Fakers, Assholes and Why You Can't Believe Much That's On The Internet

It's been close to a year since my last blog post. I've been busy with, work, writing and life, in general.

Currently, I'm writing my Creator-Owned super-hero, Energyman, which will be published by RocketBlast Comics. There's a possibility for more work from them so I keep my fingers crossed.

If you look back on my blogs you'll see a series I did debunking a conspiracy rant by a supposed "judge", who spent a lot of time uncovering the supposed lies of history.
UPDATE: I went back to the board where I saw the original document and mentioned the mistakes in a comments section. Someone, I can only assume it was the person who posted the original document, admitted there were factual mistakes in the document and started yapping about Jesus as Lord.
So there you have it.
A huge, ridiculously long, conspiracy theory document rife with mistakes essentially aimed at trying to drive people to religion, as if Jesus and/or God is going to appear out of nowhere and makes things "right" with a wave of his hand.
                             

I came across this site on Twitter. It is now one of my favorite sites!

I just recently came upon this news article which prompts me to make a few comments.
1) Why call it The Gospel of Jesus' Wife? Why not The Gospel of Mary? That is the woman in question.
2) "Jesus said to them, 'My wife...'." It also mentions that "she will be able to be my disciple," which led some to question whether women should be allowed to become Catholic priests." We all know that from the beginning of time, it's been a male-dominated society. The Catholic religion looked down upon women as inferior beings who were just put on the earth so men could procreate and make more men. That was the idea, anyway. It was the original He-Man Women-Haters Club and they conspired to keep women out and down and make it male only.
Of course, they didn't take into account that times change. Personally, what does it matter if a priest is male or female? Does the religion comes across any less because a woman is preaching as opposed to a male? Such is the hypocrisy of religion
3) And there will always be doubters. People who are so close-minded that the idea that Jesus was anything but a lone man with followers just upsets the apple cart too much. They've been brainwashed by religion into thinking that Jesus was, literally, an offshoot of God and had magical powers that could make the blind see and cure leprosy and walk on water in an age where if you cut yourself and it became infected, you were a dead man walking.

I think the video below sums up how the concept of "God" just doesn't make sense. Thanks to DarkMatter2525 on youtube for crafting the video.

Super Earths, Gravity and the Possibility of Life On Other Planets

I was happy to come across this article while I was trolling the internet one evening, which states that scientists have found 3 Super Earths orbiting star Gliese 667C in the star's habitable zone. That's the zone where the possibility of liquid water exists and with the possibility of liquid water comes the possibility of life.

Now, the planets orbit closer to the star than we do to ours because the star is cooler. It's a Red Dwarf star estimated to be at least 2 billion years old. The fact that it took twice that for bi-pedal humanoid life to appear on this planet leads me to believe that the possibility of intelligent life on these planets is slim to none BUT there's still the possibility that life of some kind may exist on these planets!

There's also the possibility that these planets, because they orbit so close to the star, are tidally locked. That means that one side of the planet always faces toward the star and the other side away. If this is the case then the probability of any life dips way down but, again, this is all theory and because the Universe is full of impossibilities then without concrete proof (like, actually seeing the planet) we have no idea what's going on there.

I started thinking about the gravity of Super Earths and realized that I didn't really know how to determine the gravity of a planet. Was it just the mass? I came across this helpful article which explained that it wasn't just a planets mass but also its radius which determined the planet's gravity. There's a chart on the page which includes the planet Gliese 667Cc, which is the Super-Earth closest to the star in its habitable zone and it's also the largest. That planet has a gravity of 1.36 compared to Earth's 1 so, yeah, the gravity is slightly heavier there but not crushingly so. I would be more interested in knowing the gravity of Gliese 667Cf, which is smaller than 'c' but sits more firmly in the habitable zone.

Ideally, scientists would like to find a planet around the same type of star as our sun ('G' type), in its habitable zone and roughly around the same age. If it's a Super-Earth then its got to have a mass/radius ratio that puts it as close to 1g as possible. That's as close to comparing apples to apples as you're going to get and just because we haven't found it yet doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

The Universe is chock full of pretty weird stuff. Just look at us!

Wanna Live On Mars? Forever?

No kidding.
Currently there's the Mars One Foundation, who is gearing up to select and train people to leave Earth and live on Mars.
Pretty cool stuff! The catch is that this is obviously a one-way trip. Even though Mars One intends to have an "escape" craft in case something major happens, after a certain point, the human body will become accustomed to Mars' lower gravity thereby making it impossible for them to ever return to Earth.
No matter what happens.
If you click on the link above and tool around the web site, it'll probably answer most, if not all, questions you may have. I'll admit that I'll certainly be glued to my television or computer to witness people walking around Mars, doing things that our current unmanned rovers just can't do!
Now, what kind of people would want to leave Earth and live in an enclosed environment for the rest of their lives? It certainly takes a special breed. You'll never again feel the warm sun on your face or feel a cool natural breeze or lay on the beach or tool around the internet. Whether the mission is a success or a failure, though, you're certain to go down in history as the first person born on Earth to live on Mars.
I would imagine that you would also want people of certain talents to be included in the trip; a Doctor, an Engineer, people that are mechanically inclined. I'm hoping this stuff will be taken into account in the selection process otherwise it may go something like this:
    "I think I broke my arm!"
    "Okay. What do we do?"
    Everyone just looks at each other in total silence.
    "...shit."

