Are 800,000 Bikers Preparing to Confront 1 Million Muslims in DC? No. Here’s Why.

Popular today among the people who couldn’t figure out how to google if it were the only ransom required to save their own mother: “already over 800,000 bikers on the road to confront 1 million Muslims in Washington.”

Actually, the photo was taken by Tech. Sgt. Cherie Thurlby, USAF in 2005, as part of an event called Rolling Thunder (official site) that is repeated annually since 1998 to recognize fallen soldiers from Vietnam and missing soldiers from all conflicts. You can see it being used in this article and this article dating to 2005 and takes place in one of the the Pentagon’s parking lots.

The photo appears in a lot of other misattributed biker-protest articles like this one as if it were part of a 2013 event.

While the 2013 “2 million Bikers” event does appear to be mostly true (mostly, according to this and this, at least), the photo shown is not part of it. The “million Muslims” actually only had a turnout of “a few dozen” (per wiki) and even the Council for American-Islam Relations (CAIR) refused to endorse it despite being reported to have been invited to help plan it — so even the idea that the bikers would ride there to “confront 1 million Muslims” isn’t even real, either.

Were 3 Armed Felons Killed By Off-Duty El Paso Police Officer? NO. Here’s Why.

Making the rounds this time, is the story of how much US taxpayer dollars were saved by the quick bullet action by an off-duty El Paso police officer when confronted by 3 armed felons who tried to rob him.

As the story goes:

YEE- HAH!!!!!!!!!!

Yee-Hah!, which means Amen!!! in Texas ….

Three armed felons crossed the US border and attempted to rob an off-duty El Paso police officer dressed in civilian clothes while he stood in front of a bank.

The plan was for two of them to grab his backpack and toss it to an accomplice on a stolen motorcycle.

However, the well prepared police officer shot all of them, killing two immediately.

The third was shot in both arms and bled to death before the ambulance arrived.

This is how much the US Taxpayer would have had to pay to prosecute these thugs:

· Arrest and detention for 1 night = $6,000

· Transportation for deportation back to Mexico the next day = $1,000

· Air time for O’BASTARD to apologize in 30 minute speech = $25,000,000

What it actually cost:

· Four .40 Cal. rounds = $1.00

· Taxpayer savings = $25,006,999.00!

Apparently They Picked The Wrong Man to Rob This Time. And There Won’t Be A Next Time!!!!!!!!!!



What a great step towards balancing the budget!!!!!


The photo shown was actally taken from this set of photos from Brazil. If you notice in the background of one photo, for instance, you can see a storefront with the logo for Gravia, which is a Brazilian company.

Here is a possible Google Streetview of where the shooting could have taken place, judging by the color/design of the Gravia sign in the background that matches the photographs.

If you put this blog post through Google Translator, pretty much the same story emerges of 3 attackers stealing a backpack and getting shot by a plain-clothes officer, even so far as praising the officer for quick action — and yet, is dated in September 2008, when Obama hadn’t even been elected yet.

Actual US taxpayer savings: $0, because it didn’t even happen in the US.

Dear YouTube/Google: Please Develop an ASMR-friendly Video Ad System.

Dear YouTube/Google:

I have ASMR. I get a genuine physical, tactile sensation when hearing certain sounds. You might take a gander at how popular AMSR YouTube channels are becoming. This one, for example, has 271,000 subscribers. This one has 477,000 subscribers. This one, 256k. That’s just from the first few search results from from the first page for YouTube search for simply ASMR.

When I browse to YouTube to hear something specific, often I am interrupted by that desire with a very noisy and harsh video advertisement that defeats the whole purpose of seeking out the desired sound. You need to develop a silent setting for ads that auto-mutes ads because your ads can be non-figuratively painful to hear. I can, yes, just mute the system sound until I’m ready to hear what I’m intentionally browsing to, but that still defeats the purpose of the ad. That would be similar to showing beer pre-roll commercials to someone seeking to treat alcohol addiction. It’s dumb, and it needs to stop.

Please develop or create a culture of advertisers who will gladly produce visual-only advertisements that otherwise have silence, perhaps that use a lot of visual words to explain the advertisement if they need to communicate something verbally, instead of blasting me with audio. Also, allow me to select an ASMR-setting so that only ads that are silent (or otherwise auto-muted) will play for me, because it is non-figuratively painful to hear the ads, and are therefore counterproductive of encouraging listening to what the ad is trying to say. On the reverse of that, noticing that an ad is silent will prompt me to pay more attention to it because it is something I’m geared toward.

