I was on the Kevin and Bean show! Update: It looks like "the establishment" is supressing the audio from my ten minute interview on KROQ on the "Kevin and Bean" show, but don't lose hope y'all, I secretly recorded the show! Hear secret recording of censored show
07/25/07 Update: More notes on the Kevin and Bean show: Ted Huntington on the KROQ "Kevin and Bean" show
and actual evidence that seeing, hearing and sending thought has been figured out
07/25/07 Update: I was on the Kevin and Bean show
! and I got a lot of good info out to the public. That is probably the largest public audience I have ever talked to. I wish I was a little faster thinking, it went so fast I didn't get to talk about my controversial views about science such as how I reject the Big Bang expanding universe theory. My thanks to Bean, Lisa, Ralph, Jay and all the crew there at KROQ.
07/24/07 News flash: Three of my youtube Presidential Candidate debate questions
were played on the KROQ Kevin and Bean show in Los Angeles, and they are going to talk to me in a phone interview tomorrow morning 07/25/07.
I went to Santa Cruz, and the University of California in Santa Cruz is very large and beautiful, full of very tall redwood trees. It reminds me of the scene in Return of the Jedi where they race through the tall trees. The beach has an amusement park that is interesting for people watching and creative foods (people sell fried twinkies, and little ice cream balls, for example) and rides. I have never enjoyed rides (too scary, and don't feel good or fun), circuses, county faires (although there are interesting exhibits there), I'm more of a gentle, museum, nature, pleasure, technology and science person. One thing that was hard not to notice was some amount of racism in the form of white superiority, and I wasn't sure how much of a problem it is, because people are beamed on and northern california tends to be more liberal than southern cal. For example, I know there are some white-power/Nazi people in San Diego which is frightening, but it's hard to believe Santa Cruz would have that kind of thing. One person said "white (right) now" as an example. But apparently, this suspicion was confirmed when I saw a brochure for Santa Cruz that has a interracial (african american and caucasian american) couple with a kid, and so the racism must be a significant problem for them and must be hampering tourism. In comparison, it was weird but Irvine actually probably has less racism. Still, 3 days in Santa Cruz is not enough, and there are plenty of uneducated rednecks in Irvine too. I was really surprised by that, maybe it's just a fad, traditionally the so-called hippies have always been intellectuals, pro-democracy, anti-racism, colorful and colorblind, for equal rights for women, the other species, etc. Racism is a phenomenon of the other side, the ultra-conservative, uneducated, spartan, religious. Probably the phenomenon is similar all over the earth, in the universities, there are enlightened people, but in the adjoining towns, people may be less enlightened. Many of the people I encountered in Santa Cruz were friendly, and I might say on average friendlier than people in Irvine, perhaps because the sourpuss murderous conservative view currently en vogue right now has really made nasty many of the people in red states and counties (and of course even those in blue counties too to some extent).
I think a slogan for the Democrats should be "the Republicans aren't the cubscouts, they are a dangerous, reckless, war-loving group with a history of violence and only a casual vision for new States on the Moon and Mars."
People often "heil" me, with a bent or straight right or left arm, and my latest response to this is, right and left doesn't even matter anymore, we know what is good and bad. As people, it's not difficult to understand what is fair, what is evil, that murder is wrong, that theft is wrong, that dishonesty is wrong. It doesn't matter right or left, blue or red, and when people adhere to abstract concepts like "right and left" or "blue and red", it opens the door to many people doing things they don't agree with inside, but do for the sake of the "team". Now we should be moving to a planet and society where people do what they themselves believe in, not necessarily what their party believes in. Stay true to your own beliefs, and we will have a good society.
The interview on KROQ with Bean and the crew really has caused a change inside me. I'm trying to lose weight now, and it feels different. I'm trying the method, or only eating when hungry, and only just enough food to stop the feeling of hunger. I have a thousand comments on this, about how people visualize a large meal, when in reality, a very small meal is all they need to temporarily stop feelings of hunger, how people have set traditions of "breakfast, lunch, dinner" and how that causes eating when not hungry, how eating less actually creates more free time for other projects, and saves money. I could go on for a while, I hope it works. I've gone down from 300 to 285 in two weeks. I'm thinking that hopefully I can quantify some kind of regular weight loss down to some ideal weight. The key is not to make myself suffer, by eating a little something whenever I feel hungry, but stopping quickly once the hunger feeling is gone, eating slowly and really trying to taste the food. This way I can focus more on eating some expensive really fancy food, but only a small amount of it, and enjoying the taste instead of just woofing it down. I'm thinking I would at least like to lose a pound a week. I'm not sure how many pounds I actually need to lose, but obviously we know when we look in the mirror and our body doesn't look fat, and on the other hand doesn't look too thin, scrawny or fragile. At a pound a week, in one month that is only 4 pounds. 3 pounds a week is 12 pounds a month, at that rate I would lose 30 pounds in 3 months. 5 pounds a week is 20 pounds a month, I would be looking in good shape in only 2 months. I'm interested to see how it turns out. Being vegetarian helps, because there are so little mainstream food choices that don't have meat, and I think many vegetarians are more into taste than meat eaters. I'm hopeful, I'm a bad muthafucka, and I have a lot of excitement, energy (or perhaps photon) and focus. I'm a person that runs my life based on my philosophy and my mind, and that controls what I do, and I am powerless to do anything else and wouldn't want to. I have a well-pruned set of many values, and I rarely depart from those values. People are like saying "eat! eat! eat!" and it's a little ridiculous, I feel fine, I'm not hungry, I'm not suffering in any way. It's either people who are into inaccurate pscyhology theories, and/or people who don't want me to gain the popularity that comes with being in good physical shape. I think this new feeling is evidence, that a little love, a little friendship, can work wonders in a person's life.
The key to this diet I think is focusing and paying close attention to what you are putting into your body. When we are putting something into our body, we should be careful about what that is. Food tastes better when a person is hungry. I think another key is stopping and taking the rest as leftovers to store in the refridgerator and hold on to eat when hungry again. People, I think, tend to think they should finish the serving. Then I am also doing a light exercize 3 days/week.
I can see the trailers for the movie "Science" in my mind, and they are cool. Beethoven's 9th Symphony plays, Aristarchus with a drawing of the sun, Archimedes runs naked, Hypatia rides in her chariot, Galileo shows the moon of Jupiter, Bruno or Servetus yell burning on a stake, Newton looks through the prism, Pupin sees eyes, a rocket lifts off for the Moon, Pioneer and voyeger travel past Jupiter...and then simply the word "Science", and "coming soon to a theatre near you". Maybe there could be narration (over Beethoven's 9th in full choir) like "The greatest story ever told....of people who died for their beliefs ... to make the world a better place....to understand the universe around them....with surprising genius....a struggle for truth....at great cost....to fulfill our destiny ....and the dream of the future........Science"
I think I'm going to redo my DOE trailer to include different angles, so you can see the Blue earth ships better, and there are changing angles to give a faster more exciting 2 second clip edit.
Some people think thought has replaced voice, and our voice muscles. But I view the voice as a separate device, still useful, although many functions are duplicated in our thought. I like to hear my voice, and there are still many uses for voice that cannot be duplicated by thought.
When a person thinks about sexual jealousy for awhile, I think they would realize how stupid it is, as I have, because, first, violence is a big deal, consensual sex and pleasure is not a big deal, but perhaps more importantly, I think people need to let other people do what they want to do...they should not try to restrict people from doing what they want...and then to try to stop somebody from having sex with somebody else besides you, or to be angry because they did, in my opinion only makes them not like you more...it increases your chances of not getting sex with them even more. Some people might argue that people are turned on by a jealous person, and maybe some are, but to me, it seems stupid, in particular because people should freely enjoy pleasure, responsibly, planning and/or removing the possibility of pregnancy, and disease. Sting said it well with his song, "If you love somebody, set them free", which is a smart message. I think people may find that with that freedom that they actually prefer monogomy, because there is no pressure, possession, or jealously with that particular person.
I feel like when people are young they are weighted down with all these traditional mistakes and problems. I see like a drawing where a poor kid is weighted down by massive words like 'religion', 'antisexuality', 'psychology', 'drug war', 'Pupin secret', 'tobacco', 'alcohol', 'no science or logic', etc...then as a child ages, they slowly start to throw off these bad traditions placed on them by a vicious and idiotic history. I feel like I threw off religion, antisexuality, the drug war, smoking, recreational drugs, alcohol, antiscience, psychology, the Pupin secret, and now finally poor eating habits and traditions. This is amazing, I feel good, I weighed myself and am at 282 pounds and heading into the 270s, so clearly losing 20 pounds was an underestimate because I still look fat, I am thinking it is going to be more like 40 pounds, but I like this new way of eating, and it will be interesting to see where the equilibrium weight finally stablizes. Plus it is interesting to see the rate of weight loss, because then I can tell other people what to expect from a similar method. This experience has been very unusual for me, and it shows me, I think that, sometimes no amount of talk (although talk can certainly help, it gives the basic raw data people need to make decisions), no amount of tricks are going to work sometimes to get a horse to drink for example, to quit tobacco, or to lose weight, it seems like an internal decision in a person's brain, as if they have suddenly figured something out, and then everything changes...I don't think people can be coaxed, it's something they need to figure out themselves. This is just my own feeling, other people may have different biologies.
