/394202/record-low-extremely-proud-american.aspx, there's a link to download the pdf with the poll numbers at the end of this article). There are 5 options for the Gallup poll: "Extremely proud"; "Very proud"; "Moderately proud"; "Only a little proud"; or "Not at all proud". So Galloway is cherry-picking again. To be fair, it's true that even including the rest of the answers, a quick glance at the data suggests (very strongly) that young people are less proud than older people. There are also more young people who choose "Not at all proud" (11% for 18-34 and 1% for 55+). Though there is probably some argument to be made about whether "extreme" pride is a good thing. Furthermore, "pretty good" and "very good" do not reflect the extremity of choosing, well, the most extreme option.
As an introduction to his next slide he says that "a decent proxy for how much we value youth labor is minimum wage". I've never heard of this before and am very very skeptical but I'm willing to attribute this to my own ignorance so I'll leave that sentence alone. So on this slide there's a graph with two lines, one is minimum wage across time adjusted for inflation, the other is whats supposed to be minimum wage if adjusted for productivity (also adjusted to inflation I assume). Galloway got this data form the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) (https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/), which shows that this gap between productivity began around 1979. This was when Carter was president and right before the Reagan administration. Those who know about the economic history of this time probably won't be surprised since a lot of the policies of this time were rather inegalitarian and heavily favoured the wealthy. I agree that many of the policies of the time contributed heavily to the inequality America faces today and though I haven't read any studies about how this affects minimum wage workers, I believe that minimum wage workers or low income workers in general today have significantly lower purchasing power relative to a few decades ago.
What I have a problem with here is the idea that productivity and minimum wage should increase in tandem. According to the EPI, "Productivity measures how much total economywide income is generated (i.e., for workers, business owners, landlords, and everybody else together) in an average hour of work" and "pay is defined as the average compensation (wages and benefits) of production and nonsupervisory workers. The pay for this group is one appropriate benchmark for 'typical worker pay' because production and nonsupervisory workers have made up roughly 80% of the U.S. workforce over the entire period shown in the figure and because the data for production and nonsupervisory workers exclude extremely highly paid managerial workers like CEOs and other corporate executives". Before I try to break down my complaints with the measures used, my immediate reaction when I saw this was that it seems rather stupid to compare the relationship between average productivity and minimum wage in an industrial economy against the same relationship in a service oriented one. There are just more jobs now that let you make an impact on the economy far beyond what you are paid and it is so so difficult to quantify this change. Using a similar argument, I really have no clue how macro people make models or do estimates for things like productivity but I'm quite skeptical about the reliability of using such a measure of productivity because of the increased prevalence of second, third, or n-th order effects that would be present in a measure of something like total gdp but pretty much impossible to identify for any employer. For those who want to read more about this difference between productivity and compensation I think this is the most relevant paper from EPI (https://files.epi.org/2015/understanding-productivity-pay-divergence-final.pdf). There are some points I'm not satisfied with in this paper like them attributing the entirety of the difference between median hourly compensation to average consumer hourly compensation but that would take more time than I want to spend on this.
Now we're still on the same slide. Galloway says "we've kept it [minimum wage] purposely pretty low" twice in three sentences. Now he's suggesting that there's some collective out there that has the political power and desire to keep minimum wage low. By "we" I think he means to suggest that the old-timers have banded together to screw the young people over. Ok buddy. I'm stepping outside the bounds of what's considered strictly economics here a little but pinning the injustices of society on some ethereal enemy whose existence can never be disproven is the same as taking "advantage of the flaws in our species with medieval institutions, Paleolithic instincts, and godlike technology" (Galloway's words, same TED talk) to me. Maybe there really is some cabal of scheming geezers out there who have some twisted desire to keep the minimum wage low, but I'm more inclined to believe that a lot of these "injustices" are a result of our existing political and societal institutions being poor and inefficient aggregators of our desires as a society, rewarding selfishness instead of cooperation. This certainly makes the problem harder to solve than if there were just some evil 'others' we could get rid of and be done with. Having a target to direct our outrage at, believing that I am good and they are bad, is easier than facing the reality that everyone is born with the selfishness that creates the injustices we live with but that's not gonna make people more agreeable. As an economist, I study the theory of incentives to use the same human selfishness that creates all the problems Galloway talks about to create solutions that hopefully improve our quality of life. This is what I believe is the beauty of being human, all the good and bad that happens stem from the same desires, it is our job to create institutions and systems that allow us to channel our desires in a way that benefits everyone, but I digress. The point is, this enemy that Galloway creates is an effective tactic at convincing people of his argument, but I don't believe such a perspective benefits society at all. Mistakes should be corrected, that doesn't mean they're always the result of ill intentions.
His next slide compares the difference between percentage increase in median household income against percentage increase in median home price, as well as a comparison of the median monthly mortgage between 2019 and 2024. I have nothing to say about the graph, I agree that over time, home prices have increased to an unacceptable level. The Fed funds rate went from 2.4 percent in Feb 2019 to 5.33 percent in Feb 2024 (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/fedfunds). To his credit, Galloway does attribute this increase in mortgage payments to "an acceleration in interest rates" but what's the alternative? Don't increase interest rates? Then if I was Galloway I'd make the same TED talk and talk about how the continued low interest rates contributed to rampant inflation that made all the poor people even poorer. It seems like he's decided to take whatever bad economic event that seems somewhat relevant and made it to be the result of some group's dogged determination to keep the younger generation down. Why is the increase from pre- to post-covid prices on anything surprising. I'd like to meet the genius who saw covid coming and intentionally created this increase in home prices.
He also says "the most expensive homes in the world, based on this metric, are number three, Vancouver. Why? Because 60 percent of the cost of building a home goes to permits...". I have no idea what point he's making here. Based on what metric, median home price? Monthly mortgage payments? Why do I care about Vancouver, a Canadian city, being number three? Then he talks about how "the incumbents that own assets have weaponized government". Either he's switched to talking about oligopolistic lobbyists in general without saying so or he's still talking about Canada. I dunno. Someone please explain. Then he says "this is the transfer I'm going to be speaking about". Also, everything he just said is talking about how there exists a group of people trying to PREVENT transfers of wealth to new entrants. And there was huge applause after that sentence. Nutsos, all of them.
Ok next slide. Galloway presents two pie charts, comparing the share of household wealth by age in 1989 to 2023. So he's talking directly about inequality in wealth now. Inequality in the US is really really bad, that's a fact. I'm a big fan of the work of Emmanuel Saez, Gabriel Zucman, and Thomas Piketty. These people have been at the forefront of research on inequality for many years now and though their work is not flawless, I'm convinced by the data they present and the methods by which they have aggregated the data and what they show is that inequality is worse than even what the pie charts Galloway presents suggest. However, this is not to say that Galloway makes a valid argument. Please note the grey bits in the pie chart. If Galloway has shown the numbers for everyone under 40 and above 70, the group that's excluded are those between 40 and 70. So those in the age range of 40-70 owned 100 - 19 - 12 = 69% of household wealth in 1989 and 100 - 30 - 7 = 63% in 2023. I could probably go and find how the age demographics of the population have changed over time and I think that with declining birth rates, the percentage change in age demographics would be pretty close to the percentage change in household wealth but I'm tired of beating every slide to death so I'll leave that to someone else if anyone's motivated enough to do that (if my hypothesis is wrong here just comment and I'll make that change). My first thought when I saw this though was again, this guy has paid no regard to structural change in society. Given the increased accessibility of buying stocks over the past three decades is it really that surprising that older people who have had more time and cash at the start of the digital age to invest in companies that are now massive mega-corporations have experienced a higher return on their capital. This is not to say that none of this change in the share of wealth held by those under 40 is due to some inherent unfairness in our society and I have neither the time nor knowledge to separate these effects out but to say that this was a "purposeful" effort to cut their wealth in half is complete and utter bullshit. Also, this guy makes another causal claim WITH NOTHING BUT A CHANGE IN SHARE OF HOUSEHOLD WEALTH. Congratulations everyone Scott Galloway has just made every econometrician in the world redundant, I always knew my professors were just trying to confuse me with funny symbols and Greek letters, someone get this guy a Nobel Prize.
Then while introducing his next slide Galloway says that his analyst's presence in the audience "brings the average age of the entire conference down in 11 days". So he's saying that TED knows exactly who's showing up to their event before it happens and that they have the exact birthdates of everyone in the audience too and that they've given this information to one of their speakers. A friend of mine has told me he's just making a joke and that I should let this point go because I'm being too anal about things but yeah I become anal about things when someone suggests sweeping institutional changes in a talk viewed by millions of people so thought I'd include it anyways just as another example of the bullshit this guy has been spewing.
When he moves on to the actual content in the slide the first point he makes is about lower acceptance rates in schools. So I don't have data on this because I couldn't be bothered to go find any so again, I'll change my statement if anyone has reliable data indicating otherwise but I think its pretty safe to say that way less people used to apply than before and combined with an increase in international student applications and enrollments the competition is just way higher than before. The most obvious explanation would be that higher education institutions have made the mistake of not increasing enrollments at a rate quick enough to meet demand. However, according to US News (https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-many-universities-are-in-the-us-and-why-that-number-is-changing) there were 3982 degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the US. and UCLA is ranked 15th in national universities. So why is it surprising now that university education is becoming more popular that higher ranked universities are harder to get into. So instead of expanding enrollment I think that a well thought out plan of affirmative action would be a much better option of giving "unremarkable kids and giving them a shot at being remarkable" (what this well thought out plan may be I don't know, I honestly didn't even search up any statistics about affirmative action this was just the first solution I thought of that didn't involve ignoring the crowning achievement of statistics). To his credit, Galloway does include a point about income-based affirmative action at the end of his talk, though he overwhelmingly emphasises increasing enrollment in schools. I don't have any data about that but I think that class sizes at public universities are large enough as it is.
The rest of the slide gives numbers on college debt of house price compared to first year income. College debt is ridiculously high and many people struggle because of it. I don't have the solution and neither does Galloway because he doesn't really mention it. I think that house price-to-first year income is a poor comparison because it doesn't take into account average rate of income increase and no normal person from any generation is looking to buy a house with first year income but there's probably a more appropriate metric out there that shows a similar change anyways so I'm ok with that.
Then he talks about him and his "colleagues" who "artificially constrain supply to create aspiration and scarcity". I would like to meet the professors who have control over enrollment rates because none of mine did. Then he says "to my colleagues in higher ed: we're public servants, not fucking Chanel bags". The marketing professor from NYU says he's a public servant...ok.
The slide after that compares Harvard's increase in endowment compared to their increase in enrollment and he calls them a "hedge fund offering classes". I see no issue with this point, he made a great argument, can't really criticise anything here.
Don't worry though he makes up for it by immediately making one of the most egregious statements in this whole talk. We're looking at his next slide, the one titled "Grand Bargain" now. He says that the government should take some of the money that's supposed to be used to forgive existing loans to about 500 of the top public universities to reduce tuition by 2% and year, expand enrollments by 6% a year, and increase vocational programs to 20% of the degrees granted. Then the slide after that, claims this will double freshman seats and cut costs in half in just 10 years. Ok so he thinks that most of the money "earmarked to bail out the one third of people that got to go to college on the backs of the two thirds that didn't" should go to future students instead because, I assume from the tone of his words, he doesn't think they need or deserve all that loan forgiveness. So why bring up the increase in college debt previously (the slide I talked about three paragraphs ago)? Anyways that's not the crazy thing. Let's see what happens if you reduce tuition by 2% a year for 10 years. So the calculation goes like this 0.98^{10} is approximately equal to 0.81. So with the number he puts up, tuition decreases by 19% in ten years. If everything before this slide could be attributed to cherry-picking, stupidity, or lack of good data, then fine he's just ignorant even though he shouldn't have been if he went up there to make that talk. But now this is just a FUCKING BAREFACED LIE. I cannot think of a greater insult to the audience's intelligence than the fact that this guy didn't think anyone would pull out a fucking calculator and do the calculation themselves. I won't blame the audience for not saying anything because I'm not sure I would have wanted to do that either but at least from youtube and reddit comments there are a decent number of people who didn't realise this. A similar calculation shows that expanding enrollment by 6% per year increases seats by about 80% total (1.06^{10}). Not sure how that translates in terms of freshman seats but at least this is closer than the tuition claim.
Then his next slide compares wages to the s&p500. This is the point of u/JustTaxLandLol's post and I think his post and the discussion in the comments covers most if not all of my thoughts so you can just read that. https://www.reddit.com/badeconomics/comments/1cc3rs8/scott_galloway_compares_median_wage_to_sp500/
Ok next slide, "The Transfer: Purposeful". Oh yay he's about to make another causal claim with nothing but a graph on the change in top marginal tax rates for corporations and individuals. And if we skip ahead to the next slide we'll realise that this claim is that the gradual decrease in top marginal tax rates for corporations and individuals results in lowered senior poverty and child poverty either remains constant or increases. Yes everybody the newest advancement in economic research has just been released. Lowering top tax rates decreases senior poverty and increases child poverty. And Scott Galloway made that argument in 24 seconds (transcript on TED website has time markers).
Man I really set out with the intention to keep the tone of this post as neutral as I could but I'm just writing out my internal dialogue with less swearing now. I apologise to those who would have preferred a more careful and less emotional knee-jerk response of an analysis but this is a reddit post, its not like there are standards.
Now he moves on to talking about social security. Galloway says "it would cost 11 billion dollars to expand the child tax credit. But that gets stripped out of the infrastructure bill". So zero explanation about why it would cost 11 billion dollars to expand the child tax credit, why not more or less, no comment about how many children it would affect, how much money it would mean for each child or family, just some number that you have to accept. Most of the time there's no why to the amount of funding that the government allocates to policies but at least there's some breakdown to how its going to be used, Galloway doesn't even have that. This is before we even consider the fact that child tax credit was expanded this year (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/child-tax-credit-2024-who-qualifies/). Maybe he's talking about some other issue that I'm not aware of but I don't think so. He says he got the social security spending data from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which is a think tank. I don't want to sort through their website to fact check so I'll accept it as the truth but as far as I know the actual social security administration releases their facts and figures for the year August of next year so I'm not sure why he didn't just use the 2022 numbers from a more reliable source.
His next few couple slides are about the increasing age of politicians. I think this is a great point but he probably should have used a better example of a younger politician than Justin Trudeau.
Then at around the 10 minute mark, using his slide titled "Generational Theft", Galloway claims that "we pumped the economy" during covid so that the Nasdaq would gain value, causing "intergenerational theft". I don't know if he thinks it was intentional or not but how is he going to completely ignore the fact that the stimulus checks were primarily for households that were struggling due to the greatest unemployment rate we have seen in our lifetime (https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/06/11/unemployment-rose-higher-in-three-months-of-covid-19-than-it-did-in-two-years-of-the-great-recession/). I'm really kind of tired of this so I'll let those at the CBR make my argument for me. "Within the first 10 days, households spent an average of 29 cents from every dollar received. The bulk of this spending was on food, rent, and bills" (https://www.chicagobooth.edu/review/how-effective-were-stimulus-checks-us). Damn so turns out struggling families did need these stimulus checks pretty urgently. Shocker. I also think that most people in finance would agree that tech stocks surged over covid because people needed fucking technology... People built PCs to play video games, used online shopping services because they couldn't go to malls, all that.
The next slide is supposed to support his point that the increase in stock prices doesn't allow young people to find "disruption". What. The only thing that matters to any investor is the percentage increase in value of the stock price after you've invested. It doesn't matter if 7 dollars is 1 share of apple or 0.04 of a share of apple. Its stock price going up by 100% means you get 14 dollars either way. I think this guy's arguments are getting dumber as the talk goes on, I actually had to go and find data to refute his points earlier on. Now arithmetic does the work for me, I should have hired a grade schooler to do my analysis.
His next point is about how algorithmic content selection is bad. Yeah its bad. Its bad for everyone, turns everyone into psychos. Though I think there's a very good argument to be made about how such content could affect developing brains. He makes a point about age-gating social media at the end of the talk. This is actually the only drastic measure he proposes that I agree with so I'll leave this alone too.
After a couple slides about Zuckerberg and TikTok (which I agree with, though I think Zuckerberg's damage probably leans more towards older people than young now), he gives a bunch of graphs showing upward trends in all sorts of terrible things happening to young people. Every single one is an issue of critical importance in the US, but importantly, no comparison to older people. For all we know, the trend on every graph could be the same or even worse for older generations. If I had written about this first then I'd go and find the data for it but at this point I just want to be done with this but can't stop without getting to the end so I'm just gonna slap this slide with lack of comparisons and move on.
His next slide shows the difference in 30 to 34 year olds who have at least one child, some of that is probably due to family planning but I still think its a great indicator of people not wanting to have children because its not affordable. Great point, I believe in it.
Next slide, oh god it's a happiness report. I think happiness reports are a fun conversational tidbit but I see no way for it to be reliable enough to be used as an argument in any semi-serious setting. That said, I have no idea how they do these measurements so maybe I'm wrong.
As if the happiness report wasn't bad enough, Galloway is gonna compare the biggest one-day market cap gain (in an unspecified time frame) to the budget of several policies implemented by the government. Oh man. This is too stupid, there's so many things to pick from it'd take too much effort to sort through them. Someone else please make the argument for me.
Then he says universal basic income should have been called negative income tax. Wow the frequency of good points is going up, though I think this is accompanied by an increase in the frequency of absolutely idiotic arguments.
Then he says we should eliminate capital gains tax deduction. The issue of taxing capital gains is a very serious one, but I don't think it actually matters that much how much we tax realised capital gains. Again, not an expert but here's my understanding. If you have a high net worth with a lot of it in stocks and you need cash, you don't have to sell them and get taxed on the realised gains. You go to the bank and say I want to borrow money, I'm going to put these stocks up as collateral so if I can't pay you back you can take these stocks which are somewhere around the value of the principal amount plus total interest over the course of this loan. Because the bank is now convinced they'll get the money back regardless of if you make the payments or not, they say ok here's the money you asked for at a nice low interest rate. Then you take the money, you keep your stocks, which will probably gain value at a rate that exceeds the interest rate by a pretty decent margin, and you can probably make your interest payments pretty easily because hey, you were rich to begin with. If you're really strapped for cash a couple years down the line, you can sell some of the stocks that are now worth more than they were before and cover your payments and not have to pay taxes on the rest that you don't have to sell. Free money. There's plenty more ways to avoid taxes if you're rich but you get my point by now. Now that's a lot of problems without a solution. Luckily we have some economists far more skilled than I am who work very hard to find solutions to these problems. Here's one example of a policy that may help (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/05/03/opinion/global-billionaires-tax.html). This is an opinion piece written by Gabriel Zucman (famous economist), for the New York Times. If you don't have an NYT subscription, sorry for giving a link you can't read but if you search Gabriel Zucman billionaire tax, you could probably get a decent idea of what this talks about. Here's Zucman tweeting his proposal for his suggestion (https://twitter.com/gabriel\_zucman/status/1763253132572729623). It probably requires a little more thinking than the NYT article but he did present this at the G20 so that might sound more exciting to you than some news article.
Then Galloway says "we need to remove 230 protection for all algorithmically-elevated content". Zero mention on what 230 protection is so here's an explanation (https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230). Basically that was a fancy way of saying that companies should be held accountable of the content on their platform, even if it's posted by an unrelated third party. I'm not sure getting rid of it in its entirety is a great idea (though I have no arguments against that except Orwellian ones) but I certainly agree that most if not all social media platforms have abused this protection and it should be at the very least restricted. To what extent? Again, I have no clue.
Then he goes "break up Big Tech". That's the whole suggestion. This is a terrible idea but the fact that he doesn't elaborate more on how to do this, the ramifications of doing so, or really provide any explanation at all makes me automatically ignore this. Then he makes his point about age-gating social media, like I said before, I agree with it.
His next suggestions are universal pre-K, great idea, then "reinstate the expanded child-tax credit". Not sure what he's going on about here, child tax credit exists and like I said before, was just expanded. Then it's income-based affirmative action. I don't know what kind of affirmative action is best and that sounds like an interesting idea so I won't criticise it. I think the rest of his suggestions are pretty normative arguments so I'll leave those alone too.
Don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly agree with the overall theme of his talk. I believe that young people in the US (and many places worldwide) are at a massive disadvantage when it comes to accumulating wealth, buying homes, inter-generational transfers, etc. But you cannot go up on a popular platform like this, make claims as sweeping as he has, and make suggestions as radical and drastic as he has, with garbage arguments and data like this. Saying the right things for the wrong reasons is arguably worse than just saying the wrong thing because it makes it easy for those who want the status quo to remain to make counterarguments. Given how divisive opinions have become over the past decade or so I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how many people are eating this up but it kinda scares me how easily people will eat up this shit as long as its for a cause that sounds like its going for some kind of radical change for the good of all and has some imaginary "them" as the common enemy to everyone.
So that's it, I've finally covered all his points. I'm free, thank fuck. I should really proofread this but this has been my past eight hours and my back is breaking from all this sitting, I'm just gonna post this and read it over tomorrow. Maybe do a tl;dr, fix some formatting.
EDIT: As u/myphriendmike and u/Mordoci have pointed out, my dummy corp example was just tax fraud, that's illegal and so it's a bad example, I've removed it. Zucman has some estimates on the "real" tax rate wealthy people (mostly billionaires) pay, maybe I'll include that at some point.
I also corrected my wording in some places.

The End of the Old Testament

Beginning in 606 BC, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon launched the first of three successive attacks upon the city of Jerusalem and the people of Judah. During the second attack (597 BC), Ezekiel, Daniel, and about 10,000 other inhabitants of Jerusalem were carried into captivity. During the third attack (587-586 BC) Jerusalem was completely destroyed. Her walls were broken down. The gates were burned. The temple was destroyed. The city was left desolate in shambles.
While in captivity, Daniel foretold that the Babylonian Empire would be overtaken by the Medes and the Persians, the Medes and the Persians would be conquered by the Greeks, the Greeks would be conquered by the Maccabeans (Hasmoneans), and the Hasmoneans would be conquered by the Romans. The Romans later installed the Herodians as vassal (or "client") kings of Rome over Judea. Daniel further foretold that the establishment of the kingdom of God would take place during the days of the this mixed empire (Dan. 2:41-44); this empire began near the end of the "intertestamental period," spilling over into the times of the New Testament.

The Intertestamental Period

The time between the last writings of the Old Testament and the appearance of Christ is known as the “intertestamental” (or “between the testaments”) period. It lasted from the prophet Malachi’s time (about 400 BC) to the preaching of John the Baptist (about AD 25). The political, religious, and social atmosphere of Israel changed significantly during this period. Again, much of what happened was predicted by the prophet Daniel. (See Daniel chapters 2, 7, 8, and 11 and compare to historical events.)
Israel was under the control of the Persian Empire about 539–332 BC. The Persians allowed the Jews to practice their religion with little interference. They were even allowed to rebuild and worship at the temple (2 Chron. 36:22-23, Ezra 1:1-4). This span of time included the last 100 years of the Old Testament period and about the first 100 years of the intertestamental period. This time of relative peace and contentment was just the calm before the storm.
During the intertestamental period, Alexander the Great defeated Darius of Persia, bringing Greek rule to the world. Alexander was a student of Aristotle and was well-educated in Greek philosophy and politics. Alexander required that Greek culture be promoted in every land that he conquered. As a result, the Hebrew Old Testament was translated into Greek, becoming the translation known as the Septuagint. Most of the New Testament references to Old Testament Scripture use the Septuagint phrasing. Alexander did allow religious freedom for the Jews, though he still strongly promoted Greek lifestyles. This was not a good turn of events for Israel, since the Greek culture was very worldly, humanistic, and ungodly. As a result, many in the Jewish population would begin to adopt increasingly Hellenistic views and ways of thinking about God and the Scriptures.
After Alexander died, Judea was ruled by a series of successors, culminating in the Selucid king Antiochus Epiphanes. Antiochus did far more than refuse religious freedom to the Jews. Around 167 BC, he overthrew the rightful line of the priesthood and desecrated the temple, defiling it with unclean animals and a pagan altar (see Mark 13:14 for a similar event to take place in the then future). Antiochus’ act was the religious equivalent of rape. Eventually, Jewish resistance to Antiochus, led by Judas Maccabeus and the Hasmoneans, restored Jewish priests and rescued the temple. The period of the Maccabean Revolt was one of war, violence, and infighting.
Around 63 BC, Pompey of Rome conquered Israel, putting all of Judea under control of the Caesars. This eventually led to Herod being made the vassal (or "client") king of Judea by the Roman emperor and senate. This is the nation that taxed and controlled the Jews and eventually executed the Messiah on a Roman cross. Roman, Greek, and Hebrew cultures were now mixed together in Judea.
The years of Herod’s rule were a time of turmoil for the Jewish people. He was an Idumean. His ancestors had been forced to convert to Judaism, but the Jews never accepted Herod. In fact, they resented him. He was the representative of a foreign power. Scheming, jealous, and cruel, he killed two of his own wives and at least three of his own sons. Just five days before his own death, Herod had his oldest son, Antipater, put to death. Augustus once said that it was better to be Herod’s pig than his son (a wordplay, since the Greek words for pig, hus, and for son, huios, sound very much alike). His relations with Rome were sometimes troubled due to the unsettled conditions in the empire. Herod was a strong supporter of Antony, though he could not tolerate Cleopatra with whom Antony had become enamored. When Antony was defeated by Octavian (31 BC), Herod pledged his full support to Octavian.
Herod proved himself an efficient administrator on behalf of Rome. He kept the peace among a people who were hard to rule. He was a cruel and merciless man. Yet, during a time of great famine, he used his own funds to feed the people. Among his many building projects in Jerusalem, his greatest contribution to the Jews was the beautification of the Temple in Jerusalem. This beautification seems to have largely been an attempt to conciliate his subjects. The Temple, decorated with white marble, gold, and jewels, became proverbial for its splendor: “Whoever has not seen the temple of Herod has seen nothing beautiful.”
It was during the reign of Herod that Jesus was born (Matt. 2:1-18, Luke 1:5). Herod was the king who ordered the execution of the male babies in Bethlehem, for fear of being usurped by the prophesied Messiah (Matt. 2:16-18).

Major Political Events of the New Testament

At his death (4 BC), Herod left his kingdom to three of his sons. Antipas became tetrarch (“ruler of a fourth”) of Galilee and Perea (4 BC–AD 39). Philip became tetrarch of the Gentile regions to the northeast of the Sea of Galilee (4 BC—AD 34). Archelaus was to be king of Judea and Samaria, but Rome refused to give him the title of king. He was ethnarch (“ruler of the people”) of these two territories. He proved to be a poor ruler and was deposed (6 AD). His territories were placed under the direct rule of Roman procurators under the control of the governor of Syria.
John the Baptist rebuked Antipas for divorcing his wife in order to marry Herodias, the wife of Philip, his half brother. In retaliation, Herodias induced her dancing daughter to demand the head of John the Baptist. Antipas yielded to the grisly request (Mark 6:17-29, Matt. 14:3-12). Jesus once referred to Antipas as “that fox” (Luke 13:32). Later Jesus stood trial before him (Luke 23:7-12).
Except for brief periods, Roman governors ruled Archelaus’s former territory. The fifth procurator appointed to rule over Judea was Pontius Pilate, before whom Jesus stood trial prior to his crucifixion. Interestingly, three times Pilate pronounced Jesus innocent, yet he lacked the courage to set him free for fear of the angry mob whipped up by the enemies of Christ (John 18).
Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod the Great, executed James, the apostle and son of Zebedee, and imprisoned Peter (Acts 12:1-5). He was smitten of God when he accepted the praise of the people, “It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.” Luke tells us that because “he gave not God the glory,” “the angel of the Lord smote him" and "he was eaten of worms," and died (Acts 12:21-23).
The governor Felix heard the apostle Paul preach the gospel and trembled at the word, yet postponed obeying the gospel (Acts 24–25). He hoped that Paul would bribe him with money, but Paul never did and remained a prisoner for two years under the governor Felix.
Festus, who took the place of Felix, also heard Paul’s case (Acts 25). Willing to do the Jews a favor, Festus suggested that Paul return to Jerusalem to stand trial. Being a Roman citizen, and knowing that the Jews intended to kill him, Paul appealed his case to Caesar.
This presented a problem for Festus. He had no choice but to send Paul to Rome. The problem was that he did not have any charges to write in the papers to accompany Paul to Rome. Thus, he asked Herod Agrippa II, great-grandson of Herod the Great, to listen to Paul’s self-defense and see if he could determine what charges should be written against Paul before sending his case to Rome. Agrippa heard Paul’s self-defense and was “almost” persuaded to become a Christian himself (Acts 26:28).
Upon the death of Festus, Albinis and then Florus were appointed governors of Judea. It was during Florus' reign that the Jewish revolt of AD 66-70 took place, which ended with the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70.

