Put Down The Hammer Jeffrey

As my friend Cliff says, when a person’s lashes out against another person the reverberation of the blow will resonate back into your own arm. Jeffrey Strahl, a UC Berkeley mathematics instructor who started out working for Bechtel on nuclear power plant construction, has cultivated an extensive email list over the past two years. After Jason removed him from our Discourse board, Jeffrey appears to have taken it upon himself to misrepresent our work to his network. Jason told me this had happened previously, and he opted to remain a member of the group to monitor what Jeff was saying about us. It was really the only reason for him to stay, because the vast majority of the content Jeff shared was centered on the health freedom arena and clearly the problem is so much bigger than that.

I made my video to set the record straight after Jeffrey lied about me and to educate people about computational agents and game theory in digital artificial societies. I am sharing two emails Jason sent to Jeff’s list and another Jeff actively posts on. The truth ALWAYS shows itself. I imagine anyone who values the work Jason and I have been doing will see this for the petty, sour grapes that it is. The only person Jeff is hurting at this point is himself. If you care for his well being, it would be a kindness to tell him to put down his hammer.

“I must correct some things that Jeffrey has stated below about Alison and the Wrench in the Gears Working Group Discourse Forum.

First of all, the forum is my project, not Alison’s. Although it is based largely on her work and I do consult with her, it was my idea, I set it up, I wrote the guidelines and I administer and moderate it.

Alison did not call Jeff a PsyOp. Here is a post and video by Alison explain what happened and includes screen shots of the thread. https://wrenchinthegears.com/2022/09/12/is-terrain-an-artificial-society-a-response-to-jeff-strahl-re-psy-ops Rather than just take Jeff’s word, please see for yourself.

I removed Jeff from the forum because it was clear to me (from the beginning actually) that he was not interested in participating in research the forum was specifically created for. Which actually include a wide range of subjects but with a common them and particular focus. https://discourse.wrenchinthegears.org/categories

By the way, I invited Jeff at the suggestion of Alison. She (and we) genuinely want more people to seriously engage with and add to the research we are doing. I reluctantly added Jeff even though I know he has misrepresented Alison’s work in the past. I now see that was a mistake based on his comments below.

On the Poornima Wagh situation, to me the whole thing appeared to be big boondoggle but I agree with Alison’s point that all this focus on credentials is way off and actually promotes “the experts” as well as “verified credentials”, which will be part of the digital ID system on blockchain. This not about whether or not you agree with or trust Wagh or not. That is missing the point.

Regarding Jeff’s comment, “Last i looked, there was an item listed there about the “Truther Community,” which had been deleted, but the headline was left behind.”

What is the point of Jeff pointing this out? What is he suggesting here? By the way, the full title was,”TRUST in the Truther Community? Vetting the Vetters, Authoritarian Fact Checkers, Blockchain Cults, Biostatistics, Voronoi in Radiobiology and Cancer, Voronoi in the Liver”. I don’t know what this article would have said as the person deleted it. The title has me curious though. I would likely agree with it based on the title. If Jeff’s suggestion is that we are against the “Truther Community” he would be wrong. I have been involved with 9/11 truth since 2002. I personally don’t like the term “Truther Community” and I certainly would have challenged the author on using that term but there is a very serious problem within these spaces around trust vetters, fact checkers and more. And I’m not talking about the official fact checkers either. I’m hoping this person posts what they are working on (preferably without the “Truther” tag, or at least with a qualifier about that label).

Jeff also writes:
Back in January and February, Alison included in her long videos segments regarding members of the “freedom” community such as RFK Jr, Steve Kirsch, and Doctors Malone, McCullough and Kory,  who continue to push the idea that the virus exists, that there is a real pandemic, and that “alternative treatments” are needed.  I sent those in Lockdown Times editions. By Spring, i sensed she was now saying (via for example Twitter) that she was through dealing with the virus matter at all, since anyone who still believed in it was not worth communicating to anyway.”

Here again Jeff appears to be misleading or implying something. Alison included those public figures in the conversation to talk explicitly about the cybernetic governance system, behavioral economics and weaponized narrative. Not the virus matter! Her position is the same now as it was then even though her understanding has expanded.

Here’s a clip of her talking about RFK, Jr. it’s about his roll in pushing early treatment, which directly connects to impact finance and cybernetic governance. https://youtu.be/UdBDebgIjjU She questions the framing “mismanaging a pandemic” within the understanding of what this narrative is serving.