An interesting aspect of the antidemocracy movement that is not often mentioned, is the way they generally despise the popular. For example, the way they hated John Lennon, Marilyn Monroe, JFK, MLK, etc. Popular leaders are viewed as dangerous to the anti-democracy movement; those people that don't want the public to have any say over decisions made by those in a representative, monarchical, oligarchical, corporate, or communist government. And so they work against the popular heros and favorites of society, in particular when those popular people don't echo the party line.
I think another key to the weight loss is keeping a close monitoring of your weight on a scale, recording your weight, two or three times a day in a log, and trying to project estimates into the future given your weight loss or gain trend.
perspectives on KROK interview:
-possibly the largest audience? I have ever spoken to. Maybe for outsider audience. Clearly, people are moving forward with some kind of plan. No doubt there will be some kind of testing to see the results of those people who hear what I say. So far, the interview order goes:
Infidel Guy 2003
if infidelguy interview is any example, probably nothing will come of this.
Clearly Kevin and Bean have to be out there, in a way that is ... the most out there in the front...probably liberal yes progressive to some extent. perhaps to a large extent, but clearly there are going to be two money pools, both with their beliefs working either for or against whatever I say. Some of my views are actually bipartisan and hopefully, people will, like me, not take political sides, but will instead take sides based only on the particular issue.
There is the possibility of being a political correspondant. Clearly that kind of job would not be enough to survive on, but could open other doors.
Something cool is definitely going on, and it's exciting.
I don't think anything is going to come of this instantly but maybe in a few months, a few years, after the next election...
This appears to be driven by my youtube videos which apparently may have 1) gotten much more attention than other vids or 2) simply were used as an opportunity to interview me and for me to get some issues out.
One thing that is key is to watch the ratings on the show. Maybe they will be nothing, but I have a feeling that they are going to be kind of wild. It's like making history. When I get a message to the public, in this kind of scale, it is going to be remembered as a historical stepping stone, a change in public opinion perhaps. Maybe it's arrogant to say, but I think the show is going to be of historical importance, and so Kevin and Bean will be included in that historical note. It's somewhere in the story of how seeing, hearing and sending thought went public, very early in the story.
this could lead to my own radio show, but that is kind of volitile, or more interestingly a tour with a band, which would be fun and we could take the mammerjammer message to the people.
I think without doubt this is clearly the biggest audience I may have ever had.
Well it's a few days after my appearance on "Kevin and Bean" on KROQ 106.7 and I am starting to calm down. I hope I didn't offend too many people, you have to remember, believe what you want to believe, it's only just talk. You make up your own mind about what you believe in. Whenever I say decriminalize drugs, I think I need to say also that, you know my advice is to stay in good shape, don't get overweight, exercise regularly, and be good to your body, you know be aware that using illegal drugs, alcohol and tobacco can cause lots of problems in your life, and there is a lot to be said for sober science and pleasure both physical and intellectual, the key is just that let's not jail those people who are overweight, who don't exercise regularly, who smoke, drink alcohol, and use drugs, eso long as they are not violent, not driving irratically, stealing, or breaking other laws, etc.
This experience has shown me, that maybe there is more going on in talk radio than meets the eye. Some people might think that since there's no video that it must be more conservative than the more progressive video, after all it's only audio, but for whatever reason, the audio-only people seem to be more progressive than tv (aside from cable access). I don't have time to listen to radio or television, but if I was looking for the newest in new, most progressive, I probably would tune in to Kevin and Bean, because obviously they shattered a major barrier forward by having me on. For example, this is the major first radio or tv station to have me on, without trying to be nasty, George Noory who covers a lot of this controversial material and who Ted Charach loves to listen to wouldn't even return my email, neither will Bean but then they already had me on so what you need foo? And so Howard Stern, Mark and Brian, Leykis, all of whom seem like cool dudes, aren't brave enough to take me on. So anyway, ... that seems like the way things are...when the establishment wants to talk to you they will call you, don't bother calling them...I mean...constantly pestering them has only gotten me in trouble and never any opportunities. Most of the material comes from the top down, not the other way around, but you have to remember I'm an outsider, so make up your own mind.
I would rate my performance as a B minus or C plux. Because I missed the opportunity to say that I think the photon is matter, and the basis of all matter, that the big bang theory is probably false, and I didn't go after psychiatric hospitals, didn't get on my issue of letting people in the military quit (I think the arrest of Korey Rowe might have had to do with people thinking that my statement would definitely get on the air, and then it dikn't). I did get some funny statements in. I did get some good info out. I wish I had defended the idea of seeing, hearing and sending thought more, by saying...'is it so hard to believe that people can see eyes?', and 'in any event it's a valid line of scientific research'. So, I could have done much better, but in a positive light, it leaves a teaser, a reason to go back. It's kind of wild how people behind the scenes arrange this stuff, and I know nothing about it. But that is kind of the interesting thing about morning talk radio: it's kind of a training ground for interesting smart people. Kevin and Bean probably have hundreds of goto people who like me have a message and want to turn on and enlighten the public with it, you know, smart people, with interesting views.
I feel kind of unsure about using the Zepellin 'ramble on' bit, but I basically have to go with the stuff that is on my mind, and much of that comes from people with far more wealth and power than I have, so many times, I simply accept their advice and presume that it is meaningful or useful. Many times, I reject the crap that is beamed into my head, because it is designed to make me look bad, or it's something I don't agree with, etc. although I can't possibly stop all of it, in which case like everybody else I end up backpeddling to explain my actual opinions. There is no deeper meaning or anything, I think I simply enjoy that song, I liked listening to that album when I was young, it's a free speech message, I only found out later the relevent line "mine's a tale that can't be told, my freedom I hold dear", which is relevent to so many of us, and the current events on earth. The 5 seconds of ramblin on, could have been "why can't people quit the military, they can quit Walmart without being jailed", but I had to balance comedy with issue, and it's important to have comedy. Here we have to take these massively terrible issues, and somehow make it funny? How can it be done? Many times, it simply can't be. But in some way, smart people can find the comedy in terrible events.
There is a lot of pressure on me because I want to keep my job, but I don't want to be dull either. So you know, people at the University are listening and have their set of values, people in the audience have a wide variety of values and includes all professions government and civilian, the owners of the radio station have their values, and so it's a tough balancing act for me, and in that case I tend to go conservatively, not reaching or improvising. So that was conservative for me. I think the only improvised line was "I think I'm going above and beyond the call of dookie here", which, like most improve might be beamed there since it's not in my notes. For this talk radio stuff, and probably for all high-pressure big audience interactions, my feeling is to make a number of one-liners that are funny and make the intellectual statement clearly and then go over those statements, and keep them available on paper or on screen if possible (I just realized that many people insiders, must go with the infinitely more convenient teleprompter in front of the eyes, then you can look into the camera and talk like you are not reading, and I am for not deceiving people, I read much of what I said...the time is far to important to be wasted with minor issues). Because you have about 3 seconds to say something when it's your turn, and it's best to make it count, you don't want to be reaching or stumbling for something to say. Each talk of 2 or 3 sentences, should end on a joke-line, with some funny statement. One of mine that didn't get played was an oldy, but still funny, "maybe the reason we don't have a registry of violence offenders is because the Republican ranks would be decimated." which is kind of funny and true, but probably only funny if you are a democrat or liberal.
To me, the question of is there a god, or are there gods, is like asking "is there a blah?", maybe there is or maybe there isn't, but it's a useless question. We should strive to live a good life whether there is a "blah" or not. But beyond that, you've got to look at history chejos. Before Jesus there were all the Roman Gods, the Goddess Venus for the Romans, goes back to the Goddess Aphrodite of the Greeks, and all the way back to the Goddess Inanna of the Sumerians, and the Sumerians are the people that invented writing, and the earliest literature already talks about the Goddess Inanna...and the 200 other Sumerian Gods that controlled various parts of the universe.
This is kind of a cool Simpson's intro:
Simpson's universe theory
and the evolution one:
With the universe one, I don't know that galaxies could be atoms. I think we would need to find similarities. One similarity I can think of is that, perhaps globular galaxies...what appears to be the ultimate evolution of intelligent life could be neutral particles, while spiral galaxies...what appear to be the middle of the galactic cycle (starting with nebula to spiral and ending as globular), spiral galaxies like our own might be charged particles. Other than that, I don't know. But the one question that remains in my mind, is what is the nature of the farthest future of the universe? What is the balance between newly formed gas clouds from stray photons, and the needs of the advanced globular clusters who need a constant supply of matter to replace lost photons?
Here are my web statistics:
|Daily Statistics for July 2007|
I get about 1000 to 2000 people a day that look at my site. But then payow, look at the 25th. 13,000 people. wow! Then on the 26th, it went down to 9,000, still a lot of people, especially, since, I wasn't on the show the 26th...it's clearly people who were stimulated on the 25th, checked more into it on the 26th. The 27th is only half done so I'm not sure how it will go.
I was thinking that I kind of think Brittney Spears has a good attitude about sex, which might be something like, screw, you have a kid, throw 'em in the back of the car, and keep screwing. Having a kid shouldn't mean the end of sex and regular life for a woman. I'm sure there is more to it. In addition, there should be a special bond between two males who had sex with the same female (or two females for the same male), and not stupid jealously and person possession. Each person will do what they want to do anyway, jealousy and possession is only annoying and doesn't help a person's chances, at least from my perspective, but I am a total amateur when it comes to sex. People should definitely plan pregnancy, and should definitely be responsible for at least half of the child care as one of the parents, unless their parents or grandparents are willing to, and then if not that, society should step in, not only with at least the minimum of child care, but also free morning-after pills and other birth control help to stop unplanned pregnancy without stopping the joy of sex.