Groups, Peoples, and Philosophies of the Day

During the span of the Greek and Roman occupations, some important political/religious groups emerged in Israel. In a study of the New Testament, it is important to consider the historical background and significance of some of the Jewish groups in Palestine at the time, whose names are familiar as participants in the drama of early Christianity. These were the groups with whom Christ Jesus had to deal as he observed and often challenged their views. Entrenched in positions of authority and leadership through anciently established hierarchy, tradition, or inheritance, their resistance to change was almost inevitable.
Most familiar of the New Testament parties and groups in political and religious life were the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the scribes. The nationalistic and revolutionary Zealots are also mentioned. The Herodians were exclusively a political party, members and supporters of the family of the Herods, whose titular authority was permitted by Rome. Finally, there's the Galileeans and the Samaritans, who weren't necessarily attached to any of the aformentioned ideologies, but were citizens of their respective states.
Jews and Samaritans were to have no dealings with each other, so Samaritans technically had no dog in this fight between the Jews' themselves and their own ideologies, but it's important to mention them because they contribute to the narrative of the New Testament through Jesus' dealings with them, and his famous parable of "the Good Samaritan."
THE SADDUCEES
The Sadducees constituted a conservative priestly party among the Jews. Their name probably derived from Zadok, the high priest who anointed Solomon as king (1 Kings 1:39). Comprised of high-priestly families from the Jewish aristocracy, who had come into power largely during the Maccabean War, they were educated and wealthy men, fairly few but wielding great power. No man who was unable to trace his descent from a priestly family could offer sacrifice in the Temple. The Sadducees represented the aristocrats and the wealthy. The Sadducees, who wielded power through the Sanhedrin, rejected all but the Mosaic books of the Old Testament. They refused to believe in resurrection and were generally shadows of the Greeks, whom they greatly admired.
While upholding the spread of Greek culture, the Sadducees stressed the letter of the Mosaic Law, or Torah. They denied the authority even of ancient tradition, and rejected the current concepts of angels, immortality, resurrection, and final judgment (Mark 12:18‐27, Acts 4:1-2; 23:8). They jealously guarded Temple worship and sacrificial rites, objecting to Jesus' cleansing of the Temple, which infringed their religious authority. After the destruction of the Second (or Herod's) Temple in 70 AD, when the Jewish state came to an end, their sway virtually ceased. In the absence of the Temple, the office of priest became obsolete, to be succeeded by that of the rabbi in the synagogue.
THE PHARISEES
It was when the people were in exile, Solomon's Temple having been destroyed, that the need arose for local gathering places, which became the forerunners of the synagogue. Even after some of the exiles returned to Palestine, and the Second (or Zerubbabel's) Temple was built, the continued dispersion of many Jews and the demand for Scriptural knowledge that came with the religious reformation of Ezra and Nehemiah made the synagogue and its school increasingly necessary. In New Testament times they prevailed in all cities and towns where Jewish people resided.
The beginnings of Pharisaism go back to the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, who lived about 450 years before the New Testament era. Ezra did much to bring stability to his nation in a period of downfall and discouragement. He upheld two main concepts, which formed, as it were, the heart of Pharisaism. First, he erected a distinct barrier between Jew and Gentile. The Jews he regarded as God's holy people. Intermarriage between them and others of mixed ancestry', such as the Samaritans, was not to be tolerated. Also, he made the Law of Moses the central point of Jewish religion, virtually establishing it as the constitution of the Jewish people.
In their objection to the Hellenizing of Judaism, after the rise of Alexander the Great, many Jews became even more strict in their desire to maintain the purity of their law and tradition. Thus it is easy to see how they came to be called Pharisees (Hebrew Perushim), meaning literally "separatists." These were the ones who adopted, or popularized, a prescriptive method of interpreting the Law of Moses, as opposed to the "descriptive wisdom" methodology of Jesus as seen in the New Testament.
Contributing a democratic influence in Judaism, Pharisees were basically laymen, coming from all walks of life, often including scribes and priests. Like the Sadducees, they sought to uphold the Mosaic Law, but their concern was to adapt its teachings to current situations, and their influence was primarily in the synagogue.
Much of the strength of Pharisaism came from the adaptability of this movement to changing conditions, a tendency which helped in preparing for Christianity. It was the Pharisees who were largely responsible for taking the Messianic idea and keeping it alive in the hopes of the people. Also, it was they who upheld the belief in immortality and the resurrection, to which the Sadducees took great exception. Unlike the Zealots, they generally rejected violence as a means to national liberation.
While modern research is providing justification for more favorable opinions concerning the Pharisees' role in history, there was ample room for Jesus' repeated denunciations of the abuses and inconsistencies he observed. The Pharisees added to the Law of Moses through oral tradition and eventually considered their own laws more important than God’s (Mark 7:1-23). While Christ’s teachings often agreed with the Pharisees, he railed against their hollow legalism and lack of compassion. Nevertheless, Pharisees such as Nicodemus (John 3:1; 19:39), Gamaliel (Acts 5:34) and his famous pupil, Saul of Tarsus (Acts 22:3) certainly represented the highest thought in Judaism.
THE SCRIBES
The powerful seventy-one-member Sanhedrin or Council, the highest Jewish court, was made up of Pharisees and Sadducees, with the high priest as president.
The scribes, strictly speaking, formed a legal profession rather than a party. They—and a nearly identical group, the lawyers—were usually Pharisees, though occasionally there were Sadducean scribes as well. They were professional teachers who were interpreters and transcribers of the Law at a time when hand-copying was the only method of preserving any document.
So insistent were the Jews upon maintaining the absolute accuracy of their sacred Scriptures that the work of the scribes demanded exceptional skill and mastery of the text. The Jews considered the Law of Moses to be the infallible standard, God's own law. It was their national, civil, moral, and religious law in one.
The scribes not only transmitted but contributed to "the tradition of the elders"—an ever-increasing body of legalistic detail, which, when committed to writing, formed the Talmud.
It was usual for the scribes to have another occupation to supplement their unpaid teaching and writing work. Their work combined the many functions of judge, lawyer, preacher, teacher, and scholar. The office of the scribe gradually merged into that of the rabbi, for when the canon of the Old Testament was finally settled in 90 AD—largely the result of the Pharisees' work—the need for the scribes as interpreters of the Law diminished.
There are many references to scribes in the Old Testament, but clearly "Ezra the scribe" (Neh. 8:1; 12:26) was the true antecedent of those referred to in the New.
THE ZEALOTS
The Zealots were members of a first-century political movement among Judean Jews who sought to overthrow the occupying Roman government. The word zealot derives from the Greek zelotes, meaning “emulator or (zealous) follower.”
According to the Jewish historian Josephus, the Zealots “agree in all other things with the Pharisaic notions; but they have an inviolable attachment to liberty, and say that God is to be their only Ruler and Lord" (Antiquities 18.1.6).
Hezekiah, under whose leadership the Zealots arose, was martyred by Herod. Their appearance on the political horizon of Palestine came early in the Roman occupation. According to Josephus, they "were particularly active in AD 6 during the revolt of Judas of Gamala, in Galilee, who maintained that compliance with the Roman demand for a census would constitute an act of enslavement 'among Palestinians." Josephus was apparently unaware of the role played by Hezekiah in the rise of the Zealots. This appears from his reference to Judas as their author.
They "were most influential in Galilee and later in Jerusalem, especially from the time of Herod (37 BC –AD 4) until the fall of Jerusalem (AD 70)."
"They refused to pay taxes and considered it a sin to acknowledge loyalty to Ceasar." They "harassed the Roman administration with every means at their disposal." They "relentlessly opposed the Roman attempt to bring Judea under her idolatrous rule."
It was from among the Zealots that the extreme Sicarri arose. The Sicarii were famous for hiding their daggers in their cloaks and using them to secretly target their enemies during the festivals (Antiquities 20.8.10). Some sources make a sharp distinction between the Zealots and the Sicarii, while others do not. It seems fair to say that the Sicarii were part of the Zealot movement, but not all Zealots were Sicarii. Thus, “Zealot” was an umbrella term for the revolutionaries who rebelled against Rome.
Some sources say that those who belonged to the family dynasty of Hezekiah were all Sicarii. Wikipedia designates the Sicarii as “a splinter group of the Jewish Zealots.” The Sicarii are mentioned in Acts 21:38, where Paul was asked if he was the Egyptian who had led 4000 assassins (or “dagger-bearers”) into the wilderness.
Of importance in New Testament history, the Zealots led a rebellion when Rome introduced imperial cult worship. The Great Jewish Revolt began in AD 66. The Zealots successfully overtook Jerusalem, but their revolt was ultimately unsuccessful. In AD 70, the Romans destroyed the city of Jerusalem and the Temple. A remnant of the Zealots then took refuge in Masada.
Josephus records many of the atrocities committed by the Zealots when they possessed Jerusalem, blaming them for being the ones truly responsible for its destruction, as the city was left quite desolate and chaotic by the time the Roman general Titus even came to finish it off.
It is my belief that there are, in fact, 5 kingdoms which precede the kingdom of God in Daniel chapter 2, and not 4, as commonly taught. It is also my belief that the fourth kingdom was the Hasmonean (Maccabean) Dynasty, and that the fifth kingdom (thus, the "Beast" of Revelation; see Daniel 7) wasn't Rome, but apostate Israel instead. It is my belief that the Beast represents apostate Israel as a whole, the culmination of which was the Zealots. This explains how it had authority over every nation (the Jewish Diaspora) and how it conquered the saints (same). The Zealots were just a symptom of the disease, but John’s vision focuses on them more because they were the ones who brought about the eschatological war.
THE HERODIANS
The Herodians held political power, and most scholars believe that they were a political party that supported King Herod Antipas, the Roman Empire’s ruler over much of the land of the Jews from 4 BC to AD 39. The Herodians favored submitting to the Herods, and therefore to Rome, for political expediency. This support of Herod compromised Jewish independence in the minds of the Pharisees, making it difficult for the Herodians and Pharisees to unite and agree on anything. But one thing did unite them—opposing Jesus. Herod himself wanted Jesus dead (Luke 13:31), and the Pharisees had already hatched plots against him (John 11:53), so they joined efforts to achieve their common goal.
The first appearance of the Herodians in Scripture is Mark 3:6, "And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him." Jesus had been doing miracles, which caused some of the people to believe in him for salvation, and that threatened the power and position of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Herodians. The Herodians again joined with the Pharisees to challenge Jesus, to see if they could trap Jesus in his words by a trick question, to either discredit him or to get him to stop preaching (Matt. 22:15-22).
Jesus regarded the two groups as in unity against him and warned his followers against them: "Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod." (Mark 8:15b). Yeast in this context is false teaching, the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah, and hypocrisy. Many scholars believe that the Herodians looked to Herod as a messiah, a savior of sorts who would put the Jewish land in favor with the Roman Empire and bring blessings to them. Jesus’ presentation of himself as the Messiah was a threat to the Herodians' attempt to make Herod the influential political power in the land.
In the then future (now past; we're Preterists), the Bible tells us that many would be deceived by an Antichrist figure and would view this Antichrist as a "messiah." He would be a political leader as well as a false religious leader, and he would promise peace and prosperity through policy. The Herodians at the time of Jesus were also focused on political goals rather than the eternal goals that Jesus proclaimed. They thought Herod might bring peace politically. But Jesus came to bring us salvation from our sins. The lesson we learn from the error of the Herodians is that we are not to trust in man's devices or politicians, as they trusted in Herod (Psa. 118:8). We are to put our trust in the Lord.
THE GALILEEANS
A Galilean was an inhabitant of the area in Israel near the Sea of Galilee. In the time of Christ, Galilee was the northernmost of the three provinces of Israel, above Samaria in the middle and Judea in the south. Approximately 700 years before Christ, Galilee’s Israelite inhabitants were conquered by Assyria. Most of the Jews living there were relocated to Assyria, while non-Jewish immigrants moved into Galilee (2 Kin. 15:29–17:24). This is why the Bible sometimes refers to the area as “Galilee of the Gentiles” (Isa. 9:1, Matt. 4:13-16).
Judeans tended to look down on Galileans, viewing them as uneducated and of questionable ancestry (John 1:46; 7:52). Galileans also had a reputation of being rabble-rousers, as they often took part in protests and uprisings against the Roman occupiers. It is significant that Jesus grew up in Galilee (Matt. 2:19‐23) and in Galilee recruited most of his disciples, started his ministry, and performed his first miracles (Matt. 4:17-23, John 2:11). Being Galilean, Jesus “was despised, and we esteemed him not” (Isa. 53:3).
We see glimpses in Scripture of how Galilee may have been a trouble spot for Roman rule. Gamaliel mentioned a failed revolt led by “Judas the Galilean” in Acts 5:37. In Luke 13:1-3, some people told Jesus about an incident involving Galileans: “There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices” (vs. 1). Neither Scripture nor secular history gives any more details regarding this massacre, but it is likely that the Galileans, visiting Jerusalem to offer sacrifices, had been caught up in a nationalistic fervor and started a commotion on the temple mount. The Roman governor Pilate quickly and violently quelled the disturbance, killing the Galileans along with their sacrificial animals, perhaps as a public demonstration of how violators must “atone” for their “sins” against Rome.
Jesus responded to hearing about the massacre of the Galileans with a warning: “Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:2b-3). Instead of conjecturing on the Galileans’ sin, Jesus said to his audience that they needed take care of their own sin. They all needed to repent.
Peter, being a Galilean, spoke in a northern Aramaic dialect, and his accent and vocabulary gave him away when he was trying to remain anonymous on the night of Jesus’ arrest. As Peter was sitting in a courtyard during one of Jesus’ trials, a servant girl came up to him and said, “Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee” (Matt. 26:69c). Later, another servant girl said, “This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth” (vs. 71). A short time later, others said to Peter, “Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee” (vs. 73). Galileans naturally stood out to the people of Jerusalem.
The fact that Jesus lived and ministered in Galilee is yet another example of his identification with those the world rejects. He came to seek and to save the lost. Those who follow his example will likewise proclaim his message and live out his teachings among culture’s outcasts and minister to “the least of these” (Matt. 25:40).
THE SAMARITANS
A Samaritan was a person from Samaria, a region north of Jerusalem. In Jesus’ day, the Jewish people of Galilee and Judea shunned the Samaritans, viewing them as a mixed race who practiced an impure, half-pagan religion.
Samaritans, as a people distinct from the Jews, are first mentioned in the Bible during the time of Nehemiah and the rebuilding of Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity (Ezra 4:17, Neh. 2:10). Both Ezra chapter 4 and a fifth-century BC Aramaic set of documents called the Elephantine Papyri point to a schism between the Jews and Samaritans during this Persian period.
The Samaritans saw themselves as the keepers of the Torah and the true descendants of Israel, from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh. They had their own unique copy of the Pentateuch, the first five books of Moses, and believed they alone preserved the original Mosaic religion. Samaritans also had a unique religious system and established their primary worship site on Mount Gerizim. They considered the Jerusalem temple and the Levitical priesthood illegitimate.
The historian Josephus and Jewish tradition trace the origin of the Samaritans to the captivity of the northern kingdom under Assyria in 721 BC. Jews of the northern kingdom intermarried with Assyrians after the captivity and produced the half-Jewish, half-Gentile Samaritan race. When the Jews accused Jesus of being a “Samaritan” in John 8:48, they were rudely suggesting that he was a half-breed, born of an unfaithful mother.
In New Testament times, the Jews despised Samaritans and would have nothing to do with them. The Samaritans were still living primarily around Mount Gerizim (John 4:1-42), but also kept to their own villages (Matt. 10:5, Luke 9:52). Scripture mentions encounters with Samaritans in towns bordering Samaria (Luke 17:11-19) and on roads between Jerusalem and Jericho (Luke 10:29-37).
Jesus met with difficulty when ministering to people in Samaritan villages (Luke 9:52-53) and at one point told his disciples not to enter them (Matt. 10:5-6). Nonetheless, Christ shared the good news with Samaritans, ministering to a Samaritan woman (John 4:4-26) and healing a Samaritan leper (Luke 17:11-19).
The most recognized Samaritan in the Bible is the one in Jesus’ parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:29-37). A Jewish legal expert had put Jesus to the test, asking him to explain the commandment to “love your neighbor as yourself”; specifically, he asked Jesus to define the word neighbor.
That’s when Jesus told his parable of a man in need, portraying the Samaritan as the hero in the story. In the lawyer’s eyes, the Samaritan was the least likely candidate to act lovingly and compassionately to his neighbor. As intended, the story shocked Christ’s audience of prejudiced Jews. Jesus showed that authentic love must transcend all human boundaries of race, religion, nationality, economic class, and educational status.
In Acts 1:8, Jesus told his disciples that, by the power of the Holy Spirit, they would be his witnesses in Samaria. In Acts chapter 8 the prophecy was fulfilled, and Samaria became an early mission field for the spreading of the Church.

The Shammaite and Hillelite Interpretations of Mosaic Law

Shammai and Hillel were two influential Jewish rabbis whose commentaries on the Torah shaped Jewish theology and philosophy for hundreds of years. The Shammaite and Hillelite schools were the two dominant approaches to Jewish Law during the years of Jesus’ earthly ministry. Unfortunately, the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD resulted in the loss of most records relating to the debates between these two groups. The Hillelite school quickly gained dominance after the Temple was razed, so much of what we know about first-century Hillelite and Shammaite law comes exclusively from later Hillelite writers. These writers portray the Shammaite-Hillelite divide in a manner similar to modern two-party politics, with each side seemingly bound and determined to contradict the other on everything.
According to tradition, Shammai was a Pharisee who taught in the years just prior to Jesus’ birth. In his commentary on the Law, he emphasized the need for Temple rituals, and his interpretation is characterized as strict, literalist, and Israel-centric. The school that followed those interpretations is referred to as the Shammaite interpretation of Jewish Law.
Rabbi Hillel, a contemporary of Shammai, was less concerned with temple worship. His commentary is seen as being more liberal, tolerant, and accepting of Gentiles. Hillel was also known for codifying traditional patterns for exegesis into seven individual rules. His Hillelite school was a rival to the Shammaite approach. After the destruction of the Temple, the influence of the Shammaite school faded, and Hillel’s philosophy became the dominant approach to Jewish Law for more than 400 years.
Scholars are unsure how many of the differences between the Shammaite and Hillelite schools are factual and how many are the products of revisionist history. While Jewish scholars prior to 70 AD make frequent reference to the disagreements between these two groups, the vast majority of surviving records are from Hillelite writers. It’s possible that the Hillelites exaggerated some of the differences between Shammai and Hillel in order to portray Hillel in a more heroic light.
Even with such open questions, it’s clear that the interplay between Shammai and Hillel influenced Judaism during the early Christian era. The rivalry between the two schools greatly contributed to Judaism’s growing belief that the oral law—such as promoted in the Shammaite or Hillelite schools—was as authoritative as the written Torah.
Some scholars debate which school, Shammaite or Hillelite, had a greater influence on the theology of the New Testament. Jesus’ restrictive rules on divorce echo those of Shammai, while Hillel allowed for a wider range of acceptable reasons to end a marriage. Jesus also phrased the “Golden Rule” using a more challenging, positive expression, in contrast to Hillel’s lighter, negative expression of the same basic idea. At the same time, Jesus was welcoming of non-Jewish people and often castigated the Pharisees for their excessive legalism. The fact is that Jesus presented the truth, and his agreement with either Shammai or Hillel was secondary and coincidental. Jesus spoke the Father’s Word, and his teaching cannot be seen as a defense of any rabbi (John 12:49).
There is also an academic debate over the influence of Shammai and Hillel on the theology of the apostle Paul. On one hand, Paul was a student of Gamaliel, who came from the Hillelite school and might have even been Hillel’s grandson. But, prior to his conversion, Paul (Saul) was hardly a tolerant, Gentile-friendly Pharisee. Rather, in opposition to Gamaliel’s teaching, Paul took a severe stance. And in his letters Paul expresses an Israel-centric, all-or-nothing obedience to the Law (Rom. 3:19-28; cp. James 2:10), which many scholars would identify more with Shammai. Of course, as he was writing inspired Scripture, Paul was not concerned with what rabbi might have had a past influence upon him; he was “moved by the Holy Ghost” and wrote what the Spirit wanted (2 Pet. 1:21).

The Ediomite Lineage of Christ's Enemies

Around 63 BC, the Roman Triumvirate Pompey brought Judea under Roman Rule. He pushed all the Jews into the areas of Gallilee, Jericho and Jersalem. Then he settled Greeks and Syrians in the rest of the land of Palestine. Originally, Galilee was settled by the tribe of Benjamin who always followed the tribe of Judah.
A few years earlier, Hyrcanus, a descendant of the Maccabees, conquered the land of Idumea. Idumea was the home land of the Edomites. He forced all the Edomites to be circumcised and follow the Jewish laws.
The Jewish Encyclopedia, 1903 edition, says under the heading Edom:

"They were then incorporated with the Jewish nation, and their country was called by the Greeks and Romans “Idumea” . . . From this time the Idumeans ceased to be a separate nation, though the name “Idumea” still existed (in) the time of Jerome."

The Edomites were the descendants of Esau. Esau married into the families of the Canaanites. The Canaanites were the people that God told Moses and the Israelites to kill and drive out of the land of Canaan. They were warned never to mix or marry with the Canaanites. God gave Edom the land south of Judea. They were driven westward by the Natabeans to the area that became Idumea. Their border was only 19 miles from Jerusalem.
Flavus Josephus who lived from 37 AD to 100 AD confirms Edomite occupation in southern Judea:

“That country is also called Judea, and the people Jews; and this name is given also to as many as embrace their religion (Judaism), though of other nations. But then upon what foundation so good a governor as Hyrcanus (grandson of Mattathias patriarch of the Maccabees, a family of Judahite patriots of 2nd and 1st centuries B.C.) took upon himself to compel these Idumeans (Edomites) either to become Jews or to leave their country, deserves great consideration. I suppose it was because they had long ago been driven out of the land of Edom, and had SEIZED ON AND POSSESSED THE TRIBE OF SIMEON (their land not the people), AND ALL THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH, WHICH WAS THE PECULIAR INHERITANCE OF THE WORSHIPERS OF THE TRUE GOD WITHOUT IDOLATRY…”

The word “Jews” in Scripture often refers to the inhabitants of the land of Judea. But it can also mean the tribe of Judah in some cases, or those who simply follow the Jewish religion (Judaism). The name for the land of Palestine was called Judea because they combined the name Judah and Idumea.
Now at the time of the Messiah, the Sadducees were in control of the Temple. Pharisees were the synagogue leaders. According to the Ency. Britannica and Philo, there were 6,000 Pharisees during the time of the Messiah.
Some had to be non-Jews and Edomites. When Herod came to power, he solidified his position by bringing in relatives from Idumea and appointing many non-Jews to important positions. And he killed the entire Sanhedrin except Hillel and Shammai. Herod was practicing Judaism, as many Edomites and Nabateans had been commingled with the Jews and adopted their customs.
The Edomites were called the Herodians in Scripture, and were politically aligned with Herod. As shown earlier, they plotted with the Pharisees to kill the Messiah.
The Bible also shows that some of the Pharisees were Edomites. Notice the verse below:

"They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?"-John 8:33

The Pharisees told the Messiah that they had never gone into bondage. This could only apply to the Edomites because the tribe of Judah was taken into captivity in around 586 BC by Babylon. They would have never told the Messiah that they never went into captivity. This verse proves that the Edomites were mixed among the Pharisees.
In the time of Christ, there were two Sanhedrins operating in Jerusalem, the first of which was a 23-member court run by the Sadducees that handled local affairs. Its larger counterpart, the Great Sanhedrin, was comprised of 70 elders with a president, who in the time of Jesus was Gamaliel. Acts 5:25 shows this group and the Great Sanhedrin coming together to discuss the problem of the Christians. The Great Sanhedrin functioned much like a combination of the Senate and Supreme Court, and most of its members at the time of the crucifixion were Pharisees from the school of Shammai.
You will note in the Book of Acts that Gamaliel, the president of the Great Sanhedrin, encouraged tolerance of the Christians. But because he and his followers were outnumbered by the aristocratic Sadducees and the Shammai-oriented Pharisees, the Great Sanhedrin ultimately elected to persecute the Christians. At the trial of Jesus before the elders of Israel, Gamaliel may not have been present. If he had, the circumstances may have turned out quite differently. The trial held to try Jesus was hurriedly assembled and included almost across the board members who were either Sadducees, or else Pharisees from the school of Shammai. It is possible that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimithea represented the school of Hillel.

Conclusion

It's important to keep in mind when studying all this that Jesus came to establish the New Covenant, which is about a heavenly Jerusalem, not an earthly one like the Zealots and Pharisees of Jesus' day thought or like how Zionists today think: "And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you" (Luke 17:20-21). Jesus even said, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence" (John 18:36b).

Hi guys, i'm a brazilian 17 year old guy that was happy, sympathetic and caring towards others, I am catholic and I participate in Sunday school every Saturday, but since the start of the pandemic in march 2020 onwards, i suddenly became brainwashed and paranoic with Christian conspiracy theories, mainly Qanon, and end times prophecies but in 2022 it only got worse, it all started at school when my sociology teacher who coincidentally was an evangelical pastor started talking a little about the end of times/Ragnarok and my friend said that between 2023, 2024 the apocalypse will begin, or it doesn't happen anything in these years, very probably in 2025 and 2027, and i searched on youtube and i saw various evangelical channels claiming that we are at the end of times and 2030 the world will end bc in that year Jesus will come back to only save evangelical christians and will only save those who are on the Life Book and will throw everyone who's those name wasn't on Life Book burn alive on the lake of fire of the hell alongside the antichrist, false prophet and everyone who followed him and God will destroy the universe and we will be living in the New Jerusalem, and they say repent of sins because the devil exists and they insist on saying that sin and the devil exist even though this has not even been scientifically proven, such as not wearing short clothes like shorts, jeans, not getting tattoos or piercings, not eating meat of pork, prohibiting homosexuality, free will, dating during adolescence and many others, they say that we are experiencing the greatest apostasy in history, which means that people are moving away from faith and and God and ignoring the warnings about the doomsday bc the world is becoming more ''sinful'' and the love between the people has been cooled and we are living like in the antediluvian days when Noah warned about the cataclysm but people ignored, mocked and called him demented and paranoid and instead they were eating, drinking and partying until the flood came and destroyed the world. world and killed everyone, and they keep repeating this saying that this is real even though it has been proven that it never happened and that it is impossible for a storm this strong to cover the top of Mount Everest, they think they are right and scientists are wrong, because science is an ''abominable sin'' against God, They say that God is merciful but he is also wrathful and cruel against those who do not follow his commandments. and they also talk about Jesus' appearance as if it were true at that time even though it has not yet been proven. i've watched some videos of these pastors and missionaries of my country and never got their prophecies and predictions wrong, all of things that have said become true
They say that geopolitical tensions are increasing which will cause ww3, it is no wonder that countless billionaires around the world like Mark Zuckerberg are building bunkers and selling several of their assets, i saw a letter written in 1873 that a American Freemason named Albert Pike who in his letter predicted the first two world wars, and is now supposedly ''predicted correctly'' the third world war, which would begin with a conflict between Zionist Israelis and Arabs, and also they claim that this war between Israel and Iran -Hamas is also the prophecy of Gog and Magog being fulfilled, They also say that the world will enter an unprecedented global economic crisis worse than the great depression, which would increase prices absurdly and this would culminate in the greatest famine the world has ever had, surpassing the great famine of the Middle Age,
They also say that elites such as the World Economic Forum, the UN and the Bilderberg Group will launch a gigantic EMP weapon that will shut down all energy and appliances in the world, and that they will then enact global martial law that will taking citizens off the streets and homes via buses and putting them in concentration camps and killing mainly white and conservative Christian groups and burying them in FEMA coffins which will start the famous New World Order and mass depopulation through the great reset and agenda 2030 and will put an end to all cash and create an electronic currency where payment is made with the global fingerprint, which they also say will replace passports with this global biometric password, they also say that They will do away with clothes and food and will replace them with processed foods made from insects, GMOs and laboratory-grown meats and everyone will be forced to wear the same clothes and have their names changed they also say that they will install government cameras inside the houses to know if any intruder is entering the empty houses
and all of this will begin the antichrist's rise to power, he will be a powerful leader who will unite all sovereign governments into one government and people will worship him and will implant the mark of the beast, where no one will buy and sell without it and will kill everyone who does not accept the mark, which means that everyone in the cities will die, only those who go to the fields or mountains will survive, it is no wonder that they are asking to stock up on water, non-perishable food, batteries , flashlights, medicines especially ivermectin (so much so that I've seen reports of people curing themselves of COVID using this medicine and chloroquine) and radios to survive between 2025 and 2027, because according to them, there will be a pandemic 30 times more lethal than the previous one that will kill almost 400 million people in just two years and that will be the period where seal the seven-year peace agreement between Christianity, Judaism and Islam and will sacrifice a red heifer in the Al-Aqsa Mosque, where it will be destroyed in sequence to begin the construction of the third temple where the throne of the antichrist will be during the final three and a half years
They also insists that global warming is a lie bc all of these disasters that are happening such as frequent strong earthquakes which happened in turkey, morocco, japan and taiwan recently, floods that left the southern of my country almost destroyed, tornadoes and hurricanes becoming stronger and killing more people and wildfires becoming more frequently is caused by these globalists, for example, the recent wildfires that happened in hawaii, canada and chile was caused by massive lasers coming from satellites and these floods and earthquakes caused by HAARP, and the fact-checking and social media such as reuters and afp is lying bc they are owned by rothschild and george soros for example
And i'm worried to have a cancer or a fatal heart attack when i become 20 years old that they discovered that in the last years have an increase on cases of cancer and fatal heart attack on young people, and they claim that is bc of the vaccines bc they contain aborted fetuses and microchips and graphene
And they also talk about the woke agenda, where defenders of this theory claim that globalists use films, video games and series to misrepresent characters from these entertainment industries to promote progressive agendas such as LGBT, black lives matter, abortion and feminism, for example, they made Ariel from The Little Mermaid black in live-action instead in white, as a way of indoctrinating masses and grooming children to be subjected to being perverse, it's no wonder that Disney is in one of the biggest crises in its history by excessively promoting identity issues in every film they release. And it's also no wonder that the number of abortions in the world increased over the last years
What I am most afraid of is the claim that globalists have knowledge of future events that makes the masses accept the event when a certain thing happens, this is called predictive programming, for example, in many disaster and science fiction films, there is a subliminal message in numbers called ''923'', supporters of this number mean that something very bad will happen on September 23rd, but obviously nothing happens, in White Noise for example, there was a train accident in the state of Ohio and in 2023 a train derailment with toxic products occurred in the same state as the film, Black Mirror ''predicted'' several technological innovations, The Simpsons for example predicted the September 11 attacks and Trump's victory in the elections, The Matrix also predicted predicted several technological innovations, such as the redpill movement and the production of babies in uterine machines. As for the Leave the World Behind', they say that the film predicted the accident of the ship that collided with the bridge in baltimore, Lastly, the film The Knowing is incredibly identical to the plot of the biblical apocalypse, but these claims are already debunked by fact checks
And i became scared of these prophecies that have been ''fulfilled'' such as Ezekiel which mentions that Dead Sea became filled with fishes and signs in the sky and stars disappearing
i will mention some of them:
They discovered recently that the moon have some rust pigments and the sun are frequently producing giant black spots which in apocalypse 6:12-17 means that the sun became black and the moon becoming blood
The days are passing faster, which on matthew 24:22 mentions that unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
The Euphrates River is drying up which in apocalypse mentions that the sixth angel poured his bowl over the Euphrates River and its waters dried up and released four demons who destroyed half of the population
Some Rivers and seas are becoming red, which refers to Apocalypse 16:4 that the third angel poured his bowl on rivers and seas and became red as dead blood
And I started to think that some mathematical calculations they do are simply not coincidences, they took the year the Black Death ended in 1353 with the year the WHO declared a global COVID emergency in 2019, subtracting those years would give the result in 666 (2019-1353=666 to be simpler) which alludes to the number of the beast and nd other math that they also thinks its a proof that we are at the end of times uf we use the word ''CORONA'' as a code where the alphabet is corresponding to its letter in ascending order (for example a = 1, b = 2), it would give the numbers 3, 15, 18, 15, 14, 1 will also give the number of the beast is correct if we multiply these numbers.
I'm trying to follow channels that disagree that we are in the end times and treat people with love, like the method of preterism where it states that the apocalypse happened in the year 70, but they say that this is heresy because in Matthew 24:24 it says that in the last days false prophets will emerge deceiving many people and in 2 Peter 3:3 where it says that at the end of time many will mock and disagree with the imminent Return of Jesus
i'm asked my parents and my friends to repent of your sins and believe in the Word of God, But I bothered them so much that now they don't even want to hear it,
however after all that, I started to think that these evangelical channels only preach fear in people, thinking that Jesus is going to return physically and that I have been superior all the time for no reason at all. I researched these things so much that now it appears when I search for an account on Instagram or YouTube, I would like to thank anyone who could give me some tips on how to get out of this and get rid of these pests, how i do?

