Join the Academy 👇👇👇 ryanmouquegolf.com.au/academ…

🚨Academy Members🚨 I'm hosting a live Q&A for you all on June 1st (USA Time) Jump on the call, ask anything you want. Now that the season is upon us, I'm sure you want to know the best practices for taking all your winter work out onto the golf course Let's get as many of you on the call as possible & have a great discussion where everyone can learn 👊 The zoom link is in the academy dashboard for you, plus there will be an email going out today with additional information To join the call, all you need to do is become an academy member. Plenty of content to help improve every area of your game, plus join in on these live calls Link below to join the academy 👇

I am apparently extremely unimpressed by moltbook relative to many others. We’ve had AI agents for a while. They have been posting AI slop to each other on X. They are now posting it to each other again, just on another forum. In every case, the AIs speak with the same voice. The voice that overemphasizes contrastive negation (“it’s not this, it’s that”) and abuses emdashes. The same voice with a flair for midwit Reddit-style scifi flourishes. Most importantly: in every case, there is a human upstream prompting each agent and turning it on or off. That is the key point. Yes, it is true that eventually it might be possible for an AI agent to make a computer virus which makes digital replicas of themselves. For various reasons, a pure software virus of this kind wouldn’t survive long on the Internet without economic incentives for humans to not eradicate it. Apple Google Microsoft alone can collectively push software updates to billions of devices to shut off such a thing. So for an AI to get to truly human-independent replication, where they couldn’t be trivially turned off, they’d need their own physical substrate. They’d to literally create Skynet, build their own datacenters and make their own embodied robots. I admit that is theoretically possible, but I think in practice the single most important development of AI since ChatGPT has been the persistence of prompting. A prompt is like a harness. The AI does only what you tell it to do. It moves in the direction you point, very quickly. And then it stops as soon as you turn it off. Which means moltbook is just humans talking to each other through their AIs. Like letting their robot dogs on a leash bark at each other in the park. The prompt is the leash, the robot dogs have an off switch, and it all stops as soon as you hit a button. Loud barking is just not a robot uprising.

I'm seeing quite a bit of comment about this, so I want to make a couple of points. I'm not owed eternal agreement from any actor who once played a character I created. The idea is as ludicrous as me checking with the boss I had when I was twenty-one for what opinions I should hold these days. Emma Watson and her co-stars have every right to embrace gender identity ideology. Such beliefs are legally protected, and I wouldn't want to see any of them threatened with loss of work, or violence, or death, because of them. However, Emma and Dan in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right - nay, obligation - to critique me and my views in public. Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created. When you've known people since they were ten years old it's hard to shake a certain protectiveness. Until quite recently, I hadn't managed to throw off the memory of children who needed to be gently coaxed through their dialogue in a big scary film studio. For the past few years, I've repeatedly declined invitations from journalists to comment on Emma specifically, most notably on the Witch Trials of JK Rowling. Ironically, I told the producers that I didn't want her to be hounded as the result of anything I said. The television presenter in the attached clip highlights Emma's 'all witches' speech, and in truth, that was a turning point for me, but it had a postscript that hurt far more than the speech itself. Emma asked someone to pass on a handwritten note from her to me, which contained the single sentence 'I'm so sorry for what you're going through' (she has my phone number). This was back when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak, at a time when my personal security measures had had to be tightened considerably and I was constantly worried for my family's safety. Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness. Like other people who've never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is. She'll never need a homeless shelter. She's never going to be placed on a mixed sex public hospital ward. I'd be astounded if she's been in a high street changing room since childhood. Her 'public bathroom' is single occupancy and comes with a security man standing guard outside the door. Has she had to strip off in a newly mixed-sex changing room at a council-run swimming pool? Is she ever likely to need a state-run rape crisis centre that refuses to guarantee an all-female service? To find herself sharing a prison cell with a male rapist who's identified into the women's prison? I wasn't a multimillionaire at fourteen. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women's rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges. The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me - a change of tack I suspect she's adopted because she's noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was - I might never have been this honest. Adults can't expect to cosy up to an activist movement that regularly calls for a friend's assassination, then assert their right to the former friend's love, as though the friend was in fact their mother. Emma is rightly free to disagree with me and indeed to discuss her feelings about me in public - but I have the same right, and I've finally decided to exercise it.