This entire idea is certainly a step in the right direction. Having the entire Earth work together to send humans into space, to mine asteroids and to possibly, dare I say, terraform Mars so that it can once again be a living planet is the stuff that drives us to dream big.
For a long time we've been waiting on government to fund these types of ideas. Those days are gone. With the hopeful success of Mars One, private businesses or wealthy individuals are who's going to build a moonbase or a large enough ship to journey to another solar system.
Kudos to Mars One and I look forward to seeing them realize their mission.

Recycle This!

I consider myself a pretty Eco-minded guy. I recycle my household plastics, cans and paper and avoid as much as I can to not contribute to polluting the ground or air. I won't buy anything in a '7' plastic container because reports show that more carcinogens leak into the food product than any other type of plastic. Hey, bottom line is I try to do the right thing and recycle.

Now, you would think that because state and federal governments want people to recycle and not pollute the Earth, that they would somehow promote recycling businesses and make it easier for people to recycle those batteries, cans of paint, old computers, etc.

So I had these old computers that I wanted to recycle. I've seen the reports that computers have mercury and other heavy metals that, if they find their way into a landfill, could contaminate ground water. I read this article about recycling and it gives a bunch of web sites to go to. The first one I go to is Earth911.org. It seemed the Staples not too far from me recycled computers. Great! I gather up the three old computers I had and drive them to Staples. Bring them in and set them up on the counter only to find out that Staples only accepts computers that have Windows Vista or Windows 7 operating systems, the two most recent operating systems at that time. According to the web site, Staples recycled computers period.

I thought about it a little later and realized that Staples wasn't recycling anything. They were refurbishing and reselling computers that were given to them, which is why they wanted the two most recent operating systems.

I let Earth911.org know what I encountered and they said they would check into it. As of right now, the web site shows that only the Staples stores in Southbury, Watertown and Danbury take computers for recycling. I called the Southbury store and they confirmed that they except any computer for recycling. Obviously, something has changed since I brought my old computers to Staples a couple years ago.

At that time, places like Staples and Best Buy also charged you $10 to "recycle" a monitor. My thought was, "Wait a minute. I'm trying to do the right thing by recycling and you want me to pay you for recycling my monitor?? You should be paying me!!" From what I can see today, recycling things at Best Buy is now free, as it should be. Check out this video to find out what happens to your stuff when you bring it to Best Buy!

As for other things like batteries, auto fluids, oil-based paints and such need to be brought to the Household Hazardous Waste facility and they're only open on Saturdays from 9-noon from mid-May until October. Personally, I think they can do a little better in this area. I'm not sure how many people use this facility but having it open year-round would certainly encourage more people to recycle.

And speaking of recycling, I'll end off with this video. Brrrr.

Guns Are The New Black!

Guns are all in the news after the recent shootings at an elementary school in Newtown, CT where 20 children and 6 adults were shot to death by a young man with apparent mental issues. I won't mention the man's name because I won't give him the satisfaction of having been remembered for such a heinous act (do you ever wonder why the word 'heinous' and 'heinie' are so similar? What does a bad act have to do with someone's backside? Or have I just answered my own question? I'm digressing...).

The media has jumped on its horse and shouts out in bold headlines that we need to come up with gun controls so that this never happens again. Everyone in political office from the President of the United States and down to the lowliest Mayor of all cities agree that something needs to be done.

My question is: What? What can be done? What laws can you possibly enact that would 100% prevent anything like what happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School from ever happening again? I think the answer is: Nothing.

I just shook my head when the media started mentioning that the shooter played violent video games in a dark, bunker-like basement, bringing up the ugly specter that video games were the reason he went on a killing spree. I don't know of a basement anywhere that isn't dark and bunker-like! There are many times when I've played "violent" video games in my dark basement and you don't see me checking myself into the nearest sanitarium or going out to kill masses of people (at least not in real life but within the virtual worlds of Dynasty Warriors and the various Medal of Honor games it's a different story! Digressing again...).

I'm sorry but to play a video game, listen to heavy metal music, read a book or comic book, watch a movie or television show and then go out and kill people there has to be something mentally wrong with you to begin with and all of the sanitizing of entertainment will not change that.

What's also missed is that, from what I've read, none of the guns were the shooter's to begin with. They were his mother's, who enjoyed going to the range and shooting. Legally. So now what, if you have a child that's seeing a psychiatrist you are no longer allowed to own guns or, if you do, must hand them over tout de suite?

New York recently passed a gun control bill. The article I read is here. Gov. Cuomo says, "This is a scourge on society...At what point do you say, 'No more innocent loss of life'?" Guns are a scourge on society? Not the criminals who use the guns to do the actual killing? Without guns, the criminals would use a knife or a bomb or a cannon or whatever else they could turn into a weapon to kill people.
We've always abhorred innocent loss of life and have a half million laws already trying to prevent that. It's a good soundbite for the Governor but if you think about it, it really makes no sense.