Two good tickets might be: Kucinich and Paul, and Clinton and Obama (for the elderly).
Maybe I have a wild imagination, but wouldn't it be scary if somehow the US military lasered down those two media new copters? No, that's a little too bizarre to believe, (although let's hope the helicopter or eye-images will show if there was a collision). Helicopters need to be made much safer, with airbags, parachutes, smart computer software to absolutely stop collisions, etc, it's worth the small investment for added safety features. Would those have been there, with cameras, etc, there wouldn't be any doubts. But I wonder if there isn't friction ever between the US miltary murderers of 9/11 and the major media companies. Clearly the major media companies don't have any army and are basically like all of us as unarmed civilians. There has to be a lot of good decent people in the US military too, I think it's out of the question to think otherwise. The article had that it looked like 9/11 and that "the man could be held responsible" for the 4 dead.
What I was thinking a couple of days after this interview is that just like throughout history, there are those for democracy and those against. I think the big two sided division now is even more basic, forget philosophy or policy or any finer points, what is happening now is basically a division between those who murder and those who want to stop them. It has nothing to do with republican or democrat, it's much of a more primal, basic, simple phenomenon. You either are ok with murder of nonviolent people, or you are against it, and that is the major division that is happening in these years. But getting back to democracy, I think it's a decent person that yields to the majority opinion for government policy (for your own policy, of course do your own thing), and a greedy selfish person who seeks to force their unpopular view onto the majority. The battle is really, I think, the individual people of the planet, versus, those who would rather have their minority view imposed on the public majority for financial gain. And this difference exists today, because the public is seldom allowed to have their vote recorded and counted.
It's interesting that, really, the radio people should stream video too. It's basically television once it's on the web.
One idea is voting to jail people who purposely cause damage (such as an insect bite, insects have brains too, and surprisingly to many, can be made to bite, not that that happened to me, but it certainly and easily is possible given the neuron activation technology)...that people who purposely cause damage, like a bruise, broken bone, should be jailed at least until the damage is completely healed for damages that do completely heal. Also, number of prior assaults I think needs to be factored into a person's voting system.
I've said it before, but it seems so interesting to me that, without a doubt, the group that views both genders as equal under the law, and is for racial diversity and harmony should be without question the largest group, because any other group that excluded or views a gender, or race of people as less than equal can't possibly hold larger numbers because of those very exclusionary policies. I suppose one factor is the amount of money a group may have, in which case, the number of people that compose the group would make less or no difference.
I define 'scientist' as a lover of science. Perhaps 'science-lover' or 'sciencer'. I don't see anything wrong with using 'scientist' for anybody that likes science, but I will think about it more. In fact I might say that my religion is the scientific method. So instead of "christian" or "judeist" I would "sciencian" or "sciencist", as a believer in the scientific method as the most accurate method of interpreting the universe.
07/24/07 News flash: Three of my youtube Presidential Candidate debate questions
were played on the KROQ Kevin and Bean show in Los Angeles, and they are going to talk to me in a phone interview tomorrow morning 07/25/07.
I did look at the debates and have many comments. For one thing it worries me that Dennis Kucinich kept repeating that text peace message, peace is a wonderful message, but does he honestly think a barbaroid like Bush is going to care, he probably will chew up those text peace messages and spit it out in scraps. I kept thinking its like that song 8674309, constantly with that "text peace" message. Those politicians already know it all, they see thoughts, they could care less about a letter or text message, and it's worrisome that Kucinich does publicly reaclize that. That was a precious few minutes of national television with a large audience, he could have said more important things. Hillary had pink on, maybe as support for my mom "hot pink" was my Mom's favorite color, I know it sounds like...what the...but yet...and I just made a "Mom Memory Mug" with photos from her life so I can remember her. There is a lot to say about the debates. I might comment more later. One thing about Hillary was that she said "I'm agnostic" and one other thing I can't remember that hinted at being nonreligious, isn't she worried about scraing away those precious evangelicals? Biden had a nice moment when he mentioned that the public might want to remember Senator Wellstone, who it seems, according to a book by James Fetzer was probably yet another victim of these murderous people in power...a reminder to us all. Along those lines, I know that if Democrats get into power in 2009, people will constantly talk about fluff and powder puff issues, not remembering that there are about a few hundred thousand 9/11 JFK, RFK, MLK and John Lennon murdering cave people on the loose. I'm still voting for Kucinich in the primary as things stand. I have to wonder about his phrase "yeah I'm for closing the breach", which to me means closing the security breach of Huntington telling about pupin and seeing, hearing and sending thoughts. And the way to close that so-called breach...the breach was when they kept it a secret from the public...they should be allegiant to truth, justice and honesty first before other things....but the way to close that so-called breach is going to be by including me, at which point I will work together with the insiders. But I have said a number of times that I am not retracting any thing I have learned so far about the brain imaging, but I do promise not to reveal any further info if included. The democrats like me excluded because I am reaching the poor outsiders with the truth about these secrets, and the republicans like me excluded because I am isolated, can't find chicks, and can't interact with powerful insiders. So it's a mutual feeling probably. On the topic of info, Hillary showed how she is going to be secretive as all hell. Hillary looks like the main favorite going into 2009...that's another thing...we are almost 2 years away from the election...I mean this is an early start of campaigning. So I am interesting in what life would be like under Clinton because it may be 4 or more years of her views dominating the scene. So she showed their love of secrecy by saying...she doesn't want her talking with presidents and monarchs of other nations to be used as propaganda, well it's all free info...that is kind of a secretive and elitist view. A better view is talk to all major people and let my message be heard, and work to make the public know the truth, in particular if my words are presented in an inaccurate or misleading way. Then in terms of science, Hillary showed her non-rigorous science education by being quesy and unsure about nuclear power. Probably it is because a majority of people are unclear about nuclear power, but there is a basic fact that those insiders all know but they wont reveal to the public and that is that all matter is probably made of particles of light, and you know, there is an infinite amount of matter and particles of light in the universe. We are never going to run out. And so extracting photons from atoms, not necessarily by Uranium fission, but as I suggest may already be done, by separating any and all waste materials in an "ultimate incinerator", for lack of a better term. Solar and wind power...wind power...forget it I seriously doubt the return is going to be worth the space used, and solar is similar, but with solar, maybe there will be advances in technology...I'm pro environment, and for growing trees on the moon and mars, clean air and water, those are important to me, but solar is experimental and doesnt seem to be entirely practical for the space used yet, in particular as space is becoming more and more of a valuable commodity as the human population continues to double every 40 years. So payyow I have many opinions.
pre-Kevin and Bean news:
words that fall out of our mouths too fast to be conscious, plus many are beamed on by high school dropouts or those with fluff science college degrees
So with this in mind, I am retracting my opinion that possibly the two Clintons support the murder of my Mom, in fact possibly Bill Clinton was even saying (with "ought to Bee")...'look at these republican monsters who beamed onto Ted's Mom', but without seeing and hearing their thoughts, as an outsider, I can't be sure. One opposite phrase for those out there is "ought not, to be". As a reminder violence is always wrong and a chaotic answer, we need to prosecute and jail murders, but I understand how maybe in the camera-thought-neuron net fast push-button murder is the law of the jungle. People beam on our heads all the time, many of them high school drop outs or people with fluff-science college degrees. And so people can hardly, I know from experience, control every word or phrase that comes out of our mouths. It happens too quickly during talking...beamers put a bad word choice, and we simply take their suggestion. Although I want to say that my other criticisms of the Clintons I still stand behind, that they are not exposing 9/11, the drug war, the copyright, etc.
measuring mass of particles
I thought more about the idea of measuring the mass of particles against the gravity of earth, and there are some simple observations I think most people can understand:
1) Given an initial force, the velocity on an object physically pushed will relate to its mass. So if a particle can be physically pushed with a constant force, the distance, and velocity it moves against the earth's gravity relates to its mass. But only because the force initially applied to it while it is at rest is constant. I'm not sure that it is possible to actually physically push a particle with a constant force in this way. Maybe with molecular machines. But this isn't as interesting to me anymore since I realized that determining mass against earth's gravity is not possible if the mass has a constant velocity.