Here’s a segment where Alison and I talk about Kirsch and Malone. Again, it is about narrative and impact finance, not the virus question. https://youtu.be/J_2sBImR9-A?t=7611

Jeff further writes:
By Spring, i sensed she was now saying (via for example Twitter) that she was through dealing with the virus matter at all, since anyone who still believed in it was not worth communicating to anyway.  And now she seems to think anyone who discusses the matter is part o a PsyOp

This another gross misrepresentation. Other than a few off comments early on, she’s never really dealt with “the virus matter”. Her discussions have always been in the context of digital governance, impact investing and hive mind/global brain/web3/etc..

Jeff:
Basically, she respects only those who focus on exactly what she focuses on.

This isn’t about respecting people or not. She’s just focused on very specific threats we are facing from a specific lens and is looking for others to join in on this investigation. If someone like Jeff doesn’t agree that the issues she and the rest of us on the forum are focused on they do not have to engage with us or us with them. This is clearly the case with Jeff, which is why I removed Jeff from the forum. He has different concerns and commitments, which mostly deal with the virus and Russia apparently.

In the future if Jeff does promote items from Alison or others from our forum on his Lockdown Times,  I hope he doesn’t lie or misrepresent them as he has done here.”

 

Alright, one last time then I’m done. Here are my responses to Jeff’s Reader’s Digest of Alison, Lynn and I’s presentation below.

JEFFREY: “1:15:00 – Discussion back in 1946 (among those putting forth early visions of the global brain, etc) of “social unrest.” Alison thought it was weird to be discussing that topic in 1946. Say what? In fact, there was a very high level of social unrest that year

Alison wasn’t saying that there wasn’t social unrest back then. What she was talking about was viewing social unrest within the context of creating a “world brain”. The quote she read from Reiser’s The World Sensorium book is, “Social unrest is inevitable so long as this process of differentiation continues for there can be no stability until embryonic maturity is reached.” This is early cybernetic thinking. I can’t imagine Jeff didn’t know what she was talking about. He’s obviously watching all her talks. His “reaction” is to a complete misrepresentation. He completely removed the context of the conversation. Why is that?

JEFFREY: “1:58:00 – People prominent in the Metaverse milieu, like Scott Stornetta just happened to be there at the time to participate in this project. Really? As if this entire “project” happening because … it is happening, just something which has been happening for a long time, which has a mind of its own. As if this process isn’t anchored in the needs and imperatives of the social/economic/political ruling system.

This is blatant deception. Nowhere does Alison say or even suggest that this project is just happening because it is happening and has been happening for a long time. WTF? Or that this isn’t serving a ruling system. I honestly don’t even know how Jeff crafted this framing. It’s quite creative but is not representative. Please people, listen to the talk yourself. https://youtu.be/ddx4z6iTM6o The point she was making in that segment was about how this system is actually being built by our friends, family and neighbors. And yes, it is anchored in the needs and imperatives of the ruling system (which does go back). We’ve always maintained that position so what is Jeff talking about here? We just think that not enough attention is paid to the everyday people actually building and managing this thing. That was the point of this segment, which was completely missed or ignored by Jeff.
 
JEFFREY: A recent interview by Alison and Jason of a Swiss psychologist named Arlette including her statement that she is not interested in systemic change, only in personal change, which is how she sees the world changing. I don’t know if Alison and Jason agree, but they did not express a different perspective.
 
Arlette is not psychologist (at least that I’m aware of – unless I missed something). She was sharing her personal experiences as a patient within the Swiss mental health system. Her statement was that her personal process was through personal change. It was clear to me that she wants systemic change but doesn’t know how to make it happen. So her approach is to pull out and to work on herself. I agree that must be part of the process of change for all of us. I think it’s vital in fact but not the only thing. How can Jeff suggest that Alison or I are not interested in systemic change when we have spent hundreds and hundreds of hours putting out material exposing and speaking out against this system? The way he wrote that implies something he knows to be false. You can watch that actual interview here: https://youtu.be/arfNOiXB8CU
 
JEFFREY: 2:28:00 – “It was the highly regarded president Eisenhower who in fact gave “birth” to ARPA, the forerunner of DARPA, in January ’58.
 
Correct, it was originally called ARPA and later changed to DARPA and Eisenhower set it up. She initially misspoke when she said DARPA but then read off some text that had the corrected name in full, “Advanced Research Projects Agency”. What is the point or reasoning for you nit picking over such nonsense? It’s ridiculous.
 