At least meet me in the middle somewhere. My brand image of YouTube as a place to go for something I want to hear is deteriorating, because of how insensitive pre-roll ads are for me and how there’s no way to opt out of them. Perhaps you could detect that a user already has subscriptions to ASMR channels, and ensure those users receive silent ads.

Considering this is an actual physical ability issue, just as you might accommodate for wheelchair accessibility, please consider implementing an algorithm that actively monitors whether someone is subscribed to (perhaps even multiple) ASMR channels to boost or weight the RNG (or whatever) to ensure silent ads are pre-rolled instead of noisy ones. Currently, you have cultivated a community of people who feel an actual tactile pain sensation when getting caught off-guard by a noisy ad that was drastically different from what they expected to hear when browsing to a video hosted on YouTube.

I even subscribe to several non-ASMR channels such as Dexbonus because she appeals to my personal tastes in voices that my ears do not react painfully toward, but her general subject matter may likely be video games — but I do not want loud-blaring video game ads to pre-roll for me. Please consider developing a very intense preference toward subscribers of ASMR subscribers to receive strictly silent pre-roll ads perhaps even just as an experiment to see whether clickthru or watching the whole ad makes any difference.


ablestmage :-3

“SATANISM represents kindness to those who deserve it..” on Tumblr

A post on tumblr that has been making the rounds really caught my eye, that seemed to propose satanism as an acceptable way of thinking:

Those interested in this line of thinking may actually find themselves to be more of a biblical Christian than they realize.

I propose that the kind of Christian who believes that God lays down the law and that’s the final word, are wolves in sheep’s clothing, perhaps even believing they are sheep among the flock. When the sheep is shorn, however, they are revealed for who they really are: actually in opposition to Christ.

Among Christians, there is a term that floats around called “legalism” and many try to falsely insert legalism into Christianity, when instead Christianity is anti-legalism.

Legalism attempts to establish that the [laws of the Old Testament] (henceforth “613”) are still in effect, whereas, the 613 are not in effect, actually. Legalism is incompatible with Christianity, because the essence of Christianity is that Christ fulfills the law on behalf of those who accept his help: those who are in Christ are not under the law, because it is upon Christ’s record of obedience that judgment of them is made, not upon their own records of obedience. The pursuit of righteousness (obedience to the 613) is not that which gains salvation from the law, in Christ.

What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. (Romans 9:30-31).

For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death. (Romans 8:2)

Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1)

Christians who declare that the law is still in effect, are in overt contradiction to scripture that clearly states the law is no longer in effect. That is, in fact, good news — and that is what makes those in favor of the above satanism descriptions actually quite a bit more like an actual biblical Christian than the so-called Christians who try to subject everyone to religious laws. Christians live in a state of forgiveness from the law and are not subject to it.

Likewise, those who propose the law still holds water are more like until the so-called satanists they believe themselves opposed to:

(a) If idolatry or false-god worship is forbidden by the first commandment, and
(b) the 613 are still in effect, and
(c) the bible is the exclusive source for discerning the identity of God, and
(d) worshipping a half-truth version of God is idolatry:

then, those who proclaim that the 613 is still in effect are worshipping a false god, and are not Christians by their own definition of Christian.

In fact, the book of Galatians in the new testament, is a letter written by Paul to the church of Galatia, specifically to reprimand them for trying to declare that you must have both Christ and righteousness, and how that idea is wrong.

Who is Johanna F. Herrstedt?

I have been enamoured by a fashion model on Facebook the last few months, who goes by the name Johanna F. Herrstedt. For the most part, her identity still remains a mystery — but perhaps by design.

I haven’t been able to find very much biographical detail about her, except that she runs a mostly-Swedish blog at, which has some English translations, as well as instagram, twitter, youtube, and tumblr (which has a “sister” version at I did find modeling profiles for her on and Global Model Scouting.

Most sources seem to agree she was born in 1994 (age 21 as of 2015) and lives in “Sweden not Stockholm.” She was also featured in the music video Ghost Town by Kerbera:

There does seem to be an established presence online specifically bent on revealing Johanna as heavily-photoshopped, but many of the photos attributed as her may actually be photographs of a model who looks similar at certain angles named Elsa Fredriksson or due to the fact that a person’s appearance can change noticeably over the span of only a few years due to natural processes of maturity and personal maintenance.