2) In theory, the slowing down of photons can be measured, and the speed of light is probably not constant as was previously thought. And also, yes, an object starting with a constant velcity moves at a slower velocity in the up direction on earth as it does when moving sideways relative to the ground. One thing people need to realize is that Galileo claimed that acceleration for falling objects on earth is independent of the mass of the object, that is all objects no matter how massive fall at the same acceleration. And this is true, that the mass of the object is not important, but Newton's law F=Gm1m2/d^2 shows us that in terms of velocity (force), mass of two objects is important. And so what we see is that, yes, mass does affect velocity and acceleration, but because the mass of the earth is so large compared to any object we can drop, only the mass of the earth is important: the mass of a ball is not enough to significantly move the earth to the ball in a measurable amount. And so it is with particles. They are far too light compared to the earth. And so all that matters on earth, for pieces of matter is their velocity and the acceleration that the earth pulls on them with. So this is a lot of introduction to point 2, but we are getting there. So if we throw a ball up with a velocity of 10m/s, and the same ball is then thrown sideways at 10m/s, the ball thrown up, with the acceleration of gravity pulling against it will lose velocity, where the sideways thrown ball will not lose velocity. This shows that for a photon, proton, neutron, etc, starting with some known velocity, we could in theory measure a delay, but the importan point is that this delay has nothing to do with the mass of the particle since the mass and therefore gravity of earth is so much larger than the mass and gravity of the particle. But we would definitely measure a delay in the up direction as opposed to sideways for even photons. And this would not provide us with the mass of a photon, but would prove that photons are also effected by the force of gravity and therefore have to be matter. And when I think about it, are people honestly claiming that there is something in the universe that is not matter?! (aside from empty space that is). That, to me, seems unintuitive and unlikely. It's a simple equation, and when I show this simple equation (Galileo's) for a photon, we see how fast photons move and how weak the earth's gravity is for the experimental results we need. So here is the simple equation of the amount of time a photon is delayed by the earth's gravity (for example when we simply turn on a flashlight in the up direction as opposed to the sideways direciton relative to the ground):
This is to measure the time a photon moves over 1km of space in the up and sideway direction relative to the earth. (Using 3e8 as the theoretical initial speed of a photon)
up against earth's gravity:
s=1/2at^2 + vt
1000=-5t^2 + 3e8t
5t^2 - 3e8t + 1000=0
(we need to use the quadratic formula to find the positive root: (-b +- (b^2-4ac)^.5)/2a)
(3e8 - (9e16-20000)^.5)/10
So you can see, the difference is so tiny it can't possibly be measured on earth. So what can be changed to make this measurement of a delay in light? As an aside, the Pound-Rebka experiment, shows that this change in speed might possibly be measured by the resulting change in wavelength of a beam of photons. Mysteriously the claim is that this experiment confirms relativity, where I think it clearly confirms Newton gravity and the photon as a piece of matter, therefore rejecting the claim of relativity (at least in its modern form) that a photon is massless. So anyway, the only way that this number is going to be seriously measurable is if the acceleration from some gravitational object is very very high...its the 9e16-20000 part. Even at a gravitational acceleration of 2 billion (2e9)
m/s^2 the photon is barely slowed at all over 1 km:
1e9t^2 - 3e8t + 1000=0
(3e8 - (9e16-4e12)^.5)/2e9
Another approach is to measure the time a photon takes to travel a very large distance under a constant gravitational accleration directly against it. (I can't imagine how this could be done since there is no way I know of to apply a constant gravitational force on a photon as it travels over a large distance). But in theory if we could, we might apply our own earth gravity acceleration 10m/s^2 over a distance of 1e9 m (1 billion meters, 1 million km):
5t^2 - 3e8t + 1e9=0
(3e8 - (9e16-2e10)^.5)/10
as opposed to 3.333333333333... seconds without the acceleration
This might actually be measurable, because it is 3333333518ns versus 3333333333ns, a measurement (185ns) we can probably make with modern electronics. But again, this experiment seems unlikely. Clearly going for a large distance is going to be the key to measuring a delay in the speed of light. I guess in theory, a star provides a constant gravitational acceleration, which dissipates as a photon moves away from it. In the same way, a photon would increase speed going towards a star. It's a more complex equation because the acceleration of a star decreases by the square as a photon moves away from it. But just using an average acceleration due to the gravity of a star's mass (as above) we can see that over large distances, gravity will pull or push photons just slightly...the reason why photons seem to be so unmoved, slowed or speeded up, is there very high velocity. Then the final analysis of this line of thinking for me is, how do photons attain this high velocity if the massive gravity of stars and galaxies can only slightly delay them over massive distances? The only explanation I have come up with so far is that photons collide with each other, and the short distance between them causes a large acceleration, and always the same acceleration and resulting velocity. And so what distance would photons have to be to have a force that results in a velocity of 3e8 m/s? There are 3 models that I thought about (but there must be others too, clearly only 1 is the correct one though):
a) with gravitational constant=1, mass of photon=1 gram (can you imagine a photon being 1 kg in mass, obviously no it must be much smaller, but perhaps we should provide a new gravitational constant based on a mass of a photon being 1)
Newton's equation is very simple:
d=57.7umeter (we know this can't be correct, because light can have a wavelength of 57um and smaller)
b) With gravitational constant=6.67428e-11 m3kg-1s-2, and photon mass=1 kg
d=2.223e-19 m (a very small distance, even in picometers it is 2e-6 picometers, well beyond any size we can measure or see as far as I know...and that is for a photon with the mass of a gram)
c) Now the most realistic scenario: gc=6.67428e-11, photon mass=9e-31kg (the estimated mass of an electron)
d=2e-49m (a ridiculously small distance, we can say for the sake of argument 2e-50meter)
2e-50meters is very small, it is 2e-41 nanometers, it is well beyond the tiniest wavelength of light ever measured. It would seem more likely to me that this distance between photons that results in a velocity of 3e8m/s would be larger, but who knows. The main thing that makes this so small is the belief that the mass is 9e-31kg.
Some people might ask 'if a photon is accelerated by another photon, why does it not have an observable change in velocity as it continues to accelerate?', and I think the answer to this might be that the acceleration lasts only for a very small amount of time. The accleration felt by a particle is:
A=Gm2/d^2 (in other words, you don't use the mass of the particle itself in calculating the acceleration it feels because of a second particle...only the mass of the second particle matters on the first particle)
and so, as the photon moves away from a photon it collided with (or orbited, such as those in a mirror), as the distance increases, the acceleration quickly decreases to 0 m/s^2, but that huge velocity remains. It's the same exact principle of using the gravity of Jupiter to accelerate shpis such as Pioneer and Voyager. All the velocity is gained, and all the acceleration happens very near Jupiter, after the initial few minutes near Jupiter, there is no more acceleration only a larger velocity. And so we can imagine photons in the same way.
3) Still there exists the possibility of measuring the mass of particles by measuring their velocities with similar massed other particles. We could in theory, measure two particles in low gravity, starting with some known velocity, and measure how they effect each other. Just simply speaking, if particle 1 is 2x the mass of particle 2, particle 2 will move around twice the speed particle 1 will, and will cover approximately twice the distance in some given time. but those are precise and tiny measurements, even that cannot be easy to do. But at least we would remove the mystery about charge being independent of mass. I think most people believe that charge is independent of mass, that a proton is really 10000 times more massive than an electron, and that their electric charge is identical at + or - 1. But the possibility of the electron and proton masses being a different ratio or even the same mass exist if charge varies with mass. I honestly believe that charge is independent of mass and the proton is probably 10000 times more massive than an electron, and that has some interesting conclusions too...for example, what is it about electric charge, that makes it so that mass doesn't matter? But I think I would feel better by using a matter-only measurement of particles with no influence by electric charge.
One thing that is interesting about relativity and the more recent standard model is that people have trouble imagining that a particle could actually "feel" all the other particles around it, that is, would feel their gravitational effect. Einstein's relativity answers this problem well by saying that particles follow a geometry, while the standard model suggests that particles bounce off each other, and that is the only way they actually "feel" each other (only when they collide). I am summarizing these ideas, and maybe I am wrong, but I think it is an interesting point. I don't think the space-time idea can be saved because time is probably the same in all spaces. Or possibly it can, if we simply view 4 dimensions x,y,z,t, and t is the same for all x,y,z at any given t. Trying to save some aspect of relativity is not as interesting to me as pursuing the more simple Newton model more. Because it hasn't been fully explained and explored. And here we see that probably the speed of photons is not constant, and since that is a fundamental claim of relativity, clearly the accuracy of relativity would then be in doubt. Beyond that, as I said before, there are major problems with relativity, in that the universe is probably all the light-like model, since all matter is probably made of photons. And beyond even that, is the problem that time-and-space-dilation was borrowed from aether theory and is completely inaccurate.
So just to conclude all of this, I feel happy that, 1) in theory at least, we could measure a delay in the speed of light, but 2) kind of disappointed that it looks like there is no way to measure any delay of light here on earth. Because of: 1) the gravity of earth is far too small to slow photons enough to measure. Sorry to the many hobbiest experimenters out there who wanted to be the first to publicly show that the speed of light is not constant, but if you are measuring the speed of light using electronics, I am sure you learned a great deal anyway in the process. There is the idea of using mirrors, but any delay would be compensated for on the return and therefore cancelled out. It seems clear that Pound-Rebka have already proved that the velocity of light is affected by the gravity of earth in measuring a tiny change in wavelength. I'm not sure how picky the gamma wavelength absorption of the material they used is, but it apparently is picky enough to reject the changed wavelength due to the slowing or accelerating of photons because of earth's gravity. So we are left with the Pound-Rebka experiment, and no other experiment I know of that will give us a clear measurement showing that photons are delayed by gravity, that the speed of light is not constant. But I feel good that at least I see that the theoretical delay can be easily calculated. Is this delay the cause of the redshifted light from distant galaxies? I don't know, it seems possible that for photons that reach us, most of the stars are behind or on the side of them, and that might spread them out...any delay of a single photon would spread out the light more since the photon in front of it would not be as delayed. I think that is a possibility, but I think more likely that any light we see from distant galaxies has been bent around other matter, and when it bends it is stretched out (for the same reason that photons are delayed when leaving a star because of the star's gravity) because of the gravity of galaxies and other stars. And so it is this stretched-out-by-gravity light we see, and the more distant, the more gravitationally stretched, although there are exceptions. Some galaxies might be just behind another galaxy, and their light might appear even more stretched than others, but yet, that would not mean that they were extremely far away. I've already talked about this issue in earlier notes, Halton Arp has documented some galaxies that have the same apparent size but different red shift. Size of galaxy should be the true indicator of distance in my opinion, more than red shift, although red-shift can be a guide in my novice view, and correct me if I'm wrong. I think at least one of the Arp galaxies is somewhat clear evidence that red shift is due to gravitational bending of light. Because it has the same size as it's neighboring galaxy but a different red shift. The explanation I think is correct for these two galaxies is that the more red-shifted galaxy is probably actually behind the less red-shifted galaxy, but that it's light has curved around the galaxy in front of it (relative to our perspective around this star) so that we can see it. So this concludes this line of thought.