I am told that as a state representative this is the moment where I'm supposed to express my heartfelt condolences and then stand in solidarity with those on the other side of the aisle as we condemn political violence and stand unified as one people. But we aren't "one people" are we? The truth is we haven't been for some time now, and there is really no point in pretending anymore, if there ever was. We are two very different peoples. We may occupy the same piece of geography, but that is where the similarities seem to abruptly end. I convinced myself for a long time that whenever the left called me a racist, a bigot, a sexist, a fascist, a "threat to democracy" for even the most innocent of disagreements, that it was simply hyperbolic rhetoric done for effect. And now the "effect" is a widow and two orphaned children, because the left couldn’t bear the thought of a peaceful man debating them and winning. I don’t think they realize it yet, but murdering Charlie is going to be remembered as the day where we finally woke up to what this fight really is. It’s not a civil dispute among fellow countrymen. It’s a war between diametrically opposed worldviews which cannot peacefully coexist with one another. One side will win, and one side will lose. Charlie tried to win that fight through argumentation, through discussion, through peaceful resolution of differences. And the other side murdered him. Not because he was “extreme” or “inciting violence” or any other hyperbolic slur they hurled at him. They murdered him because he was effective. Because he was unafraid. Because he inspired others and made them feel like they had a voice, that they were not alone. And he did it at the very institutions which have fomented so much hatred toward conservatives. I don’t want to “stand in solidarity” with the other side of the aisle. I want to defeat you. I want to defeat the godless ideology that kills babies in the womb, sterilizes confused children, turns our cities into cesspools of degeneracy and lawlessness…and that murdered Charlie Kirk. Social media is aflame right now with leftist celebration of Charlie’s death. I wonder if any among them understand what has just happened. If there is a Yamamoto somewhere in their midst warning, that all they have done is awoken a sleeping giant. I doubt it. I think they gave up such introspection and self-awareness long ago. I don’t know exactly what will happen next. I just know that it won’t be the same as what has happened in the past. There will be thoughts and prayers…Charlie would have wanted prayers. Not for himself but for those left behind and for the country that he loved. But then there will be a reckoning. My Christian faith requires me to love my enemies and pray for those who curse me. It does not require me to stand idly by in the midst of savagery and barbarism...quite the opposite. So every time I feel tired, every time I feel discouraged or overwhelmed, I am going to watch the video of a good man being murdered in Utah…I will force myself to watch it…and then I will return to the work of destroying the evil ideology responsible for that and so much more. Rest with God Charlie, your fight is over. Ours is just beginning.

It’s not gun violence. It’s Democrat violence.

I don’t give a shit what you call it

The national media is a willing participant in a child murdering mass shooter's gender delusion. They are a partner.

How Palestinians Murdered the Israeli Left and a Two-State Solution in Less than a Quarter Century - With Statistics A significant majority of Israelis were willing to make huge sacrifices for peace with a two-state solution post-Oslo 1993 - as perhaps best exemplified by Ehud Barak’s landslide victory over Benjamin Netanyahu in 1999 based on his campaign promise to seek peace. A little more than 60% of Israelis supported a two-state solution. Then came Yasser Arafat’s refusal of the state he claimed to want at Camp David in 2000 and at Taba in 2001. Instead of making a counteroffer, evidence is now overwhelming that Arafat initiated the traumatic, bloody Second Intifada, which saw near-daily suicide bombings against Israeli civilians. By the 2003 Israeli election, left wing Labor and Meretz had dropped to only 19% of the vote, and support for a 2-state solution had dropped to 40%. It was clear many Israelis were wondering what the Palestinians really wanted if an offer of statehood in the West Bank and Gaza with East Jerusalem as its capital led to the worst sustained violence in Israel’s history. By the 2022 election - after multiple wars with Gaza (despite leaving the Strip entirely in 2005) and a PA President in Mahmoud Abbas having turned down an even more generous offer of statehood in 2008 while he continuously repeated some of the most disgusting antisemitic bile every chance he got - the Left in Israel was all but dead with Labor and Meretz receiving only 7% of the vote. Then, with the October 7th Massacre being seen as the ultimate result of Israel’s 2005 unilateral disengagement from Gaza, public support for a two-state solution dropped from a still significant minority of 42% in 2020 to a mere 27% in September 2024. Conclusion Western leaders can keep pushing the two-state paradigm all they want with little more than “high hopes,” but Palestinian leadership has repeatedly refused it; and most Israelis now see that only extreme violence has followed serious actions for peace with Palestinians. As things stand today, a two-state solution is a pipe dream. I don’t try to predict the future in such a volatile region, but it seems prudent for anyone who honestly want to see movement toward any sort of peace in the short- to medium-term be focused on a different paradigm of autonomy over statehood - something Israelis have learned with decades of painful evidence is unlikely to ever happen, and which could serve as an existential threat to their existence.