Hi guys, i'm a brazilian 17 year old guy that was happy, sympathetic and caring towards others, I am catholic and I participate in Sunday school every Saturday, but since the start of the pandemic in march 2020 onwards, i suddenly became brainwashed and paranoic with Christian conspiracy theories, mainly Qanon, and end times prophecies but in 2022 it only got worse, it all started at school when my sociology teacher who coincidentally was an evangelical pastor started talking a little about the end of times/Ragnarok and my friend said that between 2023, 2024 the apocalypse will begin, or it doesn't happen anything in these years, very probably in 2025 and 2027, and i searched on youtube and i saw various evangelical channels claiming that we are at the end of times and 2030 the world will end bc in that year Jesus will come back to only save evangelical christians and will only save those who are on the Life Book and will throw everyone who's those name wasn't on Life Book burn alive on the lake of fire of the hell alongside the antichrist, false prophet and everyone who followed him and God will destroy the universe and we will be living in the New Jerusalem, and they say repent of sins because the devil exists and they insist on saying that sin and the devil exist even though this has not even been scientifically proven, such as not wearing short clothes like shorts, jeans, not getting tattoos or piercings, not eating meat of pork, prohibiting homosexuality, free will, dating during adolescence and many others, they say that we are experiencing the greatest apostasy in history, which means that people are moving away from faith and and God and ignoring the warnings about the doomsday bc the world is becoming more ''sinful'' and the love between the people has been cooled and we are living like in the antediluvian days when Noah warned about the cataclysm but people ignored, mocked and called him demented and paranoid and instead they were eating, drinking and partying until the flood came and destroyed the world. world and killed everyone, and they keep repeating this saying that this is real even though it has been proven that it never happened and that it is impossible for a storm this strong to cover the top of Mount Everest, they think they are right and scientists are wrong, because science is an ''abominable sin'' against God, They say that God is merciful but he is also wrathful and cruel against those who do not follow his commandments. and they also talk about Jesus' appearance as if it were true at that time even though it has not yet been proven. i've watched some videos of these pastors and missionaries of my country and never got their prophecies and predictions wrong, all of things that have said become true
They say that geopolitical tensions are increasing which will cause ww3, it is no wonder that countless billionaires around the world like Mark Zuckerberg are building bunkers and selling several of their assets, i saw a letter written in 1873 that a American Freemason named Albert Pike who in his letter predicted the first two world wars, and is now supposedly ''predicted correctly'' the third world war, which would begin with a conflict between Zionist Israelis and Arabs, and also they claim that this war between Israel and Iran -Hamas is also the prophecy of Gog and Magog being fulfilled, They also say that the world will enter an unprecedented global economic crisis worse than the great depression, which would increase prices absurdly and this would culminate in the greatest famine the world has ever had, surpassing the great famine of the Middle Age,
They also say that elites such as the World Economic Forum, the UN and the Bilderberg Group will launch a gigantic EMP weapon that will shut down all energy and appliances in the world, and that they will then enact global martial law that will taking citizens off the streets and homes via buses and putting them in concentration camps and killing mainly white and conservative Christian groups and burying them in FEMA coffins which will start the famous New World Order and mass depopulation through the great reset and agenda 2030 and will put an end to all cash and create an electronic currency where payment is made with the global fingerprint, which they also say will replace passports with this global biometric password, they also say that They will do away with clothes and food and will replace them with processed foods made from insects, GMOs and laboratory-grown meats and everyone will be forced to wear the same clothes and have their names changed they also say that they will install government cameras inside the houses to know if any intruder is entering the empty houses
and all of this will begin the antichrist's rise to power, he will be a powerful leader who will unite all sovereign governments into one government and people will worship him and will implant the mark of the beast, where no one will buy and sell without it and will kill everyone who does not accept the mark, which means that everyone in the cities will die, only those who go to the fields or mountains will survive, it is no wonder that they are asking to stock up on water, non-perishable food, batteries , flashlights, medicines especially ivermectin (so much so that I've seen reports of people curing themselves of COVID using this medicine and chloroquine) and radios to survive between 2025 and 2027, because according to them, there will be a pandemic 30 times more lethal than the previous one that will kill almost 400 million people in just two years and that will be the period where seal the seven-year peace agreement between Christianity, Judaism and Islam and will sacrifice a red heifer in the Al-Aqsa Mosque, where it will be destroyed in sequence to begin the construction of the third temple where the throne of the antichrist will be during the final three and a half years
They also insists that global warming is a lie bc all of these disasters that are happening such as frequent strong earthquakes which happened in turkey, morocco, japan and taiwan recently, floods that left the southern of my country almost destroyed, tornadoes and hurricanes becoming stronger and killing more people and wildfires becoming more frequently is caused by these globalists, for example, the recent wildfires that happened in hawaii, canada and chile was caused by massive lasers coming from satellites and these floods and earthquakes caused by HAARP, and the fact-checking and social media such as reuters and afp is lying bc they are owned by rothschild and george soros for example
And i'm worried to have a cancer or a fatal heart attack when i become 20 years old that they discovered that in the last years have an increase on cases of cancer and fatal heart attack on young people, and they claim that is bc of the vaccines bc they contain aborted fetuses and microchips and graphene
And they also talk about the woke agenda, where defenders of this theory claim that globalists use films, video games and series to misrepresent characters from these entertainment industries to promote progressive agendas such as LGBT, black lives matter, abortion and feminism, for example, they made Ariel from The Little Mermaid black in live-action instead in white, as a way of indoctrinating masses and grooming children to be subjected to being perverse, it's no wonder that Disney is in one of the biggest crises in its history by excessively promoting identity issues in every film they release. And it's also no wonder that the number of abortions in the world increased over the last years
What I am most afraid of is the claim that globalists have knowledge of future events that makes the masses accept the event when a certain thing happens, this is called predictive programming, for example, in many disaster and science fiction films, there is a subliminal message in numbers called ''923'', supporters of this number mean that something very bad will happen on September 23rd, but obviously nothing happens, in White Noise for example, there was a train accident in the state of Ohio and in 2023 a train derailment with toxic products occurred in the same state as the film, Black Mirror ''predicted'' several technological innovations, The Simpsons for example predicted the September 11 attacks and Trump's victory in the elections, The Matrix also predicted predicted several technological innovations, such as the redpill movement and the production of babies in uterine machines. As for the Leave the World Behind', they say that the film predicted the accident of the ship that collided with the bridge in baltimore, Lastly, the film The Knowing is incredibly identical to the plot of the biblical apocalypse, but these claims are already debunked by fact checks
And i became scared of these prophecies that have been ''fulfilled'' such as Ezekiel which mentions that Dead Sea became filled with fishes and signs in the sky and stars disappearing
i will mention some of them:
They discovered recently that the moon have some rust pigments and the sun are frequently producing giant black spots which in apocalypse 6:12-17 means that the sun became black and the moon becoming blood
The days are passing faster, which on matthew 24:22 mentions that unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened.
The Euphrates River is drying up which in apocalypse mentions that the sixth angel poured his bowl over the Euphrates River and its waters dried up and released four demons who destroyed half of the population
Some Rivers and seas are becoming red, which refers to Apocalypse 16:4 that the third angel poured his bowl on rivers and seas and became red as dead blood
And I started to think that some mathematical calculations they do are simply not coincidences, they took the year the Black Death ended in 1353 with the year the WHO declared a global COVID emergency in 2019, subtracting those years would give the result in 666 (2019-1353=666 to be simpler) which alludes to the number of the beast and nd other math that they also thinks its a proof that we are at the end of times uf we use the word ''CORONA'' as a code where the alphabet is corresponding to its letter in ascending order (for example a = 1, b = 2), it would give the numbers 3, 15, 18, 15, 14, 1 will also give the number of the beast is correct if we multiply these numbers.
I'm trying to follow channels that disagree that we are in the end times and treat people with love, like the method of preterism where it states that the apocalypse happened in the year 70, but they say that this is heresy because in Matthew 24:24 it says that in the last days false prophets will emerge deceiving many people and in 2 Peter 3:3 where it says that at the end of time many will mock and disagree with the imminent Return of Jesus
i'm asked my parents and my friends to repent of your sins and believe in the Word of God, But I bothered them so much that now they don't even want to hear it,
however after all that, I started to think that these evangelical channels only preach fear in people, thinking that Jesus is going to return physically and that I have been superior all the time for no reason at all. I researched these things so much that now it appears when I search for an account on Instagram or YouTube, I would like to thank anyone who could give me some tips on how to get out of this and get rid of these pests, how i do?

Tesla is betting on Robotaxi this year.
Instead of launching in the United States (subject to numerous regulatory approvals across various states), probably Tesla is pushing for a soft launch in Mainland China ...
Bullish or bearish?
​
EDIT:
Subsequent to the initial post, Reuters published an article indicating that US prosecutors are examining whether Tesla committed securities or wire fraud by misleading investors and consumers about its electric vehicles’ self-driving capabilities. Seems like Robotaxi by Tesla is still very remote for the US market ...
​
US seeks answers from Tesla in Autopilot recall probe
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-seeks-answers-tesla-autopilot-recall-probe-2024-05-07
​
U.S. auto safety investigators are seeking detailed answers and documents from Tesla in a probe into the automaker's December recall of more than 2 million vehicles to install new Autopilot safeguards.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said last month it was investigating after receiving reports of 20 crashes involving vehicles that had the Autopilot software updates installed under Tesla's recall. The agency's letter said it had identified "several concerns", regarding the recall.
Tesla said in December its largest-ever recall covering 2.03 million U.S. vehicles - or nearly all of its vehicles on U.S. roads - was to better ensure drivers pay attention when using its advanced driver assistance system.
The NHTSA recall investigation covers models Y, X, S, 3 and Cybertruck vehicles in the U.S. equipped with Autopilot produced between the 2012 and 2024 model years.
Tesla, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, has said repeatedly that Autopilot does not make vehicles self-driving and is intended for use with a fully attentive driver who is prepared to take over and has hands on the steering wheel.
NHTSA said it had sent Tesla an information request letter, which was made public on Tuesday, seeking details of the recall and documents by July 1.
NHTSA wants comparative data from Tesla on the performance of vehicles after receiving the recall including the number of hands on wheel warnings issued.
The agency said it had concerns after those 20 crashes as well as results from preliminary NHTSA tests of updated vehicles following Tesla's five-part recall remedy.
One issue under investigation is Tesla's recall allows drivers to set how they activate Autopilot by either allowing a single-pull or double-pull of the drive stalk.
NHTSA's letter said the single-pull activation of Autopilot "is not the default setting on vehicles that received the remedy in the field" and testing "showed it was possible to make this change while driving."
Tesla has also made additional updates to reduce crashes including high speed captive turn lane collisions that are not part of the recall.
NHTSA said it "will assess the timing and driving factors behind these updates, their impacts on subject vehicle field performance, and Tesla’s basis for not including them".
Last month, NHTSA said it found evidence that "Tesla’s weak driver engagement system was not appropriate for Autopilot’s permissive operating capabilities" and that this results in a "critical safety gap."
NHTSA said during its Autopilot safety probe launched in August 2021 that it had identified at least 13 Tesla crashes involving at least one death and many more involving serious injuries in which "foreseeable driver misuse of the system played an apparent role."
NHTSA noted Tesla's December recall "allows a driver to readily reverse" the software update.
​
Elon Musk proposed to launch robotaxis in China during April visit, state media report says
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/china-may-support-teslas-domestic-testing-demonstration-robotaxis-says-media-2024-05-08
​
Elon Musk proposed testing Tesla's advanced driver-assistance package in China by deploying it in robotaxis, during his recent visit to the country, the state-backed China Daily newspaper reported on Wednesday, citing sources.
Chinese officials told the Tesla CEO that China "welcomes Tesla to do some robotaxi tests in the country" and hopes it can "set a good example", the newspaper quoted the sources as saying.
However, Chinese authorities did not immediately approve its widespread use of Full Self-Driving (FSD) functions, the newspaper added.
Before the full rollout of its FSD functions, Tesla still needs to get approval to collect and transfer data that Tesla's cars need to train its driver-assistance features. The newspaper added that this issue wasn't discussed in detail during Musk's visit.
A person briefed on the matter told Reuters that Tesla is seeking to apply to launch the robotaxi tests in Shanghai, where the company's largest factory globally is located.
Tesla and the Shanghai city government did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The China Daily report comes shortly after Tesla CEO Elon Musk made a whirlwind weekend trip to Beijing late last month, where he met Chinese Premier Li Qiang.
Musk on the trip intended to discuss the rollout of FSD and whether Tesla could secure government approvals to transfer data overseas that could prove pivotal in its development of autonomous vehicles, Reuters previously reported.
FSD is the most autonomous version of Autopilot software and was rolled out in 2020. Its features include self-parking, auto lane changes and traffic navigation.
Among the wins during Musk's trip, which was first reported by Reuters, was a key endorsement from a top Chinese auto association that said Tesla's Model 3 and Y cars were compliant with data-security regulations. That would enable local governments to allow Tesla cars into parts of China they were previously barred from, Chinese media reported, citing a statement from Tesla.
Tesla has also reached an agreement with Baidu to use the Chinese tech giant's mapping license for data collection on China's public roads, according to two people who at the time described that as a step toward FSD rollout in China.
The China Daily newspaper, however, citing a source close to Baidu, said that the deal only meant that the accuracy of Baidu's maps provided to Tesla would be improved and that it had no direct relation with FSD.
Baidu did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Musk has abandoned a longstanding goal for Tesla to make affordable electric cars for the masses and is looking to focus on autonomous driving software, robotaxis and its humanoid robot Optimus.
Last month, the company mentioned a "purpose-built robotaxi product" that it planned to build with a "revolutionary" manufacturing process, without offering a timeline for its release.
China has been at the forefront in the development of self-driving cars, and companies such as Baidu and Toyota-backed Pony.ai have launched robotaxi services in limited test zones in several cities.
​
In Tesla Autopilot probe, US prosecutors focus on securities, wire fraud
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/tesla-autopilot-probe-us-prosecutors-focus-securities-wire-fraud-2024-05-08
​
U.S. prosecutors are examining whether Tesla committed securities or wire fraud by misleading investors and consumers about its electric vehicles’ self-driving capabilities, three people familiar with the matter told Reuters.
Tesla’s Autopilot and Full Self-Driving systems assist with steering, braking and lane changes - but are not fully autonomous. While Tesla has warned drivers to stay ready to take over driving, the Justice Department is examining other statements by Tesla and Chief Executive Elon Musk suggesting its cars can drive themselves.
U.S. regulators have separately investigated hundreds of crashes, including fatal ones, that have occurred in Teslas with Autopilot engaged, resulting in a mass recall by the automaker.
Reuters exclusively reported the U.S. criminal investigation into Tesla in October 2022, and is now the first to report the specific criminal liability federal prosecutors are examining.
Investigators are exploring whether Tesla committed wire fraud, which involves deception in interstate communications, by misleading consumers about its driver-assistance systems, the sources said. They are also examining whether Tesla committed securities fraud by deceiving investors, two of the sources said.
The Securities and Exchange Commission is also investigating Tesla’s representations about driver-assistance systems to investors, one of the people said. The SEC declined to comment.
Tesla did not respond to a request for comment. Last October, it disclosed in a filing that the Justice Department had asked the company for information about Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.
The Justice Department declined to comment.
The probe, which is not evidence of wrongdoing, could result in criminal charges, civil sanctions, or no action. Prosecutors are far from deciding how to proceed, one of the sources said, in part because they are sifting through voluminous documents Tesla provided in response to subpoenas.
Reuters could not determine the specific statements prosecutors are reviewing as potentially illegal. Musk has aggressively touted the prowess of Tesla’s driver-assistance technology for nearly a decade.
Tesla videos demonstrating the technology that remain archived on its website say: “The person in the driver’s seat is only there for legal reasons. He is not doing anything. The car is driving itself.”
A Tesla engineer testified in 2022 in a lawsuit over a fatal crash involving Autopilot that one of the videos, posted in October 2016, intended to show the technology’s potential and did not accurately portray its capabilities at the time. Musk nevertheless posted the video on social media, writing: “Tesla drives itself (no human input at all) thru urban streets to highway streets, then finds a parking spot.”
In a conference call with reporters in 2016, Musk described Autopilot as “probably better” than a human driver. During an October 2022 call, Musk addressed a forthcoming FSD upgrade he said would allow customers to travel “to your work, your friend’s house, to the grocery store without you touching the wheel.”
Musk is increasingly focused on self-driving technology as Tesla's car sales and profit slump. Tesla recently slashed costs through mass layoffs and shelved plans for a long-awaited $25,000 model that had been expected to drive sales growth.
“Going balls to the wall for autonomy is a blindingly obvious move,” the billionaire executive posted on his social-media platform X in mid-April. Tesla shares, down more than 28% so far this year, surged in late April when Musk visited China and made progress toward approvals to sell FSD there.
Musk has repeatedly promised self-driving Teslas for about a decade. "Mere failure to realize a long-term, aspirational goal is not fraud," Tesla lawyers said in a 2022 court filing.
LEGAL CHALLENGES
Prosecutors scrutinizing Tesla’s autonomous-car claims are proceeding with caution, recognizing the legal hurdles they face, the people familiar with the inquiry said.
They will need to demonstrate that Tesla’s claims crossed a line from legal salesmanship to material and knowingly false statements that unlawfully harmed consumers or investors, three legal experts uninvolved in the probe told Reuters.
U.S. courts previously have ruled that “puffery” or “corporate optimism” regarding product claims do not amount to fraud. In 2008, a federal appeals court ruled that statements of corporate optimism alone do not demonstrate that a company official intentionally misled investors.
Justice Department officials will likely seek internal Tesla communications as evidence that Musk or others knew they were making false statements, said Daniel Richman, a Columbia Law School professor and former federal prosecutor. That is a challenge, Richman said, but the safety risk involved in overselling self-driving systems also “speaks to the seriousness with which prosecutors, a judge and jury would take the statements.”
FATAL CRASHES
Tesla’s claims about Autopilot and FSD have also drawn scrutiny in regulatory investigations and lawsuits.
Safety regulators and courts have raised concerns in recent months that corporate messaging about the technology - including the brand names Autopilot and Full Self-Driving - have imbued customers with a false sense of security.
In April, the Washington State Patrol arrested a man on suspicion of vehicular homicide after his Tesla, with Autopilot engaged, struck and killed a motorcyclist while the driver looked at his phone, police records show. In a probable-cause statement, a trooper cited the driver’s “admitted inattention to driving, while on autopilot mode ... putting trust in the machine to drive for him.”
In Washington state, a driver remains "responsible for the safe and legal operation of that vehicle" regardless of its technological capabilities, a state patrol spokesperson told Reuters.
The same month, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration launched an investigation into whether a Tesla recall of more than 2 million vehicles in December adequately addressed safety issues with Autopilot.
NHTSA declined to comment.
The recall followed a long-running probe opened by regulators after cars with Autopilot engaged repeatedly crashed into vehicles at first-responder emergency scenes. Regulators subsequently examined hundreds of crashes where Autopilot was engaged and identified 14 deaths and 54 injuries.
Tesla disputed NHTSA's findings but agreed to the recall, which employed over-the-air software updates intended to alert inattentive drivers.
The NHTSA investigation found “a critical safety gap between drivers’ expectations” of Tesla’s technology “and the system’s true capabilities,” according to agency records. “This gap led to foreseeable misuse and avoidable crashes.”

I am STILL NOT the Original Poster. That u/Organic_Let_5948. He posted in AITAH.
Previous BORU is here. New Update marked with ****\*
Trigger Warning: religious trauma; parental alienation; suicidal ideation; depression; alcoholism
Mood Spoiler: incredibly disheartening
Original Post: April 13, 2024
I dont even know where to begin with this.
Me 34M and my Wife 33F have 2 Kids together 11M and 9F.
Me and my Wife have been together for 12 years and married for 8.
Around a year ago I noticed my wife increasingly sending me these Tradwife or traditional housewife tiktoks. I have nothing against that type of relationship but I don't think it makes sense for our current family situation. I do earn earn quite a bit more than my wife and enough to sustain our family on my own but I dont see the need to do so. I work 80% and my wife 50% and besides Wednesdays where the both of us are working, either one of us is always home for the kids. I could work a 100% and let my Wife be SAHM but again, both of my kids are attending school and in my mind there is no need for my wife to be at home 24/7.
She got increasingly pushy about it over the past two months and again I just kept on telling her that there wasnt any need for that and If we did decide to go down that route, what would she do during the hours my kids attended school? I know damn well our house doesent need to be cleaned for 6 hours a day. She would constantly try to butter me up with "You would have dinner ready every day when coming home from work" and something about unlimited blowjobs or some bs like that. Again in the nicest way possible I would remind her that our kids werent toddlers and our current work-life schedule allowed us to function perfectly fine.
We got into a pretty heated argument two weeks ago about it and my wife completely stopped having sex with me to "show me what I would be missing out on." Shes basically been treating me like a roommate since.
I just thought she would get over it and this was just a phase but god was I wrong. I came home from work yesterday and saw a bunch of presents on the dining table. At first I thought they were all for me since my birthday was in a week but I then I saw the labels on them addressed to my wife. I read one of the letters attached to one of the presents. The last sentence on it was literally "It was so a pleasure working along side you and I wish you all the best moving forwards." I thought this was some sick prank. A few minutes later my wife just casually strolled into the living room acting like nothing was wrong. I guess she saw my mad expression and had the audacity to tell me that "You'll get over it." I just lost it.
I just left without saying another word and went to my parents house. I feel absolutely disrespected. Why the fuck would my wife think it was okay to just quit her job without telling me and just expect me to be fine with it. My wife has been bombarding me with texts and calls demanding to know where I am and that the kids miss me. I just told her to go find a lawyer and that I was done with her and then proceeded to block her.
My son just sent me a voicemail crying and asking why I was divorcing mom and if I was leaving the family and I guess that kind of broke my heart. I haven't responded and honestly dont know what to say to him. My mother in law has also been demanding that I return home and apologize to my wife. My parents also seem to be siding with wife since they are traditional muslims. My mom also used to a SAHM.
I feel like im wrong for immediately jumping to divorce without hearing her out and besides this whole job drama, love my wife too much for this to be the end of our otherwise perfect marriage but on the other hand I feel like i've lost complete trust in her.
Should I just swallow my pride and let my wife stay at home from now on or should I follow through on divorcing her?
How should I navigate this situation?
AITA here?
Relevant Comments:
About their religion:
Thank you but we arent strict muslims. Yes we pray etc but we dont follow any of the traditional gender role ideologies. My wife tends to be a bit more on the conservative and traditional side where I am a bit more labral. And i mean doesn't the same apply for christianity?
Go back home:
Ive told my son ill be home by tomorrow. Ill just be gone for two days..
There had to have been red flags earlier than this:
I mean before this the only red flag I saw was her constantly just ignoring me if we had a disagreement but usually that was for maybe max 2 days. This was the first time she did that for a longer period of time.
Crux of the issue:
The fact that she would be home relaxing isnt the issue. Its the fact that we now have to significantly cut down on our current expenses and im not even sure if my company is willing to let me work 100%.
This exchange:
Commenter: This “tradwife” shit is cult-level batshit crazy. The women who are indebted to tradwife culture out of some desire to be more valued (?) and have fewer outside of the home responsibility and the men who encourage women to be/become “tradwives” out of some weird chauvinist nostalgia for the family dynamics of the 40s-60s and an insecure need to fully control their wife and household are codependent wrecks and borderine sociopaths, respectively. I feel so bad that you’ve been hit so hard by this, I imagine it’d be like figuring out one of your parents went down the Q Anon rabbit hole or worse. You should split with her, absolutely. Beyond a certain point there’s no reasoning with these people.

OOP: Thank you but I dont think that this post should spread hate to those who currently are/were tradwifes. Its a completely acceptable type of relationship IF both partys agree to it and thats my primary issue with all of this.

There is no consensus bot on AITAH, but the majority of responses were NTA
Update Post: April 18, 2024 (5 days later)
First of all I just want to thank you guys for the overwhelming support I have received.
Ive received a ton of messages but please be patient with me, This week has definitely been tough on me. This whole family drama has definitely taken a toll on me physically and mentally.
Here is my original Post: https://www.reddit.com/AITAH/comments/1c397zy/aita_for_threatening_my_wife_with_divorce_afte?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
I just want to add a few crucial details that I missed to mention in my original Post.
I suffer from a genetic heart condition that puts me at risk to stress induced cardiac arrest. I used to work full time but was forced to cut down on my work after suffering a silent heart attack. This was nearly a decade ago but since then ive worked my own physical and mental wellbeing . Some people didnt understand me constantly mentioning why it was such an issue working the extra 20%. I honestly dont know how much time I have left and my kids are the most important things in my life. For my own mental health its essential that I get to spend time with my kids throughout the week. Besides my Wife and kids I have nothing. I hate my fucking job and purely continue for the sake of my kids and wife.
Well after spending a day at my parents house, eventually I felt enough time had passed for me to gather my thoughts on everything. What she did seemed like the ultimate slap in the face but I went back with the intention to resolve this and didnt want to escalate this fucking nightmare.
My wife seemed happy I returned but wasnt apologetic at all. The kids ,especially my son, were ecstatic. That sort of made me ignore the lack of remorse for the time being. That same night after putting my kids to bed I told her we need to have a serious discussion.
I told her how I felt about everything she did. The fact that she knows about my health condition and still went through with it. The fact that I set clear boundaries and she still chose to quit her job without my consent. How the fact that she told my son that I was going to abandon the family really felt like a stab in the back. How throughout all of this, she didn't even seem remorseful once. The fact that she chose her own happiness to the detriment of mine. The fact I sacrificed so much for the family and I got repaid like this. The fact that we now as a family have to make major lifestyle changes, since a third of our family income vanished.
For a split second I saw an ounce of sadness in her eyes before she went right back to being annoyed with me.
I then simply told her to lay out her half of the story. Here is a summary of what she said.
She felt ignored by me constantly rejecting her proposal. She had worked long enough and this was finally the time for her to enjoy her life as a "true wife". She also said that I was being a baby about the whole spending extra time with the kids thing. That really pissed me off and we ended up getting into a heated argument. I coudnt bare any of it anymore and just ended up sleeping in the guest room.
Until yesterday nothing changed. She constantly tried to play everything off and wanted to "embrace her new role" by constantly trying to have sex with me and by making me my favorite dishes. It just felt like she was trying to manipulate me again I wasnt having any of it. I just kept on sleeping in the guest room.
Well my birthday was yesterday. And after work my wife and kids picked me up and we ate dinner together. This was probably the first time I genuinely had a smile on my face in a week. Well that smile vanished because she tried to seduce me again later that night.
I rejected her and to my surprise she had a full on mental breakdown. I just held her as she started apologising for what she did. She claimed she didnt understand how much she hurt me, she was sorry for making me feel like an afterthought etc. We ended up sleeping in the same bed yesterday. I felt like things were finally moving in the right direction and I again asked her about searching for a new job today. Instead of getting mad she just replied with a "i need to think about it."
Yeah thats where things are as of today.
It feels like progress is being made but idk this just might be another manipulation tactic of hers.
I'll probably make a final update in a month or so. Reddit isnt doing my mental health any favours.
How would you guys move forward in this situation?
Could I have done something better?
Is she being genuine?
(And to those incels who constantly bring up islam as a way to justify her behaviour, please shut the fuck up. )
Relevant Comments:
Commenter: If you're still questioning things at this point, respectfully, take your fucking head out of your ass

OOP: I guess youre hinting at divorce. Let me make it more clear for you. In our culture divorce is the last resort and extremely frowned upon and especially if there are kids involved. I want to fix this. If she shows no improvement after ive tried everything? Yes then ill go for divorce.

Commenter: She's not even being a good tradwife since they are supposedly meant to put their husband's needs ahead of their own but she is definitely putting her wants ahead of your needs. It sounds like you really need couple's counseling.

OOP: She believes my needs soley revolve around sex. That's the problem.OOP (different comment) She has always been like this. She fucks up or wants something from me = trying to fuck me 24/7

Commenter: When she came to you with her issue what did you do to help find a solution?

OOP: I constantly told her she can reduce her hours if she wants. Thats fine with me. Being at home 24/7 without my consent is where I draw the line.

Do you have life insurance?
Yeah. I work for an insurance.
Couples counseling:
Thank you. Couples therapy can definitely help.
Alcoholism Post: April 19, 2024 (Next Day)
(Editor's note: I did not originally include this post in my first BORU because I was not sure if the sub it was taken from allowed crossposting. Several people linked it in the comments of that BORU, so after reviewing the rules several times I've included it on this post. I will take it down if that is against the rules anywhere.)
Title: I am going through some family issues and have been noticed myself reaching for the bottle far too often.
Life has been terrible for the past week. A lot of family drama and work has been more stressful than ever.
I just notice myself reaching for whisky more often than I usually do. I guess im just trying to drown out the misery for the time being.
Im scared I might turn to alcohol more often in the future. As of right now im drinking about two glasses of whisky a day when I get back from work. It used to be one glass a week.
My gut is telling me to stop but i feel like a zombie just going through life. I dont have any energy or self control left.
I also have two young kids and definitely dont want to set a bad example for them.
Is this normal? Should I remove all alcohol from the house immediately or am I overreacting?
What would your guys first steps be in my case?
Relevant Comment:
Hi mate,
It's hard for me to say if you have a drinking problem or not. I think, deep down, only you can know if something feels wrong or unhealthy about what you're doing. What I will say is that, in my experience, alcohol is a really addictive and sinister substance that can easily take a hold in your life. If you ever feel it's getting out of control and/or that you want to quit drinking, then remember that there's lots of help out there for you- primarily from your doctor, and also from support groups such as AA.
Wishing you all the best, mate. Feel free to message me for a chat if you like.
George

OOP: Thank you so much George!
I think I will start to cut down over the coming days. I dont want to take that risk of falling into complete addiction.
Wishing you the best aswell. And hey likewise. If you want to talk im a few clicks away.

*****New Update Post: April 29, 2024 (10 days later, 16 from OG)****\*
Again. Im beyond grateful for the all the love and support you guys have shown me. If im being honest with everyone ive been drinking a lot to get through this mess. I felt like a zombie just wandering around with no purpose. My wifes actions completely broke me.
Thankfully ive managed to cut most of it out over the past week and thats mostly thanks to reddit. You guys seriously helped me keep my mind busy with something else besides alcohol. Being reminded that have two smaller versions of myself, looking up to me and learning from the things I do, really helped me snap out of it.
Ive been at my lowest since making my first post and I think ive just hit a new low.
Until last week nothing changed since my last Post. My Wife still pranced around enjoying her new lifestyle while I suffered in silence. After Posting my update I did realize that my Wife 100% was trying to manipulate me into submitting to her demands. I asked her if she actually started looking for a job and she hesitated and told me no and she needs more time.
If im being honest thats all I needed to know from her. I tried making this work but honest to god, I couldn't keep living like that. Everyday that past felt like a part of my soul vanished. My Wife kept on trying to "please me" but It didnt seem genuine at all. Ive also started noticing her getting lazy and starting to neglect my kids. My wife stopped cooking and after working 9 hours of hell, I now was the one to help my son with his homework and the one to play Barbie with my daughter. Im not complaining about spending time with my kids but I could seiously see this becoming worse as time goes on. I dont know where the woman I once fell in love with went but that thing that lives with me wasnt her.
I know a lot of you are going to smile hearing this but I did tell my wife that I want a divorce last week. I came home from work and I saw my wife sitting on the couch watching TV while my daughter was crying in her room. I just snapped at that moment. I told we need to have a serious discussion after the kids go to sleep.
After I put my Kids to sleep I sat down with her and told her our marriage was over and that Ill be contacting my lawyer tomorrow. Divorce was never something I ever planned on doing in my life but I just felt like something needed to change or my kids would be visiting my gravesite in a few years. Our culture frowns upon it and I knew I was about to get serious backlash for it but at this point I couldn't care less.
I dont know why but she thought I was joking and started laughing. I told her I was being serious this time and her manipulation methods weren't going to work on me anymore and her face just went pale. She then went from screaming at me to crying to then blaming me for every issue in the family to then begging for another chance. She literally went to get her laptop and tried to apply for jobs on Indeed while begging. I just told her to cut the bullshit and told her I tried my best but she just kept giving me empty promises.
I told her the following:
I know her trying to fuck me just was a manipulation tactic and not to show her "devotion" to me as she puts it.
If she was truly sorry, why didnt she start applying for jobs immediately instead of waiting until I confronted her.
Her completely disregarding any of my feelings and needs while purely perusing her own, shows me how selfish she actually is. She knows about my health and still chose to completely fuck me over.
And now this part pissed me off a lot: Her poisoning my son against me when this all started, was beyond fucked up and looking back was enough of a reason to divorce her.
We ended up fighting for another hour or so and her constant screaming ended up waking up our daughter and thats when I told my wife to shut the fuck up and go to bed.
The following day my mom called me during work and asked if I lost my mind or something. My wife told my mom that I was going to divorce her.
She claimed that I was bringing serious shame onto the family and she didn't raise me to abandon my kids.
Yep my wife told my mom that I was planning on abandoning my kids and has been feeding my kids the same bs. I explained to my mom the reasons why I wanted divorce but she wont budge. If I divorce my wife, Im a disgrace of a man and my mom wants nothing to do with me.
I know my mom well enough to tell that her words are just empty threats but what hurts me most are the reactions of my kids. My son wont look me in the eyes and wont even let me anywhere near his room. My daughter just tries to hit me whenever I try to talk to her. I've tried explaining to them that im in fact not going to "give up on them" and me and their mom are just going to separate but they just seem to believe whatever bs my wife tells them. Friends and Inlaws also claim that im a monster for making my wife go through this.
My wife was served with divorce papers two days ago and has been crying nonstop since. My wife told my kids about the divorce papers and they both claim that they will never talk to me again and in my sons words im a bad husband and father. I cried myself to sleep that night.
I thought divorce would bring me peace but its only brought me one step closer to taking my life. As I stated in my previous post. I have nothing and am nothing without my kids.
Growing up dead poor as a refugee in Germany, i promised myself that I would give my kids a life that I myself could have only dreamed off but I feel like ive failed.
Im sorry for making this post longer than it has to be. Again I just want to thank everyone for the love and support but this will probably be my last post.
Wishing you all a lovely week.
Relevant Comments:
Commenter: I’d be showing anyone and everyone your posts and also look into the custody laws for wherever you live. Also you have to keep trying to get through to your kids and convince them you’re not going anywhere. You are one hundred percent NTA in this situation.

OOP: Thank you for the advice but I feel like thats going to do more harm than good. I feel like theyre just going to be mad that im sharing my private life with strangers on the internet. On top of that theyre english isnt good enough to understand my story anyways. And yes ive been looking into the ins and outs of custody laws here.

Commenter: The best way to get your kids to understand that you are not abandoning them is to go for full custody. You can tell the judge that your wife has no income and no desire to work and as such she cannot afford to give your children any kind of stability or decent life.
When the children see you fighting for them, they'll realise that you are not abandoning them, only their mother who wants to coast through life on your dime.

OOP: Thank you but I seriously fear that I wont get any custody due to me working near full time.