I realized a new ice cream topping which is delicious to share with you, carrot cake batter, and then too, banana bread batter, both delicious on ice cream or by themselves. Beyond that, zuccini bread batter.
I saw Peter Dale Scott's talk in Vancouver, and it was after a young guy talking about borders, globalization, the "amero"...and I thought...don't tell me Scott is going to start talking about "globalists" etc...that was kind of funny. The Illuminati, globalist talk is kind of like UFO material, but clearly secret societies, in particular the Pupin society of seeing, hearing and sending thought is a reality. It's bizarre, in my novice outsider view, the way so many people (Alex Jones, who otherwise has some very smart commentary on 9/11 being an inside job and the drug war, is perhaps the most visible of these people) view "globalists" as the big enemy, when to me it's the "murderists". It's an appeal to nationalism and isolationism probably. I see full democracy happening in all the nations, basically even now the governments as representative democracies are almost identical. But changing people's opinions is easier said. Maybe they can convince me, or the other way around in any case positively. When all nations are full democracy, there is no real difference between one side of the border or the other, and so it is a defacto planetary democracy. Besides we are talking about Moon and Mars cities soon, and I think we need to take a look at the larger main picture.
I recorded an idea for a new song "Draco's Laws", and while I was singing, the fascists that control the secret neuron activation technology used it to make my vocal muscles sing "chewing on some gun" instead of "chewing on some gum". And this is typical of the violent criminal nature of those nazi punks and thugs that control the neuron activation technology. They are violent criminals, who not only advocate violence against lawful citizens, but also participate in violence against lawful citizens, as 9/11, JFK, and RFK are only the most obvious example of. This neuron activation technology was invented what appears to be even before the atom bomb was invented long long ago. Take a listen to this audio: DracosLaws.mp3
Is that a fun song? That is funny. I hope to get a video example of my eyelid muscle twitching up here soon. This evidence will be dismissed by most people, but it all ads up, and it helps those who are outsiders to reassure themselves that yes! this technology does exist, and people are watching over us every day in order to abuse us in every way.
In terms of neuron activation to move muscles, these nazi fascist punks who rule the neuron activiation camera-thought net in police and military like to make people "drop things". They do this by simply loosening a muscle in the tiniest millimeter way, to make a person drop some item. Already, they made me drop and break 1) a glass (6/07) 2) a router (7/14/07). And if they are moving muscles in this nuisance way of making people break glasses, you know they are using them for nastier purposes like to make lawful people drive off the road, etc.
Think about the technology that is needed to change a person from saying "chewing on some gum" to "chewing on some gun". That is very advanced technology, used by very unadvanced humans. I mean clearly much of this is run by computers, because these are millisecond decisions (which is nothing for modern electronics, but very fast for human speaking muscles and the human brain which runs very slowly compared to electronic computers). Probably the humans just simply press a button that says:
1) "we want one verbal typo"
2) "we want a violent one sound substitution, for example 'nice' to 'knife'"
a) or could be "we want a suicidal sound substitition", for which there might be years of word play examples gathered over the years, such as "chewing gun" instead of "chewing gum".
How specific this technology is I don't know, but clearly...the fascist shitheads who control it are a violent lot who ought to be forced out, and probably into prison once their lives have been thoroughly examined by the public.
I was watching Forensic Files and there was this poor black guy who was slow or had a learning disbility and these people who he worked for took out all these insurance policies on him, and then killed him. And I thought...you know, how different is this from the Bush administration? They killed 3000 people on 9/11 for insurance money, and for military money. There really is no difference, those people who killed that poor guy are scumbags and murderers, and so are the neocons who murdered all those people in 9/11. Then these fascist thugs that control the secret cam-thought net beam below our eyes, to make us itch our cheek like there is a tear there...like...'wuts a matter....boo hoo...you are not tough enough...' etc, when...do we say that to those shithead scum bag murderers who killed that poor cute girl in San Diego by pushing her off a cliff for $30,000 is life insurance? (also on Forensic Files), no of course not, it's not being a pussy to jail those killers of that poor cute girl, it's only the most basic principle of law and order to expose and jail them. As if people are being pussies to not allow a couple of scam-artist scum to kill a girl for $30,000. It's mind numbing. This shows how shockingly allegiant people are just to the concept of "the right wing". Even when the head of the republican party has authorized the deliberate murder of 3,000 lawful citizens, (and secretly thousands more using secret neuron technology)...even mass murder is not enough to create the tiniest bit of doubt about voting for such a person or party. At that point, one has to wonder what "republicanism" is about, because clearly allowing murder seems to be allowable...is there any thing in particular that they do stand for? Maybe their core value is simply murdering those who oppose "the right wing". And that is a terrible philosophy, it is very similar to the Nazi philosophy of the 1930s and 40s, where people who disagreed were basically murdered. It's a heavily nationalistic, heavily Christian, heavily uneducated, very violent, secretive, kind of phenomenon. Those systems appear to be effective, because it's like a single-minded machine rolling over the unorganized and ununified rest, but I think it's weakness is it's own brutality, eventually, as I have said before, people see that there is no honor in their cause, and when given the opportunity they won't defend or support the leadership...or allow the leaders to fall. In addition, it's built on lies, and the enemy of lies is more time and more information, and so as time continues, more and more lies are revealed, and eventually, all the lies catch up to the murderous leaders. Why people need to tortuously go through this again and again throughout history can only be the result of improper education, and poor memory. What shocks me, is how 40% or 50% of the people allowed monsters like the Bush administration to get into power, and those neocons have killed hundreds of thousands of people. Here they voted for people who basically want to end the people's limited one day in four-years right to vote...the clear example is 2000 where they simply took the presidency without the popular vote...obviously democratic opinion means little to them. I could go on for hours, but think about how they wired up the World Trade Centers with explosives, and the insiders just sat there and watched...they did nothing...these neocons completely wired up WTC1 WTC2 and WTC7 with tons of explosives, while people just watched...I mean that is unbelievable...and then they reelect this group. What are they going to wire up and explode next? Your house? Your childrens' school? some business of university building? And if they did...who would stop them? Clearly nobody! Who would even say anything to the public? Would CNN? Would ABC, CBS, or NBC? Would the NY Times tell the public that the military neocons are wiring up a building with explosives to murder more innocent people? no, 9/11 stands as a crystal clear example, that no, the major media will not tell the public that, and the neocons can and no doubt probably will successfully murder more thousands of people without so much as a peep or whimper from those against murder.
When there is a violent crime, or even any crime, the perpetrator of the crime should definitely be punished, but let us never forget the "beamer" too. The person who beamed on them may very well be partially responsible for the commission of the crime, and should also be punished. And so for every example of crime, we need to also expose and examine those who beamed on the assailent, and determine if they too need to be punished.
Back to the unthinkingly allegiant to the "right wing" concept despite mass murder, despite dishonesty, etc. for me the key idea is "principle", I am against murder, and so I will critisize any supporter of murder of lawful people, when Clinton voted in the SOnny Bono act, I criticized and vote against that decision, I vote against Clinton's filling the prisons full of drug users...it didn't matter that I am liberal and Clinton is a member of the Democratic party thought to be liberal too...the entire idea is principle. And so it is, that I happen to agree with Ron Paul on many issues...republican, democrat, etc. it doesn't matter, it's the principles of people that should matter the most. And that apparently is a concept that is very difficult to grasp for many voters.
On January 1 2009, when Bush jr and Cheney officially leave the US government, and the security alert moves down from Defcon 5 to Defcon 3, I think the majority of people on earth will breathe a huge sigh of relief, knowing that the earth is still in tact, that we individual people are still alive, that we have survived this mass murderous reign. Even if some republican wins, I think most people will be releaved, because Bush jr and Cheney are far too violent and extremist for positions of power in any government.
Yeah, I think hydrogen gas will probably replace fossil fuels, but who knows...I'm sure people in science will continue to improve fuels and electricity sources. I was thinking that, since people are only getting photons that atoms are made out of, couldn't there be some way of just simply using up all the nuclear waste and radioactive material until it was all separated into particles of light? Maybe they should just continue to bombard it with neutrons, etc until the stuff is completely reduced to it's original particles of light. Then we would be getting the most out of all the matter, whether it is uranium, or whatever. I was thinking it could be like some "ultimate incinerator" where a person could put anything in, and eventually it would be reduced to photons, but then, there is always the real issue of 'what about the container' for such a system? You know, definitely the container would become radioactive, but perhaps that could be constantly incinerated too, and replaced with a new container, or maybe only more inside container material would need to be added from time to time to replace the inside container that is reduced to photons. In theory as long as there was always trash to convert to photons, the container would be ok.