My favorite, though, is Sen. Jeffrey Klein who said, "This is not about taking anyone's rights away. It's about a safe society..." You'll notice he doesn't say a 'free' society but a 'safe' society. Contrary to popular belief, the two are different. In a 'safe' society, people have fewer rights than in a 'free' society but many people don't understand that. The one drawback to living in a 'free' society is that things like the shootings in Newtown WILL happen. You can certainly do your best to prevent it but the only true way would be to take all guns from every nook and cranny in this country (all 270,000,000+) and destroy them, leaving the police and armed services with guns and no one else.

It's a pipe dream. Never gonna happen.

Another article here has President Obama working hard to come up with proposals that Congress (Lord help us) can craft into some form of gun control law. President Obama is right when he says, "While there is no law, or set of laws, that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely, no piece of legislation that will prevent every tragedy, every act of evil, if there's even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there's even one life that can be saved, then we've got an obligation to try."

By the way, Mr. President, thanks for letting the social security tax to go back up to 6.2% from 4.2% and thanks for giving the middle class people less deductions thereby making our taxes go up, even though you technically stayed true to your word that the tax amount wouldn't go up. Yeah, I'm being sarcastic and I'm digressing again.

At any rate, I have no problem reinstating the assault weapons ban. I have no problem only allowing civilians 7 round clips instead of the 10 round or more. I have no problem that mental health Doctors should report patients who say they are going to kill someone with a gun.
I just don't like it when A) politicians use the Newtown shootings (or any tragedy) to further their own career and/or agenda (which quite a few seem to be doing) and B) when they try to target extraneous stuff (like video games) as the cause when it isn't.

And that's my 2 cents.
By the way, Forbes ranks the best video games of 2012!

Yet More Classic Films!!

Happy New Year!!
Since there was no zombie apocalypse, rapture, civilization-ending meteor strike or take-your-pick of world-ending disasters; I get to continue writing and watch more classic movies!

The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - Wow. That's pretty much all I can say about this western which stars Jimmy Stewart, John Wayne, Lee Marvin and Vera Miles. It also features Andy Devine (the voice of Friar Tuck in Disney's Robin Hood), John Carradine, Lee Van Cleef and Strother Martin among others.
Some of Stewart's early lines in the movie seem forced or scripted. He says a few things that, well, people don't talk like that. Even at that time. That aside it is a great movie. I would highly recommend it for anyone who hasn't seen it.
I was wondering if this movie was nominated for an Oscar but that was the year Lawrence of Arabia, The Music Man, Mutiny On The Bounty and To Kill A Mockingbird came out soooo...
It did get nominated for an Oscar for Best Costume Design, though. So there's that.

Metropolis - This German silent movie from 1927 is considered a classic and I can't argue with that. As of this writing I haven't quite finished the movie (watching the restored version on Netflix which is 2 1/2 hours long) but I can already tell you that the special effects are ridiculous good for that era. Some of the acting might be considered over-the-top but I understand that in the silent era actors and actresses needed to move their hands more and show large facial expressions in order to get their point across.
The music, also, is deeper than the solo piano that you constantly hear in any Charlie Chaplin short (been checking those out also and now understand why Chaplin is Universally revered. Good stuff!).
I was most surprised at the complexity of the story. Written for the screen by Thea Von Harbou, from his own novel, you can see the slightest parallel relationship between this story and Orwell's 1984. It more explores the relationship between workers (who build and keep the city humming, live in the dark depths and basically have no future) and the planners (who are the rich, live IN the city and have the easy life). There is no Big Brother but the workers are kept a close eye on and, of course, there's an underground movement for revolt.
I guess the movie was edited for time and, possibly content. The cut scenes were lost for many years and then found in South America. Well, most cut scenes. There are still scenes that are lost forever and the added scenes are beat up so you can tell what's what when watching the movie.
If you don't mind B & W silent movies then check it out.

Well, 2013 is upon us and still no flying cars! What the Hell??!! What's up with that?
Interested in nanotechnology? Go here. Enjoy the year and be excellent to each other!

Some Classic Films Finally Seen

I hope everyone reading this has had a good Christmas and will have a happy and safe New Year! I've had a couple of movies staring me in the face for a little bit now. Finally decided to watch them.

Fahrenheit 451 - Everyone knows Ray Bradbury's classic story. In a society where books are illegal and firemen start fires to burn the books, one fireman, Guy Montag, questions the way the society is run after a couple of incidents. I knew of the story but never actually read it. The movie has some interesting moments and it took me about an hour to realize that Julie Christie plays both Montag's wife, Linda, and the rebel Clarisse. At least now I can say that I've seen it.

1984 - Another dystopian society-type movie where false information and a "big brother" who watches everything reign supreme. I think I enjoyed this movie slightly more than Fahrenheit 451 but, again, having never read the book by George Orwell I had questions aplenty and the ending left me completely flummoxed.

Equilibrium - Influenced heavily by Fahrenheit 451 and 1984, Equilibrium stars Christian Bale as John Preston, policeman supreme in a society where emotions are suppressed by Prozium (the drug of choice for suppressing emotions!). More current and more action scenes make this movie easier to watch, if you can ignore all the illogicalities(?) that are present in trying to make this movie believable. Still, it was entertaining and I enjoyed it.