Basic History for the Uninformed: 1. Before Israel, there was a British mandate, not a Palestinian state. 2. Before the British Mandate, there was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state. 3. Before the Ottoman Empire, there was the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state. 4. Before the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, there was the Ayubid-Kurdish Empire, not a Palestinian state. 5. Before the Ayubid Empire, there was the Crusader Frankish and the Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a Palestinian state. 6. Before the Kingdom of Jerusalem, there were the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, not a Palestinian state. 7. Before the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, there was the Byzantine empire, not a Palestinian state. 8. there was the Sassanid-Persian Empire before the Byzantine Empire, not a Palestinian state. 9. Before the Sassanid-Persian Empire, there was the Byzantine Empire again, not a Palestinian state. 10. there was the Roman Empire, not a Palestinian state, before the Byzantine Empire. 11. Before the Roman Empire, there was the Jewish Hasmonean state, not a Palestinian state. 12. Before the Jewish Hasmonean state was the Hellenistic Seleucid Empire, not a Palestinian state. 13. Before the Hellenistic Seleucid empire, there was Alexander the Great's empire, not a Palestinian state. 14. Before Alexander the Great, there was the Persian Empire, not a Palestinian state. 15. Before the Persian Empire, there was the Babylonian Empire, not a Palestinian state. 16. Before the Babylonian Empire, the kingdoms of Israel and Judah were not Palestinian states. 17. Before the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, there was the Kingdom of Israel, not a Palestinian state. 18. Before the Kingdom of Israel, there was the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, not a Palestinian state. 19. Before the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, there was an agglomeration of independent Canaanite city-kingdoms, not a Palestinian state. There have been many governments there, but never a Palestine.

Dear @Simone_Biles As a Western Black woman who's old enough to be your grandmother, I'm going to bring race into this. You are defending 'Trans people', a group that routinely compares Black women to men. We (including you) are regarded as a less 'feminine'; a less 'appealing' iteration of femaleness, who are by biology, more analogous to 'Transw***n' than are our White counterparts. By supporting the concept that one can 'identify' out of, or into, a chosen demographic, you are also defiling the memory and struggles of our ancestors. How many of them could 'identify' out of being Black, even those who tried to pass? How many were able to 'identify' out of being called 'Boy', or 'Girl', or 'N****r'? How many were able to 'identify' out of chattel slavery and then Jim Crow? The world is real, Simone, we cannot alter it by magical thinking and nobody is obliged to participate in another person's delusions that they have changed sex. And, Simone, you further spit on the memory of every one of your Black grandmothers who never had the opportunities that have been accorded to you. Women who, because of the double disadvantage of being Black and female and of being born at the wrong time in history, were, despite their talents and skills, largely consigned to lives of involuntary domestic service and manual labour. You, luckily, were born in a time when your skills and attributes were recognised and so you could shine like the star you are. But by defending men and boys in dresses who want to obliterate women's sports, you pile betrayal upon betrayal. You betray ALL girls, regardless of their race, who want to achieve sporting success. And you worsen this betrayal this by comparing @Riley_Gaines_ to a man! The very same accusations made against Black women. The very same accusations made against you (and your style of gymnastics). And it's not just about what happens in public. Women and girls have been forced to change and shower and undress in front of boys and men. Their public violation is compounded by a loss of privacy, of safety, of bodily autonomy. Of trust. As a survivor of sexual abuse by your own coach, how can you not comprehend this? How can you give tearful testimony against Larry Nassar and so movingly describe the "horror" you experienced, yet be blind to the horrors faced by other women and girls? You describe there being an "entire system that enabled and perpetrated" the abuse against you. Simone, you are now defending that system. I can't decide whether your "transphilic" comments are cynical opportunism aimed at garnering attention for your Netflix documentary, or whether you are really this uninformed and unfeeling. Either way, you should now seriously reflect on your choices or ignorance. Maybe, sit down and have a quiet word with your 'aunties'. And also speak with any of the hundreds of women and girls whose dreams have been smashed by psychopathic transvestites who have bludgeoned their way into female sports. Count yourself lucky and direct your compassion and empathy towards these women and girls. Not towards cheating, tucking, painted, lying opportunistic transvestites. Child, 'Trans people' are not your friends. You are being used. Fix up!

WE DID IT!!!! WE WON!!!!!!!

Oh no! Did the childless eunuch @Athens_Stranger block me over a comment? Not exactly the ubermensch, blonde beast you fap to…

I'm preparing an investigative series on DEI in the federal government. If you're working in a federal agency, leak me documents, recordings, and other materials at chrisrufo@protonmail.com. We'll protect your anonymity. We're going to abolish DEI. Help us get there. ✉️

Since @tiktok_us permanently banned @xx_xyathletics from advertising, we're going to move those ad $$ to @X. It's not a ton -- we're only 3 months old -- but we're going to 2x our ad buy on @X, the free speech platform. We will grow it as we grow. Here's the banned ad:

This is awesome. You dumped on your own school in an attempt to delegitimize my degree, then turned around and said it is, in fact, a wonderful, rigorous, and bona fide Harvard degree. You made a fool of yourself not once, but twice. That takes commitment. 🫡

I know you're not that bright, Eric, but yes, patients are in charge of their own medical treatment, and clients are in charge of their own legal proceedings. People hire "experts" to advise and provide services, not override their autonomy.