You know, my own belief about is that nothing is sacred, because I'm not religious, but I definitely think there are beautiful places in the star system that need to be preserved, for example, I don't think the Grand Canyon or Mariner Valley on Mars should be filled in any time soon. I wonder about the inevitable over crowding on earth...it it inevitable. Certainly people moving to the Moon, Mars, etc will free up some of the space on earth, but the earth is going to reach even a physical limit as to how many humans it can physical house, and what that will probably mean is that people fill and live in every part of the oceans, in mountains, in the earth, above in massive skyscrapers, it is very interesting to project into the future.
There is a video on youtube of Reagan talking about if there was a threat from some other alien world, earth would be united, and that is kind of funny, but in reality, I don't think it's too remote of a possibility to remove from possibility.
It's obvious that advanced life formed the globular clusters. How hard is it to believe that some advanced life evolved on some other planet? We can't even move a star (see my video on how a planet can be used to move a star). We only occupy one planet, and so we are far behind being a major advanced life in this galaxy. Like those who call 9/11, JFK and RFK truth tellers "insane" so it is with the reality of advanced life in the universe, although there is probably no evidence for advanced life visiting the earth, if we were that advanced, wouldn't we want to see what our neighbors looked like?
Put yourself in the advanced life's place, as we start to grow humans onto planets of other stars, how will we regard the living objects we might find on planets...like ocean life, etc....probably they will be viewed as pets, and kept in zoos, their planets converted into matter to fuel ships to other stars, for food, water, and the supplies humans need to live and grow.
This is interesting. Some people in the California State goverment did a study of the quality of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft surgery performed by various doctors and overall in various hospitals and found some interesting results:
I am amazed that the UC hospitals rank very lowly compared to the average. St. John's Religional Medical Center is better than average, where UCSF ranks worse than average. 331 people had operations at St. John's and only 4 of them died, while 270 people had the operation at UCSF and 16 died. Maybe neocons secretly and invisibly laser beam killed the people in the UCSF figuring they were liberal enemy combatents, and that nobody would punish them for murder anyway? So here, clearly the Christians are defeating the atheists in a science. And so it is with St. Joseph's and UC Irvine in Orange county. So that is really sad. A person would think that being in a university would make people the smartest, most educated and informed, while in the religious places they would be using a crucifix for warding evil spirits away. But what this study shows is that the exact opposite is happening. It's the University of California supervisors that appear to be waving magic crosses to ward away evil spirits. UCSF has a letter arguing that risk factors are not easily determined, and certainly there are many variables, there needs to be sustained and clear analysis over a number of years to get a good rating on people and hospitals. This kind of public reporting and analysis is really useful to people, and we need to open this info up even more. This report is nice because it actually rates individual doctors too. I guess this info is probably available to anybody interested. Maybe some hospitals or doctors withheld the info. This is only the beginining of real analysis free and open of people and companies. Without everybody seeing thought there is definitely room for corruption by insiders...this is a nation where Sturgis was not even questioned by police about the JFK murder, nor Thane Cesar by LAPD, and on and on...where 9/11 has not been exposed as an inside job...there simply is not a lot of honesty out there. This is all part of the public turning their focus away from sports, acting, etc and onto science and things that really matter. It's nice to know even simply how many surgeries a person has performed.
There is a good video about the attempted coup against Hugo Chavez in Venezuela:
And this video shows how powerful and dishonest the owners of television stations are. The implications of CIA involvement, using our own tax money, to support a potentially violent activity against a popular democratic government is upsetting. I have to wonder about what happens that is not shown. Clearly, they have the camera-thought net, and neuron beams in Venezuela, so always as outsiders and even as insiders, people have to understand that added element of complexity. Because of lasers and neuron activation, war in the conventional form known for centuries throughout history has changed to such a dangerous thing, that it basically....the tools of murdering humans, are too fast and effective to make war anything other than a massive murder of millions done in seconds...and therefore very different from when people dug trenches and fired conventional metal bullet guns, or even flew over and drop bombs or missiles (because a powerful laser on the ground or on a satellite can simply cut through a plane in seconds). War nowadays is a very frightening prospect because of lasers and neuron activation. In particular because our entire civilization depends on one tiny planet...we haven't even moved into a two planet (or even more, a two-star) civilization yet.
I would probably feel more emotion for Chavez if he hadn't attempted a coup. Coups are never a good idea. I could see perhaps when some democratic election process is broken or corrupt so that a minority constantly controls the government unfairly and undemocratically, but then the better answer is to use nonviolent free information to expose the cheating, and the legal system to cause change. In addition, Chavez makes a "shh" sign which I disagree with being for total free info, or at least speaking in favor of such a thing if actual free info is physically currently impossible.
When Chavez talks about neoliberals, I think this is a mistaken view, because, you know, the people who orchestrate and funded violent coups in South, Central and North America are neoconservatives, and conservatives. So to hold "liberals" as the enemy is either simply a mistake, or some kind of technique to confuse people. Apparently, wikipedia also refers to the other political party in Venezuela as "neoliberal". I kind of doubt that, as they probably represent conservative interests. But there is also the element that Chavez is a military person, and so, in some sense, it shows that the military has a lot of control over the Venezuelan government. Clearly, scientists, or intellectuals are not being elected, and don't have the military backing. That is what I am saying about what happened in the background in this video, probably there was a military confrontation, and it was eventually won by Chavez supporters, who then took back the Presidential palace. How many people may have been killed is not shown, hopefully none, and it is possible that none were. This video also shows that the Chavez opposition made large use of his ties to Castro. That is a criticism of mine too, Communism is not a good system, I support full democracy with the public voting for a basic standard of living so nobody is starving, etc. So much is possible in a full democracy, because ultimately the majority makes all the rules, they can even redistribute land if they choose. But I think the most offensive thing about Castro is that he hasn't ever had elections on Cuba...maybe he is the popular favorite, but elections would prove that, and so Cuba is basically a monarchy, and that is nothing to support. It's interesting looking at Chavez's attempted coup: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_coup_attempts_of_1992
that this happens months after Clinton took control of the US government. Perhaps they knew that the vicious republicans who for years waged secret war and murder in south america were out of power or had their power limited with a democratic president in the USA. So anyway you look at Venezuela, and many of these South American and Central American countries they seem to me volitile sadly, and no doubt as a result of the undemocratic abuses of wealthy people on the native people for centuries going back even to the conquistadors. The USA is no prize either, I think there is a clear analogy to this attempted Venezuelan coup against Chavez and the successful coup against JFK, that has left the US government in the hands of the murderers (largely the Bush family, the CIA, and a violently criminal portion of republicans).
With the massive settlement of the catholic church in los angeles, that is shocking to me. people are violently assaulted all the time, and they don't receive a dime, but these kids, who are in fine physical condition, who had their butts and genitals fondled each get a million dollars? I mean that is amazing. If only I had my genitals fondled when I was young, I could be rolling in the millions now. What are they all going to do with all that money? The catholic church created a few thousand millionaires. With a million dollars (of course there is income tax but still imagine each person gets $1 million after taxes which is probably not inaccurate), the interest on that, currently at 5% is $50,000 a year. A person can easily live comfortably on $50k a year without having to work ever again. That doesn't even mention that better returns of real estate, low-risk stocks, etc. And here nobody was even physically hurt, but even if they were...even if there was a preist who punched a kid, honestly...is that worth $1 million dollars? Who is ever going to have 1 million dollars in their lives? I can see paying for any hospital bills, and even paying as a punishment, but most people don't have millions of dollars, in the case of nonviolent molestation and even to some degree violent assault where no permanent damage is done, I don't think monetary penalties should go beyond the thousands, honestly....it's bizarre that people on juries award millions to victims of nonviolent crime. This is clear evidence of a lack of logic, and sexual hysteria on the public's part, so that inappropriate or unpopular nonviolent sexual activity is wrongly viewed as being equal to murder and massive violent assault.
Most atheists love this bad publicity of the cult of Jesus, and go on for hours about how evil the religious are, but I find myself more on the side of defending physical pleasure without objection, although definitely I am for stopping, exposing and punishing assault of any and all kinds, for full free info, and am against religion in favor of science. To me the antipleasure hysteria is more frightening than a few minor assaults or butt and genital touches, but assaults must be exposed and stopped, all assaults against children, against adults, sexual and nonsexual too. Many of us have been assaulted, although nonsexually, in particular when we were kids, but I seem to be the only person speaking up for our rights (except the recent anti-spanking group, but spanking is a tiny fraction of nonsexual assaults of people under 18). A better focus is against violence starting with murder, and most damaging assaults, and then moving on to smaller assaults, a public database of violent offenders, exposing 9/11, Frank Sturgis, Thane Cesar, and so many thousands of others, helping to solve unsolved murders, Bonnie Bakley, Jam Jay, Chandra Levy...the killers are still out there some where, protected by the insiders.