Reservoir Dogs - Never saw this Tarantino flick until the other night and it's pretty much like every other Quentin Tarantino movie you've ever seen. Interesting conversations then shocking bloody violence. You also have the end scene which reminds me a lot of the bar scene in Tarantino's Inglourious Bastards, with the same results. If you've never seen this movie, then check it out.

Some more classics that I still have to watch include Reefer Madness, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance and Metropolis.

Why I voted for Rocky Anderson

In the recent 2012 Presidential election, there are many people who think that it was President Barack Obama vs. Mitt Romney. That's it. Two choices. Pick one or the other.

Wrong.

Other people running for President included former Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson for the Libertarian Party, Physician Jill Stein of the Green Party and former Mayor of Salt Lake City Rocky Anderson for the Justice Party.

I've voted for third party nominees before. One of the questions I get is "Why would you waste your vote [on a third party candidate who is definitely going to lose]?"
My answer: I'm not "wasting" my vote if I'm voting for who I want to win. It's my choice, not someone else's.

In this past election I've heard a lot of "I don't really like either candidate but I have to vote for one of them."
My answer: Why? Why do you have to vote for a Republican or a Democrat if you don't like either?

Mainly because many people don't even realize that there are other candidates. We are bombarded in all media that it's Democrat or Republican, choose one. Most people, in general, are dependent sheep who are resistant to change, believe the media as if it were gospel, are too lazy to do any research ("Oh, I'm so busy I just don't have time!") or are bound by some unwritten familial rule that they must always vote Republican or Democrat. ("My family has voted Republican/Democrat for generations!") Even if they don't like the candidate!! How ridiculous is that?!
My proof? All we heard about the previous Congress is that they were do-nothing and useless and unable to agree on anything. So what do the people do? Re-elect 98% of that useless body of do-nothings! Why? Because those were the faces that were front and center on every tv channel in their respective states.
I would love to do a poll to find out why people vote the way they vote. The resulting book of stupidity would be amusing, if nothing else. Maybe a little sad, as well.
Now, with that being said, I'm NOT saying that you should never vote Republican or Democrat. What I'm saying is that there are other choices if you don't like either candidate. To me, voting for a candidate you don't like is "wasting" a vote.

I was surprised to find that Rocky Anderson was not on the ballot in every state so I decided to do some research. How exactly do you get on the Presidential ballot?
According to ask Yahoo.com, third party and independent candidates have to get voter signatures (in some states as many as 750,000!), pay steep filing fees and follow many complicated procedures to get on the ballot. Republicans and Democrats are automatically put on the ballot because they are the recognized "major" parties. You can also read the Wikipedia article regarding ballot access here. It has some interesting stuff.
Then I asked myself why you hardly ever see third party or independent candidates at Presidential debates. So I did more research and according to Wikipedia, the debates used to be sponsored by The League of Women Voters but in 1987 withdrew their sponsorship because the major parties (Republicans and Democrats) wanted to control just about every aspect of how the debates were run. When the LWV withdrew guess who stepped in to run the debates? Yep, the Republican and Democratic Parties assumed control of organizing the debates through the Commission on Presidential Debate (CPD), or , if you prefer, the Commission on Public Deception. You can read an insider account of the debate process by Ralph Nader here.

So, why did I vote for Rocky Anderson? Well, I didn't trust Mitt Romney as far as I could throw him! I figure when a guy is the Governor of a state (like Mitt was in Massachusetts) and doesn't even win that state in the election, you know he can't be any good. Obama won Mass. with 60.8% of the vote to Romney's 37.6%.
Obama, in my mind, didn't really bring the "change" that he ranted about in his first campaign so I didn't want to vote for him again.
I agree with MOST of what Rocky Anderson and the Justice Party say they want to bring to government. Especially ending the incessant bribery, oops, I mean lobbying that has become a way of the political system. Enough to give him a shot.

You want to bring change? Real change? Then stay away from the major parties. They just want to keep the same old wheel turning.

Justice Party
Rocky Anderson on the Issues

Elementary, conclusion

Let's continue with more misinformation from this self-proclaimed Judge, shall we? Again, my comments are in red.


Americans are not unlike all other humans who inhabit the earth. All human beings possess malleable minds, which are minds that can be shaped and controlled; and when government shapes and controls a mind, it’s called “brainwashing.” Brainwashing causes the subject to become ‘functionally illiterate.’ In America, our functional ignorance excels in the areas of history, government and law, which really are one in the same. Ninety-eight percent of the officials in public office are lawyers and these so-called representatives set policy and created the laws that govern this society. Their use of Greek and Latin terms in law and the habit of changing definitions and usage of common words is intentional. The intent is to confound and confuse the general public; and to hide the treason they are implementing; and so that members of the public are forced or decide to hire a lawyer out of frustration, rather than try to represent themselves in our, ‘fictional courts of law.’ As you read on I’ll explain to you why and how, our courts and laws are fictional!