Commenter: And how would your wife support herself and the kid now she don't have any job either ? She may have time for the kids, but no money at all to support them.
And your argument of the first post still work. Your child are grown and go full time to school, they don't need you to be at home 24/7.

OOP: https://www.axa.ch/en/privatkunden/blog/at-home/law-and-justice/calculating-support-payments.html
These would roughly be my child support payments monthly. On top of alimony idk. Still have to look into it more. One of people in my team was only given weekend visitation due to him working full time so thats where I got the fear from so yeah. Need to continue consulting my lawyer for more info.

Commenter: Date outside your culture

OOP: Its not about culture. This can happen in any culture. Yes the things my mom and my inlaws are saying about me are because of the culture. Theyre is a lot of beauty in my culture but also a lot of ugly. I just dont want to deal with the stress of divorce ever again and ive never really "dated". My wife was my first real girlfriend so dating seems a bit overwhelming to me . And again I just want peace not more problems. If I die alone so be it.

Deleted Commenter: You are an idiot. Take your kids and get out. Stop leaving them with her.

OOP: Do you want me to take them with me to the office? And they currently dont want anything to do with me. I took a week off work to maybe go on a trip with my kids to help them relax during this mess but they just refuse to leave my wifes side and claim im a monster.

Commenter: You working FT is what will get you custody. You can afford to house feed and clothe your kids. Start the paper trail, communicate with your STBX only by text. Use reddit search for "FU BINDER" MAKE ONE RELIGIOUSLY and backups. Have a plan for after school care for the kids. That's the last part that will show you're 100% ready for full custody. Don't give up. Your kids need you. You need you alive. Big hugs and keep updating us please.

OOP: Depends. Government could argue that me just paying my wife alimony and child support and me maybe getting weekend visitation would be a better option. Nothing is definitive. Im still researching what the most likely outcome would be and preparing my finances accordingly.

In response to several longer, encouraging comments telling OOP to seek help and that they're worried about him:
Thank you❤ Its hard battling these thoughts but I know that im only going to hurt my family doing it.
OOP clarifies on one point:
I know a lot of people assume this but we used to split chores. If I was home, I did most of the cooking, cleaning etc and on weekends my Wife cooked and I did the chores.
Parental alienation:
Thank you for bringing that up to my attention. Ill have to look into that where I live. As far as im concerned, it doesent exist here but ill be researching it regardless.
Post-nup so you can keep your money?
Thank you for the advice but im not worried about giving her half of my assets. When we both got together we were both flat broke. She helped me achieve the things ive achieved so far in my carrier. Thats why I married her in the first place because I thought she would be with me through thick and thin but yeah people change. As far as alimony is concerned, im not sure. Might be around 2-3K a month for both kids if she gets primary custody of them.
(OOP clarifies alimony vs child support) Im sorry english isnt my first language. Yeah I meant to say child support. As far as alimony is concerned, I dont really care. I just want this nightmare to end.
Do you live in Germany now?
I live in Switzerland. Yeah but courts here still rule in favor of the woman.

A reminder to not comment on Original Posts. See rule 7.

Hi lovelies :) I’ve been a watcher of this page for awhile. I stumbled across law of attraction and assumption when i was really young - 14! Since then I genuinely have manifested such a lucky life. I thought I’d inspire people to believe in the law, as so many others on here do! I’m 19 for reference, and everyone in my life only talks about how lucky of a person I am - it truly follows me around. Everyone I tell my life story to says “wow you have such good luck” I swear!!! Sorry if this is long-winded but I’m happy if it helps anyone at all :) read or don’t read! EDIT: this isn’t me scripting manifestations, I’ve genuinely lived all of this luckiness and you can too!!!

1. Attending/a transfer to an expensive private school

This was the first ever manifestation I ever got at 14, and it was accidental and before I really knew the concept of Neville’s teachings. For reference I grew up on a very tiny island, known for being the most expensive in the world. And it definitely lives up to its name. Billionaires, Millionaires and celebrities buy their vacation houses and yacht here to get away from the press, while the locals generally struggle to keep up. My parents are immigrants, and while they are not poor - they were extremely middle class and feeding our family of five. My sisters are significantly older than I so they also had to pay international fees for their university and living abroad as there is no university in my country. They were spending over 100k a year to sustain my two sisters lives out there and it left us with very little money at home when taking into consideration the cost of living. To add to the stress, at the time my mother lost her job, and the company my father was vice president at went bankrupt. At this time my father took out loans to literally feed my family and they were in no financial state to be sending me to private school that cost $24,000 a year, we moved to a really tiny apartment and when my sisters would come home all three of us would share a room. At public school I struggled deeply with mental health (like really bad😵) I cried everyday, got bullied, and I kid you not spent every lunch time on the steps alone. I had just found out about LOA but very vaguely. I had wanted to attend private school because my only friend on the island did and it honestly felt like my only chance at survival. I was DESPERATE. I knew we couldn’t afford it and when I asked my mom about it she literally just laughed in my face and when I did again she got extremely angry. But I PERSISTED!! Looking back I literally just lived in the end without knowing what that was. Even though in my 3D I knew it was “impossible” I just had this firm knowing within that it was going to happen. I looked into scholarships and they only gave one away. I applied to that and would just tell myself it was going to happen. Eventually because I had persisted my mother allowed me to apply on the condition i figured out the paperwork on my own. I told everyone around me that I was transferring before I knew if I could even go or not, or if I was even accepted. Funnily enough, after just being in the state already (I really felt I already had it)- I got the email that I got the scholarship and the remaining fees my parents could afford to pay. Because suddenly my mom got an even better job, and my father ended up leaving the company and starting two businesses!!! EDIT: Also! When I transferred I met and be-friended TONS of people and grew in to my best self. This lead me on the path I am now. I actually have friends for life, and I got into a beautiful relationship when I was there as well. It was the best thing I did for myself.

1. A whole gap year in south east asia!!!

I really struggled in my senior year, and when I got rejected to my top university choice I was really crushed and felt I needed a break! I also was going through a bad breakup. Long-story short my extremely conservative parents were NOT OKAY like at allll about this, and threatened many times that they would disown me! They said they definitely would not be funding it even though at this point had the money and I would be on my own. I was desperate to travel but didn’t know how. I did the same thing. All throughout exams and at graduation everyone would ask me “What’s next?” And said “I’m going on a gap year!!!” With full confidence. I had NO money and my parents were not going to fund it AT ALL. Even though I wasn’t allowed to get a job legally as an expat I got one working in a tourist shop under the table, but it still wouldn’t have been enough. But one of my best-friends moms (a friend I made at said private school) is a multimillionaire and has owned over 10 businesses. They moved to Thailand shortly after I met them. Randomly last summer, she emailed me with her new business venture and was paying a number of girls to put together a marketing pitch. I KID YOU NOT, this was literally just a PowerPoint. A powerpoint. I got paid $1,400. FOR A POWERPOINT. She was always such a bigger supporter of mine and then invited me to stay at her home in Thailand for however long!!!!!!!!! I didn’t have to pay any accommodation or food. I stayed for 4 months and travelled with my best friends. Met lifelong ones!!! They had guests over every 2 weeks it seemed and I met my first two billionaires having dinner with their friends! During this time I also had dinner with Thai celebrities by coincidence and my network grew incredibly! Two of my own friends flew out to stay with me, and they let them stay!! They stayed in a 9 bedroom house with full staff. Craziest experience ever. The best part is that they are the most genuine, kind and caring people ever, and are truly my second family now. I am extremely extremely grateful to have met them and to have visited, I love them to bits with all my heart, I can’t even express it!!! Also, my parents obviously didn’t disown me and found it quite inspiring that i managed to fund the tickets!

1. Remember that university I got rejected from last year? I GOT IN.

For years, I had wanted to attend this arts school in the UK. It’s ranked number one in the world for fashion and its alumni include the wonderful John Galliano, Alexander McQueen, Stella McCartney, and recently Miss Sohee (If you love fashion you probably know what school this is!) The acceptance rate is tough, especially for fashion! The Harvard of art school students!!!! I was just a literal small town girl (21 sq.miles to be exact, and everyone around me was going into finance and law) and I never had any confidence in my fashion abilities- as much as I wholeheartedly loved it. This university was on my vision-board for 3 years. When I got rejected last year I was so angry and felt quite frustrated. Deep down I just had no self confidence and I truly felt I was going to get rejected (always anxious)and surprise! I did. On my gap, being surrounded with LITERAL billionaires and millionaires in the fucking flesh, working for one as well! (many of whom also had small beginnings) there was one underlying trait EACH swore by. Which was in their own ways the LOA. For example many believed that “You are what you believe you are” and that it was very important to dominantly believe you could succeed. It totally changed my thought process. I then read Neville’s work, and also other books such as “The Game of Life and How to Play it” and The Power of Positive Thinking” (my favorite!) wow. Life changing for REAL. Once I kept making the teachings a habit it all came naturally to me! I had the confidence to make my own dress, and re-apply. I applied to my dream uni 7 HOURS before the deadline and just detached. I visualized doing SATS of my acceptance email and different techniques (I can go more in depth in comments) and SURE ENOUGH! I got the offer email and it was the happiest moment ever!!!!!! They even changed THEIR conditions to let me in!! What made it even more once in a lifetime is that on my gap year I met who I believe is my absolute platonic soulmate and life-long friend and she got into the EXACT COURSE AND UNIVERSITY, and I had NO idea who she was until I met her through a friend! Despite the acceptance rate!! She is also a firm believer of the law and we manifested this together. The difference from the first time around and this time was my state and just knowing. Internally I was just so sure as if it was fact, which came after CONSISTENT practice of the law. I have a few favorite techniques that really helped me.

1. New COMPLETELY BRAND NEW FREE vehicle and dream job!

I think this is my favorite story mainly because it was the first time where I felt I truly understood Neville’s teachings consciously and there was a click. I had the most resistance but I was able to re-wire my subconscious. For context most people get around my island by motorbikes and a good one ranges around $4000 after insurance and licensing which is a legal requirement. When I got home from my gap year I had only $200 (which went QUICKLY bc of how expensive my country is). So no money or job, my old bike broke down and I was stuck with the shitty bus. Public transport here is EXPENSIVE if you have somewhere to go all the time and really inconvenient because of how many bloody tourists fill the bus! It would make me so late, and I live 30 minutes away from the main city so I was getting really depressed holing myself inside. I needed a bike to get a job without exhausting myself. My sister moved back from Canada and I told her my plan. I said “I’m gonna get a bike.” And she kinda gave me one of those surface laughs did one of those skeptical “okay if you say so”’s. Ngl, I definitely had resistance. My parents AGAIN did not want to purchase me the bike as last time I had gotten a ticket for no insurance and they didn’t feel I was responsible (also we have a complicated relationship). How tf was I gonna get a bike? But I was more confident in the law after seeing my acceptance letter, so I decided to really give this MY ALL. At first I just affirmed I was gonna get a new Vespa whenever I saw one out, and would tell my sister and my mom that a blue Vespa was my sign I was going to get one. I saw them everywhere and affirmed. I would get on the bus and go out as if I already had easy transportation and would envision that the bus was my bike, getting very excited. One day, while I was feeling very content about my current state, I got on the bus and had the urge to open Facebook. (I never do) but to my surprise after a few scrolls my local newspaper was advertising that the biggest motorbike store was giving out a FREE NEW BIKE every-month with insurance and licensing paid for a year! All you had to do was write a paragraph. I was astonished! There actually was a free way to get a bike and it plopped right into my lap, I had never heard of this! Naturally, I applied and lucky me it was the start of the month. I said to myself I am gonna commit this month to consistency and persistence. I wrote my paragraph about how I wanted the bike to apply to a very specific high end boutique store that I’ve always wanted work at. For a month, I meditated right when I woke in morning and at night using SATS and just went to bed feeling fulfilled. I had so much fun with my visualizations and I never missed a day (just because I wanted to.) My sister does not believe in LOA and thought it was a bit cray. It was my first time REALLY dedicating myself to consciously manifesting so I also sometimes had doubts. But I would let them pass then affirm the opposite. Eventually I felt I didn’t need to anymore, I reached a state of detachment naturally. A month and a couple days passed and honestly forgot I even applied. But there it was!!!!!! An email telling me I won a free bike!!! The crazier part was that it was even more expensive than the Vespa and I got to pick the model! My sister was blown away. As for the job, which I had casually included in my SATS, I just finished the interview for! They are a high-end boutique who doesn’t open hiring up often. I had said for years it was my dream summer job, but they never were hiring (even when I emailed them). After actually using SATS I saw them post a hiring advert on their IG!! Perfect timing. They hadn’t hired in three years. What a coincidence 🙃😉The interview went amazing and I feel as though I’m going to get the job!!
I’m saying this all to say, this is YOUR reality. Everything you need to succeed you already have because it is WITHIN. A “state” is WITHIN. My biggest tip is have fun with your manifestations and stay grateful always! It’s so much fun manifesting!! Life is beautiful if you let it be, and it’s easy if you let it be too❤️❤️blessings! Keep going strong!

8-minute read.

Armenian legal center files Global Magnitsky Act sanctions with the U.S. Treasury Department against Azerbaijani officials for war crimes in Nagorno-Karabakh

The Armenian Legal Center for Justice and Human Rights (ALC) filed seven Global Magnitsky Act sanctions cases with the United States Department of State and Treasury against more than 40 senior Azerbaijani officials

They are co-filed by the Lemkin Institute and an Armenia-based law firm.
Also, last week, a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced the “Azerbaijan Sanctions Review Act.” The proposed bill mandates the Biden Administration conduct a comprehensive review within 180 days of enactment to determine whether Azerbaijani officials listed in the bill meet the criteria for sanctions.
source,

U.S. authorities charge Congressman Henry Cuellar with accepting bribes from Azerbaijan to advance its interests

U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas and his wife were indicted on conspiracy and bribery charges and taken into custody
From 2014 to 2021, Cuellar, 68, and his wife accepted nearly $600,000 in bribes from an Azerbaijan-controlled energy company and a bank in Mexico, and in exchange, Cuellar agreed to advance the interests of the country and the bank in the U.S., according to the indictment.

source,

United States reaffirms support for Armenia’s territorial integrity and sovereignty

A day after meeting Senator Cardin, the delegation from Armenia's ruling party met Michael Carpenter, Special Assistant to Joe Biden and Senior Director for Europe at the US National Security Council.
Carpenter reaffirmed the United States’ support for Armenia’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and welcomed the demarcation between Armenia and Azerbaijan based on the Alma-Ata Declaration.
They discussed CoP, the April 5 meeting in Brussels, and the AM-US and AM-EU cooperation in strengthening Armenia's resilience and economic diversification.
Carpenter welcomed the steps aimed at strengthening democracy in Armenia.
source,

military expert Vova Vartanov about the reorganization of military positions after the Tavush delimitation

REPORTER: What problems do you see here and how safe will this section be?
VOVA: Was there a chance not to pull back? Maybe no, maybe yes. Only the top brass of military-political leadership possess certain information.
REPORTER: Do you mean there was a threat of war, as warned by Pashinyan?
VOVA: There could be, yes, but we should exchange instead of giving. Azeris will move their positions forward. They will gain a trampoline in a poorly entrenched area that they could use later.
REPORTER: So Azeris gain a more convenient position for themselves?
VOVA: I wouldn't call it more convenient for them because this trampoline would take them to a forest. It could give them some tactical-level achievements but I don't see any strategic-level advantage for them with the use of these positions. After the delimitation, Azeris will move from 1.5 km to several hundred meters away from villages. This is a local tactical-level thing. One position can never have a strategic level of importance. The control of the interstate road is what's "strategic".
full,

ex-PM Aram Sargsyan criticized the church and accused its members of attempting to derail peace and incite conflicts

Sargsyan says Russia gave Azerbaijan its "approval" to attack Armenia in March by using those 4 Soviet-Azeri villages as an excuse, so it could derail Pashinyan's April 5 visit to Brussels and bring the ex-regime back to power. Sargsyan believes the Russian scheme didn't work because Pashinyan was able to control the threat, launch a delimitation process, and pry out Azerbaijan's approval of 1991 Almaty.
SARGSYAN: None of the Kremlin schemes have worked in recent years because they want to reverse the clock, which is an impossible task. Armenia will be a developed country headed to the West. Armenia will prevail, we will prevail, the state will prevail.
video,

Armenia's former High-Tech Minister (now MP) reveals details about the 2021 Abu Dhabi military expo and why Armenian products didn't reach the destination

HAKOB ARSHAKYAN: I haven't spoken about this in the past for various reasons but today I have that opportunity. In early 2021 Armenia was given a pavilion to display its military products during the Abu Dhabi expo. We prepared everything accordingly; you can request the official documentation. The small items reached their destination successfully, but there was a problem with the large ones. The delegation could not transport the large items in the same Yerevan-UAE airplane so another transit flight was chosen just for those items. So a route with a larger airplane was chosen that had to fly through Moscow. Our items were unloaded from the airplane in Moscow. They told us some documents were missing, so we gave it to them. Then they requested another document and we gave it to them, and they said they would absolutely load our items back and send it to Abu Dhabi. It kept being delayed one flight after another until the day of the expo. By the way, they weren't functional weapons, there were no explosives or dangerous components in them.
source, source,

World Press Freedom Index 2024 (by Reporters Without Borders)

Armenia climbs 6 positions, Georgia falls 26, Azerbaijan falls 13.
(1) Norway
(31) Moldova
(43) Armenia (was #49; score up by 1pt to 71.6)
(46) Italy
(47) Poland
(48) Croatia
(49) Romania
(55) United States
(62) South Korea
(65) Cyprus
(70) Japan
(88) Greece
(101) Israel
(103) Georgia (was #60 in 2021)
(154) Yemen
(158) Turkey
(162) Russia
(164) Azerbaijan (was #151 previously)
(176) Iran
(180) Eritrea
REPORTER: How do you explain this progress?
MELIKYAN (Chairman of the Committee to Protect Freedom of Expression): Indeed last year we also noticed a decline in violence against reporters, but sadly in recent days we have seen several instances of violence [during Tavush protests committed by police, and in parliament backyard committed by opposition MP's assistant]. The organization raised Armenia's score also thanks to legal reforms. There are ongoing active efforts and I believe the results of those will be visible this year. The organization also welcomes the abolishment of heavy insult as a felony; that law was adopted and repealed within a year.
REPORTER: There are several negative findings. For example, amid the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, there was an uptick in disinformation and hate speech.
MELIKYAN: In my opinion the most important criticism by the organization was in regards to the severe polarization of media. There is disrespect towards journalists and the profession of journalism. Other issues include various pressures [e.g. lawsuits by officials] and lack of punishment for violating journalists' rights [e.g. right to request and receive information]. We need to set the bar higher and start comparing Armenia to the Baltic states.
full, source, video,

anti-corruption: IRS inspected a thousand businesses (unclear if targeted or random) and found that half of them didn't provide electronic payment methods mandated under law

source,

Yerevan begins cracking down on "rich" bus drivers that pocket the passengers' cash: VIDEO

REPORTER: There is no strict rule yet requiring passengers to have on them a ֏100 coin or a mobile app while boarding, but the city has ramped up the monitoring of payments to combat theft.
CITY: Do not pay cash to drivers; use the coin machine. If you don't have a ֏100 coin and you ask the driver to break a bill for you, make sure to take that ֏100 from the driver and insert it into the coin machine.
REPORTER: The city plans to use the in-bus cameras and the special sensors that count the passenger traffic.
CITY: Once we launch these systems, we will know the exact number of daily passengers. Drivers will be asked to pay the missing amount. Those who are caught stealing will be fired. Our drivers already get paid a lot. A driver of a MAN bus earns ֏550,000 ($1,400) for 14 days of work [what in actual fuck?].
source,

Prosecutor General about reforms at military prosecutor's office

ANNA VARDAPETYAN: The 2020 war was a brutal lesson that has taught us several things. (1) We have launched serious changes in the personnel at the military prosecutor's office. We have increased the number of mil. prosecutors and provided them with professional training to make them independent so they can act as "outsiders" while investigating incidents.
(2) Mil. prosecutors make regular visits to military bases to meet soldiers and remind them that every action comes with consequences. The goal is to reduce army crime driven by interpersonal disputes between soldiers.
(3) I wrote a letter to the Defense Minister regarding the corruption schemes used in the army's procurement process. The ACC recently exposed a case involving a ranking official.
(4) There are criminal episodes exposed during the 2020 war investigation that we rather not discuss publicly today in order not to cause unintended damage to the morale of the army. We have filed several cases with the court to prosecute commanders for failing to carry out their duties, while in other cases the investigation has absolved some of the commanders.
source,

Prosecutor General lists the percentage of crime suspects arrested and jailed pending trial

2017: 92%
2018: 92%
2019: 89%
2020: 79%
2021: 77%
2022: 75%
2023: 75%
source,

Prosecutor General about the fight against domestic violence

VARDAPETYAN: We have started to "understand" what domestic violence is and we look differently at something that was previously considered "ordinary". The domestic violence detection rate is up. In some instances, prosecutors have reviewed cases and decided to pursue charges after identifying the domestic incidents as crimes.
Our attitude is changing towards domestic violence. We face resistance in small communities where the population accuses us of "destroying families". It requires a great deal of effort to explain to them that combatting domestic violence is meant to protect families.
source,

Prosecutor General about hundreds of asset forfeiture cases worth over $1.3 billion, mostly against ex-regime figures

VARDAPETYAN: We settled 4 cases last year and 2 more this year. This year's settled cases were about ֏609M and land plots. The minimum share of assets they can return to avoid a trial is 75%, but in some cases, we have negotiated a return of 85%-90%.
There are 15 active cases in courts that have reached the fact examination phase. A total of 103 cases have been filed for assets worth over $1.3 billion.
We have cooperated with European countries to freeze the assets in their baking systems but since it requires time and resources on their part, we have to share a percentage of the recovered funds with them. The exact percentage is negotiable. Last week we hosted European colleagues to discuss this and other issues.
source,

ex-regime MP wins a legal process and regains the right to use a clay mine near Yerevan

Գաջ CJSC is owned by ex-MP Mher Sedrakyan and his family. In 2012 it received a permit to exploit the gypsum-clay mine near Jrvezh until 2057.
By 2021 it owed ֏8.5M to Yerevan municipality because, under the mining contract, it was required to make small annual contributions to Yerevan's schools.
The company was warned about the outstanding debt. In 2023 administrative proceedings were launched and the Commission found that the company failed to repay the debt in time.
The Infrastructure Minister revoked the company's rights to use the mine and canceled the 2012 contract. Գաջ CJSC filed a lawsuit to appeal it. In February the parties agreed to settle the case and the company's rights to the mine were restored. The lawsuit was dropped.
source,

government launches e-work.am to help job seekers and businesses find a match: VIDEO

LABOR MINISTER: This is the first large-scale digital platform from the state that combines vacant job positions, businesses, and job seekers in one place. Similar attempts have been made in the past so we have to establish deeper ties with the private sector and state agencies to make this an important tool. The user can create a profile page with the resume. Businesses can contact them with offers.
ORGANIZER: The platform is connected to various state databases and automatically receives certain information and fills out the user's CV. Compared to private foreign websites where you can write fairy tales about yourself, this platform aims to provide accurate information, which in turn will help the state to have quality data for labor market analysis.
video,

չստիկներով դրիֆծյոռին բռնին: VIDEO

video,

futsal UEFA Champions League finale kickstarts in Yerevan: PHOTO

source,

Turkish court acquits 2 human rights activists who recognized Armenian genocide

Eren Keskin and Güllistan Yarkın were found not guilty of "insulting Turkish nation" by recognizing the genocide.
source,

Russia's Gazprom reports the first annual loss in 20 years as trade with Europe hit

Gazprom’s $6.9 billion net loss followed a net profit of approx. $13 billion in the previous year.
Revenue from sales outside Russia:
2022: ₽7.3 trillion
2023: ₽2.9 trillion
Russia’s share of Europe’s gas imports:
2021: 40%
2023: 8%

The long-delayed Power of Siberia 2 pipeline is planned to send gas [to China] from the fields that once supplied Europe, but would require years to build and still not compensate Gazprom’s losses in Europe, analysts say.
The loss of revenues from Europe is an unfixable problem without going back into Europe

credit, source,

This is a lot of info, its poorly organized so sorry about that but hopefully it can help people looking at what they might need to do to move:
Integration course: I am enrolled in the integration course now, it took about 3 months to get the approval and find a course, I got very lucky to get the last spot in a course at the local folk school. Otherwise I would have been waiting until Sept.
For the integration course you can ask BAMF to pay for 75% of it, youll automatically qualify for them to pay for 50% then if you pass the first time they will reimburse 50% of what you paid (250 a month) https://verwaltung.bund.de/leistungsverzeichnis/DE/leistung/99011002007000/herausgebeLeiKa-574959/region/00
This is the application for that, however, you wont be able to apply until after youre in germany and after you have a german ID card, not just a passport, this is because they require a NFC code from your ID card.
For the integration course youll need all of the Pluspunktdeutsch books in A1-B2 along with their workbooks. The integration course is 4 hours a day for 7 months.
Burgergeld (citizens money):
If you have less than 45k euro you may also qualify for Burgergeld. Burger geld will pay you about 750 euro a month and for your rent for 1 year in a small apartment. https://www.arbeitsagentur.de/en/financial-support/citizens-benefits
Again, youll have to already be here to apply and it takes about 4 months for it to start.
If you qualify for burgergeld, they will pay for your integration course fully and supply a bus pass to get to it.
Burgergeld will also pay for your health insurance.
Finding a place to live:
In order to get an apartment, unless youre renting a room somewhere, you'll likely need a SCHUFA which is a credit score, which you can't get unless you have a registered address, which you also cant get without a schufa generally. We were lucky and found a landlord who would let us pay for a year up front in lieu of a schufa
A lot of people stay in a short term rental from housing anywhere (which allows you to register an address) until they can find a place or rent a room (if you do this make sure the landlord lets you register as living there its required by law)
but a lot of landlords try to not let you.
expect finding housing to be hard. REALLY hard. I had to apply for over 200 apartments to get 5 showings and 2 offers.
Health insurance:
For health insurance I applied directly to TK on their website, if you don't apply directly (ie through a broker, or in a TK office) they may not accept you and send you to get private coverage (they told me I could not apply) if youve never had german health insurance before and will direct you to private insurance, but applying directly on their website for some reason they let me get statutory insurance, expect to pay about $250 for your entire family per month until you find a job, then its 7.3% of your income.
Expect finding a doctor to be hard, especially if you don’t speak German.
Do I need certified translations and apostille?
YES! Absolutely yes, everywhere we went wanted these. Some people will say you don’t, Just get them it’ll make your life a LOT easier. I have needed them at nearly EVERY appointment I have gone to.
Get your apostles before you come to Germany, you can get them from your states secretary of state office.
Which documents to get apostle:
Birth certificates, marriage certificates, name change documents, divorce decrees, etc. Any document the state issues.
What is an apostille?
When a document is to be used in another country, it may be necessary to have the document authenticated. This is known either as an “apostille” or “certificate of authentication.” Examples of documents that are frequently authenticated by the Department of State are birth, marriage, and death certificates.
Fortranslations, Once in germany, I just emailed a photo of everything we needed translated to about 10 translators in germany and asked for the pricing, I went with the cheapest one and they sent me certified copies in the mail within a week or so.
We got EVERYTHING translated.
Birth certificates, driving records (our licenses had only been issued a few weeks before we left so we got certified copies of our driving records to show how long they had been valid for), marriage documents, my husbands US passport (mine wasn't needed as I have a german passport and use that here).
Family reunion visa:
Once you register at the city office if anyone in your family who needs a visa will get a letter in the mail with an application asking for the application to be returned via email with documents. They'll then mail you an appointment date and ask you to show up then with your spouse and all the documents they requested.
Transferring your drivers license: https://www.german-way.com/for-expats/living-in-germany/german-drivers-license-reciprocity/getting-a-german-drivers-license/
For me I came from a state that I was able to directly transfer, here is what that process looked like:
Emailed the drivers license office asking for the application.
They asked for the following via email:
Certified translations of our license we got these from ADAC they were about 50.00
Copies of my passport and my husbands family reunion visa
Copies of our house registration
They took about a month to verify everything, then sent us an application, which we filled out and then took to the city offices to have them stamp that we really lived in the city (this had a cost of about 10.00 each) and then made an appointment to take them to the drivers license office. She then took our licenses for about a week to verify they were real then gave them back to us so we could drive on them until our german ones came and now we are waiting for the new licenses to come and we will need to pick them up.
Bringing pets from the US:
We brought a LOT of pets. 2 cats, a dog and a snake.
For the dog and cats we used across the pond pet transport. They were absolutely, amazing. we did not use their full service only their documentation service and found our own vet. For the vet call a few, our normal vet wanted 1800 for the three animals to do the exit exam, but another animal hospital in the area only charged us 500. We ended up using condor to bring the animals on the plane with us, it was stressful and hectic, but worth saving the 4-6k on shipping them with a professional shipper. Make sure you use IATIA approved crates. We used pet express for their crates: https://pet-express.com/services/purchase-crates/
For the snake this was the trickiest, we got a bunch of quotes in the 5000-8000 range, but ended up using Dutch dragons import https://www.dutchdragonimport.com/ and they were excellent, they had us ship our snake from our old house to California (we used https://www.reptiles2you.com/ and they ALSO were absolutely excellent and even responded right away to my 3am emails which I was NOT expecting) then they shipped our baby from CA to the netherlands and had a driver drive him from the netherlands to germany. They charged only 595.00.
University in Germany:
University in Germany is free in most cases, you can use DAAD (https://www.daad.de/en/) to find universities that offer english courses. You can use this website to check your current degrees to see if they are comparable to german degrees. https://anabin.kmk.org/anabin.html
Banking: We signed up with Wise and have been using that just fine. (if you use this code I think we both get some benefits: https://wise.com/invite/ahpc/stephanierobinr)
Helpful Websites:
https://www.simplegermany.com/ https://www.immobilienscout24.de/ Instead of brining all of our bags we used Shipmybags.com to ship our suit cases, the process was fine, but I would schedule this early. https://www.make-it-in-germany.com/en/
We also used an international mover to move our items, but it took from december until the end of april to get all of our stuff (we were quoted 8 weeks) and its in poor condition so I wont be naming them as I don't think anyone should use them. 150 cubic feet cost about 6k overall, now that we are here, I would have taken a lot less.
Overall it was a stressful experience but well worth it. I know I have missed a LOT and maybe gotten some things slightly wrong as I am still learning so feel free to ask in the comments anything you might be wondering about and I can try to help.
Any of the websites I posted I am not affiliated with in any way, except the Wise link, which I indicated above.