This is kind of scary and a loss for children's rights in my opinion. You have to understand the bottom line: "the county to screen all children in the foster system", and this is a screening to see if they have psychological "diseases" such as psychosis, neurosis, scizophrenia, adhd, manic depression. The important issue to me is "do these kids get to consent or object to this treatment?" And the answer is definitely a resounding "no". They have no choice but to be subjected to these "mental health screenings". I think the public and in particular outsiders ought to think about who might fund this. I mean clearly ultimately the govenment is going to be spending $90 million tax payer dollars, not on free food, not on free clothes, but on these highly doubtful psychological claims and theories for which there is not one physical diagnostic test like those for cancer, broken bones, cavities, etc. I would not doubt at all that big phamaceutical companies support this effort, because it is a wise investment to peddle their drugs to kids who might become life-long customers of their meds, by those employed in psychology who get money when people are in their hospitals, who get money to treat people, this creates a few thousand more potential patients, but then also the more Nazistic element of the supporters of this kind of movement, are those conservatives, who want to roll out these "mental screenings" onto the general public, and start to hospitalize their political opponenets. The psychological imprisonment system has been an open door around habeus corpus for centuries, and therefore it is always possible, until that door is closed (and think about what that requires...basically an end to forced psychiatric treatments, and even psychiatric imprisonment...at least where the hospital is not simply serving as a prison for a person who has had all legal opportunities like any other person imprisoned). This is why my story "We are all sane" is so relevent. You can see how this psychological pseudoscience apparatus is being rolled out...and it's onto the defenseless first, onto children who can't defend themselves, then onto highschoolers, then onto homeless, then onto the unemployed, who knows...those on some form of govenrment assistance, those who want a driver's license, etc. And the amazing this is how they couch it...as being in the best interest of children...that to not mentally screen them is neglect. You know, I can see providing people to talk with children...but you know...there are adults and teachers who talk with kids...and explain to them about sex, about science, about people, about history, about violence, about the history of religions and religious persecution, etc. but this screening...you should know by now what this is all about...it's about pumping meds into kids, trying to get them hooked on these meds, so they will give johnson and johnson and pfizer etc multibillion dollar income without curing any problems whatsoever...and they key is "do these kids have the choice to say no?"...isn't that an important issue? Do they have the right to say "no I don't want to be screened for mental problems"? Do their foster parents even have that choice? You can see that if you are a child, and have no natural parents, you are going to be at the lowest status of all...not even a parent will stand up for your rights, right to enjoy physical pleasure, right to vote, right to work, and the right to refuse treatments, etc. Just the way the people operate is so shockingly smooth....they buy the newspaper story, they buy these legal cases...they buy the judges....and its all funded behind the scenes...by drug companies...buy eugenics-believing nazistic republicans....it's very very deceptive what they are doing. So get ready for your mental health screening...and legally mandated meds and surgical treatments, don't bother saying 'no' it makes no difference.
It's interesting thinking about human evolution, in particular how the racial differences evolved. For example, it is interesting to think that, the early australopithicines, like their common ancestor with monkeys and chimpanzees had straight hair much like many european, and chinese people do...but that interestingly enough, for this to be true, it means that the curley hair of many black people, had to have evolved only recently, and been selected, perhaps sexually selected, or for some environmental reasons. And so it may be with the dark skin of native African people today...or did australopithicus have dark skin? Chimpanzees have light skin, but are covered with bodily hair, so it seems possible that with the loss of hair, darker skin was created in its place. It seems the answer would be one or the other...that the ancestor of all homonids had dark skin, or light skin. It's hard to believe that all native Southern African people only evolved dark skin after a common ancestor left Africa, but then, it seems clear that the curley hair characteristic of all these people must have evolved after that common ancestor left Africa into Europe. Also another major evolutionary difference was the Chinese evolution of so-called "slanted" eyes as opposed to the round eyes of chimpanzees, european, native african humans...and it seems likely to me that this feature of slanted or horizontal eyes was sexually selected out again in native american descendents (the other option being that round-eyes Asian people are the ancestors of most if not all native american people, possibly the Ainu people of Japan have the more common round eyes). Still, it is a wonderful and curious thing that humans in Asia found slanted eyes more sexually appealing, since I can't imagine that there is some other reason for the evolution of slanted eyes. There are other subtle differences that are also interesting but harder to define, for example there are various skeletal and muscular features that exist as lineages among humans, for example those with so-called "hooked" noses, etc, almost all sexually selected or simply the effect of genetic combination.
many people use the term "crazy" all the time, many times simply out of tradition, but many times to make an explicit point about their belief that a person is crazy, and I think we need to watch out for these believers in psychology. They are to me like concentration camp people, the anti-habeus-corpus people, its like an "other" religion, similar to those who believe in stories of witchcraft and psychics. The "crazy" judgers who of course always presume themselves to be perfect, sane without a particle of a mistake in their beliefs or unusualness in their behavior. These are like the auschwitz camp guard people, like the witch trial mobs, its like racism, but I think with even more dangerous reprocussions because unlike being a member of a minority race, you can be jailed without a trial for life if you are judged to be "insane", even though you may be in perfect accord with all existing popular laws. The founding people of the first representative democracies should have created an ammendment that explicitly stipulates protection from arrest or confinement for "delusion" and erroneous beliefs. Violence is more important. People who are violent should be a bigger focus of discipline and attention. Violence is by far a worse problem than inaccurate beliefs and/or unusual nonviolent behavior. But surprisingly I hear more complaints about "crazy" people than "violent" people. I guess violent people are more scary than so-called crazy nonviolent people. Isn't honesty/dishonesty more important too? Isn't lying a bad thing? Isn't lying unethical and immoral? Isn't dishonesty dangerous? Isn't dishonesty a feature of fascist regimes, and criminals? Isn't secrecy wrong? Isn't is neglectful and unethical to withold important information? In any event, we don't hear many complaints about dishonesty, and those who routinely lie, how wrong dishonesty is...I mainly hear more about the dreaded "insanity", weirdness, psycho(sis), etc and of course with that goes rampant "drug use", sexuality, blasphemy, etc. Violence and dishonesty don't appear to be big hang ups with the majority of people in society. I would add antisexuality and antigay feelings which I encounter on a daily basis. Antisexuality and antihomo and antibisexuality like dishonesty are certainly freedom of thought, and speech, and people should be entitled to those terrible mistaken beliefs, but aren't those somethings we should definitely be looking out for? Aren't those things we should openly identify and work to support those who do not espouse them, and to try and reach those who do with the truth?
Then there are those people who tell children not to be "tattle tales", and again that is in my opinion very bad advice, ... I'm shocked when I see adult reprimend children for telling on their siblings...that is so backwards....it's like...no don't tell us the truth....make sure to lie to us....and expresses an elementary school mentality of many of these people that control the cam-thought-neuron net, secrecy is wrong...people should have allegience to the truth and informing the lied to above all else, that is the more ethical path, although lying and keeping secrets is for the most part legal, or certainly should be in my opinion, still, lying and keeping secrets is bad advice to be giving people of any age, in particular young people...that is a barbaric slogan and thing to be telling children...not to tell the truth about something they know or saw.
Let's not forget the antigay death campers, I feel like taking a second to remind shitheads like this that the neocons detonated a killaton of explosives in the WTC while 2000 people were still inside...I mean no complaints about that? Gayness and unusual nonviolent behavior is more dangerous and upsetting than that?! No fears about that? No fear about the future of that not being punished? of that happening again? What a bunch of petty mixed up people with upside down values.
I've been reading about the history of democracy, and it's interesting, in some cases, such as the parliamentarians versus the king the rights of the citizens were won in violent confrontation, but other times, the rights were won through nonviolent negociation (in some cases, because the king needed money, and the land owners forced him to grant certain rights before agreeing to pay). The colonists of the US, of course, fought a brutal 8 year war against the kingdom of great britain and colonial loyalists and so many thousands of people gave their lives to create the representative democracy in the USA and throw off the shackles of the parliamentary monarchy of England. The US representative democracy was the first (so far as I know) to grant the right of freedom of religion to people. The Mediterranean Island of Corsica was the first nation of modern times to create a constitution, the US being second. The US was the first major colonial nation to throw off its foreign ruler. All this is ancient history, and we are looking at forming colonies on the moon and mars. But isn't it likely that those colonies on the moon and mars will express similar self-governing ideals and express contempt for those of earth who might want to control their freedoms? And even now, there exists a conflict between majority opinion and representative opinion. In my opinion we are on our way to a full democracy in the USA, and every other nation. We could expect that some of the first nations to throw off monarchy and embrace representative democracy would be some of the first nations to throw off representational democracy and embrace full democracy, a view that was considered anarchy in the 1700s, but then representational democracy without a king was seen as anarchy by many at that time. How is that going to happen? I think the most probable course is going to be through the representational democracy, by voting for people who will introduce the reforms...through a nonviolent process.
Many people are hinting that our next Presidential election is already rigged for the Republican candidate to win. Nice eh? I don't know. But it would not surprise me. Think about it. Here there is a powerful group of people who routinely has been seeing, hearing and sending thought for 100 years. By now, there can't possibly be any secrets for those at the top, and the power of control over people's minds and votes has to be unprecedented with the neuron activation technology, where outsiders are basically simply bit-twiddled to vote one way...their minds are made up for them. But beyond that, it seems clear that 2000 was pure fraud and undemocratic. I don't know, but there cannot be too much that is unknown or unpredictable for those in the camera-thought net.