Also, one element of being a fashion model is inconsistency of appearance: depending on the makeup and wardrobe artistry performed for whatever a model signed to shoot, a model may appear to be one way and in the next shoot appear a completely different way even in profile due to prosthetics, holding one’s lips closed while opening the jaw for a longer jawline shape, packing on cosmetics and artificial textures to change the shape of the face, and other visual tricks outside of photoshop.

Australian modeling mega-star Gemma Ward, for instance, (whose rise to stardom I enjoyed following closely) looks drastically different from one shoot to the next depending on even very simple aspects like lighting — and that is credited among her strengths as a model, in ability to portray a wide variety of looks as a kind of ideal canvas upon which artistry can be boldly and very favorably represented. The emphasis of the fabric, brand, cosmetic, or otherwise product is often the role of models (rather than self), so much that the model may often go entirely uncredited for their work. I have personally written some companies whose ads have appeared in Vogue or Harper’s Bazaar for the name of a model in a certain ad, only to be denied just knowing their name, as a fan.

Her voice can be heard during what appears to be a self-introduction filmed at a public XO2U modeling showcase here (from appx 3:49 thru 4:15) and can be seen scattered throughout:

As of publication, I am still pursuing an informal text-based interview with Johanna via contact details in hopes to gain a little insight, without being too nosey or controversial. This article will be updated to reflect those details, if any.

Predictions for US Election 2016


I generally stay out of politics except to provide evidence to establish or dismiss rumors that occasionally have to deal with political things, like whether Obama removed the flags from the press briefing area to be replaced with gold Muslim prayer curtains (and no, he didn’t; those identical curtains have been there since Nixon or prior).

My particular political leanings are too scattershot to decide on a party and highly critical of conspiracy theories. I would call myself independent from Independent voters, if that makes sense. However, I thought I’d diverge from the no-politics game for just a moment to throw out some ideas for discussion.

Also, I do not blame “the media” for anything, nor do I believe they are organized — because you personally choose your own media. The television I do own is only used as an HD monitor and is only switched to TV modes for severe weather alerts. If all you have is a TV to get your news, and then blowhards at work telling you their interpretation of what the news said last night or whatever, then your strategy for getting news is possibly the dumbest strategy ever and have no business complaining about the media, because you know approximately one billionth of the news out there. Big box news anchors get a finger nail file’s worth of time to whittle away at Mount Rushmore, when they’re not reporting on sob stories.

Note the date this was written: August 21, 2015. No nominees have been named. I don’t have any of the knowledge available to those people reading this after that date.


I have predicted all of the US president election winners Clinton thru Obama with success, before the official nominations were even made, which began about the time I started paying only vague attention out of high school. I still only pay vague attention, but I’m pretty sure who is elected has little to do with issues than it does just the general image of the person running, especially since Ron Paul was deemed “unelectable” early on and for some reason that hung with him regardless of his position on anything. This is not a rant, just a set of personal, no-stakes predictions along the same level of personal investment as a person making their draft picks for fantasy football for the first time and not even really liking football.

My prediction is Hillary for the win, not only to be the first female president but also to upset the Dem/GOP switching pattern. The two-Dems in a row idea is important, because it makes for an even greater sap story than just how women being elected already is one. Weed being legalized in all 50 will bring previously-non-voters out of the sideline to her favor for a giant landslide. Obama having legalized gay marriage already was good timing in her favor, because that likely will not clog up the debate.

Hillary I think already has the woman vote, which will (a) take an epic amount of votes away from GOP hands down even if done in secret, *plus* (b) enough women who have never voted will emerge from the peanut gallery to vote just because of a potential woman president. “(B)” may not be a lot, but it will be statistically significant in her favor.

Trump might actually be *the* epic Trump-card..

If he threatens the GOP with switching to independent as a ransom (at risk of stealing loads of GOP votes) for getting the GOP nod, he can easily get the GOP platform regardless of his position on issues as long as he maintains the smackdown character.

If he gets the GOP nod and runs, he’ll keep all those GOP votes but I still think all Hillary needs to do is figuratively sit back without even having to campaign, unless she royally screws up in the final debates somehow but even then it would just be a close win in her favor.

If Trump gets the GOP nod and then just *drops out* at just the right timing, the GOP will have to scramble to re-nominate someone and then the Dems will get all the clout because the GOP will be viewed as a party that can’t even nominate someone serious enough.

If he gets the GOP nod and then switches party preference at the right timing as above, to Democrat, he won’t lose any GOP funding because he’s already self-funded, and might actually take away a bunch of Dem votes to *nearly* (but not quite) guarantee a GOP win. Even if he takes a bunch of Dem votes also away from Hillary, it will only be the numbers of party line voters on the Dem side which will have to actually pay attention for once and possibly vote non-Hillary if the image is just deep/shallow enough to not bother with actually doing any research and just trusting a single weekly newspaper recap or a steaming head on AM radio the night before or morning of.

However, the GOP could already have a backup in place that could swoop in as a replacement, as prep for when Trump does make the (planned-and-timed) switch to Dem. While the Dems are scrambling for what to do now with 2 Dem nominees well after the nomination phase has occurred, both parties would be seen for their true colors as a disorganized muddle of children slap-fighting for who has the most toys.

At that point, Trump could switch *again* to Independent and then get a landslide of votes because of being seen as someone who was just playing both sides for the children that they are, and that he is the right person for the American people by cutting through all the crap. I still think Hillary will win, but Trump has a chance if he moves his pieces right.

If Trump does no timed switching/quitting and runs GOP legit, he could still be owed a lifetime of protection for having secured the Dem win just by sabotaging the GOP from within, or else (without intentional sabotage) offering the impression that the GOP has an identity crisis and can’t figure itself out anymore. If the GOP attempts to sue Trump for that, he’ll have all the Dem backing/pardons to get him out of whatever penalties are placed upon him.

I don’t think either side’s win will have much to do with position on particular issues, but rather because of (a) vagueness of overall image, (b) leverage of the identity that is formed by the people who eavesdrop/lurk on what blowhard co-workers rant about, and (c) how approaching-100% of the public seems totally fine with not fact checking anything because they need to do the laundry or whatever.

(As a side note, “trump” is the British word for “fart”. That just needed to be said.)

Why Was Russia’s Teardrop Memorial Never Covered in US Media? It Was, Actually.

You may have only just recently heard of Russia’s tribute to America’s struggle against terrorism, via a teardrop-shaped memorial that points toward the statue of liberty. The title of the artwork, crafted by Russian artist Zurab Tsereteli, is “To The Struggle Against World Terrorism.”

A forward making the rounds lately asks, “Now ask yourself: why was there never any press coverage of such a beautiful and generous gift?”

There was, however, plenty of press coverage, at the time. CNN had a live broadcast of the dedication ceremony, at which former-president Bill Clinton made the keynote. Vladimir Putin was on scene there himself for photos, which can be found at the 9-11 Memorial website. US country-music artist LeAnn Rimes was at the dedication and sang Amazing Grace.

Personally, I think the biggest reason is that it’s not even really that big of a story. There are in fact at least 43 structural monuments in commemoration or dedication to 9-11 as of this article’s writing, so I can imagine one out of 43 being pretty easy to forget about. It was also installed in September 2006, which as of this article’s writing is nearly ten years ago. Why would the “media” report on it 10 years after the fact? Millions of things have grasped the nation’s attention since then — how could you be expected to remember the dedication of a monument?

The structure itself is not even really all that inspiring. I mean, Lady Liberty makes sense at least. A person with a torch and tome is someone with which one can empathize. This monument, however, is more of a head-scratcher than inspiring.

Also, you must remember that the “media” was very likely inundated with other 9-11 tributes of their own, considering it was commemorated on the day of the “five years later” anniversary of the attacks. You know every individual city’s media outlet in the nation had their own tribute to broadcast. The Today Show on NBC had their own tribute at the time. Could it not have been through all of that you may have overlooked a single memorial dedication, of a sculpture that isn’t even really that popular based on looks alone?

For those concerned about “the media” failing to report on it:

Incidentally, there’s also a glass cube in Boston, near Logan International Airport from which two of the planes in the attacks left. Is the fact that you didn’t know about that also, something else you can blame “the media” for? How about you actually going out and learning about stuff you want to know about, instead of blaming those who spoon-feed you a very limited cross-section of information available within an hourish per day? “The media” isn’t organized since you choose it. If you were strapped to a chair and forced to watch Barney all day, sure, that’d be cause for concern. However, you’re reading this ON THE INTERNET. There are literally thousands of media options available, and just because one of perhaps 6 that still broadcast on the ancient television set fail to cover a single subject you personally find inspiring is indicative that you personally have the dumbest strategy ever for figuring out how to get news.