There has never been a law on the books created by the Congress, which made it illegal for a common man to practice law. Every Judge of a District, Circuit or Appeal Court, except Justices and Magistrates, is a lawyer and a member of the Bar. These Judges have the authority to establish local rules of court and those mentioned, have created a local rule that prevents common people from representing any other person in their court or ‘to practice law without a license!’ A license requires that you produce your Bar Association number. For those who don’t know, the Bar Association is simply a ‘Lawyers Union,’ and when lawyers are accepted into the Bar, they are required to swear allegiance to a foreign power! The American Bar Association is a branch of a national organization titled; “The National Lawyers Guild Communist Party” and can be found recorded in the United States Code at: [28 U. S. C. 3002, section 15a]. They have become so big and entrenched that they no longer fear reprisal!

This is wrong. There are actually 2 Bar Associations; the American Bar Association and the National Lawyers Guild. The NLG has always been criticized for being a Communist Front Organization but in 2007 they passed a resolution calling for the impeachment of then-President George Bush and VP Dick Cheney, so they can’t be ALL bad! If you want, you can read up on the NLG here and here and/or go to ABA’s website here.
As I continue through this “document” it becomes more and more apparent that no judge would ever make such elementary mistakes. It again refers to the same U.S. Code that supposedly defined the United States as a Federal Corporation and I’ve already debunked that.

Whenever I tell people that there is no actual law that makes it a crime to represent another person in court, their reaction is, “liar!” I remind them that Abraham Lincoln and Clarence Darrow never went to law school or passed the Bar, but their reaction is understandable because the Bar is a very powerful organization and its members have infiltrated every nitch of American life and business. How many times in your life have you heard, “You can’t practice law without a license?” I’ve heard it said in numerous movies spanning one hundred years; in my mother’s soaps and by comedians in jokes and in theatrical skits. I’ve seen the phrase in print in newspaper articles, magazines and heard it on the radio! Before I learned the truth about this fact, even my personal lawyer made that comment to me! We all have been brainwashed to believe a lie and because we’ve heard it so often from people we trust, and who are supposed to have our best interest at heart; we all just assume it must be true! How many other lies have you assumed, “it must be true?”

I’m beginning to think that this “document” is a bunch of lies that people are assuming to be true! This rhetoric is attempting to brainwash people into thinking that everything in it is true but isn’t. It’s relying that no one will do the research and just take what it states at face value. Yes, I’m using it’s own words against it.

Our America society has been lied to by their government and lawyers more times than you will sign your name in your lifetime, and we have been indoctrinated “brainwashed” to believe that the Constitution was created for “We the People.” The purpose behind these lies is to make you believe that you are free, safe, protected and secure, and it is all an hallucination! How many of you have studied each line of the Constitution; the Statutes at Large and the Articles of Confederation, armed with a reputable dictionary or a law dictionary from that era?

If you take the time to do this, you will soon discover that the true purpose of the Constitution was to create a business plan and to establish a Military Government, for the protection of the Founding Fathers, the Kings commerce, protection of his Agents and the future control of his subject Slaves! Even the preamble of the U. S. Constitution is a clue to the lie and which states, “…to ourselves and our posterity!” If you never saw the title, “The Constitution,” and you were never told what this document was about; what do you think would be your first impression upon hearing or reading: “…to ourselves and our posterity!” The CONSTITUTION is not for “We the People” and AMERICA is a Matrix of misinformation. In the eyes of those in control; America is nothing more than a large Plantation and “We the People” are the Slaves. In many U. S. and World Treaties, the term “high contracting powers” is used to define your Masters! Everyone else is considered by them to be their Slaves!

All of the Founding Fathers had two things in common. They all shared the gift of a good education or were gifted individuals, and they all came from families of business and or substance. These men all suffered from, “visions of grandeur!” They viewed America as their one opportunity to make them powerful and wealthy “……….to ourselves and our posterity!” Initially, their plan was to steal America away from the King; despite the fact that King George funded the exploration of the New World, which legally gave him first claim to all new continents discovered.

The way the Constitution is written we all assume that “…to ourselves and our posterity!” is referring to “We the people…” Again, there really is no concrete proof that it refers to ONLY the Founding Fathers. Yes, the Founding Fathers all had a good education, for the time, and were all business-wealthy THAT’S why they were the governmental Leaders of the Colonies! How would the U.S. Colonies have unfolded if we had a bunch of uneducated boobs running the show??
We all know that Christopher Columbus, from Italy, discovered the New World for the Spanish Empire. The first settlers in, what would later be Chesapeake Bay and Jamestown, Virginia, were from England. The King of England at the time was James, not George.

The seizure of the Americas by the Kings explorers was not as it has been depicted in our history books, presented to us by our government, in our government controlled public schools. Native Americans (the Indians) were murdered, their villages burned, many were enslaved, infected by diseases brought from England and their lands taken by force and the threat of force, by these early explorers! The Indians were labeled savages by these immigrant explorers from England, but the true savages were our English ancestors!
One thing the Founding Fathers did not know, was that all of the Kings lands and all future acquisitions such as the AMERICAS, had been given and pledged by King John to Pope Innocent III and the Holy Roman Church, by the Treaty of 1213. After that fact was proven to the Founding Fathers; King George and representatives from the Vatican; decided to use the Constitutional draft created by the Founding Fathers, to further their plan to control the Colonists! Control attained by bringing the Colonists to their knees in debt! Any way you read it, the Constitution was never written with the intent of benefitting the American people!