2:38:00 – “Comments about how everyone’s “right to have a job” is being taken away. Speaking personally, i do not regard having a job as a “human right.” It is an imposition upon the population of the world, unprecedented till the advent of capitalism, i.e. the Enclosures, when a population consisting largely of self-subsistence farmers working hereditary land, with access to the Commons, was pushed off their lands and enclosed from the Commons. These people are required for the first time to acquire money in order to buy their subsistence needs, which is why they needed jobs. The very idea of wage labor is part and parcel of the capitalist form of slavery.
 
Alison made a short comment in response to me mentioning the Points of Light Foundation and the promotion of mandatory national (volunteer) service. She then said, “because they’re gonna take away everyone’s right to have a stable job.” In here extensive work over the past several years she has not advocated for people to simply have a job. We have both explicitly spoken about many of the problems with the jobs people are pushed into and I have often spoken about how the artificial demand or actually requirement for one to possess the legal fiction of “money” is manufactured in order to force people into labor. I give the example of Cecil Rhodes mining operation in southern Africa in the late 1800s. How the implementation of taxation played a significant role in coercing and forcing the locals into mining. We’ve also spoken about the Enclosures in the past but not in detail. They way you framed your comment suggest that Alison and I are advocating the “right to have a job” as a “human right”. I certainly don’t and I don’t think Alison does either. Leaving the word “right” aside, she is correct that they are taking away everyone’s ability to have a stable job. But Alison absolutely knows the problem is much much bigger than that. Jeff should she does after listening to so many of her talks.
 
3:15:00 – Alison states that the Cold War was really just a cover for the creation of isotopes for shaping the future. Sorry, i have to disagree, there were numerous factors which led to the “Cold War,” particularly the consolidation of the US post-WWII global order. Reducing it to a single deception is not even Monday morning quarterbacking, more like Wed morning.
 
Actually she said it was about weaponizing space and isotopes. I don’t know what to think about the Cold War but I do know that the narrative we have been indoctrinated with is wrong. I haven’t read all the stuff that Alison has that leads her to make that statement but so far she’s had a damn good batting average. Whether it was only about those things, I’m sure it was also very much about those things. And they are not being talked about.
 
With all that said, please take me off this list Jeff. I don’t have the energy to correct all of your creative misleading interpretations and lies. It doesn’t appear you’re going to stop. How you can watch so much of Alison’s material and keep getting it so wrong does not sit well with me. I just hope people will go to the source and not rely on Jeff or anyone else to be their intermediary for information.
 
Go to the source and think for yourself!
 
And please don’t respond to me Jeff. I don’t want to hear it. You’re not being honest or acting in good faith.”

 

6 thoughts on “Put Down The Hammer Jeffrey

  1. tangiblenutrition
    Marlese ramirez says:

    I am familiar with Jeff I left his group as it was fruitless circle not changing anything. His denial that I had severe covid- its not like the flu and that I a Nutritionist could access my own lab work to confirm I had covid is ridiculous- the Cowan no virus camp is fruitless harmful to advancing our cause and dangerous

  2. stephanieswalk – Texas, U.S.A. – Just my stories. Thank you, Jesus. 💛
    Stephanie Cox Marchbanks says:

    Hello. I’m at the 30 minute mark of this video. I just want to say I find it refreshing so far. I’ve been drawn to your work for some time, but I am way behind on the research. Thank you, and with kind regards.

  3. Pavol says:

    Hi, I’ve been devouring your videos for hours on end lately. I don’t have a modem, I’m too off-grid for that so I always download a bunch of your videos and presentations and watch them with a pen in my hand. Thank you for everything that you do! Greetings from the Canary Islands 🌞

  4. Marjorie Steakley says:

    Jeff did not establish the listserv in question; he acts as though he did and is taking credit for others’ work. It was actually established by the “What’s Left?” podcast of which he’s not a member. A. L. is its leader; J. S. is trying to take it over. J. S. is pugilistic and has fought with me and others, sometimes over petty matters. There are good people on the list and the now biweekly meetings whom I hate to be cut off.

    BTW, yt has permanently blocked me from commenting on live chat on Alison’s livestreams. Whenever I promote her channel or Hearts Over Hexagons in comments on other channels, yt immediately removes the comments. This is deeply disturbing.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply