Left Still Making Stuff Up, Claiming Loughner Got His Ideas From DAVID-WYNN: MILLER

It's simply not true. I was willing to give the theory a shot, mostly just because crazy is interesting, but there is no connection between DAVID-WYNN: MILLER and Loughner.

Sorry: Another long post, and deployed to destroy a silly nit. But this seems to be the Patient Zero of their viral insanity, so I wound up spending a lot of time and words quarantining it.

The left (here, Mother Jones) is riding this pony hard because as of yet there is nothing else to connect Loughner to anyone arguably on the right. DAVID-WYNN: MILLER is not on the right, and is not "well-liked in conservative circles," as DAVID: CORN claimed, but hey, it's something.

This article shows just how utterly absent any connection is, by straining so hard to establish a connection -- and failing.

What was going on in Jared Loughner's mind? Based on his online rantings, the man who allegedly emptied a 31-round clip into Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and dozens of bystanders Saturday was preoccupied with theories on a massive government fraud. Many of his seemingly random statements—on "grammar," "the ratifications," "the new currency," and more—echo the teachings of the "sovereign citizen" movement, a right-wing school of thought alleging that Americans have been surreptitiously stripped of their God-given rights.

No, they don't echo that at all, and no, DAVID-WYNN: MILLER is no more "right wing" than David Icke is left-wing.

These are not random parallels, as I discovered in reviewing Loughner's YouTube videos.

They're not, in fact, random parallels, but only because they fail the first test of being random parallels, that is to say, being parallels in the first place.

In multiple instances, he uses the precise talking points sovereign-citizen theorists teach via a thriving cottage industry of books, websites, bogus legal companies, and seminars; one popular theorist, David Wynn Miller, told the New York Times that Loughner has "probably been on my website."

DAVID-WYNN: MILLER is obviously insane and also wants attentions for his moron machine code language. DAVID-WYNN: MILLER has no evidence that Loughner has visited his site, and a lot of crazy and ego to guide him to the claim that Loughner did. This is what Mother Jones cites as evidence: One attention-seeking morno lunatic's evidence-free opinion that another attention-seeking moron lunatic might have visited his site.

But let's go to those "parallels."

[Quoting one of Lougner's YouTube videos:] "The government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar." (3:34)

As the Guardian's Peter Walker and Politico's Carrie Budoff Brown reports have pointed out, this is the basic premise of the sovereign-citizen argument, which posits that government has used linguistic devices in certain laws to strip us of our rights.

They may point that out but I can point out that dogs have feathery wings; in neither case is the pointed-out claim true. Jared Loughner had a specific belief that the government was mind controlling us by, weirdly, grammar; this is an idea derived (if anything) from The Illuminatus Trilogy, which claimed (it's fiction; they can claim crazy stuff) that the word

FNORD

is actually written into every single article, book, movie, tv show or song in the world, but you are hypnotically compelled to not notice the word FNORD when you see it, which somehow reinforces their basic power of mind-control over you.

That is not even close to DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's theory. DAVID-WYNN: MILLER is not talking about mind control. He is claiming -- in a theory just as crazy as Loughner's but entirely separate -- that the sovereign state writes in one fashion and the subordinate individual writes in another. And his theory is that if we write like the sovereign state does, we change our legal category, from a subordinate under the jurisdiction of the state to a sovereign state in ourselves.

Here's a Wikipedia entry on DAVID-WYNN: MILLER:

On April 6, 1988, Miller invented what he calls the Mathematical Interface for Language or Quantum-Math-Communications and Language[12] or Correct-Language.[13] According to Miller, his language is "for the stopping-claims of the Theft, Cheating, Fraud, Slavery and War."[12] Miller's language uses sentences that begin with prepositional phrases, using the word For, are at least thirteen words long, and have many more nouns than verbs. According to Miller, only nouns have legal authority. The language has an abundance of punctuation. Miller explains:

FOR THE FORMS OF OUR PUNCTUATIONS ARE WITH THE CLAIM OF THE USE: FULL-COLON=POSITION-LODIO-FACTS, HYPHEN=COMPOUND-FACTS =KNOWN, PERIOD=END-THOUGHT, COMMA-PAUSE, AND LOCATION-TILDES WITH THE MEANINGS AND USES OF THE COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE FULL-COLON OF THE POSITION-LODIAL-FACT-PHRASE WITH THE FACT/KNOWN-TERM OF THE POSITIONAL-LODIO-FACT-PHRASE AND WITH THE VOID OF THE NOM-DE-GUERRE = DEAD-PERSON.[12]

According to Miller's teaching, the addition of hyphens and colons to one's name turns one from an ordinary, taxable human into a non-taxable “prepositional phrase.” They are distinguished from the names listed at birth in all capital letters (as on a birth certificate), which he claims turns one into a taxable Person (Corporation). (e.g., DAVID WYNN MILLER as opposed to :David-Wynn: Miller.).

Loughner is talking about mind control by grammar, and his method of escaping mind control (and physical reality: he believes he can enter a world of "conscience dreaming," a real world, but a world in which his mindthoughts control the universe) is by somehow avoiding proper grammar.

Well, as far as avoiding proper grammar: Mission accomplished, Jared. And yet here you are in the real world still.

Note that these ideas have nothing to do with each other at all. Both are lunatic premises, both are lunatic because they are based on something we know is not capable of controlling anything except clear expression of thought, but the ambit in wildly different. DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's concept is much more prosaic (but no more plausible) than Loughner's; he merely thinks he can put himself into a different legal category, as regards the courts and their exercise of jurisdiction, by writing like a moron.

Jared Loughner's ambition is grander -- he does not seek to escape a legal jurisdiction or legal category, but reality itself. He's not talking about escaping a tax-evasion beef, but the actual universe.

DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's "theory" is a legal defense (he thinks). It doesn't change reality; he just thinks that it's some kind of loophole (that he invented) that means he doesn't have to pay taxes. Loughner is talking about creating a private heaven of where his mind, not the government, controls reality.

Do these ideas really have anything to do with each other, except in the imagination of a leftist desperate to claim it to be so? No, they do not. Mother Jones doesn't even attempt to make a decent stab at connecting them up in an detail, apart from asserting, without evidence or even argument, that they're similar.

See, what I did just there? I talked about the details of each lunacy and explained in what ways they're different (almost all of them) and in what slender way they're similar (both think that grammar has an unexpected power). I go into details, whereas Mother Jones skates, deliberately, on the surface. I offer explication; Mother Jones just says "these two leftist British propagandists think so too." And they're experts, because, accents.

Who has the better case? Well, I think I do, in as much as I bothered to bring a case at all.

Let's go on to the next "parallels."

"I can't trust the current government because of the ratifications." (3:34)

...

"You don't have to accept the federalist laws. Nonetheless, read the United States of America's Constitution to apprehend all of the current treasonous laws." (3:10)

The sovereign citizen movement argues that if you closely study the Constitution, you can prove that federal laws are illegitimate—leaving you free to choose not to, say, pay taxes or follow traffic laws. In their view, the minute you get a Social Security number or driver's license, you enter into a contract giving up your sovereignty. (Several sovereign-citizen adherents have told me that home births are popular in the movement for this reason.) To become a sovereign citizen, you retroactively withdraw from this contract. Some also argue that you aren't bound to government contracts if you sign documents in red crayon or use lowercase lettering, alternative punctuation for your name (say, "Justine,,, Sharrock"), or add the letters "TDC" for "under threat, duress, and coercion.") There are myriad theories on how to prove your sovereignty in a court of law, with plenty of experts willing to help—for a fee.

That is all very interesting, and (from what I gather) a decent enough summation of the Sovereign Citizen delusion; but again I ask, what the hell does that have to do with Jared Loughner?

They are offering the basic idea that Jared Loughner doesn't trust the government, then going into great detail about how the Sovereign Citizen movement doesn't trust the government, and then concluding, See? All these details are completely congruent.

Wait a minute -- you didn't offer any details about Jared Loughner! How can you conclude the details are similar in both cases when you haven't even produced the details of one?

They offer a lot of details about DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's psychosis, then assert it's similar to Loughner's, without offering a single shred of detail about Loughner's -- you're to assume Loughner believes what DAVID-WYNN: MILLER believes, and then having assumed they believe the same things, compare them, and discover -- a ha! Their belief systems are similar!

What? You just assumed one was like the other and then, that assumption now in place, instructed us to compare the one to the other, which is assumed to be the same as the first.

Where is the evidence for this assumption? You cannot assume the thing you seek to prove. That's pretty basic.

So we seem to have one lunatic who doesn't trust the government who shares a very similar idea, common to lunatics, of not trusting the government, who in turn share this idea with 90% of the sane population of the United States -- not only do Loughner and : MILLER (I'll just use his last name for brevity) not trust the government, but neither do you, neither do I, and neither do the writers or editorial staffers at Mother Jones.

But from this very basic idea -- "Loughner doesn't trust the government" -- we are invited, along with the committed government-not-trusting delusionals at Mother Jones, to assume that in all specific ways Loughner agreed with : MILLER.

I decline. And that doesn't make me a Sovereign Citizen, just because we both share the "same" impulse to reject a "scam."

I will once again point out that DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's machine-code stupidity is fairly easy to parody, as I demonstrated this week, which means it's also easy to copy.

So, if Lougner is a disciple of DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's, why does he not adopt the most basic goofball tropes of : MILLER's "writing," which is to say, FOR THE PURPOSE OF STARTING SENTENCES WITH PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES, starting sentences with prepositional phrases, and FOR THE PURPOSE OF WRITING IN ALL CAPS, writing in all-caps?

Those are easily done. One needn't be clever, as Lougher wasn't, to write in all-caps.

And the easiest thing of all is to write one's name as DAVID-WYNN: MILLER does, just like that, all caps, colon. This is the most important part of DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's theory, that signaling, via this stupid manner of writing a name, that you are not a subject of any sovereign but instead a sovereign yourself.