This “Treaty” was more of a reconciliation between King John and Pope Innocent III and it all stemmed over the appointment of an Archbishop. The Church at that time was the real power in Europe because they held a lot of land  and had a lot of money. The Pope influenced Leaders of countries through letters that, essentially, blackmailed the countries (Do this or you will be excommunicated from the Christian Church!). The research I’ve done indicates that John only surrendered England and Ireland to Pope Innocent and agreed to pay restitution for all the money John was pocketing instead of sending to Innocent as a “pledge.”
King John never did repay ALL the debt and received support from Innocent, who staved off an impending French Invasion of England and helped John in a baronial revolt in 1214. Eventually, the Church lost power and countries were able to govern themselves without any “help” from the Church.

I think I’ll end my debunking of this paper here. I’ve already proven that the author is more than likely NOT a Judge, Federal or otherwise. There’s no way to contact this person. There is no “mountain” of research. It’s just misinformation, misinterpretation and flat-out lies designed to get people’s ire up about the government. The paper goes on and on about historical “facts”, that are more opinions with no connecting proof.
I’m not saying the U.S. Government, or any Government, is perfect and great but this pablum does nothing to solve any problems…it only creates more.

On a related note, gotta love Ron Paul and his farewell speech to Congress. I hate to tell you, Mr. Paul, but it is not the Constitution that has failed the people but the people who have failed the Constitution.

"A republic, Madam. If you can keep it." Benjamin Franklin, 1787
"Government is a trust, and the officers of the government are trustees; and both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people." Henry Clay, 1857

Elementary, Part 2

We continue with my attempted debunking of this anti-government rhetoric to see if I can get to the bottom of what's real and what isn't. My comments are in red.

Many early writers researched much of this history and were forced to fund their own publication and the distribution of their work. Most never received the acclaim they deserved, and never knew our government was responsible for their failures! I am prepared to supply anyone interested with mounds of research in support of what I have written herein!

Details here would be nice. Who were the early writers? What are the publications? The author claims to be prepared to show anyone interested his research but he’s written this anonymously with no contact e-mail. I’ve found the blog source and have left a reply stating that I would love to see the author’s research. We’ll see what happens. UPDATE: I did receive a reply that the “Judge” is unavailable but gave me some leads to go here and here. My view is that without seeing this so-called Judge's research, there is no real proof that what this person is writing is nothing more than an opinion and that the person is not who he claims to be.

When I’ve conveyed parts of this information in court documents, the opposition’s lawyer, responds to their clients that, “I’m just crazy,” and if the judge is within ear-shot of that comment, he will nod his head in judicial agreement! Well, I guess that caps it! If a lawyer and a lawyer judge, both contend that I am crazy, then I must be crazy! They wouldn’t lie to you! ………. or would they?
THE motive of our Founding Fathers was totally self-centered. It was their personal greed that inspired them to accept the task of writing the Constitution of the United States and not patriotism!

I kind of believe the self-centered, personal greed angle from what is documented in a bunch of American history books and from the History Channel’s, The Revolution. There isn’t a government or people who like to be held ‘in captivity.’ People, in general, want to be free. There was no United States back then so there was nothing to be patriotic about. Many colonists were Loyalists, people loyal to Britain. Britain had overextended itself and needed money so they just passed those costs on to their Colonies, including the North American Colonies. The Colonial government wasn’t too keen on that so rallied the people to revolt with anti-british propaganda. If Britain had won the war, many of the figures we come to revere would have been hanged as traitors to the crown.

 In actuality, the United States is not a land or a place: ‘It is a corporation, a legal fiction that existed well before the Revolutionary War.’ [See: Republica v. Sween, 1 Dallas 43 and 28 U. S. C. 3002 (15)].

I’ve actually been able to debunk this. If you look up the U.S. Code Title 28 3002 (15) it’s referring to definitions within the code. It is NOT saying that the U.S. IS a Federal Corporation, it’s saying that in the context of the code the term United States can also mean a Federal Corporation. Also explained at fauxcapitalist.com.

The Constitution of the United States was written in secret by the Founding Fathers and was never presented to the Colonists for a vote. Surely, any document as important as this demanded the approval of the people it governed! Well, it wasn’t presented for a vote because the Constitution wasn’t created for “We the People,” it was created by and for the Founding Fathers, their family, heirs and their posterity! The Constitution is a business plan and any reference contained within it that appears to be the safeguard of a ‘Right’ is there because none of the Founding Fathers trusted each other. The safeguards were intended to prevent any one or group of them from cutting out the others! Proving that; “There’s no honor among thieves!”

There are so many things wrong in this paragraph I don’t know where to start. Do the American people vote for every bill that comes up in House or Senate? No. This is why we have elected Reps and Senators, who are supposed to be following the will of the people who elected them. Now, of course, I’m not sure whose will they’re following. It seems to be whoever gives them the most money which, in my book, is bribery. Elected officials in the 13 Colonies ratified the Constitution, although Rhode Island, which was mainly an Anti-Federalist State, boycotted the Convention and was the last state to ratify in 1790.