My nephew and friend Jxxxx (in Pakistan) has paid compelling tributes to his mentor Sheykh Adam, who recently passed away in New York. Jxxxxx's memories in verbatim are as follows:

 **Shaykh** 

(Remembering Dr Mohamad Adam El-Sheikh) ‘In the eye of custom, only that individual is considered to be a companion who is often in the company of someone’
The Arabic term Suhbah means: companionship but often also encompasses the concept of fellowship or mentorship—a method of learning that is well established in all traditions but especially the Islamic tradition.
It was only after I received a call from Auntie Fatima, Shaykh’s wife on Saturday April 13, 2024, when she informed me that the doctors had given Shaykh about 48 hours, did it hit me that I was fortunate to have the full experience of suhbah with a great scholar and human being. From 1984 (when I was 10) to 1989, I was his immediate neighbor, living next door to the ‘Imam’s house’ at the Islamic Society of Baltimore (ISB)—and then from 1994 to 2003 I was living just down the street from him. Nearly 15 years of my formative years were around this man.
His name was Dr Mohamad Adam El-Sheikh, and he was known to many as Shaykh Adam, but to many in the early days of ISB, he was simply known as ‘Shaykh’—likely because he was the only Shaykh most of us had ever met. There are too many stories to share and too many reflections to ponder, but I have tried to capture the essence of this man and his impact by way of a few anecdotes.
Humility At one point in time, the Shaykh was the Imam of ISB, an Executive Member of the Fiqh Council of North America, a legal specialist called by US courts to help adjudicate cases involving Islamic Law….and a bus driver for Al-Rahmah School! One need only to reflect on the level of humility of a man who used to be a judge in the Shariah courts of Sudan and a holder of a PhD from Temple University having no problem driving a bus to earn a halal living. Finding such men, having no insecurities, in today’s landscape is nearly impossible.
Hikmah The Shaykh was over-qualified for the role of local Imam in a nascent Muslim community. Needless to say, his knowledge was unparalleled in all of North America. However, it was the beautiful manner with which he dispensed this knowledge that truly made him unique.
Around 1997 a very well-known and articulate salafi-circuit speaker moved to Baltimore from New Jersey, and he immediately became engaged with the young adults of ISB. He started implanting the basics of the salafi approach to fiqh in which everything we learned to date was wrong and the evidence was as clear as a single authentic hadith. It all made sense as the literalist approach was simple and easy to understand. In those days, whenever a proof of a form of shirk or bida’ah (innovation) was presented to me, I would immediately run to the Shaykh’s house to confront him as to why he misled us all these years. I would randomly show up at the Shaykh’s doorstep and he would sit with me, go through the evidence, walk me through the various perspectives and then explain why the literalist arguments were invalid. He never once bad-mouthed anyone nor ever grew impatient during those many visits in which he had to educate this young man standing at his door. Rather, he engaged that salafi imam (who, by the way was unable to complete his studies at Madinah University but was now considered a leading advocate of salafi dawah in the US) and invited him to his house, sat us next to him and told us to listen to his story of conversion and his journey in learning Arabic and obtaining knowledge. After encouraging him by listening to him in full detail, Shaykh took a deep breath and asked, “Do you know what Imam Shafi’ (RA) said about knowledge? Imam Shafi taught us that one cannot obtain true knowledge except with six conditions: a high level of intelligence, an ability to understand, financial means to dedicate time, extreme struggle, advice of a teacher, and a long period of dedication”. This salafi imam was blown away and asked for a pen to write this saying down, and after repeating the six conditions the Shaykh closed our sitting with a simple, “Let us go for salah.” No long lectures to this brother, no reprimanding, no judgment—only encouragement and soft but very pertinent advice. I am not sure the brother got the message, but I most certainly did.
I am also reminded of the clarity the Shaykh had with regards to the concept of ‘rukhsah’ (a special dispensation or ease or leniency on obligatory matters). Every day after maghrib prayer, Shaykh would share a hadith followed by a brief explanation (which was always followed by uncle Farooq Marfani’s question!). Every so often the routine would change. My friends and I all knew when that was going to happen and we eagerly awaited. In times of inclement weather, Shaykh would slowly glide to the window after prayer, look up to the clouds to inspect the weather, and softly announce , ‘Aqeemussalah!’ (call the iqamah). And every time the gathering would be divided into three groups: (1) those who were experiencing this for the first time and became utterly confused, (2) those who would immediately get up and walk away claiming this is an impermissible act, and (3) those who were jubilantly high-fiving each other as we were about to combine maghrib and isha—needlessly to say, we were always in this last group. Despite vocal objections and rational arguments, Shaykh was very clear and very comfortable with his opinion, namely, that the Prophet (PBUH) gave us a clear relaxation to combine the obligatory prayers during poor weather. The intent, as explained by Shaykh, behind this exemption was to avoid inconveniencing those coming to the masjid for prayer.
Generosity In 2018, I went to visit the Shaykh and Auntie Fatima in Virginia. They were living in a relatively large home and a thought crossed my mind—why do they need such a large home? It was only them two as their grown children had moved out some time ago. As I was entering their home and pondering this question, I was greeted by a young Arab man at the door as he walked by me. Shortly after, a young Arab woman came out of a room and walked out of the house, then the man came in and out, and the woman came in and out. I observed all this, distracted from my conversation with Shaykh. Eventually the young woman walked up to Auntie Fatima and took a deep breath, gave her a long hug, and started quietly sobbing while Auntie whispered some words in her ear—and like that, both the husband and wife were gone. After some silence, I asked Shaykh about the couple. Very casually and in his classic low voice he replied, “They are Iraqi refugees who have been living with us for some time and today they are moving out.”
As I left their house that day, I started reflecting on what I had experienced—something perhaps our generation experienced time and again with our immigrant parents, yet something we have been unable to emulate in our own lives. Our fathers and mothers would regularly open their homes to random strangers who were vulnerable and needed temporary support. Today, there are a multitude of reasons we have failed to carry on this tradition—for all the things that ‘could’ happen—yet our parents looked beyond those reasons and regularly opened their homes.
When Shaykh used to live next to the masjid, I distinctly remember his basement being used for two purposes: (1) his office/library and (2) a haven for those who needed a place to stay. So many people would come through that one would think his house was a hotel—having serviced countless people who are now successfully living their lives in the US but had their humble beginnings in the basement of Shaykh’s house.
Spirituality Shaykh had a special connection with the Quran. Many a time, we would be walking either to or from the masjid or sitting on his porch, and he would pass on small secrets of the Quran —secrets which I clearly did not value at the time, as today I have sadly forgotten most of them! These were not commonly known secrets but those he had learned through experience—for example, he would say if you wanted to get over stress, then recite this; if you want to make sure you never miss fajr prayer, recite that verse; if you want to succeed in this, then recite these verses, and so on.
Once we were at a traffic light and I dismissively brought up something I had heard, “Shaykh, someone told me if you recite prayers on the Prophet (Salah ‘ala an Nabi) 1,000 times before sleeping, you will see the Prophet (PBUH) in your dream.” I was expecting him to outrightly reject it as unfounded or maybe from a weak hadith. Instead, he sat quietly as if his mind was drifting off and then he replied in a very soft voice, “Very effective…very effective.” Naseeha (Sincere Advice) Perhaps the greatest gift the Shaykh gave me was one that I can never repay him for. My father migrated back to Pakistan in 1994 and left me and two of my siblings in the US to figure things out on our own. In the absence of my father, I would look to two people for advice —Dr Khokhar and Shaykh.
At the budding age of 20, I decided I was an adult and could make my own decisions on matters pertaining to my life. I did not seek out the advice of my parents on major life decisions. One such matter was marriage. My father had very different ideas, and he and I started to butt heads making our relationship quite contentious. I would take a ‘principled’ stance about what rights Islam has provided me, and my father would be firmly claiming the overarching rights parents had within the framework of Islam. I would always run to Shaykh when I would receive a scathing letter from my father. Shaykh would sit down with me, sometimes in his office and sometimes just sitting on the steps of his porch with his trademark bright yellow pointed slippers and read the letter with me. He would counsel me on how to process and respond to the letters. He would never tell me I am wrong but would only gently nudge me in the right direction. He stood by me on key decisions but never without balanced counsel—and it was the one sitting in which he simply shared a verse of the Quran that changed my entire direction in life. He started by quoting the verse, “And your Lord has ordained on you that you worship none other than Him”, and he said this is the right the Creator has on His creation. Shaykh asked me, “What then is the greatest sin?” I replied “Shirk.”
“Correct, and after communicating the most essential principle of the deen, what does Allah (swt) say next?”
Shaykh continued the verse, “And with (your) parents, treat them with Ihsan (a manner that is beautiful/with perfection),” finishing off his lesson with this most powerful conclusion, “and so from the rights that the creation of Allah has on you, the highest priority is to your parents.”
That conversation changed the trajectory of my life. I decided to focus on the most important relationship of my life and subsequently spent the next 20 years nurturing a healthy relationship with my father to the extent that we became the closest of friends and confidantes. This process brought so many blessings in my life that I cannot stop advocating to one and all who are willing to listen. There are other means to achieve the blessing of Allah (swt), but the path the goes through your parents is undisputed. I owe much of those blessing to the counsel of my dear Shaykh.
All these memories are not meant to glorify and deify our dearly departed Shaykh. Rather, when our loved one’s pass, it is a time to remember and cherish the good they gave us and forgive and let go of the bad.
The world has lost a great scholar and even greater mentor. Hopefully the words I have shared will provide some insights to those who did not know him and rekindle some fond memories for those who did. Al-Fatiha.
Jxxxx Xxxxx Islamabad, Pakistan"
My words: I pray that may Allah swt assign a high place in Jannah to Sheykh Adam and let his memory be preserved for a long time to come. Ameen. He was exceptionally kind and generous to others, mashallah, JAK.

(Caution: Long Post)
The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is without doubt and still is to this day one of the most influential, powerful, and iconic figures in American history due to his steadfast and nonviolent commitment in the fight for Civil Rights, Equality, and Justice during Jim Crow Segregation in the United States. The highlight of his career as an activist came in 1963 in which he delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech in front of Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. in which he envisioned a nation in which his children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. This resulted in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to be passed. Even after his assassination in 1968, his legacy inspired many similar Civil Rights Movements around the world.
Today, Martin Luther King, Jr. is hailed by both sides of the American political sphere as a beacon of hope on how to fight for justice and equality for all during turbulent times. But it's the Conservatives who constantly claim that they truly support him and follow his dream, especially in modern times and they've expressed it in a rather whitewashed and partisan fashion. The most obvious being their use of his "I Have a Dream" speech by quoting the one line that has often been cherry-picked and misinterpreted quite a lot in which they judge people not by skin but by their character. The main reason they do this is to give them the appearance that they are colorblind as their way of opposing racism. And in doing so, they consistently criticize Liberals of trying to divide the country into special interest groups and promote favoritism. As a result, they always claim that Dr. King is a Republican, let alone would've been one in this era given his views, along with the fact that he was a Christian. His niece, Alveda King even emphasized it herself.
Some of the ways that Conservatives try to supposedly live up to Dr. King's "colorblind" dream is by opposing supposed "Wokeness", Critical Race Theory, and the practice of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion everywhere. They also express it by opposing Affirmative Action and the use of racial quotas when it comes to applying for schools, universities, and jobs because they believe it causes Reverse Discrimination. In terms of nonviolence, Conservatives express their disapproval of the Black Lives Matter movement. On the basis of Christianity, Conservatives believe that Dr. King supported a fixed moral code as indicated in his Letters from Birmingham Jail since he led with love and not racial hatred by changing the lives of people and not the laws itself, along with the notion of self-sufficiency. Seeing all this, it seems like Conservatives are really desperate to prove how much America has progressed in this post-racial world in order to debunk accusations that it isn't a racist country and that's why they always prop up Dr. King by claiming that they follow his dream and will continue to do so. Well.....up until now.
During this year's Martin Luther King Day, a string of prominent Conservative activists and organizations suddenly turned on him. Starting off with Charlie Kirk of the youth Conservative movement Turning Point USA, who launched a blistering anti-MLK campaign in which he supposedly dispelled the alleged myths surrounding his popularity. He accused Dr. King of being a "bad person" and that his "sainthood will cause Black voters to realize it's being used against them to suppress the individual." He even went further by stating that "we made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s" accusing it as "a way to get rid of the First Amendment". A while ago, the organization marketed the Conservative image of Dr. King when they sold $55 T-Shirts with his name as well as stickers of him with the words "Let Freedom Ring". Kirk was later joined by the Daily Wire's Matt Walsh who accused him of being a "communist". In fact, he railed against Dr. King a few years ago by accusing him of being a Womanizer, Adulterer, Plagiarizer, etc. Coming after Walsh was Human Events editor, conspiracy theorist, and fellow Turning Point USA alumna Jack Posobiec, who labeled Dr. King "a God of the Left" and stating that "the real legacy of the 1960s was enshrining Racial Discrimination and Race Consciousness into the Federal Bureaucracy." And finally, a popular Conservative Twitter account called "EndWokeness" called Dr. King "a Racial Marxist" because he "did not support a Colorblind Meritocracy" after it cited his quote on Wealth Distribution. What's even worse is that even non-White Conservatives hate him. Two examples include a commentator named Vince Everett Ellison and former football player and sports columnist, Jason Whitlock. The latest editions to the lineup of Black Guilt Conservatives, they railed against Dr. King and the passing of the Civil Rights by stating that they worsened the Black community by drifting them away from God into "Democratic Dependency". They even accused him of the same crimes as Walsh did.
With the sudden change in tone and emphasis from the Right against Dr. King, you have to ask yourself why they're doing this and what caused them to believe this way. And this is not an extremist fringe of the Right that some would expect to hear from. All of these are Mainstream Right-Wing Figures who have direct lineage to the GOP, including the current presidential nominee, Donald Trump. That's as Establishment you can get. Their remarks have been criticized by a lot of people from both sides and surprisingly by some Black Conservatives. One of them was Pastor Darrell Scott, a former faith advisor of Trump, who these days, is one of a few Black Conservatives who has been calling out other Black Conservatives for tearing down their own race in order to elevate their status among others, a very notorious habit of them. He criticized Kirk for inspiring a Hitler youth. Another was Kimberly Klacik, who in 2020, gained viral for her campaign video stating that Black Lives don't matter to Democrats when she was running for Maryland's 7th Congressional District following the death of civil rights leader, Elijah Cummings, who was the incumbent. She criticized Kirk for his remarks stating that his rhetoric will prevent Blacks from voting Republican. Even with that said, there have been instances in which Conservatives themselves have questioned the Civil Rights Act and many of them have been pretty negative. If you check out other Conservative websites and especially here on Reddit, many of their criticisms echo the same sentiments as those Pundits stating that it was unconstitutional and that in infringed on the First Amendment, particularly the Notion of Freedom of Association.
That being said, there is some silver lining to this. Now, that they exposed themselves for what they really of think Dr. King, I think it's time for them to admit that they never really liked him in the first place, let alone understood who he really was and what he really stood for. In fact, they never really liked him at all. All they did was whitewash him and cherry-pick his ideas and speech for own Partisan Agenda. Dr. King constantly talked about the notion of Black Pride and campaigned about the need for Reparations. He also supported Affirmative Action stating in 1965 that "a Society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for the Negro. Dr. King realized that our society was created in a way that managed to disadvantage the many for the benefit the few, and that America's Racial Hierarchy was connected to its Class Hierarchy. He also had political beliefs that manifested through both Racial Reconciliation and Concrete Policy Changes that could help restructure and benefit a divided and unequal nation. This is the reason why he referred to himself as a Democratic Socialist as he wanted a "Radical Redistribution of Economic and Political Power". In fact, he argued that true Equality can only be achieved, not just through legal rights, but through an equal distribution of resources. This is evident when he said “Call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all God’s children.” This is the exact vision that Vermont Independent Senator Bernie Sanders believed in. After all, he did participate in the March on Washington in 1963. In regards to Police Brutality, while Dr. King opposed violent protest, he did acknowledge that a riot is the language of the Unheard and that it came from a place of Desperation. In fact, in his "I Have a Dream" Speech, he stated that Blacks could "never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the Victim of the Unspeakable Horrors of Police Brutality." After all, he was hounded by the FBI, was called a Communist, broke the law in protest of race-based Segregation and Violence, was thrown in jail, advocated Protests and Sit-Ins, opposed White Rule of Society, and was assassinated for his Race and his views on Race. Regarding the quote about the Content of Character from said speech, Dr. King's daughter, Bernice King stated that using solely that quote diminishes the purpose of the entire speech because her father's dream and work included "eradicating Racism, not ignoring it."
If anything, this goes to show that is Dr. King were around today, he would be heavily criticized for being Woke, politically correct, a Communist, a Race Hustler, and a member of the Radical Left. And we all know that the Right hates those ideologies passionately. But here's the thing, he never considered himself a Democrat, let alone a Republican. He was an Independent as he felt that both parties are the same. And reducing his legacy to a single quote diminishes the gains that he fought for and believed in. This especially goes to a lot of Conservatives out there who claim to follow his lead using that quote because they interpret them in a way that benefits them today than how he meant them back then. For you to claim that he didn't care about Skin Color is like saying Susan B. Anthony didn't care about Gender. And to those Conservatives who now hate him, including Black, I hope you're OK with people getting treated unfairly, including your own. Who knew being seen as an Equal is a Negative in your eyes.

15-minute read.

school final exams will become admission exams for universities, and the number of exams will be reduced.

The government discussed the ongoing education reforms and a pilot program launched in Tavush.
EDUCATION MINISTER: For the graduates of the public schools of Tavush region, new opportunities for admission to universities will be established, which is also considered a component of these important reforms in the field of education, according to which, at the end of studies with new educational standards, school final exams will also become admission exams for universities. From 2026, this system will be in operation for all graduates of Armenia.
We have developed entirely new types of exam tests that will shift from measuring purely the knowledge to measuring the competency that includes practical and application components. This is finally going to address the yearslong complaint that exams are promoting a culture of mechanical անգիր անել (memorization). The new tests will measure critical thinking.
PASHINYAN: Starting this year the graduates in Tavush, and from 2026 the graduates of schools in Yerevan and all provinces can use the points they received in the school's final exams to enter a university.
EDUCATION MINISTER: In the future, the entrance exams will be computerized, and the number of exams will also be reduced. The student's average grade from multiple subjects will also be taken into account, as it's currently done in other countries. For the latter to work as intended, we are changing how students are graded in schools. Students do not receive a graduation score in 1-5 grades. This year in Tavush the graduation exams for 9th grades won't be based on numerical scores but rather an attestation summary. This year in May we will organize a unified test for 3 subjects in a centralized manner to check the progress of our 4th graders. The 9th graders' STEM exams were recently rewritten to include practical components since now they have access to labs. As for literature and history, we have combined them into an essay requirement; this will be tested for the first time in Tavush this year. These are the multiple grading changes that we hope will reform the system.
PASHINYAN: What steps will you take to ensure teachers don't rig the exams to give students higher grades?
EDUCATION MINISTER: The submissions are checked by computers, not humans. The exams are organized by the Assessment and Testing Center. This year's experiment in Tavush will uncover the potential issues ahead of a wider rollout. The exams should be taken on computers, not paper as it's done today.
Also, if we see that everyone in the school gets high grades, we organize external exams and if they show a significant discrepancy with the average grades in the school, we will demand answers. We already have experience with this, and sometimes it's the other way around, sometimes students perform significantly better in external tests because some teachers principally refuse to give the highest "10" grade to any student. So the external assessment practice aims to resolve that as well. After COVID we introduced the electronic scorebook so we can see every grade in every school.
PASHINYAN: Once again, did I get it right that we won't have separate entrance exams?
EDUCATION MINISTER: We must gradually shift to a system in which universities set their minimum entry requirements and we must ensure that our school graduates meet those requirements. We are also implementing a credit system in high schools. We already have examples of cooperation between universities and schools to use school credits for the entrance process.
PASHINYAN: Got it. So before we get there, we are reforming the exams and tests, making them electronic, etc.
full, source,

Government greenlights an amendment to the Criminal Code to more clearly define what "cybercrime" is, and to ban cash transactions of crypto

The proposed regulation is designed to ensure the formation of effective legislative bases in the context of the fight against cybercrime, forming the necessary material bases and procedural tools in line with international legal requirements.
INTERIOR MINISTRY: Along with the development of IT, cybercrimes have also increased, reaching a large volume in Armenia, but when we try to understand what cybercrimes are, we notice that there is confusion in the public domain. Today we do not have a clear definition of cybercrime, and the first amendment of the bill is aimed at it, so we define the list of cybercrimes in the Criminal Code. This will also allow us to better cooperate with international partners and meet international requirements.
INTERIOR MINISTRY: During a criminal investigation we often reach a roadblock after learning that the cryptocurrency was purchased or sold in cash. There are tens of companies in Armenia that process crypto with cash. The bill will require all crypto sales and purchases to be electronic.
This amendment will also expand the scope of investigators' warrants so they can conduct searches in the cloud systems remotely managed by the suspects instead of only the computers under their physical possession; they'll need to obtain only one warrant from the court. The draft package was drafted with the help of state institutions and U.S. colleagues.
PASHINYAN: That's good, but there is no legislative regulation defining what cryptocurrency is in Armenia. We have a law requiring public officials to disclose crypto assets yet the law currently doesn't properly define what it is. We need to have a legal regulation for crypto.
CENTRAL BANK: It's coming. The crypto regulation bill will be published soon. Today's bill will address the traceability of crypto to combat crime. Crypto is used mainly as an investment asset rather than a currency for transactions, so we want to make the crypto field more transparent and trustworthy to protect our citizens and investors.
PASHINYAN: Great. It's long overdue. Do we know what the size of the shadow economy is driven by crypto? Every luma that legally belongs to the state must be collected, and we need to understand the volume of "lobbying" that's done through crypto because it's turning into offshore 2.0.
IRS CHIEF: We have introduced the second bill to tax crypto transactions. It's important to synchronize these two in order not to leave a legislative gap that would force local crypto exchanges to shut down. Since the Central Bank's bill is extensive and will require years for companies to comply, we propose intermediary KYC requirements and a system to exchange information with the relevant authorities, to allow crypto exchanges to operate before the full implementation of the law.
source, source,

Armenia's economic activity grew 14.3% YoY in Q1

Industrial output +30.4%
Agriculture +3.7%
Construction +11.7%
Services +5%
Domestic trade +26.5%
Foreign trade +110% ($9.1B)
Exports +170% ($4.4B)
Imports +76% ($4.7B)
source, source, source,

IRS released the number of income-generating jobs as of March 2024

741,610 (+5% YoY)
source,

the average monthly nominal salary in February

֏273,000 ($703), +9.3% YoY
Public sector salaries +11.2%
Private sector salaries +8.5%
January inflation -0.4% YoY
February inflation -1.7% YoY
March inflation -1.2% YoY
source, source,

surging U.S. presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy calls for U.S. to sanction Azerbaijan until the safe return of Armenians to Nagorno-Karabakh: VIDEO

KENNEDY: We must act now to hold Azerbaijan accountable by calling for the release of the hostages and enforcing sanctions until a safe and viable path for the return of the indigenous Armenians to Artsakh is achieved. I want to commit the U.S. to the restoration of the sovereignty of Armenia and Artsakh, and to the restoration of its territory. Instead of starting another war somewhere, I want to stop one.
full, video,

65% of Nagorno-Karabakh refugees have no desire to leave Armenia: National Democratic Institute survey

REPORTER: Russian peacekeepers are leaving Nagorno-Karabakh. This was expected after the ethnic cleansing, but not so soon. How did you respond to the news?
STEPANYAN (Artsakh Ombudsman): It was indeed clear that the peacekeepers would leave but as you've said, we were not expecting it to happen 1.5 years before than the 5-year term. Just two weeks ago the Russian ambassador to Armenia told an Armenian outlet that the peacekeepers remained there to ensure the safe return of Armenians.
REPORTER: Russian officials were also saying that their peacekeepers were protecting Armenian properties.
STEPANYAN: Yes, also that. So it was a surprise for us given the complete lack of signs. We have contacts with American and Russian circles and none of them ever brought up the early withdrawal of peacekeepers.
QUESTION: What is the theory among Artsakhtsis about the withdrawal?
STEPANYAN: There were people who didn't take the news lightly because they thought the presence of Russians was the last hope for their return, and no one has the right to blame them for feeling that. There were also people who thought the withdrawal of Russians could allow for the deployment of an international contingent that could pave the way for return.
REPORTER: What's your personal opinion?
STEPANYAN: I never maintained a hope that we could return with the presence of Russians. I think the return cannot be guaranteed by a single state. If the so-called international community has a wish to ensure the return then it has to be done under international guarantees.
REPORTER: Do you see it theoretically possible for Armenia and Azerbaijan to reach an agreement for Azerbaijan to provide certain conditions, mechanisms, and security guarantees for the return?
STEPANYAN: The refugees won't agree to return without an international military-political presence. We are talking about physical security and not being under the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan.
REPORTER: Did Artsakh become part of the "Armenian question", if you know what I mean?
STEPANYAN: I still believe it's possible not to concede our position on the issue of Artsakh and to continue our struggle.
REPORTER: What do you mean?
STEPANYAN: There is still a UN World Court case about the discrimination against Artsakh Armenians. Who knows, maybe this will give us a legal path to promote our agenda. When we raise the right to return, various members of the Armenian government say our rhetoric endangers Armenia's security and it's unrealistic. I disagree.
REPORTER: Here is the issue. When we continue to give refugees hope for return, it keeps them in a state of permanent anticipation so they don't fully settle and integrate into Armenia and they don't live their lives in full in Armenia, which opens up the door for emigration. What is the solution?
STEPANYAN: A survey says the two things that give hope to refugees are the possibility of return and the possibility of having an apartment in Armenia. They want to have safe housing in Armenia with the hope of returning to Artsakh one day.
REPORTER: 65% said they don't want to emigrate from Armenia. The vast majority of the other 35% see Russia as the potential destination. How do you explain the latter? There is dissatisfaction with Russia's inability to protect them yet a large share of the population is willing to live in Russia.
STEPANYAN: People want to leave because of poor living conditions. Why Russia? (1) They have friends and relatives residing in Russia who are actively convincing them to move there. It's not necessarily the refugees' idea to move to Russia, but they are being called from Russia. (2) They speak Russian and can more easily integrate and find work. (3) Living conditions. They say housing and food is cheaper in Russia.
REPORTER: Some Russian officials and business figures even said they are willing to house and help them find employment in Russia.
STEPANYAN: I've heard those reports as well, and that it's an organized policy by the state of Russia. I can't confirm this.
REPORTER: You and the ex-Ombudsman make foreign trips and hold meetings. Is there a coordination with the Armenian government?
STEPANYAN: No. During our trips we discuss the right to return; this is not an active part of Armenia's foreign policy. We also discuss several other topics that are part of Armenia's agenda, for example, the protection of cultural heritage, the return of captives, and the rallying of wider international support for the needs of refugees.
REPORTER: You said the right to return is not part of Armenia's agenda, yet you also stated that it's part of the UN World Court case brought by Armenia. Doesn't that mean it's actually part of the Armenian government's agenda?
STEPANYAN: The World Court case was launched before Armenia changed its policy, and it wasn't explicitly about the right to return, although the Court did give the order to guarantee the right to a safe return. Armenia's legal actions against Azerbaijan and the political position of not demanding the right to return currently do not match.
REPORTER: Some argue that it's a strategy used by Armenia to pressure Azerbaijan in courts while politically using a softer tone to achieve peace.
STEPANYAN: I can't comment on that. I see it differently.
source,

Parliament President Alen Simonyan thanks the French Senate for efforts towards the safe return of Nagorno-Karabakh refugees to their homes

Simonyan hosted a delegation from the French Senate.
SIMONYAN: Thank you for condemning the military aggression against Nagorno-Karabakh, the invasion of Armenia, for calling for sanctions against Azerbaijan, for the calls to sanction Azerbaijan and to ensure the rights of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians to return. //
The parties discussed AM-EU visa liberalization, AM-EU ties, the EU border mission, humanitarian aid for refugees, and the diversification of Armenia's economy and defense.
source,

opposition MP Garnik Danielyan fainted while blocking the interstate road linking Armenia to Georgia: VIDEO

video,
Garnik thus becomes the undefeated champion of roadblocking. He has been in Tavush on and off for almost a month.
PASHINYAN's OFFICE: The 5th column is instructed to carry out an Operation Ring. Small groups of people are trying to block the interstate roads of Armenia, to cut off Armenia from the outside world. However, roads are being opened within minutes by the police. The 5th column is attempting to give the impression that numerous local and interstate roads are currently closed, which is not true. This hybrid war against Armenia has one goal: isolate Armenia, break its resilience, and turn it into a remote province [of Russia]. //
source, source, other,

the U.S. reiterates its support for the AM-AZ delimitation agreement reached on April 19

STATE DEPT SPOKESMAN (was asked to comment): We welcome the announcement that Armenia and Azerbaijan have agreed on the 1991 Alma-Ata Declaration as the basis for the delimitation of the border between the two countries. This is an important step towards a lasting and dignified peace agreement.
source,

Armenia and Azerbaijan have already installed 20 border posts on the newly delimited sections of Tavush-Kazakh

An Armenian serviceman was wounded during the demining activities. He is expected to survive.
source, source,

Azerbaijani President Aliyev about the border delimitation in the Tavush-Kazakh section

ALIYEV: Up to 12 kilometers of our state border has been demarcated. This is an important moment. It's no coincidence that several regional and non-regional states have expressed their support for this process. Let's see how it continues. This shows that bilateral contacts bring results when the situation is not being used for political ambitions.
Both sides have shown constructiveness in this process because we understand the sensitivities and the international obligations, and if the same approach is adopted during the next phase, the process can advance even faster.
The border must be safe for both sides. Obviously, it must be demarcated based on principles. At the same time, there are parts of the border that raise issues for both of us. This is in regard to roads and sometimes security mechanisms. Of course we accept the border line as the basis, but instead of blindly following the line we must be smart and reach agreements that will make borders safe and comfortable for both of us. //
source, source,

Q&A with Parliament President Alen Simonyan

SIMONYAN (to reporters): Armenia and Azerbaijan have agreed to demarcate these borders in Tavush. This is great for Armenia and Azerbaijan and it makes the border safer, while each side gets to keep the triangles of lands as part of the agreement. A third state [Russia] is pressuring our opposition to derail this AM-AZ peace process so we can have a conflict so they can send peacekeepers to "resolve the conflict". We don't want their peacekeepers, we want to monitor our stable borders.
These forces regularly visit our border villages to spread misinformation and play on residents' emotions. Not the entire population of our Tavush villages is protesting this process. We will rebuild or re-route any road or bridge if necessary; there is no such issue that cannot be addressed along the entire Georgia-Iran line. It is much more beneficial for Armenia to have a stable demarcated border.
Our soldiers are going to stand near Kizil-Hajili village and observe it; why don't you ever report that? Azeris are going to wake up and see the Armenian flag every morning. You won't report that but you always cite Aliyev. You love Aliyev, not even Azerbaijani media outlets cite him so much, so why don't you also cite his statement this morning about the successful demarcation of 12 kilometers?
The heads of offices of opposition parties, ARF and Armenia factions, and agents of foreign intel, are sending figures to Tavush to lie to the population. They will gather 40 people, scream and shout on the roads, then go home. Their mentality is that wherever our soldier stands, the area belongs to us. This is wrong and neither Armenia nor Azerbaijan should do that. Our plan is to reproduce the state border from Georgia to Iran.
REPORTER: What about the main road in Voskepar that crosses the state border?
SIMONYAN: We will move it 150 meters or 1 km if necessary, that's not an unresolvable issue.
REPORTER: Is it possible Armenia could exchange the [Armenian] Berkaber triangle [that's under Azeri control] for [Azerbaijani] Voskepar triangle [that's under Armenian control]?
SIMONYAN: It's too early to tell but I haven't heard such plans.
REPORTER: [unintelligible] is it possible Armenia could buy gas from Azerbaijan? Is it realistic?
SIMONYAN: That would be very positive, very good. I think we should discuss that issue. It's not like the gas we currently use it's partially Azeri. I'm confident that under the RU-AZ gas agreement, by in large, it's the same gas that enters Armenia. Another excellent option is to install a gas pipeline and import gas from Iran. [Scandal brewing guys 🤔]
REPORTER: Are there such discussions [to purchase Azeri gas] right now?
SIMONYAN: No, but I read about it today. I'll talk to our colleagues about it. I can't predict what their response will be. [Damn. This was Alen's post-2018 megaplan that he hasn't even drafted yet. Incompetent fool. 🤔]
REPORTER: Did [Russian Senate leader] Matvienko send you a letter? { Context in Wednesday report }
SIMONYAN: I haven't received one yet. They always talk about the centuries-old friendship of Armenian and Russian people yet they didn't even send a letter on the 109nd anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.
REPORTER: You made an anti-Russian statement in Europe, angering Matvienko.
SIMONYAN: I participated in a forum headlined "illegal occupation" of Ukraine by Russia but I even went as far as to remove from my speech the word "illegal" not to upset Russia. My statement was fully in line with international law, while Russia's actions are not in line with the agreements signed by Russia.
REPORTER: You said Armenia recognizes the territorial integrity of Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and Cyprus.
SIMONYAN: Yes. That was/is Armenia's official policy. Even Belarus and Turkey don't recognize the [newly captured Ukrainian territories] as part of Russia. Has Matvienko sent them complaint letters? This stems from the fact that Russia does not believe Armenia should be an independent state. Their perception is that Armenia is still a remote province of Russia. HOW DARE YOU VISIT A SUMMIT INDEPENDENTLY AND GIVE A SPEECH WITHOUT FIRST CLEARING IT WITH US! Has Armenia ever NOT recognized Ukraine's territorial integrity? Didn't Russia itself admit that they "entered the territory of Ukraine" to carry out the "special military operation"? Yes or no? If they "entered Ukraine", where are they located right now? What do you call this? I even decided not to use the word "illegal" in my speech in order not to upset them.
source,

Armenia and Czechia discuss military industry cooperation after signing an agreement in September

Details of the agreement in the September 12 news digest.

regulates relations between the two countries in areas of production, import, export, licensing, quality control of military products; training of specialists

On Thursday Armenia's defense ministry hosted the delegation led by the head of Czechia's defense ministry's Industrial Cooperation department. A number of agreements were reached after discussing military-technical cooperation.
source,

India: we have good relations with Azerbaijan, but we have a policy to promote our defense exports (including to Armenia)

Context: Aliyev complained about India, France, and Greece providing defense assistance to Armenia. (forgot the US and its armored vehicles)
source,

Foreign Ministers of Armenia and Serbia spoke over the phone

Bilateral topics, possible cooperation, the need for more visits, regional issues, the AM-AZ peace process, and territorial integrity.
source,

European Parliament calls for sanctions against the head of the ruling party

The EU Parliament has adopted a scathing condemnation of Georgian Dream’s foreign agent draft law, calling for the sanctioning of the party’s founder, Bidzina Ivanishvili, and hinging Georgia’s accession talks with the abortion of the draft law.

source,

Armenian government hosted a delegation from the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Department of State and Foreign Operations

Deputy FM Hovhannisyan commended the high level of political dialogue between Armenia and the U.S. and touched upon the Armenia - U.S. bilateral agenda as well as the prospective spheres of cooperation.
Issues related to the U.S. assistance to Armenia, as well as the arrangements reached as a result of the joint Armenia-EU-US high level meeting, held on April 5, 2024 were discussed.
source, source,

Armenia confirms plans to open a consulate in Iran's Tabriz, after the latter opened a consulate in Armenia's Syunik

The Government adopted the decision on Thursday based on the principle of reciprocity.
GOVERNMENT: The Eastern Atrpatakan province of Iran borders Armenia and the establishment of the consulate will greatly contribute to the further development of commercial, socio-cultural, interpersonal and tourism communication.
source,

anti-corruption: authorities report the discovery of ֏263 million in COVID-era healthcare fraud in a case involving a Pashinyan-era deputy minister

AUTHORITIES: The administration of a medical center inflated the number of patients in ER rooms by 829 to defraud the state of ֏263M. The [now ex-]Deputy Health Minister Gevorg Simonyan [arrested last year] is a relative of one of the suspects. He was warned by another agency about the violations at the medical center but chose to ignore it. New charges were pressed last month. The case is sent to the Anti-Corruption Court. //
source, source,

top-10 taxpayers in Q1 2024 (and their Q1 2023 numbers), in billion drams

(1) Mobile Center 19.9 (5.3)
(2) Gasprom Armenia 18.2 (20.9)
(3) Zangezur copper 15.6 (15.5)
(4) Grand Tobacco 13.2 (11.7)
(5) Pretty Way 8.8 (8.7)
(6) CPS oil 4.8 (5.1)
(7) Masis tobacco 4.7 (7.3)
(8) Viva Armenia 4. (3.0)
(9) City 4.3 (3.6)
(10) Wildberries 4.2 (2.1)
The top 1,000 taxpayers paid 1.6% more YoY.
source,

Government to bring forward the transition of those on legacy ESA as part of acceleration of Move to UC process
Change, that will see all migration notices sent by the end of December 2025, will give people 'more access to the world of work', says Prime Minister.
In a speech to the Centre for Social Justice, the Prime Minister Rishi Sunak set out a 'moral mission' to get people back to work, and said -

'... we’ll accelerate moving people from legacy benefits onto universal credit, to give them more access to the world of work.'