I repeat: This is the most important aspect of DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's thesis. That if I write my name like OF-SPADES: ACE or whatever, I declare myself a sovereign entity, like the United States, and the United States must deal with me as a sovereign, via diplomats and embassies and comminques and state dinners and such, and not as a subject.

If Loughner is a devotee of : MILLER's, why did he not ape the most basic, most important, and easiest trope of MILLER's? Why does Jared call himself (not all caps) "Jared"?

If Mother Jones says "because he's stupid" or "because he's crazy," ah, yes, but this proves too much, doesn't it? Because then they are postulating that he could believe anything, even misunderstand the most basic part of his alleged mentor's "mathematical syntax system," then he could in fact have gotten these ideas from anywhere, and there's no particular reason to trace these ideas to DAVID-WYNN: MILLER except that the left claims he's "well-liked in conservative circles."

Where else could Loughner had gotten this highly-original idea that the government cannot be trusted, that amendments are a lie, etc., etc., etc.? Mother Jones treats these notions as if they're sui generis and therefore if we find anyone else on earth possessing them, a clear chain of custody has been established.

But is there anywhere else Loughner could have gotten these ideas?

Let me ask: Is there a political conspiracist with wild ideas who has slightly better funding that : MILLER? Is there a political conspiracist with a 50 or so year old conspiracy newsletter trafficking in outre ideas about government control? Is there a political conspiracist with a large-ish movement behind him whose adherents always show up at rallies and protests to wave their flags?

And is there such a politcal conspiracist who is decidedly socialist, that is, leftist, in ultimate thesis? A political conspiracist the left always likes to pretend doesn't exist when they're talking up the craziness on the right?

Who can say, who can say.

Who can say who showed up at those health care protests with Nazi signs which were immediately claimed to be members of the Tea Party and the political right?

Yeah... no one in the media or on the left likes to talk about Lyndon LaRouche -- except when they're cynically propagating his ideas.

But to trace this to LaRouche would be a pure guess. For while it is true that LaRouche has the greatest reach of any conspiracy theorist, with his Watchtower magazine and pamphlets and committed followers, it's also true that these ideas are simply common boilerplate of the entire conspiracy delusion. Right and left -- whatever they might mean when we're talking about people who essentially reject everything as a lie -- feed from the same troughs and shit in the same wallows.

None of this crap is particular to Loughner -- all these guys believe in the very basic paranoias.

Except in the details, of course. Different crazies have different details in their crazy. And, can I point out for the third time?, when you go into the details of what Loughner believed, it is once again obvious to anyone who's actually looking that Loughner is not talking about politics, he is talking about metaphysics.

He is not seeking to change politics in his "conscience dreaming." He seeks to change physical reality.

Now, does Lyndon LaRouche believe that? No, I don't think he does (but who knows what crazy ads he has at the back of his magazine). But I'll tell you who else doesn't believe that: DAVID-WYNN: MILLER.

How ca beliefs so utterly different be claimed, straight-facedly, to be identical?

I could go on with the last claim of proof, but it would be repetitive: Loughner said something about silver and gold, and supposedly the Sovereign Citizen movement joins Ron Paul in wanting a metal-based currency. Yes, Mother Jones, there are no other people in America who prefer a metal-based currency. Just these two, Loughner and DAVID-WYNN: MILLER. Not Ron Paul, not a swath of Austrian economists like Peter Schiff, not even former Fed chief Alan Greenspan, who confessed that he was "a bit of a gold-bug."

No, obviously the only place a man could have gotten the idea that money should have innate value is/was the Sovereign Citizen movement.

And that's it. Based on these four (4!) vague examples, Mother Jones asserts that they know that Jared, uncapitalized, got his ideas from DAVID-WYNN: MILLER, capitalized, and therefore the shooting can be laid directly at the feet of the right.

And all those bits of Jared Loughner's beliefs that expressly contradict :MILLER's? Eh, ignore them. Those are unimportant.

Let me just quote Mother Jones' "expert," talking, self-servingly and self-promotingly, about DAVID-WYNN: MILLER's word-games:

"This is an extraordinary freaking word game," says Alfred Adask, a guru of the sovereign movement and former publisher of the sovereign-citizen magazine AntiShyster, told me. "Not many people know how to do it or even understand it. The government has ensnared us with the sophisticated use of words and put us back into bondage. You have to master the definitions and start working out with a law dictionary."

Yes, I agree about extraordinary freaking word games, and the attempt to enslave and control us through tendentious and bizarre re-definings of words and implausible claims of cause and effect; but I would substitute "Mother Jones" and "The American Left" for "the government."

Does that mean I just got my ideas from the Sovereign Citizen movement? I guess it does. There is no other possible place I could have gotten such a novel idea.

Correction: Huh, I thought LaRouche's magazine was the Watchtower. A commenter reminds me that's the Jehovah's Witnesses' magazine.

I thought it was something like that. But all I can see is that he publishes the "Executive Intelligence Review." But I'm 90% sure he has some magazine with a catchier name.

posted by Ace at 01:25 PM

| Access Comments