After the Revolution, the people KNEW that the elected officials, the Continental Congress, was in session to come up with a form of government. Those officials were charged with coming up with a Constitution for everyone, not just the government. Sure, the people didn’t like the secrecy of it but it was necessary "so that the delegates could speak freely, negotiate, bargain, compromise and change." Again, if there were any “evil” intentions on the Founding Fathers part, it would be written somewhere. In letters, a private journal. Somewhere. It wouldn't have remained a secret for over 220 years because as we've seen, no one can keep a secret. To date, no proof has been found that the Continental Congress wrote the Constitution with just themselves in mind and utter contempt for the people that put them in Office.

TO  BE  CONTINUED...

Interlude: Conspiracy Theory...or is it?

Came across this episode of Jesse Ventura's Conspiracy Theory. It's about 45 minutes long but find the time and watch it.

Did some research on www.senate.gov and found the bill H.R. 645. Text below.

H.R.645 -- National Emergency Centers Establishment Act (Introduced in House - IH)

HR 645 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 645

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 22, 2009

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

---

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `National Emergency Centers Establishment Act'.

SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.

(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure--

(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;

(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;

(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and

(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.
So, it is indeed up to the Secretary of Homeland Security that he can use these Emergency Centers as whatever he/she feels like depending on what's happening.

SEC. 3. DESIGNATION OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AS NATIONAL EMERGENCY CENTERS.

(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.

They figured military installations would make great emergency shelters? This raises the hackles on my neck.

(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be--

(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;

(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;

(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;

(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;

(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;

(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:

(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and

(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and

(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.

(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:

(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.

(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.

(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.

(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.

(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.

(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
You'll notice the 10 regions here.

(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.

(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.

(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.

(g) Reports-

(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;

(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;

(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;

(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and

(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).

(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);

(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);

(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and

(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.

(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site--

(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);

(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and

(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.

(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.

SEC. 4. LIMITATIONS ON STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

This Act does not affect--

(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or

(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.

Your tax dollars hard at work.

SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act, the following definitions apply:

(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `closed military installation' means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:

(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.

(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.

(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.

(2) EMERGENCY- The term `emergency' has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
“Emergency” means any occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the
President, Federal assistance is needed to supplement State and local efforts and
capabilities to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or to
lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States.

(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term `major disaster' has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
“Major disaster” means any natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado,
storm, high water, winddriven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic
eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), or, regardless of cause, any
fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination
of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant
major disaster assistance under this Act to supplement the efforts and available
resources of States, local governments, and disaster relief organizations in
alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby.

(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `military installation' has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).

Just so you know who is responsible. This lovely bill is sponsored by Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] (introduced 1/22/2009) and Co-Sponsored by Rep Altmire, Jason [PA-4] - 6/29/2010 
Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 9/16/2009 
Rep Davis, Artur [AL-7] - 4/22/2009 
Rep Doyle, Michael F. [PA-14] - 6/22/2010 
Rep Gerlach, Jim [PA-6] - 2/25/2009 
Rep Murphy, Tim [PA-18] - 6/22/2010

A modified bill (s.3476) was brought before the Senate on June 10, 2010 but it was essentially the same. It was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services. The modified bill was sponsored by  Sen Casey, Robert P., Jr. [PA] and Co-Sponsored by Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] - 6/10/2010

Elementary: Debunking Secret Societies, Conspiracy Theories and New World Orders, Part 1

I recently was pointed to an article on www.in5d.com. The article was supposedly written by a judge who, through exhaustive research, discovered that the United States of America isn’t what we all think it is. Now, the fact that this article is on such an obscure website to begin with and isn’t featured on ABC News or CNN has me a bit skeptical but I’ve decided to go through the article and do some research of my own and see if what the article is saying is the truth…or something else.

I've actually noticed the same article, or bits of it, on a snopes.com forum and at what looks like a blog, pepehatesme.wordpress.com. It seems to have made the rounds on conspiracy theory web sites, which, in itself, doesn't lend credence to its content.

It’s a fairly long article so it will probably take a few blog posts to go through it and I’m hoping the research won’t take too long. The important thing here is to get to the bottom of articles like this and either shrug it off as another crackpot or, if it’s true, bring it to the forefront and make people aware.

The article will be in the usual white text while my comments will be in red. Let’s begin:

The following article presented in three parts, starting today, was written by a former judge.
He doesn’t reveal his full name, but the information contained within the writing is well-worth reading and digesting anyway.

It is worth reading because it should stimulate your pursuit to understand the truth behind the formation of America.

This is important since Americans have long been deceived by the likes of men who followed in the footsteps of despicable characters like Ben Franklin, men who have hidden their Illuminati and Vatican connections behind a false veil of freedom and Christianity.

I’d like to step in here to say that, right off the bat, this author accuses Ben Franklin of being “despicable”. In all that I’ve read so far about the Founding Fathers of our country, Ben Franklin was, by far, the most honest of the bunch. It was Ben Franklin who stood up at the Constitutional Convention and offered his opinion that politicians in the Executive Branch should not receive a salary. “…though we may set out in the beginning with moderate salaries, we shall find that such will not be of long continuance.” The Anti-Federalist Papers, page 44. Ben Franklin, above everyone else, saw the long term dangers of any government. Despicable? I disagree.