While the DWP had intended to exclude claimants in receipt of ESA only, or ESA and housing benefit only, from the universal credit managed migration process until 2028, the government said today -

'We will bring forward the transition of those on the legacy ill-health unemployment benefit known as employment and support allowance onto universal credit, thereby completing the full rollout of universal credit. More than six million people are already benefiting from the modern digital universal credit system which allows claimants to access their benefits more easily and amend their claim should their circumstances change.Many of these individuals will also be better off on universal credit and we are committed to providing transitional protection for eligible claimants that are migrated to universal credit. This ensures that those claimants will not have a lower entitlement to universal credit than they did on legacy benefits at the point they transition.'

The DWP's Universal Credit Senior Responsible Owner Neil Couling later confirmed on social media that -

'All migration notices will now be sent by the end of December 2025.'

Mr Couling added that the regulations to support the migration of pensioner cases 'should be published in the reasonably near future'.
For more information, see Disability benefits system to be reviewed as PM outlines 'moral mission' to reform welfare from gov.uk
​
​
​
Further increase to Administrative Earnings Threshold (AET) following Prime Minister’s statement on ‘moral mission’ to get people back to work
New thresholds of £892 for individual claimants and £1,437 for couples come into effect from 13 May 2024.
DWP Minister Jo Churchill confirmed that new regulations being laid before Parliament will introduce a higher threshold of -

'£892 per calendar month for individual customers and £1,437 per calendar month for couples in Great Britain. The new threshold levels would be equivalent to an individual working 18 hours per week at the National Living Wage or couples working a total of 29 hours per week at the National Living Wage. This change will mean that the threshold will have doubled since September 2022 when it was first increased from the equivalent of nine hours for a single person.'

In her written statement in the House of Commons, Ms Churchill added that -

'This is all part of our welfare reforms to make work pay and is backed up by our £2.5 billion Back to Work Plan which will help a million people find, stay and succeed in employment.

NB - while the Universal Credit (Administrative Earnings Threshold) (Amendment) Regulations 2024 (SI.No.529/2024) were laid today, they were then revoked and replaced by the Universal Credit (Administrative Earnings Threshold) (Amendment) (No.2) Regulations 2024 (SI.No.536/2024) in order to amend the coming into force date from 6 May 2024 to 13 May 2024.
For more information, see Written statement: Changes to the Administrative Earnings Threshold from parliament.uk
​
​
​
Government publishes consultation on reform of fit notes process to ‘better understand who needs additional support’
Views sought on plan to offer integrated employment and healthcare services to those seeking a fit note.
Setting out its proposals for reform in a consultation document published today, the government outlines that -

'At Autumn Statement 2023, the Chancellor announced £24 million to begin designing and implementing 'trailblazers' in a number of Integrated Care Systems in England, to test offering better triage, signposting and support to those who have received a fit note for a prolonged period of time. These trailblazers will build on the WorkWell vanguards due to be announced this spring.'

The government goes on to say that its ambition is to co-develop a new process that brings healthcare and employment systems together to support people who are at risk of falling out of work, or who have already fallen out of work, due to ill health, and that the core components of the new process will be -

• a triage service that supports people seeking a fit note into a pathway that best suits their individual health and employment needs;
• an assessment of someone’s ability to do their job, and a work and health conversation with a healthcare professional or with a work and health adviser. Healthcare professionals and work and health advisers will have work and health training and dedicated time, making them better placed to take into consideration a wider set of factors that affect someone’s ability to work; and
• the ability to refer people to more intensive work and health support and assist employers in accessing expert work and health support through Occupational Health services, where appropriate.

The government adds that -

'Whilst staying in work or returning to work as quickly as possible is in many cases the best outcome, we understand that the right support looks different for different people.For example, some people may need a fit note for short or time-limited illness (such as an infection or to recover from an injury or surgery) and can return to work promptly without additional support. Others may require a more detailed assessment and discussion about their work and health, including signposting to more intensive support where appropriate.Our commitment to reform the fit note process, and this call for evidence, will help us to better understand who needs additional support, and how government can enable them to access it.'

The deadline for responses to the consultation is 8 July 2024.
The Fit Note Reform: Call for evidence is available from gov.uk
​
​
​
The Prime Minister announced plans for major reform of personal independence payment (PIP) for those with mental health conditions
Measures to introduce a more 'objective and rigorous approach' set out as part of the speech outlining 'moral mission' to remove barriers to work.
Mr Sunak said -

'The role of the welfare state should never be merely to provide financial support, as important as that will always be, but to help people overcome whatever barriers they might face to living an independent, fulfilling life. Everyone with the potential should be supported, and not just to earn, but to contribute and belong.And we must never tolerate barriers that hold people back from making their contribution and from sharing in that sense of self-worth that comes from feeling part of being something bigger than ourselves.'

Noting that the number of people who are economically inactive has grown by 850,000 since the Covid-19 pandemic, Mr Sunak added that -

'Of those who are economically inactive, fully half say they have depression or anxiety. And most worrying of all the biggest proportional increase in economic inactivity due to long-term sickness came from young people. Those in the prime of their life, just starting out on work and family - instead parked on welfare.'

Turning to disability benefits, Mr Sunak went on to say -

'We now spend £69 billion on benefits for people of working age with a disability or health condition. That’s more than our entire schools budget; more than our transport budget; more than our policing. And spending on PIP alone is forecast to increase by more than 50 per cent over the next four years... That’s not right; it’s not sustainable and it’s not fair on the taxpayers who fund it. So in the next Parliament, a Conservative government will significantly reform and control welfare. We also need to look specifically at the way PIP supports those with mental health conditions. Since 2019, the number of people claiming PIP citing anxiety or depression as their main condition has doubled, with over 5,000 new awards on average every single month. But for all the challenges they face it is not clear they have the same degree of increased living costs as those with physical conditions. And the whole system is undermined by the way people are asked to make subjective and unverifiable claims about their capability.'

As a result, Mr Sunak said that -

'In the coming days we will publish a consultation on how we move away from that to a more objective and rigorous approach that focuses support on those with the greatest needs and extra costs.We will do that by being more precise about the type and severity of mental health conditions that should be eligible for PIP. We’ll consider linking that assessment more closely to a person’s actual condition and requiring greater medical evidence to substantiate a claim, all of which will make the system fairer and harder to exploit. And we’ll also consider whether some people with mental health conditions should get PIP in the same way through cash transfers or whether they’d be better supported to lead happier, healthier and more independent lives through access to treatment like talking therapies or respite care.'

For more information, see Disability benefits system to be reviewed as PM outlines 'moral mission' to reform welfare from gov.uk
​
​
​
Sunak accused of launching ‘full-on assault on disabled people’
The 'moral mission' speech has triggered an outcry from disability charities, who say that the rates of people being signed off work and claiming benefits were being caused by crumbling public services, poor-quality jobs and high rates of poverty among disabled households. Mind, the mental health charity, said services for mental health conditions were “at breaking point”.
There are 1.9 million people on a waiting list for mental health treatment in England, meaning the treatment they should be able to access through the NHS is not currently available to them.
Dr Sarah Hughes, the chief executive of Mind, said the mental health charity was “deeply disappointed that the prime minister’s speech today continues a trend in recent rhetoric which conjures up the image of a ‘mental health culture’ that has ‘gone too far’.
“This is harmful, inaccurate and contrary to the reality for people up and down the country,” she said. “The truth is that mental health services are at breaking point following years of underinvestment, with many people getting increasingly unwell while they wait to receive support. Indeed the Care Quality Commission’s latest figures on community mental health services show that nearly half of people (44%) waiting for treatment found their mental health deteriorated in this time.”
Iain Porter, a senior policy adviser at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, said the prime minister had launched an “irresponsible war of words on people who already aren’t getting enough support, which the government would rather not talk about”.
“Many people want to work, as the prime minister says, but have their hopes dashed by woeful health and wellbeing support and job centres unfit for purpose,” he said.
The British Medical Association said the prime minister should focus on getting people access to the medical help they needed to get back to work rather than “pushing a hostile rhetoric on ‘sicknote culture’”.
Charities warned that the benefit curbs would make people’s problems worse. James Taylor, the director of strategy at the disability equality charity Scope, said the speech “feels like a full-on assault on disabled people”.
“These proposals are dangerous and risk leaving disabled people destitute,” he said. “In a cost of living crisis, looking to slash disabled people’s income by hitting Pip is a horrific proposal.
Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: “Millions of people are stuck on NHS waiting lists, unable to get a GP appointment or struggling to access mental health support. Rishi Sunak is attempting to blame the British people for his own government’s failures on the economy and the NHS and it simply won’t wash.”
Matthew Pennycook, the shadow housing minister, said Sunak had been pursuing a “cheap headline” over his claims that Britain has a “sicknote culture”.
“There has been a long-term rise for many, many years under this government in people who are on long-term sickness benefits, either because they can’t get the treatment they need through the NHS, which is on its knees after 14 years of Conservative government, or they are not getting the proper support to get back into work,” he said.
An election is coming, vote wisely people!
​
​
​
Mims Davies has been appointed as Minister of State for Disabled People, Health and Work
Promotion means that there is once again a dedicated Minister of State for Disability following redeployment of previous role holder in December 2023.
Further to the portfolio for Disabled People, Health and Work being added to Ms Davies' existing brief as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Social Mobility, Youth and Progression in December 2023 - following the redeployment of the previous Minister of State for Disability Tom Pursglove to a role in the Home Office - there was criticism that the government's failure to appoint a Minister of State dedicated to the disability brief showed that 'disabled people's needs aren't a priority for government'.
However, Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride has confirmed that Ms Davies had been appointed as Minister of State, saying -

'Absolutely delighted our fantastic Minister for Disabled People, Health and Work Mims Davies has been promoted to Minister of State. She is a passionate advocate for disabled people and is motivated by making a difference. This couldn't be more deserved.'

The current ministerial team is set out on the DWP's gov.uk page.
ICO orders DWP to publish ‘Move to Universal Credit’ readiness and scaling assessments for managed migration
Finding there is a 'significant and weighty' public interest in understanding and being able to scrutinise the policy, Commissioner orders Department to publish requested information within 35 days.
While the complainant requested the assessments in relation to single and couple claimants of tax credits and other legacy benefit claimants as part of the Department's rollout of universal credit, the DWP relied on section 22 and section 35(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to withhold the requested information.
In response to contact from the complainant, the ICO investigated the way their request for information had been handled.
In relation to the Department's argument that section 22 was engaged, while the ICO acknowledges that the DWP publishes Universal Credit Programme Board papers such as those requested by the complainant after two years, it is not persuaded that the DWP had a settled intention to publish the requested information in its entirety prior to the complainant making their request.
Turning to consider whether the requested information falls within section 35(1)(a), the ICO says -

'Having reviewed the withheld information and considered DWP's previous explanations, the Commissioner accepts that the 'Move to UC' policy was still being developed at the time of the request and the withheld information forms part of the development of this policy … whilst universal credit has been implemented for new claimants, the Commissioner accepts that DWP is still developing its policy on how and when all legacy benefits claimants should be migrated to the new system.'

However, while accepting that section 35(1)(a) is engaged, the ICO does not accept the DWP’s argument for maintaining the exemption from publication. For example, in relation to the DWP's reliance on needing a 'safe space' to develop ideas away from external interference and distraction, the ICO says -

'… guidance on section 35(1)(a) clearly sets out that the relevance and weight of the public interest arguments depend entirely on the content and sensitivity of the information itself and the effect of its release in all the circumstances of the case.'

Reflecting on all the circumstances of the case in light of this guidance, the ICO reaches the conclusion that -

'… there is a very significant and weighty public interest in understanding, and scrutiny of, a policy that will affect millions of people, including the most vulnerable in society. The Commissioner considers that the public is entitled to be able to scrutinise the decision to progress Move to UC and the criteria that DWP has set with regards to this. Disclosure of this information would allow the public insight into the decision making process and an understanding of the decisions made and challenges overcome. The Commissioner considers that there is greater understanding to be gained from the timely disclosure of information than retrospective scrutiny.'

As a result, the ICO rules that the public interest favours disclosure of the requested managed migration readiness and scaling assessments. Accordingly, the Commissioner orders the DWP to disclose the requested information within 35 calendar days of the date of the decision notice (4 April 2024).
The ICO's decision notice is available from ico.org.uk
​
​
​
Lawyers warn that government’s new ‘bank spying powers’ would breach privacy rights
Expert legal advice commissioned by civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch questions the lawfulness of measures included in the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill.
Big Brother Watch has published legal advice which raises human rights concerns about the government's proposed new powers for wide-ranging surveillance of bank accounts.
The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (DPDIB), which is currently being considered by the House of Lords, includes powers to compel financial institutions to undertake large-scale monitoring of accounts to detect possible fraud and mistakes in the payment of benefits. This surveillance would be ordered by the DWP, and there would be no requirement for any suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of account holders.
In the new legal advice, Dan Squires KC and Aidan Wills of Matrix Chambers explain that data about financial transactions is clearly private information and can in some cases be highly sensitive. It may reveal information about a person's movements, their opinions and beliefs, sexual preferences or interests, their medical treatments, potential addictions and financial difficulties. As a result, the legal advice says that, in order to be compatible with the right to a private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the new law must -

• ensure the exercise of the power is sufficiently foreseeable; and
• contain sufficient safeguards against the power’s arbitrary and disproportionate exercise.

However, the legal advice says that the current bill does not specify when the power may be used, what criteria may be used to identify relevant accounts, or what information may be provided to the DWP. It also questions why the financial surveillance powers, unlike comparable investigatory powers, lack 'anything like the same' legal safeguards and oversight, describing the discrepancy as 'striking', and concludes that -

'In absence of these safeguards, it is difficult to see how the exercise of this power could ever be in accordance with the law.'

The legal advice also considers whether the use of the proposed power would be proportionate and highlights that, although it might aid in identifying the accounts of high-level fraudsters, it appears that it could also be exercised for the purposes of identifying -

• whether people in receipt of benefits are mistakenly claiming benefits when they are not entitled to them;
• whether people in receipt of benefits are improperly claiming benefits but in circumstances in which the sums are small; and
• whether the DWP has mistakenly paid someone benefits to which they are not entitled.

Pointing to a line of EU case law holding that such measures are unlikely to be proportionate unless their use is limited to 'preventing and detecting serious crime or safeguarding national security', and noting that domestic legislation reflects that position, the legal advice also highlights -

'[There is no] equivalent suspicionless bulk financial surveillance power available to HMRC (or at least none that is publicly avowed) to engage in bulk financial surveillance looking for indicators of transactions that might raise suspicions that, for example, income tax, capital gains tax or inheritance tax have not been properly paid.'

Silkie Carlo, director of civil liberties at Big Brother Watch - that recently joined more than 40 other campaign organisations and charities in signing a letter to the Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride warning of the risk of wrongful investigations and benefits suspensions if parliament allows the automated surveillance powers to pass into law - said -

'These powers are a disaster for financial privacy and the presumption of innocence, and could lead to Horizon-style injustice on steroids. It is breathtaking that a Conservative government is so recklessly creating Big Brother-style spying powers to intrude on the population’s bank accounts. Everyone wants fraudulent uses of public money to be dealt with, and the government already has powers to review the bank statements of suspects. However, this is a completely unprecedented regime of intrusive generalised financial surveillance across the population, not restricted to serious crime or even crime at all. The legal advice is clear that the bank spying powers seriously risk Britons’ privacy rights. We urge the government to go back to the drawing board and scrap these Orwellian powers.'

For more information, see Government's new bank spying powers 'breach privacy rights', warn lawyers from bigbrotherwatch.org.uk
​
​
​
Scotland - Scottish Government announces pilot of pension age disability payment will commence in five local authority areas from October 2024
The Scottish Government has announced that pension age disability payment will be introduced in five local authority areas from October 2024 and will become available nationally in April 2025.
Further to it announcing in March 2023 that it does not intend to introduce fundamental changes to existing attendance allowance criteria when delivering devolved pension age disability payment, the Scottish Government confirmed today that it will pilot the new benefit from 21 October 2024 in Argyll & Bute, Highland, Aberdeen City, Orkney and Shetland.
Rollout will then expand to include 13 more local authority areas from 24 March 2025 - Aberdeenshire; East Ayrshire; North Ayrshire; South Ayrshire; Na h-Eileanan Siar; Stirling; Clackmannanshire; Falkirk; Fife; Angus; Dundee City; Perth & Kinross; and Moray - before the payment becomes available across Scotland by 22 April 2025.
In addition, the Scottish Government advises that there are around 150,000 people in Scotland in receipt of attendance allowance who will eventually have their awards automatically moved to the new Scottish benefit, with the transfer process being completed in phases and the first claimants transferred from 'early' 2025.
Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said -

'In the midst of the cost of living crisis it is more important than ever that older people get the support they’re entitled to.We developed pension age disability payment by listening to the people who would be applying for it and those who support them. We made changes including making it easier for an eligible person to nominate a third-party representative, something people told us was important for many older people.The pilot phase will allow us to put our different approach into practice, learning and improving before the benefit is rolled out across Scotland.'

For more information, see New disability benefit for pensioners from gov.scot
​

I am not the OOP. The OOP is u/Organic_Let_5948 posting in AITAH and alcoholism
Ongoing as per OOP
2 updates - Medium
Mood spoiler - Depressing for OOP
Thanks to u/colorsofautomn for finding this BORU
Original - 13th April 2024
Update1 - 18th April 2024
Update2 - 19th April 2024
​
AITA for threatening my wife with divorce after she quit her job to be a "tradwife"
​
I dont even know where to begin with this.
Me 34M and my Wife 33F have 2 Kids together 11M and 9F.
Me and my Wife have been together for 12 years and married for 8.
Around a year ago I noticed my wife increasingly sending me these Tradwife or traditional housewife tiktoks. I have nothing against that type of relationship but I don't think it makes sense for our current family situation. I do earn earn quite a bit more than my wife and enough to sustain our family on my own but I dont see the need to do so. I work 80% and my wife 50% and besides Wednesdays where the both of us are working, either one of us is always home for the kids. I could work a 100% and let my Wife be SAHM but again, both of my kids are attending school and in my mind there is no need for my wife to be at home 24/7.
She got increasingly pushy about it over the past two months and again I just kept on telling her that there wasnt any need for that and If we did decide to go down that route, what would she do during the hours my kids attended school? I know damn well our house doesent need to be cleaned for 6 hours a day. She would constantly try to butter me up with "You would have dinner ready every day when coming home from work" and something about unlimited blowjobs or some bs like that. Again in the nicest way possible I would remind her that our kids werent toddlers and our current work-life schedule allowed us to function perfectly fine.
We got into a pretty heated argument two weeks ago about it and my wife completely stopped having sex with me to "show me what I would be missing out on." Shes basically been treating me like a roommate since.
I just thought she would get over it and this was just a phase but god was I wrong. I came home from work yesterday and saw a bunch of presents on the dining table. At first I thought they were all for me since my birthday was in a week but I then I saw the labels on them addressed to my wife. I read one of the letters attached to one of the presents. The last sentence on it was literally "It was so a pleasure working along side you and I wish you all the best moving forwards." I thought this was some sick prank. A few minutes later my wife just casually strolled into the living room acting like nothing was wrong. I guess she saw my mad expression and had the audacity to tell me that "You'll get over it." I just lost it.
I just left without saying another word and went to my parents house. I feel absolutely disrespected. Why the fuck would my wife think it was okay to just quit her job without telling me and just expect me to be fine with it. My wife has been bombarding me with texts and calls demanding to know where I am and that the kids miss me. I just told her to go find a lawyer and that I was done with her and then proceeded to block her.
My son just sent me a voicemail crying and asking why I was divorcing mom and if I was leaving the family and I guess that kind of broke my heart. I haven't responded and honestly dont know what to say to him. My mother in law has also been demanding that I return home and apologize to my wife. My parents also seem to be siding with wife since they are traditional muslims. My mom also used to a SAHM.
I feel like im wrong for immediately jumping to divorce without hearing her out and besides this whole job drama, love my wife too much for this to be the end of our otherwise perfect marriage but on the other hand I feel like i've lost complete trust in her.
Should I just swallow my pride and let my wife stay at home from now on or should I follow through on divorcing her?
How should I navigate this situation?
AITA here?
​
Comments
​
aeroeagleAC
Nothing wrong with being a SAHP, but your partner has to agree to it and you don't get to strong arm them into it. This level of blatant manipulation would be a deal breaker for me. NTA.
​
Internal-Salary-2258
Nah thats crazy. She just quit her job because she saw some TikToks. Listen to what I just said OP.
​
KlingonsAteMyCheese
I have a friend who got REALLY into the tradwife thing because of tik tok. Then she went to a tradwife meet up and found out that most of those tradwives make a lot of money from being influencers and pay to have nannies and housekeepers, so that they can spend their time creating content, getting ready, filming, editing, all that.
They are working, and they hire help. They just don't tell their followers that. A lot of clothing, makeup, food, furniture, utensil brands pay them to use their products in their videos. More than a few bring in more money than their husband's. But make it out like they don't earn anything and their husband's pay for everything. Estee Williams (the famous blonde tik tok trad wife) is one of them.
She has a housekeeper. Almost everything in her videos is sent to her by various brands to use in her videos. She makes, on average, about $15,000 a month. After that meet up, my friend went back to work and stopped with the tradwife life. Because the social media tradwives are working already and are selling lies.
​
**Judgement - NTA*\*
​
Update - 5 days later
​
First of all I just want to thank you guys for the overwhelming support I have received.
Ive received a ton of messages but please be patient with me, This week has definitely been tough on me. This whole family drama has definitely taken a toll on me physically and mentally.
I just want to add a few crucial details that I missed to mention in my original Post.
I suffer from a genetic heart condition that puts me at risk to stress induced cardiac arrest. I used to work full time but was forced to cut down on my work after suffering a silent heart attack. This was nearly a decade ago but since then ive worked my own physical and mental wellbeing . Some people didnt understand me constantly mentioning why it was such an issue working the extra 20%. I honestly dont know how much time I have left and my kids are the most important things in my life. For my own mental health its essential that I get to spend time with my kids throughout the week. Besides my Wife and kids I have nothing. I hate my fucking job and purely continue for the sake of my kids and wife.
Well after spending a day at my parents house, eventually I felt enough time had passed for me to gather my thoughts on everything. What she did seemed like the ultimate slap in the face but I went back with the intention to resolve this and didnt want to escalate this fucking nightmare.
My wife seemed happy I returned but wasnt apologetic at all. The kids ,especially my son, were ecstatic. That sort of made me ignore the lack of remorse for the time being. That same night after putting my kids to bed I told her we need to have a serious discussion.
I told her how I felt about everything she did. The fact that she knows about my health condition and still went through with it. The fact that I set clear boundaries and she still chose to quit her job without my consent. How the fact that she told my son that I was going to abandon the family really felt like a stab in the back. How throughout all of this, she didn't even seem remorseful once. The fact that she chose her own happiness to the detriment of mine. The fact I sacrificed so much for the family and I got repaid like this. The fact that we now as a family have to make major lifestyle changes, since a third of our family income vanished.
For a split second I saw an ounce of sadness in her eyes before she went right back to being annoyed with me.
I then simply told her to lay out her half of the story. Here is a summary of what she said.
She felt ignored by me constantly rejecting her proposal. She had worked long enough and this was finally the time for her to enjoy her life as a "true wife". She also said that I was being a baby about the whole spending extra time with the kids thing. That really pissed me off and we ended up getting into a heated argument. I coudnt bare any of it anymore and just ended up sleeping in the guest room.
Until yesterday nothing changed. She constantly tried to play everything off and wanted to "embrace her new role" by constantly trying to have sex with me and by making me my favorite dishes. It just felt like she was trying to manipulate me again I wasnt having any of it. I just kept on sleeping in the guest room.
Well my birthday was yesterday. And after work my wife and kids picked me up and we ate dinner together. This was probably the first time I genuinely had a smile on my face in a week. Well that smile vanished because she tried to seduce me again later that night.
I rejected her and to my surprise she had a full on mental breakdown. I just held her as she started apologising for what she did. She claimed she didnt understand how much she hurt me, she was sorry for making me feel like an afterthought etc. We ended up sleeping in the same bed yesterday. I felt like things were finally moving in the right direction and I again asked her about searching for a new job today. Instead of getting mad she just replied with a "i need to think about it."
Yeah thats where things are as of today.
It feels like progress is being made but idk this just might be another manipulation tactic of hers.
I'll probably make a final update in a month or so. Reddit isnt doing my mental health any favours.
How would you guys move forward in this situation?
Could I have done something better?
Is she being genuine?
(And to those incels who constantly bring up islam as a way to justify her behaviour, please shut the fuck up. )
​
Comments
​
No-Personality5421
Do you actually think she's looking for a job? Here's a hint, she's not. As far as she's aware, you folded, she won. She doesn't need to work anymore, and you're footing all the bills.
​
LLJKSiLk
She's still manipulating you. The seduction didn't work. Out come the crocodile tears. You need to fortify your boundaries and recognize she's just looking for chinks in your armor.
​
CrunchyTacocat
And she just found one. By crying, she managed to make him sleep in the same bed, she will keep "thinking about it" Just to keep OP Off her Back.
​
I am going through some family issues and have been noticed myself reaching for the bottle far too often - 1 day later
​
Life has been terrible for the past week. A lot of family drama and work has been more stressful than ever.
I just notice myself reaching for whisky more often than I usually do. I guess im just trying to drown out the misery for the time being.
Im scared I might turn to alcohol more often in the future. As of right now im drinking about two glasses of whisky a day when I get back from work. It used to be one glass a week.
My gut is telling me to stop but i feel like a zombie just going through life. I dont have any energy or self control left.
I also have two young kids and definitely dont want to set a bad example for them.
Is this normal? Should I remove all alcohol from the house immediately or am I overreacting?
What would your guys first steps be in my case?
​
Comments
​
Secession03
After looking through your past posts I can tell there is a lot of stress in your life. With medical, financial, emotional, and physical stress it’s only human to want to escape like that. You being conscious of yourself and wanting to be better for your kids shows that it’s a choice you’re debating the same way in everything in life. I would moderate myself but I would not go cold turkey as sometimes that’s more harm than good. Please relax, spend time with your kids, and let them know that everything you do is for them from the bottom of your heart. That’s the true release. Much love x

OOP: Thank you so much! My kids mean everything to me. I would never want to set a bad example for them or put them in harms way.

​
I am not the OOP. Please do not harass the OOP.
Please remember the No Brigading Rule and to be civil in the comments

Hi everyone, posting here as i can’t post on AITA cus it mentions self harm. But maybe someone can give some perspective
I 26F had a friendship breakup after 14 years for not picking the friends side. Giving anonymous names to avoid confusion. I had two friends, we’ll call the Chloe and Ella- they both have names beginning with the same letter in reality but I get the muddled up all the time so if seperate names to stop me doing this. For context I have an issue with words getting muddled up and can legitimately be adamant that my cucumber has a virus and I eat cheese and computer sandwiches . My mum has the same problem, it’s normally a laugh. But it can mean I get people muddled up. in terms of personality I’ve been described as a hufflepuff or a cinnamon roll. I always try to do my best by people to the point I’ve ended up hospitalised for stress which has made me ill. I make care packages for my friend which they get every now and then when they feel blue and I do my best to be mindful and thoughtful of others as I keep to the rules “ if you treat someone cruelly, your not human, be honest, be kind, never harm another, protect those who need it” thsee are rules I have for myself and others , so the moment someone is cruel or does something inhumanely disrespectful, like putting someone’s safety at risk with their actions- I cut ties. This is important for the story I’m about to say.
Chloe at the time was 25 and Ella 24 , I and Chloe we were in seperate year to Ella I school but the two used to be childhood friends living on the same street, Ella is marrying into Chloe’s family via Chloe’s Cousin… who we will call Rori. Chloe would say Ella was like family, as she would with me and a few others. Both Chloe and Ella have mental health issues. Ella specifically doesn’t produce seratonin in her brain which she needs medication as it, giving her symptoms of Bipolar disorder ( she’s awaiting diagnosis) and Chloe has anxiety and anger issues along with other issues. I’ve always gotten on well generally with both in school and thought I’d gotten close to both after school even more so. However I began noticing Chloe had very little interest in initiating conversations, meeting ups and constantly ‘ forgot’ things that were important to others but not her. She would get incredibly rude and defensive over things that didnt need to be defended agains ( for example she was being loud one time and I asked her if she could lower her voice as I was on the phone and she kicked off badly). I’ve seen her shout at her step dad when he asked if she could hurry along ( not rudely I might add) and she even shouted in the middle of a restaurant to Ella on Chloe’s 18th birthday ( we live in uk and you can drink at 18) when Ella Joked the She herself was yet to be able to drink. Chloe’s behaviour has always been irrational and she’s required a lot of sugar coated conversations and In order to keep the peace I’ve had to excuse a lot of negative behaviours. if you go clothing shopping you can’t say if shes worn something that doesn’t suit her because she gets upset because she’s flat chested and very androgynous in appearance. She takes everything as an attack and whenever she has recieved criticism she ended up a state. And if I ever brought up bad behaviour she’d done she’d conveniently forget or say “ it makes me feel really bad that you’d say that, like I’m a terrible friend if you’d say a thing like that”. In fact I believe I have been gaslit by her many times, which I chalked down to her mental health. She claimed she had self harm, and whilst I have never doubted her, there has never been a mark on her body, covered or uncovered, no scars, no scratches, no bruises, burns, grazes or scalds. There’s no self neglect apart from the occasional meal skip and forgotten shower. In fact she’s obsessed with her appearance. I used to self harm and starve myself as a young child… using bruising and self hitting and Ella used to self harm with cutting and scalding. I have a friend who also has an entire arm with things carved into her arm and marks. We’re no experts and I’d never judge, but you do learn to recognise people who harm themselves. She’s always seemed to be a bit of a mystery on that front but we never mentioned it and just did our best to support her.
I have done my utmost to be supportive, i used to leave my university classes when she’d have a panic attack in her own, I used to do the care packages, I’d take her out when she was down, give her space when she needed, I even made her a book of photos and anxiety tips , I helped her move in to her apartment to escape her parents which she would say didn’t understand her and weren’t helpful, taught her how to cook bacon. I basically did everything I could to be supportive and good to her, as I do for all my friends. Unfortunately I never received the same , in fact the only time I would get messages is if she’d want something, she’d forget about plans we’d made which often meant she would invite others for the same thing and forget we were going. She would even tell mutual friends I was too busy when they said about inviting me, I felt used and neglected. And the stress landed me in hospital with polyps in my stomach which had to be removed. work Put me in therapy which helped and I realised I neeed to set boundaries to protect myself. Which I did. I got excluded by her more. On the flip side if I went to hang out with mutual friends without her she’d guilt trip me if I didn’t invite her and she pushed my boundary as far as she could. In the end I stopped hanging out with some people unless she was invited. It meant I had very little social life. But it kept the peace.
Ella was the opposite and engaged as much as she was engaged to. As I say she too had mental health issues. She particularly has been struggling the last few years……she comes from a poorer background ( Chloe does to an extent but didn’t struggle as much as Ella’s family). Ella has very rotten luck, and has family issues ranging from finding out her dad isn’t biologically her father ( her bio she calls a sperm donor and is a nasty piece of work), to her mum not having enough food to feed herself, her younger ( but two oldest out of her three brothers) are special needs with autism and adhd the 3rd and youngest who she has no blood connection to was abandoned and abused by his bio mum and fraudulently putting Ella’s dads name on bills even though they’re not together- so he gets organisations looking for money he doesn’t have… he has severe health issues meaning the youngest has been put unofficially under Ella’s mum’s care ( who is an amazingly strong woman and deserves all the best) , Ella does her best to support them but always is anxious for them. Her personality is passionate and it can sometimes land her in trouble as she can be a little sassy and quick to jump the gun. Her other stressors includes she’s stuck in a toxically managed job which has sucked the joy out of her favourite thing, marine biology. She dreamed as a child of being a shark behaviourologist and job has killed it leaving her shaken and struggling to find her feet, she is also planning her and Roris wedding, which his mother appears to be sabotaging anyw way she can with outbursts and toxic comments. She dreads going to visit them . So you can imagine Ella is strugglng with a lot of emotions simultaneously and panicking a lot. Chloe and I both know this . Her soon to be mother in law, We will call Sally ….has never liked Ella and her sister ( Chloe’s mum) are quite snarky women and have made rude or inappropriate statements which I have witnessed. Sally is also similar to Chloe in attitude And doesn’t treat her son very well, and I suspect nor does she treat Rori’ siblings and father well. When she drinks she becomes nasty also. Anyway…
Over the years when ever Sally gave Ella or Rori a hard time, Ella would share the details and her upset with me and Chloe, I would keep my mouth shut but have pointed out when I considered behaviour bitchy and when Ella said things were starting to smooth out between them I was Suspicious as hell. I have met Sally 6 times and from the first time I didn’t like how she spoke at and down to people. Chloe always gets avoidant in those conversations, no doubt avoiding making someone upset.
now to the story. A few months ago Sally told Ella that Chloe had told her she was dating a guy. In truth Chloe had been having hook ups with a couple of guys but was adamant e was not looking for a relationship. Fair enough right. At this point in time I’d just entered into a new relationship, we’ll call him Alex. Alex was part of our school group of friends and even though I wasn’t friends oer say with him, Chloe was kind of. She’d hung out a few times with him and others but would go long periods of not talking to him. Alex is amazing and it’s been over 6 months since we got together and we love each other in the cute weird couple way. A couple of years beforehand we started dating Alex had actually tried to ask Chloe out which I’d wing manned him with and was shocked to find Chloe had shot him down saying he was like a brother. Couldn’t understand why as he’s a great guy ( I’m not biased , he’s a miraculously lovely person who wears his heart on his sleeve and isn’t afraid to be honest or himself, he’s really supportive and creative). Anyway we Didn’t talk for those couple of years but all the sudden a few months ago we started chatting about comicon and getting a group together and we just started talking and having fun together, we ended up dating as a result. In truth I didn’t tell Chloe straight away, in fact she didn’t find out until after a few dates. I just wanted to avoid any questions and enjoy some alone time getting to know each other… well guess who Chloe had supposedly said to Sally she was dating And then Sally to Ella. Rori and Ella corrected Sally of course, revealing it was I who was dating him. Sally was adament on what Chloe had said and since Sally and Ella was smoothing things out … Ella panicked, and decided to ask Chloe about it. forgetting to put on the soft touch gloves that she normally would use with Chloe to avoid upset. Ella when panicked drops all small talk, talks abruptly and physically can not talk soft and fluffy when panicking. So the way she was phrasing things youd be able to tell would trigger Chloe.
Anyway Chloe denied it but Ella wasn’t sure how Sally would know Alex’s name. So she asked again. Chloe became very defensive, but did not actually address how Sally would know Alexs name. Instead she took on the approach of “ I can’t believe you’d think I’d say that” and she asked Ella why she would.
heres part of the problem. Over the last two years specifically Chloe has been saying she’s unhappy and struggling, but posting on socials that she’s going out a lot and basically portraying the opposite of what she’s telling others, she’d been sleeping around , lying about things that happened and started smoking and drinking more, had a bad habit of picking the “ bad boy” who would string her along … she appeared very self destructive. she quit her job in a small convenience store where she barely worked 3 days a week and had no realistic career plans after leaving. She thought she could go into modelling or do art, however never completed the art work she did do and didn’t do any research for modelling, whenever I found a job that was advertised in town I’d send her a snap and she’d say no thank you. And the apartment type she’s in is designed for vulner girls like addicts or abuse victims, even though at her parents house she was safe, supported and well cared for ( which naturally I can’t guarantee but what I witnessed seemed ok) She just appeared like she was making risky choices and in combination to what she was saying and what we were seeing on socials. Especially as she was avoiding and neglecting her friendships with both of us…It didn’t make sense. Well Ella brought up this to Chloe as part of her reason and that with her and Sally’s relationship going so well ishe wasn’t sure on the truth,
next thing we know Chloe has had a huge melt down over this and they argued. In the end I listened to both sides, saw the messages and put in our group chat, they were both being idiots because if they had been better at communicating and hadn’t neglected their friendships they wouldnt have argued. And it’s because they’d become so distant that Ella questioned and Chloe reacted the way she did. I got them both to apologise to each other and we thought that was other, apparently not.
apparently Chloe had a physical melt down about it while she was with her mother… who then proceeded to send a really rude message to Ella , speaking down at her like a child. Ella simply said that Chloe is the one who should be talking to her, not her mother. As the argument had been resolved she was acting unnecessarily. This actually angered Ella and she went back to Chloe saying her mother needed to back off, argument number two happening. Ella believed that Chloe should have just discussed things further is she wasn’t happy after the apology. Chloe believed her mother could say what she wanted as she was defending Chloe, and Ella was saying that her mother shouldn’t have been involved and the fact she thought it was ok for her to jump in after a resolution has been made was not ok. Chloe then proceeded to avoid messaging her. Which is something Chloe does when she’s had an argument, she basically mutes the conversation and goes off grid for a couple of weeks before expecting an apology. and I have even heard her say “ —— with come crawling back and when they do I’m gonna give em hell” personally I think this is a rather childish response but didn’t say that. I tried to stay as neutral as possible .Instead I tried to encourage her to talk to Ella, and vice versa. I got them to start a little bit but Chloe kept dismissing Ella’s view and feelings, blaming her and basically acted like Ella never even apologised . Ella even skived off work to come down to visit our area to work things out but Chloe bailed stating she didn’t “ feel safe” ,which seemed a bit extreme to me to say about someone you'd been friends with for 15 years and had only expressed concern for your wellbeing and huge support. I had even suggested using my house as the middle ground but after hearing her attitude about the situation realised it wouldn’t improve anything. So cancelled it because I thought heyd both just argue again. I tried to explain to both of them how their feelings were to the other and get them to see each others viewpoint. Ella saw Chloe’s view and had apologised multiple times but Chloe was refusing to even acknowledge hers, saying she felt attacked- repeatedly. She never clarified on what specifically she felt attacked by… and she was really avoiding talking things out , she even muted me and group chats we we’re all apart of As she had even been rude with me and was insist that Ella should be apologising still. She really did not seem to understand that Ella had apologised and it was wrong for her mother to stir things up again and that all she needed to have said instead of getting defensive was that her mother shouldn’t have said anything.
Ella was in bits about the argument, her anxiety went through the roof. She started panicking saying what if Chloe stopped being friends, what if she didn’t come to her wedding, she asked me if I’d go back to being the maid of honour for her ( she’d asked me when she got engaged and I said it would upset Chloe if she didn’t ask her so I relinquished it for Chloe) … basically she spiralled into negative thoughts and cried every night…After nearly 10 days of Chloe avoiding both of us and Ella becoming so stressed she lost her two years self harm sobriety I became frustrated and stopped sugar coating things and said to Chloe her avoiding the situation was making things worse and it wasn’t fair to string Ella along as she was panicking so much she kept thinking about if she needed to make rash decisions. Chloe was essentially punishing her, Sally was also getting involved and her true colours popped out again, Chloe’s mother was stirring Chloe up and I believe Chloe’s “ newer” friends ( she befriended a bunch of younger adults, some i Believe we’re still in school- they seem vulnerable ). I was met with aggressive defensive behaviour and she wouldn’t acknowledge any other view apart from her own. I was accused of attacking her whch I wasn’t and I’d even apologised if I’d upset her. She continued to avoid me and muted again. She decided going out to a club with her newer friends to get drunk and party was more important then resolving her argument with someone she would say was like a sister to her. She also actually said “ I didn’t want to because I was hanging out with ——- and didn’t want to be in a bad mood all “ I was genuinely baffled by the attirude and unwillingness to just listen and work things out. She said the whole situation was ridiculous and shouldn’t of happened, but was refusing to stop it from continuing. she Even accused us of not being supportive of this “ new me” she was becoming and that we were the only two to have a problem. Bare in mind out of all our mutual older friends, they agreed she was over reacting and it was only her newer younger friends that didn’t know her very well who were “ being supportive” some of her older friends are also her x friends because they had arguments with her where they disagreed with her actions and she ditched them.
Anyway … again… sorry it’s so long…Ella then decided for her own wellbeing to set a… I suppose a time limit, you see when they first argued we were 3 weeks away from seeing an Ashniko concert together- the 3 of us. Ella basically said to me she was going to wait so many days and if Chloe hadn’t come forward to work it out she would regretfully message us both about the concert. She was thinking about cancelling all the tickets as she didn’t want to feel used for the tickets if Chloe suddenly wanted to talk it out just to go to the concert. She was mentally and physically exhausted from stress.
now it was my Time to panic, so I hurriedly messaged Chloe saying the time to fix things was over a week ago, if she didn’t message soon there’s was a chance non of us would be going to the concert , or Ella wouldn’t go, so shed need to look at putting money aside as a back up in case a hotel and transport was needed ( at the beginning of the argument I’d said I’d be going to this concert no matter what) .id got money just in case but Chloe has a habit of trying to get others to pay for her so my line of thinking was to avoid getting stung with the bill. Anyway Chloe took my message as an assault, caused us of kicking her out the concert, blamed Ella some more, made out I was picking sides because I didn’t agree with her mothers actions ( I told them I understood them but didn’t think they should of happened) either and basically dismissed the fact that she dragged everything out which has made things worse. I don’t think she understood or cared that Ella had lost her self harm sobriety over this and she just took the stance that it was all on her and also I was being just as rude and disrespectful ( I wasn’t being rude, I just stopped talking to her like it wasn’t her responsibility to work things out too and didn’t agree with everything that she said or put the blame on just one person- I chalked it all up to bad communication) anyway I told her. That avoiding everything hasn’t made it better. She said “ I think we should stop talking before we say something we might regret” she was the only one being aggressive in her messaging and I really didn’t understand her reaction or why she was saying as everything she was saying was so incorrect and twisted to what she’d actually been told. I Told Ella what happened as I had a sense of forboding and apologised profusely which Ella assured me wasn’t my fault and that she was being unreasonable.
I also messaged one of her newer friends that I’d slowly become friends with. Granted that I shouldn’t have but I said I was worried about her, that our mutual friend didn’t know if she wanted to remain friends, I didn’t think we’d be friends longer, and since I’d talked about going to the cinema with this friend I’d offered to remain friends no matter what happened,
a few hours later I received a message from both, him saying no thanks Tata etc and a long paragraph from Chloe with her accusing me of being disrespectful, that my attitude crossed a line ( to my knowledge the only attitude has been her own) , she accused both of us for making A decision - which I suspect her friend showed the paragraph I’d sent him Basically admitting we weren’t sure we’d be friends etc and twisted that into a decision…that we could keep her concert ticket as she didn’t want it , she said I’d put a childish post about her up on social media ( I had posted a poem I’d written in school about my parents when they used to argue and I had put a post that could only been seen by her and Ella up saying it was heartbreaking when you could see something about to happen- mistake I know but by this point I was expressing my feelings on the matter which was sadness) I used to use my social media as a diary in school so it wasn’t uncommon to find stuff written By me- usually in the form of poetry or monologues etc… she’d posted a tik tok where she looked smug in the camera and lyrics which seemed to address the situation. Atleast my post was my feelings and not disrespectful…anyway she also said I had disrespected her mother etc. basically it wa as big F U I’m out paragrap and seconds after she blocked us so we couldn’t respond. She then proceeded to block us off every social media she could find. I was baffled, hurt and angry but also there was an enormous wave of relief that I was surprised by. And I was on the phone to Alex that night and I actually said that to him …
Chloe did miss one of my TikTok accounts and instagram, which I did manage to squeeze a short response via instagram messaging explaining she had twisted everything and when she realised the truth we’d be gone as she’d been a terrible friend to us for years. I then blocked her. I know I shouldn’t have sent the message but after years of being Treated so poorly by her - 14 years of her being neglectful, agressive, unnecessarily defensive, lying, constantly making me feel like I wasn’t a good enough friend to her for her to say the things she did, just because I didn’t agree with her view entirely and that her actions were wrong. It struck a nerve,Ella was equally as hurt and angry, as she had really tried to work things out and although hadn’t been treated as badly as me, had still been neglected for several years by Chloe… we feel like dropped toys. I couldn’t stop apologising to Ella but she simply said it wasn’t on me.
Over the next couple of weeks Sally and Ella still converse. With Ella’s mental health fried to a crisp she let slip a few things to Sally. Chloe also did the same, however I only spoke to Alex or Ella, with a witness in the room. I received through Sally, using Ella as a messenger. Accusations that I had apparently accused Chloe of stealing from my business ( I hosted a stall at Comicon which op she offered to help at Whilst I was worried about theft in general and had £200 of stock missing with no money for, I never blamed Chloe and put it down to people walking past my table swiping things, Chloe is terrible at maths but for the most part I handled the money, all she was asked is if she saw anyone acting suspicious) initially I never thought she had, there was evidence she hadn’t , but the accusation of me causing her… was suspicious. I didn’t investigate however to protect my business I blocked her off my businesses social account of Facebook. Ella also cleared up things with Sally on what Chloe had said. There was also the accusation that I’d said she was jealous of me. Never said that however at this same Comicon, my boyfriend came to support and was being very affectionate and she got upset and expressed she wanted that for herself, I tried to comfort her and said it was natural to feel like she wanted affection and romance , especially after being strung along by other boys in the past. She herself has made the comment “ or jealous” she’d had a similar conversation with Alex himself and he tried to comfort in an appropriate way. i shrugged of these accusations as I’d already heard she was telling people lots of things to get sympathy and I was so tired I didn’t want to handle anything to do with her. A couple of others admitted that she tried to make things about her which Alex confirmed as he went to visit to test the waters after the argument to see where they stood as friends. Apparently she felt it was all our fault and that we should be apologising, near begging forgiveness.
just before new year is when the real doozy happened. Now for context. Now just when I had started dating Alex I had told all my gal pals I was looking for lingerie , I’d specifically told Ella over messages I was looking for it in Alex’s favourite colour and at a group Halloween mini golf night out I’d shown Chloe a set in Alex’s favourite colour. I was wearing it and basically flashed It a bit. Lo and behold days within Chloe and Ella had epargument number 1 … she showed me a bra in that colour saying she wanted to try something new. I played it cool but it screamed cringe to me. After the argument I mentioned it to Alex, with the word I only said was that I felt it was Odd, which Alex agreed. i also at a later date mentioned to Ella the conversation I’d had with Alex about it and that I said it was odd because I honestly thought I’d told Chloe about the colour being Alex’s favourite colour.
now as I said Ella had been talking to Sally. I’m not sure what was said but Chloe some how heard something about it. And she sent the most outrageous message to Alex that was “ addressing ” this accusation I’d apparently made about her and I going to a lingerie shop and her telling me his favourite colour, then buying lingerie for herself in the same colour” she wrote points saying she wouldn’t talk to him about her underwear etc and why would she do that and that I was lying about her. Alex basically said something about what did she want him to do about it and basically said I’d talk to her to address it. She basicalky said no way blocked on everything. Almost proudly in tone, and that she didn’t want to talk things through and even though she was owed an apology she didn’t want it now ( i wasn’t sure what she wanted an apology for as she’d already received an appology whenever I felt i wrote something bit harshly I would say it- I’ve recently found out what I consider harsh is a normal conversation). Alex was really frustrated and said I was trying to make it right. Not sure about the rest of the conversation but I’ve always said to him it’s his friendship I won’t interfere and he was no way obligated to share anything if he didn’t want to. He was confused that she would call him like a brother as she doesn’t act like he is, in fact she avoided him too friendship wise just like me and Ella. She didn’t even say get well soon when he or Ella was in hospital. Just focussed on her. He was so mad by her message but he’d also had a few drinks by then so I told him it was his choice whatever he did and I would love and support him either way. I felt so bad for him and cuddled him as the new year started and he decided this was her last chance as all throughout me trying to negotiate I’d showed him the messages and he’d seen me getting upset and frustrated and knew I was only trying to help. I sent one last text to her addressing the accusations. I sternly put I wanted nothing to do with her and she should go live her life as I wanted nothing to do with her ever again. He hasn’t to my knowledge been messaged by her since and I warned Ella not to share anything to Sally.
its been almost 5 months since then, me and Alex are going strong. It turns out the people Chloe used to say I was too busy for meeting up with are more then happy to see me and I’ve been going out more, I go to concerts with Alex and support his band in competitions. I’m making friends with his friendship group and his cat. The friends I made at uni and outside of Chloe and Ella are all supportive and I have more time and social energy for them now I’m not having Chloe in my life. Still I hope she’s somewhat ok, maybe with a dash of life lessons mixed in. Is that bad?
Ella is still stressed but has learnt that true supportive friends have been with her all along. She’s on stress leave from work and is searching for a not so toxic job. Rori is has said his mother has to behave at the wedding or be remoevd. Chloe and her immediate family are not longer part of the wedding party. I gave in to Ella’s request to return me to maid of honour, I have a club booked and goth decorations for her Bat-chellorette. The location is going to be a secret until 48 hours before to avoid unwanted guests, but we will be in the vip section. I’ve got biodegradable confetti made for the wedding for her, all the bridesmaids aree sorted for dresses and shoes, im picking up her bridal jacket for her in a couple of weeks ( the bridal shop accidentally ordered the wrong colour so bit of a panic) I booked the week off prior to her wedding for any panicking bride feelings and wedding needs. I’ve also been asked to be prepared to do a back up speech in case the best man gets stage fright. And so far there’s not been any news on Chloe. my main concern is Sally starting something at the wedding or Chloe revealing something about Ella’s wedding dress that was being kept as a surprise for Rori. She’s also checked in with Rori who has been really torn about things and considering she used to say they were like twin siblings, she’s not acted like it.
We’ve also had a few comments come through from Mutual friends . Apparently she said to one good luck to Alex for putting up with my BS… im not even going to respond on that. Alex is pretty happy with me and we tried to avoid Chloe as a topic unless it’s unavoidable . The tik tok account she forgot to block gets her videos come through. I forgot about the account until a month ago and was scrolling through my FYP and she popped up…They seem self destructive and in denial of what’s happened. But it’s not my concern now. I don’t need to stress about her any more So why have the temptation.I closed that account as I don’t use it and there’s some really bad videography work in them- proper cringe… so after posting one last video where I put I was saying goodbye to the account and those cringey videos . I put “ in order to move on from the past, you need to make it unimportant” … I also may have did some silly sweary motions with my hands to say goodbye to the old videos and account, which is she somehow sees think it’s for her… but as I say you have got to make the past unimportant to move on and I have A new tiktok for my business to post thing on. I’ve not seen her about town either but I’ve heard from one of Ella’s friends that Chloe conveniently shows up to where Ella’s friend is if she post anything on social media about it; bit odd. Alex takes me to bar twice a week which Chloe isn't normally seen at , as I say I’ve been making new friends, there’s a girl with rainbow hair and dresses harajuku that seems nice 🥰
I’m not sure if this is my fault, I tried to be supportive and fair to both, but I feel like I was forced into an awkward position by Chloe when she put Ella at risk physically. there’s only so much support you can give without giving yourself and I was still in recovery from my polyp removal as this happened. I feel depressed some days thinking about this situation and blame myself as well as feel angry at Chloe, I’ve stress ground my teeth in my sleep and although I feel calmer day to day over normal things. And I’m getting more socialised and loving relationships…I feel like I’m losing motivation and dipping into my old self harm habbits…. So am I to blame? And also how can I be better Supportive to Ella now she’s off the sobriety wagon

From u/TheGooombler
_______________________________________________________________________
​

1. COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
2. Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
3. Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
4. How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
5. Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

_______________________________________________________________________
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum..
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'
Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'
Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precidence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share then with HQ.
_______________________________________________________________________
Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
Note: The first rule and last five (or six, depending on situation) rules are generally not directly within the ability of the traditional disinfo artist to apply. These rules are generally used more directly by those at the leadership, key players, or planning level of the criminal conspiracy or conspiracy to cover up.
1. Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. Regardless of what you know, don't discuss it -- especially if you are a public figure, news anchor, etc. If it's not reported, it didn't happen, and you never have to deal with the issues.
2. Become incredulous and indignant. Avoid discussing key issues and instead focus on side issues which can be used show the topic as being critical of some otherwise sacrosanct group or theme. This is also known as the 'How dare you!' gambit.
3. Create rumor mongers. Avoid discussing issues by describing all charges, regardless of venue or evidence, as mere rumors and wild accusations. Other derogatory terms mutually exclusive of truth may work as well. This method which works especially well with a silent press, because the only way the public can learn of the facts are through such 'arguable rumors'. If you can associate the material with the Internet, use this fact to certify it a 'wild rumor' from a 'bunch of kids on the Internet' which can have no basis in fact.
4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
6. Hit and Run. In any public forum, make a brief attack of your opponent or the opponent position and then scamper off before an answer can be fielded, or simply ignore any answer. This works extremely well in Internet and letters-to-the-editor environments where a steady stream of new identities can be called upon without having to explain criticism, reasoning -- simply make an accusation or other attack, never discussing issues, and never answering any subsequent response, for that would dignify the opponent's viewpoint.
7. Question motives. Twist or amplify any fact which could be taken to imply that the opponent operates out of a hidden personal agenda or other bias. This avoids discussing issues and forces the accuser on the defensive.
8. Invoke authority. Claim for yourself or associate yourself with authority and present your argument with enough 'jargon' and 'minutia' to illustrate you are 'one who knows', and simply say it isn't so without discussing issues or demonstrating concretely why or citing sources.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
10. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man -- usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with - a kind of investment for the future should the matter not be so easily contained.) Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually then be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues -- so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions. Using a minor matter or element of the facts, take the 'high road' and 'confess' with candor that some innocent mistake, in hindsight, was made -- but that opponents have seized on the opportunity to blow it all out of proportion and imply greater criminalities which, 'just isn't so.' Others can reinforce this on your behalf, later, and even publicly 'call for an end to the nonsense' because you have already 'done the right thing.' Done properly, this can garner sympathy and respect for 'coming clean' and 'owning up' to your mistakes without addressing more serious issues.
12. Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve. This causes those otherwise following the matter to begin to lose interest more quickly without having to address the actual issues.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
14. Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely, a ploy which works best with issues qualifying for rule 10.
15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions. This requires creative thinking unless the crime was planned with contingency conclusions in place.
16. Vanish evidence and witnesses. If it does not exist, it is not fact, and you won't have to address the issue.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.'
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations -- as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution. This works best when the crime was designed with contingencies for the purpose, and the facts cannot be easily separated from the fabrications.
21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body. Subvert the (process) to your benefit and effectively neutralize all sensitive issues without open discussion. Once convened, the evidence and testimony are required to be secret when properly handled. For instance, if you own the prosecuting attorney, it can insure a Grand Jury hears no useful evidence and that the evidence is sealed and unavailable to subsequent investigators. Once a favorable verdict is achieved, the matter can be considered officially closed. Usually, this technique is applied to find the guilty innocent, but it can also be used to obtain charges when seeking to frame a victim.
22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s), leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.
23. Create bigger distractions. If the above does not seem to be working to distract from sensitive issues, or to prevent unwanted media coverage of unstoppable events such as trials, create bigger news stories (or treat them as such) to distract the multitudes.
24. Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely. This can be by their death, arrest and detention, blackmail or destruction of their character by release of blackmail information, or merely by destroying them financially, emotionally, or severely damaging their health.
25. Vanish. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.
_______________________________________________________________________
Eight Traits of the Disinformationalist
1) Avoidance. They never actually discuss issues head-on or provide constructive input, generally avoiding citation of references or credentials. Rather, they merely imply this, that, and the other. Virtually everything about their presentation implies their authority and expert knowledge in the matter without any further justification for credibility.
2) Selectivity. They tend to pick and choose opponents carefully, either applying the hit-and-run approach against mere commentators supportive of opponents, or focusing heavier attacks on key opponents who are known to directly address issues. Should a commentator become argumentative with any success, the focus will shift to include the commentator as well.
3) Coincidental. They tend to surface suddenly and somewhat coincidentally with a new controversial topic with no clear prior record of participation in general discussions in the particular public arena involved. They likewise tend to vanish once the topic is no longer of general concern. They were likely directed or elected to be there for a reason, and vanish with the reason.
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.
5) Anti-conspiratorial. They almost always have disdain for 'conspiracy theorists' and, usually, for those who in any way believe JFK was not killed by LHO. Ask yourself why, if they hold such disdain for conspiracy theorists, do they focus on defending a single topic discussed in a NG focusing on conspiracies? One might think they would either be trying to make fools of everyone on every topic, or simply ignore the group they hold in such disdain.Or, one might more rightly conclude they have an ulterior motive for their actions in going out of their way to focus as they do.
6) Artificial Emotions. An odd kind of 'artificial' emotionalism and an unusually thick skin -- an ability to persevere and persist even in the face of overwhelming criticism and unacceptance. This likely stems from intelligence community training that, no matter how condemning the evidence, deny everything, and never become emotionally involved or reactive. The net result for a disinfo artist is that emotions can seem artificial.
Most people, if responding in anger, for instance, will express their animosity throughout their rebuttal. But disinfo types usually have trouble maintaining the 'image' and are hot and cold with respect to pretended emotions and their usually more calm or unemotional communications style. It's just a job, and they often seem unable to 'act their role in character' as well in a communications medium as they might be able in a real face-to-face conversation/confrontation. You might have outright rage and indignation one moment, ho-hum the next, and more anger later -- an emotional yo-yo.
With respect to being thick-skinned, no amount of criticism will deter them from doing their job, and they will generally continue their old disinfo patterns without any adjustments to criticisms of how obvious it is that they play that game -- where a more rational individual who truly cares what others think might seek to improve their communications style, substance, and so forth, or simply give up.
7) Inconsistent. There is also a tendency to make mistakes which betray their true self/motives. This may stem from not really knowing their topic, or it may be somewhat 'freudian', so to speak, in that perhaps they really root for the side of truth deep within.
I have noted that often, they will simply cite contradictory information which neutralizes itself and the author. For instance, one such player claimed to be a Navy pilot, but blamed his poor communicating skills (spelling, grammar, incoherent style) on having only a grade-school education. I'm not aware of too many Navy pilots who don't have a college degree. Another claimed no knowledge of a particular topic/situation but later claimed first-hand knowledge of it.
8) Time Constant. Recently discovered, with respect to News Groups, is the response time factor. There are three ways this can be seen to work, especially when the government or other empowered player is involved in a cover up operation:
a) ANY NG posting by a targeted proponent for truth can result in an IMMEDIATE response. The government and other empowered players can afford to pay people to sit there and watch for an opportunity to do some damage. SINCE DISINFO IN A NG ONLY WORKS IF THE READER SEES IT - FAST RESPONSE IS CALLED FOR, or the visitor may be swayed towards truth.
b) When dealing in more direct ways with a disinformationalist, such as email, DELAY IS CALLED FOR - there will usually be a minimum of a 48-72 hour delay. This allows a sit-down team discussion on response strategy for best effect, and even enough time to 'get permission' or instruction from a formal chain of command.
c) In the NG example 1) above, it will often ALSO be seen that bigger guns are drawn and fired after the same 48-72 hours delay - the team approach in play. This is especially true when the targeted truth seeker or their comments are considered more important with respect to potential to reveal truth. Thus, a serious truth sayer will be attacked twice for the same sin.
_______________________________________________________________________
How to Spot a Spy (Cointelpro Agent)
One way to neutralize a potential activist is to get them to be in a group that does all the wrong things. Why?
1) The message doesn't get out.
2) A lot of time is wasted
3) The activist is frustrated and discouraged
4) Nothing good is accomplished.
FBI and Police Informers and Infiltrators will infest any group and they have phoney activist organizations established.
Their purpose is to prevent any real movement for justice or eco-peace from developing in this country.
Agents come in small, medium or large. They can be of any ethnic background. They can be male or female.
The actual size of the group or movement being infiltrated is irrelevant. It is the potential the movement has for becoming large which brings on the spies and saboteurs.
This booklet lists tactics agents use to slow things down, foul things up, destroy the movement and keep tabs on activists.
It is the agent's job to keep the activist from quitting such a group, thus keeping him/her under control.
In some situations, to get control, the agent will tell the activist:
​

• "You're dividing the movement."

[Here, I have added the psychological reasons as to WHY this maneuver works to control people]
This invites guilty feelings. Many people can be controlled by guilt. The agents begin relationships with activists behind a well-developed mask of "dedication to the cause." Because of their often declared dedication, (and actions designed to prove this), when they criticize the activist, he or she - being truly dedicated to the movement - becomes convinced that somehow, any issues are THEIR fault. This is because a truly dedicated person tends to believe that everyone has a conscience and that nobody would dissimulate and lie like that "on purpose." It's amazing how far agents can go in manipulating an activist because the activist will constantly make excuses for the agent who regularly declares their dedication to the cause. Even if they do, occasionally, suspect the agent, they will pull the wool over their own eyes by rationalizing: "they did that unconsciously... they didn't really mean it... I can help them by being forgiving and accepting " and so on and so forth.
The agent will tell the activist:
​

• "You're a leader!"

This is designed to enhance the activist's self-esteem. His or her narcissistic admiration of his/her own activist/altruistic intentions increase as he or she identifies with and consciously admires the altruistic declarations of the agent which are deliberately set up to mirror those of the activist.
This is "malignant pseudoidentification." It is the process by which the agent consciously imitates or simulates a certain behavior to foster the activist's identification with him/her, thus increasing the activist's vulnerability to exploitation. The agent will simulate the more subtle self-concepts of the activist.
Activists and those who have altruistic self-concepts are most vulnerable to malignant pseudoidentification especially during work with the agent when the interaction includes matter relating to their competency, autonomy, or knowledge.
The goal of the agent is to increase the activist's general empathy for the agent through pseudo-identification with the activist's self-concepts.
The most common example of this is the agent who will compliment the activist for his competency or knowledge or value to the movement. On a more subtle level, the agent will simulate affects and mannerisms of the activist which promotes identification via mirroring and feelings of "twinship". It is not unheard of for activists, enamored by the perceived helpfulness and competence of a good agent, to find themselves considering ethical violations and perhaps, even illegal behavior, in the service of their agent/handler.
The activist's "felt quality of perfection" [self-concept] is enhanced, and a strong empathic bond is developed with the agent through his/her imitation and simulation of the victim's own narcissistic investments. [self-concepts] That is, if the activist knows, deep inside, their own dedication to the cause, they will project that onto the agent who is "mirroring" them.
The activist will be deluded into thinking that the agent shares this feeling of identification and bonding. In an activist/social movement setting, the adversarial roles that activists naturally play vis a vis the establishment/government, fosters ongoing processes of intrapsychic splitting so that "twinship alliances" between activist and agent may render whole sectors or reality testing unavailable to the activist. They literally "lose touch with reality."
Activists who deny their own narcissistic investments [do not have a good idea of their own self-concepts and that they ARE concepts] and consciously perceive themselves (accurately, as it were) to be "helpers" endowed with a special amount of altruism are exceedingly vulnerable to the affective (emotional) simulation of the accomplished agent.
Empathy is fostered in the activist through the expression of quite visible affects. The presentation of tearfulness, sadness, longing, fear, remorse, and guilt, may induce in the helper-oriented activist a strong sense of compassion, while unconsciously enhancing the activist's narcissistic investment in self as the embodiment of goodness.
The agent's expresssion of such simulated affects may be quite compelling to the observer and difficult to distinguish from deep emotion.
It can usually be identified by two events, however:
First, the activist who has analyzed his/her own narcissistic roots and is aware of his/her own potential for being "emotionally hooked," will be able to remain cool and unaffected by such emotional outpourings by the agent.
As a result of this unaffected, cool, attitude, the Second event will occur: The agent will recompensate much too quickly following such an affective expression leaving the activist with the impression that "the play has ended, the curtain has fallen," and the imposture, for the moment, has finished. The agent will then move quickly to another activist/victim.
The fact is, the movement doesn't need leaders, it needs MOVERS. "Follow the leader" is a waste of time.
A good agent will want to meet as often as possible. He or she will talk a lot and say little. One can expect an onslaught of long, unresolved discussions.
Some agents take on a pushy, arrogant, or defensive manner:
1) To disrupt the agenda
2) To side-track the discussion
3) To interrupt repeatedly
4) To feign ignorance
5) To make an unfounded accusation against a person.
Calling someone a racist, for example. This tactic is used to discredit a person in the eyes of all other group members.
Saboteurs
Some saboteurs pretend to be activists. She or he will ....
1) Write encyclopedic flyers (in the present day, websites)
2) Print flyers in English only.
3) Have demonstrations in places where no one cares.
4) Solicit funding from rich people instead of grass roots support
5) Display banners with too many words that are confusing.
6) Confuse issues.
7) Make the wrong demands.
8) Compromise the goal.
9) Have endless discussions that waste everyone's time. The agent may accompany the endless discussions with drinking, pot smoking or other amusement to slow down the activist's work.
Provocateurs
1) Want to establish "leaders" to set them up for a fall in order to stop the movement.
2) Suggest doing foolish, illegal things to get the activists in trouble.
3) Encourage militancy.
4) Want to taunt the authorities.
5) Attempt to make the activist compromise their values.
6) Attempt to instigate violence. Activisim ought to always be non-violent.
7) Attempt to provoke revolt among people who are ill-prepared to deal with the reaction of the authorities to such violence.
Informants
1) Want everyone to sign up and sing in and sign everything.
2) Ask a lot of questions (gathering data).
3) Want to know what events the activist is planning to attend.
4) Attempt to make the activist defend him or herself to identify his or her beliefs, goals, and level of committment.
Recruiting
Legitimate activists do not subject people to hours of persuasive dialog. Their actions, beliefs, and goals speak for themselves.
Groups that DO recruit are missionaries, military, and fake political parties or movements set up by agents.
Surveillance
ALWAYS assume that you are under surveillance.
At this point, if you are NOT under surveillance, you are not a very good activist!
Scare Tactics
They use them.
Such tactics include slander, defamation, threats, getting close to disaffected or minimally committed fellow activists to persuade them (via psychological tactics described above) to turn against the movement and give false testimony against their former compatriots. They will plant illegal substances on the activist and set up an arrest; they will plant false information and set up "exposure," they will send incriminating letters [emails] in the name of the activist; and more; they will do whatever society will allow.
This booklet in no way covers all the ways agents use to sabotage the lives of sincere an dedicated activists.
If an agent is "exposed," he or she will be transferred or replaced.
COINTELPRO is still in operation today under a different code name. It is no longer placed on paper where it can be discovered through the freedom of information act.
The FBI counterintelligence program's stated purpose: To expose, disrupt, misdirect, discredit, and otherwise neutralize individuals who the FBI categorize as opposed to the National Interests. "National Security" means the FBI's security from the people ever finding out the vicious things it does in violation of people's civil liberties.
_______________________________________________________________________
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression
Strong, credible allegations of high-level criminal activity can bring down a government. When the government lacks an effective, fact-based defense, other techniques must be employed. The success of these techniques depends heavily upon a cooperative, compliant press and a mere token opposition party.
1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.
2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "How dare you?" gambit.
3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors." (If they tend to believe the "rumors" it must be because they are simply "paranoid" or "hysterical.")
4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspects of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors (or plant false stories) and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.
5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down.
6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money (compared to over-compensated adherents to the government line who, presumably, are not).
7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
8. Dismiss the charges as "old news."
9. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hangout route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken. With effective damage control, the fall-back position need only be peddled by stooge skeptics to carefully limited markets.
10. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
11. Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. E.g. We have a completely free press. If evidence exists that the Vince Foster "suicide" note was forged, they would have reported it. They haven't reported it so there is no such evidence. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press who would report the leak.
12. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely. E.g. If Foster was murdered, who did it and why?
13. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or publicizing distractions.
14. Lightly report incriminating facts, and then make nothing of them. This is sometimes referred to as "bump and run" reporting.
15. Baldly and brazenly lie. A favorite way of doing this is to attribute the "facts" furnished the public to a plausible-sounding, but anonymous, source.
16. Expanding further on numbers 4 and 5, have your own stooges "expose" scandals and champion popular causes. Their job is to pre-empt real opponents and to play 99-yard football. A variation is to pay rich people for the job who will pretend to spend their own money.
17. Flood the Internet with agents. This is the answer to the question, "What could possibly motivate a person to spend hour upon hour on Internet news groups defending the government and/or the press and harassing genuine critics?" Don t the authorities have defenders enough in all the newspapers, magazines, radio, and television? One would think refusing to print critical letters and screening out serious callers or dumping them from radio talk shows would be control enough, but, obviously, it is not.

I wrote this for anyone who is considering purchasing TechnoTutor, joining Self Perfected, or anyone involved with Self Perfected/TechnoTutoDesteni who might be questioning if it's right for them.
TechnoTutor is one of the many rapid serial visual presentation software that helps improve reading speed. Self Perfected is a community that sells TechnoTutor and claims that it will "end child abuse" and "change the system".

TechnoTutor is Overpriced and There Are Free Tools That Serve the Same Purpose

TechnoTutor is a software that uses rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP), which is the flashing of stimuli at a high speed. In TechnoTutor, a word, letter, or phrase is presented for less than 500ms. TechnoTutor supposedly contains all of the words from the Oxford dictionary. They claim that it subliminally integrates the words into your subconscious and "opens your natural learning ability", improves comprehension, and increases reading speed, enabling users to learn faster.
TechnoTutor operates on a structured system of word lists, categorized into different levels. As you progress through each level, you'll be flashed with every word within the list. This process includes vocalizing the word, writing it down, typing it out, and finally reading its definition sourced from the Oxford dictionary. The Self Perfected members and TechnoTutor cofounders claim that by using TechnoTutor daily, we are "purifying words", "reprogramming the subconscious mind", and "integrating the words into our subconscious".
Whether TechnoTutor is effective or not, TechnoTutor charges their customers over $7,000 for functionality that already exists for free, and it is in no way an original idea. Tools like Accelareader, Spreeder, Brillkids, and Swift Read possess the same functionality.
Instead of paying $7,000, individuals can simply use Brillkids, Accelareader, or Spreeder for free, google the Oxford definition of the words they're flashing if they desire, then use the notes app on their laptop to write the words/phrases back. TechnoTutor can easily be replicated by asking ChatGPT. My gut tells me it's not best to charge people who are already financially struggling, a high price for a free and unoriginal idea.
According to one TechnoTutor's leading distributors, TechnoTutor provides the same value as a Tachistoscope, which can be bought on Ebay for $500-$700. To his point, TechnoTutor is overpriced. Personally, I have experienced no results from using TechnoTutor daily.

Free/Affordable Online Tools that Have Similar Functionality as TechnoTutor:

https://www.brillkids.com/teach-reading/
https://www.brillkids.com/pop-up/videos/product-lr-quick-tour-youtube.php
https://accelareader.com/
https://swiftread.com/
https://www.spreeder.com/
https://irisreading.com/course/speed-reading-foundation-course/

• BrillKids’s Little Reader Software appears to be a very similar to TechnoTutor designed for children. Both use high speed visual imprinting. LittleReader is a prime example of how to sell TechnoTutor in a way that is ethical and closer to “best for all”, parents can teach their babies to read without putting themselves into deeper financial pressure. Watch this video or check out their website.
• Accelareader is completely free, and the UI is drastically different from TechnoTutor, but the core functionality of flashing a string of text is accessible for free. You can adjust the speed of the words flashed, and TechnoTutor does not have this functionality, nor will they tell you the rate at which they flash the words. You can use any words you’d like, similar to the Customs List on TechnoTutor. It takes in any input you give it. You can use this tool just like TT Basics list by flashing any word, looking up the Oxford definition on Google, then writing the word back in a notes app.

False Advertising

Self Perfected uses false advertising tactics to convince their members into buying tickets to their events. They charge a high amount for the ticket to attend, then use deceptive sales tactics on the zoom calls (Self Perfected hosts weekly zoom calls on Fridays, and various other zoom meetings if you purchase TechnoTutor), claiming that the tickets are selling out fast or almost sold out, and that you should buy immediately when they are in fact not close to being sold out. I was informed of this by members that are close with the distributors that run the zoom calls and have witnessed it personally.
Misrepresenting the availability of a product in order to create a sense of urgency and pressure consumers into making a purchase is a form of deceptive marketing. I witnessed this last year when they were promoting the San Diego event on a their Friday zoom. The facilitator on the Friday zoom call claimed that the tickets were "selling out fast" and won't be for sale much longer, and unfortunatley, I purchased the ticket out of pressure, only for them to keep selling tickets for the next couple of months.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforces laws against deceptive advertising under Section 5 of the FTC Act. This law prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in commerce, including false or misleading representations about the availability, characteristics, or benefits of a product. "Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are hereby declared unlawful."
This could also potentially raise legal concerns under various other consumer protection laws and regulations: * Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA): Prohibits false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of trade or commerce. Making unsubstantiated claims about the benefits of a product, such as the ability to reprogram the subconscious mind, could potentially violate the DTPA if it is found to be deceptive. * False Advertising: If TechnoTutor is making false or misleading claims about the product's capabilities or benefits, ex. TechnoTutor will make you rich, this could constitute false advertising. If the company claims that its product can reprogram the subconscious mind without providing substantiated evidence or research to support these claims, it could be considered false advertising. * Consumer Protection Laws: Selling a product at an inflated price without providing sufficient value or making false claims about its benefits could potentially violate these laws.

So, why is the price for TechnoTutor so high?

I have witnessed multiple members claim, "The price is high because they get access to the community". However, the Self Perfected community comes free to those who simply join the Facebook group, local club houses, and/or the Self Perfected zoom calls every Friday.
My favorite excuse is, "The price is high because they plan to invest the money into buying company shares". The cofounders of TechnoTutor profited millions since it was founded. I was told on multiple occasions that the profits of TechnoTutor will be used to invest into "changing the system" and that is why the price of TechnoTutor and its various levels are so expensive. They continually raise the price for TechnoTutor and their licenses without having a real financial goal/plan to buy out anything, nor do they make any visible improvements to the software itself. I have asked on multiple occasions, "If the cofounders really want more people to use TechnoTutor, why do they charge so much?"
A member told me, "If people spend that much money on it, then they'll be more motivated to use the tool, and if it is cheap, no one will want to use it consistently." Suggesting that charging a higher price for this product to motivate consumers to use it more consistently is considered very deceptive.

TechnoTutor is Mostly “Effective” for Children

When individuals ask for proof that TechnoTutor is effective, the first thing they will do is bring up the "TT children" and how intelligent they are. These children were raised using TechnoTutor regularly and homeschooled in a stable environment. In my opinion, it is not surprising that their children were more intelligent than your average child when you compare them to today's children that were raised by the system. I mean no offense to the "TT children", but it's not fair to use them as a sales tactic for being drastically more intelligent than today's kids that were raised by Ms. Rachel and baby shark.

Are the TT kids actually that smart?

The reality is, the cofounder's children, and many of the kids involved with the Self Perfected community were raised with intention and most kids weren't. The average child gets separated from their parents at a young age, raised in a daycare, then placed into the school system as soon as age 3. The average child is not being raised to become a genius, and we all know that the school system wasn't designed to make anyone a genius. It is simply unfair to compare the cofounder's son to today's children. Yes, he is intelligent. No, I'm not impressed. On the downside, the parents involved in TechnoTutor raise their children to such isolating extremities that will turn them into socially weird narcissists.
Having attended a few Self Perfected events, a couple of things stood out to me about the members. The parents allow their kids run to on stage and interrupt the speakers, take the mic, and actually start talking while the speaker is waiting to finish their presentation. The parents watch and do nothing about it. They believe that they should allow their kids to express themselves in any way, but in that sense, they aren't teaching them proper manners either. The TT children are worshipped in this community and the way they boost these children, in my opinion, isn't healthy because they will end up believing that they are superior to other children. The adults in this community actually take these kids' opinions to heart like they are "all knowing". They were literally seeking advice from kids that were 6 years old or young, and that's when I knew I was in a group of delusional individuals.
There is no doubt that the TT children are intelligent, and yes, they learned to read at a drastically younger age than most due to using TechnoTutor. However, that does not mean TechnoTutor was the only method that could lead to those results, nor does it justify charging $7,000. Again, there are free reading software programs that can produce the same results as TechnoTutor. Most likely, parents would get the same results using flash cards and showing it to the child. Until someone proves that's not true, I think my point remains. Anyone impressed by the children using TechnoTutor simply aren't asking enough questions, never met a stable child, and/or does not know how to do very basic research. With or without TechnoTutor, kids are sponges and will become proficient at anything the parents guide them to.

Some Members Are Playing a Role, Some Are Under The Placebo Effect

I have witnessed many individuals claim that every good thing that has happened to them since purchasing TechnoTutor, was because of TechnoTutor, and yet every realization they've had through using TechnoTutor could be reached through effective writing or by asking themselves the right questions.
I've seen individuals buy expensive things to maintain their reputation, purchase Instagram followers, and fake a perfect life on social media and use that to compare to their old lives and say that TechnoTutor changed their lives, while remaining in a financial crisis the entire journey.
Distributors who were under deep debt and financial pressure, told their leads that TechnoTutor will make them rich, while not being a living example of that.
Instead of training the distributors ethical and effective sales strategies, the cofounder trains the distributors to manipulate. He is creating a team of liars and manipulators. Today, most of these individuals lack the ability to be down to earth and actually question what they are doing.

Terrible Marketing, Outdated Sales Strategy, and Misrepresentation of TechnoTutor

Most successful businesses adjust their sales strategy and marketing based on the market, the type of leads, and many other variables.
TechnoTutor's marketing and sales strategy hasn't been changed, despite the many concerns that were raised about it in the past. The logo has always been the same and their social media accounts are never kept up-to-date. It seems like their only sales strategy is to buy a bunch of "technotutor" domains and create several websites promoting TechnoTutor to balance out the negative reddit reviews.
Strangely, members were told not to mention "TechnoTutor" in their online content as if there's something to hide. To avoid mentioning TechnoTutor or discussing its purpose until you trap them into a 3 hour presentation says a lot about the product AND the individual. It's like these individuals are doing the exact same things they're against, deceiving people.
Most individuals won't sit through a 3-hour presentation. What ends up happening is the presentation would either be broken up into multiple sessions, the leads ghost the distributor and don't buy, or they endure the presentation and still don't buy. This is a recurring pattern that isn't being addressed since they mostly treat sales as a numbers game rather than a strategic plan.
The average attention span is 8 seconds. It is common sense that a 3-hour presentation is not effective if we want TechnoTutor to be used by the majority of the people. If it takes 3 hours to explain the value behind your product, it is probably not so valuable and you should reconsider what you're selling.
The presentation is clearly targeted towards parents, and yet it's being presented like it is "best for all". They have no data to prove that except for the various testimonials from members, and they have no plans to change the presentation despite the high failure rate and no one questions that.
The distributors are not being trained to understand the product and the "research" behind the tool so that they can answer the common skeptical questions that come up. Instead, the cofounders they are training the distributors to gaslight their leads into buying. A common question is, "Are there any studies to back this up?", and all they say is that there's hundreds of years of research without giving it to you, mention the TT children, or they share dishonest "miracles" and changes they've personally experienced.
For example: One of the distributors claimed to have learned how to play the guitar in 45 minutes from using TechnoTutor, but they've actually been playing guitar since they were a kid.
Distributors are also trained on how to manipulate people who can't afford the technology or tickets to their events, putting people into deeper debt.
Saying things like "Everyone is in debt", "Money is debt", "What else were you going to spend your money on?" "You'll never have the money so you might as well buy it." "You'd rather spend your money on that than a tool that could change your life?" I couldn't help but think, who are these people to think they should dictate someone's financial decisions or what is best for them? While simultaneously not being a living example of a financially/mentally stable person.

The Sales Presentation is a Misrepresentation of What TechnoTutor Actually Is

Towards the end of the presentation, they will have you take a reading test. They make you read a document about the heart. Then, using what appears to be TechnoTutor, a series of strings are flashed on the screen. These strings had TWO words. One word, and the meaning of the word.
For example: itis = inflammation encephalon = brain
You'll flash these phrases three times then type them back. Naturally, you remember that itis means inflammation and encephalon means brain after typing it, saying it, and spelling it three times.
Then, they ask you what words like encephalitis means. Naturally, you understand that means brain inflammation. For a split second, I actually was impressed by my ability to comprehend these unfamiliar terms. Now, after having used TechnoTutor for a while, I understand that it was a false representation of what TechnoTutor really is. They simply did a memory exercise in the presentation, but TechnoTutor is not at all like that once you start using it.
In the presentation, they flashed BOTH the word and a one-word definition. When you buy TechnoTutor and use it, it flashes one word, and then you have to read the full Oxford definition. You simply can't remember the definition of every word, and some of them can be incomprehensible depending on your reading level. Just know that how TechnoTutor is used in the presentation, is not how your experience will be when you purchase it. This is another example of how they use False Advertising.

Deceiving Claims

“The profits will be used to change the system”

One of the things that attracted me to this community was their passion around changing the system.
I am confident that the cofounders combined have earned millions since the company was founded in 2013. Individuals are investing over $100k+ for a Regional Distributorship, and a small amount is left. Many License Distributorships/Area Distributorships/Regional Distributorships and copies of TechnoTutor were sold between now and 2013.
Knowing that, what are they waiting for?
To this day, I wonder why was no one has asked themselves: Why haven't they invested the money into anything other than throwing events? Notice how nobody is making investments outside of TechnoTutoSelf Perfected related products.
There are specific individuals in this community who plan to get involved in politics, and actually do great things that can make an impact. I have full respect for the select few members who are actually taking action and living their purpose, but that is a small percentage of individuals and it surely doesn't have anything to do with TechnoTutor. One of the cofounders once told a member whom was financially struggling, that they had to buy the ticket for one of the events they were throwing, despite not being able to afford it, because they had to be there and that the impact is worth more. Sadly, that individual left every event as the same person. Only with temporary feelings of positivity and motivation from being around people who love-bomb you.
For example, the 2023 San Diego Event cost around $400 to attend and nearly 200 people showed up. The $400 ticket was to simply be present at the event. It did not cover the hotel fee or any traveling fees. ~$80,000 was earned from that one event alone and they throw at least one per year, and sometimes additional smaller events during the year. I'm sure a nice portion of that money is used to cover the event fees like the various rooms they reserved, catering, etc.
Now they are charging $500 for the Miami trip. If 200 people show up, that's $100,000 profit, minus the fees for the event.
I simply do not align with how they overcharge and deceive their members by claiming that they are planning to change the system when most clearly don't have those intentions except maybe a few people who are actually trying to get into politics and it's not the cofounders.
The reality is, they don't plan on doing anything more than what they are doing right now. Nothing. Other than teaching you how to manipulate people.
I'm a firm believer that if you're going to dedicate your life to this community and using TechnoTutor, you should be informed of the cofounders' true intentions with the profits. Otherwise you're not much different from an employee, and from what I can see, a full time McDonald's worker is making more money than some of these distributors.

“TechnoTutor will end child abuse”

The founders of TechnoTutor claim that "TechnoTutor will end child abuse." If that's the case, ask yourself: Why aren't they promoting this impactful tool to a wider audience? Why are they avoiding mentioning TechnoTutor in online content? Why don't the cofounders help the distributors individualize the presentation based on the lead, instead of a 3 hour presentation that was CLEARLY designed for parents and not your average joe?
It's apparent that the goal was never for a huge amount of people to find out about TechnoTutor. Cults like this only succeed with small amounts of loyal people, but just enough for the people at the top to profit, and gain new members that come from those loyal people, rather than from anyone who could easily challenge them and their business model. More people will realize they are in fact false advertising and are likely to get involved in some serious legal issues if they scale too much.

“TechnoTutor will make you rich”

I've heard multiple members/distributors claim that TechnoTutor itself and/or buying a Licensed Distributorship/Area Distributorship/Regional Distributorship can make you "wealthy" and help you build the vocabulary of a wealthy person. Not a single person in this community is who I'd consider financially wealthy other than the co-founders and maybe individuals who bought the $100k+ Regional Distributorship.
There are members that present themselves as if they are financially wealthy through materialism, but behind the scenes they are in a financial crisis. I would not advise to anyone who is struggling financially to invest in this tool or any of the licenses not only because it's an overpriced dictionary that you can find online for free, but because nothing is guaranteed in return. Buying TechnoTutor and any of its distributorships is a huge gamble, especially if you don't have the skills to be a decent salesman.
Anytime I asked questions, I got responses like, "Look at my car", "Didn't she see our house?" or "Successful people invest thousands to make the money they do".
Wealthy people invest large sums of money into things that are likely to have a high success rate and return value. Let's measure that for TechnoTutor, shall we? If you are a distributor, take the total # of sales made and divide it by the total # of presentations. That's your success rate… that should tell you if this is a worthy investment of $7,000+. I've come to find that TechnoTutor alone will not give you the skills of a wealthy person. Wealth is developed through your actions and experience. Which can be driven by - who you surround yourself with, the content you consume, and who you are learning from. Not by self hypnosis, fake-positive thinking and flashing words and reading the definition. When/if you get any results, it will not be overnight or sustainable. I have not seen anyone get consistent results through using TechnoTutor and attending the calls.
The members are great at creating the illusion that anything good happening in their life is due to using TechnoTutor. They often disregard the action it takes to get results in anything and give all of the credit to TechnoTutor. No different from a religious person thanking God for something they did themselves. Completely ignoring the fact that most individuals are under deeper financial pressure than they would have been if they simply read a book and found a mentor.
While I was involved in this community, I've noticed that most don't make a sale more than once every 1–2 months. There are members who haven't made a single sale in months or at all and still convinced themselves this is "best for all".
I watched more individuals struggle financially and mentally, more than I have seen anyone in this group become wealthy.

Investigate All Things and Keep What is Good

This community lives by a set of principles originating from Desteni and one of them is to Investigate All Things and Keep What is Good, or I've heard it as "Question All Things and Keep What is Best". What I never understood is why they promote such a principle that gets abandoned immediately when the questions involve them or TechnoTutor. They push back on the only people who are actually trying to investigate things regarding TechnoTutor and the intent of the community. That's a common brainwashing tactic many cults use.
I've been made to feel guilty about my doubts, and that my questions are stemming from my trust issues or something that happened in my childhood. Saying things like, "Well have you put that in TechnoTutor?" "Have you investigated where that question is coming from?" "You need to trust yourself first." "How can you trust this process when you don't trust yourself?" "When was the first time you experienced this emotion?" As if any of that is relevant to why I am having these observations. These manipulative tactics began to affect how I normally thought and distracted me from my original observations because it made me feel like there was something wrong with me for having these thoughts.
Being in Self Perfected was one huge, exhausting brain fuck. I overanalyzed certain things about myself that weren't relevant to the problems I was noticing in the community and I gained a ton of clarity by taking a step back, snapping out of the over-analyzing spell they cast on their members, and looked at this community for what it really is.
Telling your members to flash "I understand TT" when you experience doubt, instead of answering their questions, was a huge red flag to me and I'm very disappointed that I allowed someone to instill these thoughts in my head. I am grateful that nothing could brainwash me to ignore the obvious truth, even when I tried to, just so that I felt like I could fit into this community and keep my relationship.
They've mastered the ability to use your past or certain personality traits against you when the time is right. And they've glorified and redefined the concept of a cult to make you feel okay with being in what is clearly a cult. They say "everything's a cult" like a church or a group of people with similar beliefs, but forgetting the main difference which is that:

• They charge people thousands to be involved and you're not guaranteed results in the end.
• If you don't buy tickets to their events they gaslight you into purchasing, saying that it'll be "life-changing" and that "if you really wanted to make it happen you would".
• They share information that you could otherwise find by doing research or reading a book.
• They don't encourage or empower you to question things if it involves them.
• Majority of the members themselves are too brainwashed and aren't open minded enough to consider information/opinions outside of the group
• They look down on people without TechnoTutor as if they are superior, when most of them have the same problems as everyone else
• Members will quickly cut off family members and close friends for not being involved in the community
• They encourage their members to date members only
• They want you to isolate yourself from anything that brings you further from making a TechnoTutor sale.

I even heard the cofounder speaking on a zoom call complaining about people who doubted the tool and said "If you're not seeing results and you don't think it works, then leave".
I advise to anyone who wants to use this tool (or any tool) for the rest of their lives, and encourage their kids to use it daily, then you are responsible for asking about know the why's and the how's. One should never take things at face value. Just because there are testimonials and YouTube reviews (made by the distributors), doesn't make it a success for everyone, and I simply will not make my future children use something just because of the results other people got.
If the co-founders and distributors had honest intentions, they'd have no problem sharing the "hundreds of years of research" behind the tool since it's not secret information, and anyone with half of a brain would ask to see it. The reality is, skeptics who question things often can't be manipulated or molded to be loyal agents for these communities, hence why they never last in cult-like groups. The government treats conspiracy theorists the same way Self Perfected treats their skeptics. Let that sink in.
Instead of admitting they only want moldable people in their community, they say that you must be "teachable". By teachable, they present it as if they mean someone who's willing to learn. But that's not really what they mean, or else I would have fit in the group perfectly. I probably asked the most questions than anyone there. By being teachable, they are referring to someone gullible enough to regularly use TechnoTutor without question, sell it, then buy a license. Teachability is measured by whether you believe in their teachings and their teachings only.
Unfortunately, both TechnoTutor and these licenses (LD, AD, and RD) are being presented to people with a lower vocabulary and ones who don't have the skillset to become wealthy or question their intentions. This is not a jab at those people, but at the corruption of the clear intent of the folks "at the top" of this pyramid scheme. If the distributors were trained to understand the "research" behind TechnoTutor, then they can better answer the questions they're hit with by leads, especially the smarter leads who ask legitimate questions about the studies/research behind TechnoTutor. For example, I observed that these distributors can only sell TechnoTutor to individuals up to a similar IQ/vocabulary. I witnessed a distributor gaslight someone for asking a legitimate question. For example, someone asked, "How is this going to make me rich and successful when no one in this group is rich except the cofounders?" And he responded, "Dude, have you seen my car?" (The car he couldn't afford). Obviously he didn't make the sale because this person had common sense, and gaslighting is a complete turn off to anyone smart. Overall, I've noticed this recurring pattern where folks start to question things, and the members/distributors don't respond well. And instead of being trained on how to respond in an ethical, honest way with facts, they're trained to play mind games with their leads, and guilt-trip them into buying. They seem to be caught under a spell, and no longer possess the ability to empathize.
Throughout all this time, I just kept wondering different variations of the same questions: What's wrong with questions like this and why is no one able to answer them when they are extremely simple? Why does every question I ask lead back to my past or childhood? Why do they only answer in metaphors? Wouldn't we want to sell this to people who ask questions like this? Wouldn't we want to attract more people in this community who "question all things and keep what is best?" Why do we shy away from these types of people? Why aren't we encouraging people to understand the research so that we can attract different types of people into the group? As a group that claims to value vocabulary building, why don't you want them to expand their vocabulary on the wonders of TechnoTutor and how it works?
And after having all of these questions for a year straight, and flashing them in TechnoTutor, my common sense kicked in.

Anyone Can Become a Distributor

Reminder, this community claims that they want to change the system by selling TechnoTutor, and yet, anyone can sell TechnoTutor regardless of their intentions and their knowledge set. Anyone can simply buy an entire area/region for the sole purpose of making money, and write a convincing letter. This made it clear that they are not as serious about their mission as I thought they were.
There are a limited number of licenses and I would assume, if they truly valued their mission, they wouldn't sell distributorships to anyone who writes a convincing letter. Actions speak louder than words, and they are making it clear that they only care about money. There are plenty of people who bought a license who are no longer affiliated with the group. They don't seem to distribute the licenses wisely, in a way that ensures TechnoTutor is spread properly.
In a hypothetical world, let's say that the real purpose of TechnoTutor is to end child abuse and save lives. If someone who's ignorant sells it (can't answer questions about the tool, has poor sales skills, etc), they could be spreading the wrong information about it, not helping Self Perfected reach this overall goal, or lead to more sales. It's clear to me that they are willing to sell these things to anyone, and that it's easier to sell this to someone who's ignorant than someone who isn't. And that is why the co-founders are okay with having distributors who aren't fully educated about how the product works, or how to be decent salesmen.
At the end of the day, this is a numbers game. 100 mediocre salesmen can still sell X amount of TechnoTutor copies per week to more ignoramuses, and the cofounders will still make a lot of money. While the individual distributors who are only making a sale here and there will remain stuck at their full time jobs or in a financial crisis, paying back the license they bought. This sounds familiar, doesn't it?

If TechnoTutor Could Actually Change Anything, It Wouldn’t Be Accessible

TechnoTutor alone won't change the system. This has been proven because there are already several tools that exist today that are more popular than TechnoTutor that possess the exact same functionality/purpose, and nothing has changed.
If TechnoTutor had the slightest ounce of potential to change the system, the elite would shut this tool down, and the various other rapid serial visual presentation products.
One of the cofounders and I were discussing how corrupt the elite are. He said something that stood out to me - when you start making up to a certain amount of money, someones gonna come knocking on your door and asking you to do some dark shit to keep your success… There's always a glass ceiling to how much an average person can make, and yet they're telling their members that they can become billionaires with TechnoTutor while completely disregarding: 1) What they know about the elite and how they operate. 2) No one in this group is a billionaire. This group is pure hypocrisy.
Self Perfected is doing the same thing the elite is doing to us, at a minor scale and convincing you they are doing what is best. As if they are in any position to dictate what is best.
(To continue reading, read Part 2)