If anyone doubts what the judge has researched, just ask yourself why America has crumbled into fascism after only a little more than 200 years of so-called “freedom”.

Fascism is a harsh word. “…a little more than 200 years” tells me the article was possibly written in the 1980’s but the author references The Matrix, which came out in 1999. We’ll say early 2000’s. (Note: did some quick research; article posted in 2009 but who knows when it was written.)

THE MATRIX AND
THE U. S. CONSTITUTION
By: no name (hidden for his safety)
INTRODUCTION:
During my twelve years service as a Judge, I always insisted on the truth and placed justice above law and order! I could have prepared this article indicia of a research paper however; people tend to lose interest when articles of this nature become too technical. Science has taught us that, “For every action there is a positive reaction!”

Actually, science teaches us for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction.

If your life on earth resembles a Matrix, it is because you’re seeing things for the first time, with eyes wide open, but you feel confused! That feeling of confusion is appropriate because the information you are now digesting, contradicts much of the information you have been spoon fed throughout your life! I named this paper after the movie “The Matrix,” written by the Wachowsi brothers. After reading this, watch the movie and you will notice many similarities.

The author is obviously a fan of The Matrix so it surprises me that he misspells the name ‘Wachowski’ and writes ‘Wachowsi’. It could be an innocent misspell that he/she didn’t catch but it certainly grabbed my attention.

In 2002, my brother ran into a problem with the IRS and to help him out, I began to research the Tax Code. One thing led to another and suddenly I was uncovering information about our government, which was directly in conflict with the U. S. Constitution and what I have been led to believe throughout my life. In time I began to interface with people from every state in the Republic, who was doing the same thing I was doing; some for the same reason and others for different reasons. We began to trade our research and the facts I uncovered was totally in contradiction to the history of America, which had been taught to us in public school and the principals of law, I had absorbed during my service as a Judge. I began to assist people to prepare and file suits in the courts and I filed several of my own. At one point, because of the information I’m about to provide to you; I became extremely depressed. After about three months, I eventually shook it off and continued on with my research.
My hope in writing this is to help you, the reader, make sense of it all, which will require you to wash your mind clean of the brainwashing you were subjected to by our government, our government controlled public schools and church’s and re-educate yourself. When you understand the actions, the reactions will make sense, and it should anger you! Eventually, you will have a choice to make; a choice that will define: “How to survive life in, The Matrix?” In ‘The Matrix’ nothing is real however, your mind has been conditioned to believe it is real! The Matrix is far too big to defeat; no one can escape it, and we haven’t the means or intelligence to beat those in control! Through my research, I discovered that America is a society of functional illiterates! I remind you that this is not my opinion, I’m just the messenger!

I do agree that the American History we are taught in school is the Reader’s Digest version, where America always wears the white hat and any enemy is portrayed as if it were the Anti-Christ. We do this so that the citizens of this country grow up supporting this country. Why would you want to teach your citizens, “Yeah, well, America isn’t perfect and we’ve done some not-so-good things but we’re okay and since you were born here, well, that’s the reason you should support the country.” Every country on the face of the Earth teaches their people the same, that whatever country they live in is the best!

That’s why I find it laughable when I see news articles about American politicians complaining that certain middle eastern countries teach their citizens to hate America because we’re the Anti-Christ. We do the same thing, just aimed at other countries! Is it a form of brainwashing? Yes, to a certain degree, but I understand why it’s done.

The people in charge of the Matrix represent the most powerful and intelligent humans on earth. When gifted children appear in the public schools of the world, they are courted with scholarships, money and eventually memberships into secret societies! They will be introduced to very persuasive intellectuals, who will convince these young gifted people, that it is their place and duty to be a part of the elite who rule the worlds population, because the rest of the worlds population are too stupid to make decisions for themselves (their comment – not mine)! When the “New World Order” is officially and openly in control, only the extremely intelligent will be allowed to propagate. Everyone else will be sterilized or murdered through staged pandemics, used to eliminate excessive populations! Every Foreign Revolution, the World Wars, the Depression, Prohibition, Korea, Vietnam, the Middle East conflict and the Influenza Epidemic during World War I; was planned and orchestrated by these people!

This is where the author begins to sound a little, well, crazy. Powerful and intelligent don’t go hand-in-hand. He makes it sound as if there are a vast network of people who hang around schools and when they spot a student who seems exceptionally intelligent they mark that student and whisk him/her away. In order for a Secret Society to work, it has to remain secret. The only way to accomplish this is to keep it small, otherwise, you’ll get someone with a guilty conscience who will expose everything. We know about every “secret” society there is exactly for that reason.

The New World Order is a conspiracy theory that says there are people in power (who are also members of a “secret” society) who want to have a single totalitarian world-wide government. Everything they do is supposed to steer everyone else toward that direction. The problem is that you would never get all governments to submit to one world wide government. It’s a dream. A fiction that will never come to pass.

TO  BE  CONTINUED...