One thing that is unpleasant to talk about, but it is important to understand, is that without seeing eye images, ears, and video of a sex assault, it is very difficult to prove that a sex assault (generally erect penis assault of anus, or vagina) happened. For outsiders all there is, is a person's testimony that it happened. If the assaulter (and also for nonviolent crimes, the genital, or buttock toucher) admits, then I think that might be enough proof for me, but just the say so of the alledged victim, I don't think is enough, because there is always the possibility of them lying, and seeing, hearing and sending thought, Frank Fiorini, Thane Cesar are all strong evidence that many people lie all the time. Without a video, without the eye images, (a who video tapes them having sex or being assaulted?), it's tough for an outsider to know if an assault really happened. Even with sperm, how do you know there was at least one objection? 07/19/07 many people have a tough time being unbiased when there are accusations of sexual assault without any physical evidence such as a video, and no confession. In fact, probably most people will absolutely believe a person who claims to have been raped even without physical evidence. Nobody should be jailed for lying, but they should be exposed, and as always the truth and proof should be available to all. And always, do people argue that we should legalize prostitution? No, that never seems to be an answer to sexual assault. And what about more sexual education? There again, no. And as a result, young 15 year old males, like those in Florida recently, become violent, can't get sex, desperately need sex, and so they do violent sexual assaults. Where if prostitution was legal, if the public accepted that young people, in particular males need sex, and assisted them to get consensual sex, we would not have these vicious sexual assaults like the recent one in Florida. Sex for money is legal on video, why not without the video? Supporting prostitution is too much for even so-called liberals, even when there are 15 year old males sexually assaulting people...they don't get it, and won't anytime soon.
Seeing the Venezuelan television, shows perhaps an even more corrupted version of the US television, or maybe more easily detected because in the US our main source of information is the highly corrupted dishonest television stations.
Bill Clinton said "ought to be" which might be code for "triple ought shot gun to Bee" (Bee being my Mom's nickname). It wouldn't surprise me. Hillary Clinton was senator of NY when the insider animal in the camera-thought net killed my Mom, and another Democrat, Spitzer was Governor, although probably the insider murderer was probably more republican or nazistic than anything. This probably is an appeal to insider murderers for support, and no doubt to the blood-thirsty murderous Christians, who hold up religion and then murder any who reject it. Ultimately the insiders like Bill and Hillary Clinton are so morally corrupted, when you lie about seeing, hearing and sending thought images and sounds, a person must think "well I'm already lying about that...so I might as well lie about other things too", and so it is with 9/11, Frank Sturgis, Thane Cesar. They are so morally corrupted by seeing, hearing and sending thought, like so many insiders, that they are in the business, not of expressing their own personal views, but of manipulating other people with specially calculated phrases such as "ought to be". You can see that many power-hungry people have this venomous talk in the USA. We are not going to have smart and honest leaders until religion falls to science, until seeing thought is fully exposed, until there is a majority against violence, for pleasure, etc. There is not much we as outsiders can do in the short term to change the murderous insiders in the USA, but I am glad for the 9/11-truth videos, for my own videos exposing the Pupin secret, for my efforts to stop violence, for free info, against the drug war, etc. What insiders do is try to manipulate outsiders mainly, their own views don't really matter, but probably they are rotted anyway. I haven't seen many decent people in my life, and probably it's the idiocy of religion, about stopping violence, about sexuality, secrecy, dishonesty, that make most people that way. We have to remember that the murderer of my Mom like so many other murderers is being protected by insiders such as the Clintons, and Spitzer. We can't deny that they protect Thane Cesar, Frank Sturgis, the 9/11 killers, etc. Maybe it's weakness, maybe it's apathy, whatever it is, we obviously need stronger leaders. The least worst there are, are Kucinich and Paul. I hope the public figures out that 9/11 was an inside job, that Sturgis killed JFK, that Pupin saw eyes, etc, and soon before the 2008 election, and reclaim the USA for law and justice, in particular for stopping violent people most importantly murderers. My hope is that conservatives recognize that violence is evil and vote for Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul.
Jeanene Garafalo said that 9/11 was an inside job on the Conan O'Brian show. Garafalo seems like a person who would probably try to spit out the meds. 9/11 was an inside job, it's much less likely that outsiders would do such a violent and immoral thing, unless beamed on by an insider I suppose.
I saw a good video on Pol Pot, Nixon and Kissinger: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9159164859238659487&q=year+zero&total=1498&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
This is a good introduction to the work of John Pilger too. The video has some good and clear writing, but I think there is too much appeals and expressions of people starving for me, I am more interested in the political story, I understood that people were suffering from the first 5 minutes of "people suffering" video and it could have been more interesting by not dwelling on that issue (all the Red Cross, etc prejudice against the Communist Vietnamese government, by supporting the Nazistic mass murderer Pol Pot is very informative, useful and interesting). Its interesting that, perhaps with more education, people might have thought to eat the leaves of trees, to fish, ... I see that they made use of corn, the potato would be a good item to grow too in the event of starvation. Then drugs, might be important, mainly penicillin and the morning after pill to stop unwanted pregnancy, and xray equipment, but it seemed to me that the main problems are the typical problems: clean water and food (perhaps unstopped and/or unpunished violence...that is a typical problem all over earth and one most people refuse to address).
These comments by the Clintons have reminded me that we really as a nation need to be looking for a president who is more of a science teacher and less of a religious preacher. And when I say teacher, I mean somebody who is an open and active promoter of evolution and science. For example promising to instruct the NSF to fund a major movie of the history of science, the story of evolution of life on earth, and the probable future plans for humans of earth in terms of going to other planets and stars. My Mom was really naive about people, and this is really a classic flaw in intellectuals and the educated. Smart and compassionate people like to presume that everybody else is like them, and the truth is very very different. For example, my Mom loved the two Clintons, I have audio recordings probably of how she told me she bought and read both of their books. I wish I could tell her how the two Clintons, in particular Hillary who was Senator, not only did nothing to stop her from being murdered, not only protects the murderer to this day, but openly support and joke about her murder with comments like "ought to be", and "sell more stakes". (Kucinich who seems to be a person actually concerned with murder replied with "maybe in her stake (state)"). My Mom thought that most people in this nation don't care about a person's religion, that a person's religion isn't a big deal, that they will still be viewed kindly and fairly. And I am telling the educated, that this is a very bad mistake. I am saying that those of you who have university degrees should not presume that the Cult of Jesus is harmless and Christianity benign. Because, if ever history was taught, and we must teach ourselves, we would know that religious people killing atheists is nothing new. Socrates is a clear example, long before Christianity in 399 BCE, condemned to death for atheism. There are many many others. Even early Christians were killed as atheists of the Polytheistic Roman religion. Jewish people have been killed by the millions as atheists of Christianity. Even in the early United States, those who did not fit in to the Christian religion, many times scientists and atheists, or simply those who rejected the mainstream Christian claims were murdered as witches. One of the Popes allowed torture of "witches". Christians tortured people with red hot irons, and nobody can dispute these historical facts, they can only try to keep them secret which they do very successfully. Anaxagarus is an example of a person jailed for atheism and science before Christianity by Greek religious polytheistic believers. Galileo is a classic example. Are we to believe that all of the sudden 200 years ago, this rabid hatred and murder of atheists by the majority suddenly stopped? No of course not, there is still a large amount of hatred of atheists, agnostics, scientists and the "spiritual but not religious". But in my experience, those people who are atheists, agnostics, not religious, scientists, etc. don't realize that they are dispised by a very large majority of people, and in particular those in the cult of Jesus and cult of God. There is a lot of anger in the cult of Jesus for those who don't go to church like they have to. We like to think this is a modern society where people sleep in, go out in flip-flops, eat icecream in the morning, stay up late, or whatever they want...but you have to remember there is a large amount of vicious murderers out there in the cult of Jesus who don't take life so casually, but as intellectuals and educated, people have made the bad mistake of thinking everybody else is as educated, honest, fair, nonracist, gender equitable, sexual and lawful as they are. Another person my Mom sang the praises of before she was murdered was the Governor of NY Elliot Spitzer, she parroted out the paid-for television and newspaper stories about how Spitzer was the champion of the consumer, against the corruption of big business, etc. but she admited that her view of Spitzer was tarnished after I informed her about a story that didn't make the front page about how Spitzer signed into law that employees of big business and state hospitals can inject drugs into people even against objection. Now after my Mom was murdered, Spitzer, Clinton and company have supported the electrocution of a woman in New York State. You can see next that they absolutely can push through involuntary sterilization, lobotomies (cutting out parts of your brain), removing your lung, you genitals, anything goes...the state and big money hospitals, the big money psychiatric pharma companies can drug you, electrocute you, cut into your brain, take your lung out...and no amount of money for a lawyer or objection is going to make any difference. And we are talking about nonviolent people, many of them even lawful people, held without trial, crime or sentence in total violation of the 1200s habeus corpus concept. I can see using a tranquilizer dart on a person who is asssaulting others, but what these people are doing is drugging, shocking and (for all I know) operating on nonviolent people, people who are not violent, and have never been violent in any way. So Spitzer and Hillary are clearly no defenders of the individual citizen's right to their own body, to say no to drugs and operations, but are defenders and supporters, their campaigns entirely funded by big business and government, your individual rights mean little to nothing to those people. So how do they do it? How are they loved by so many millions who think they are defenders of their freedoms? They convince millions of people about their piousness and fairness by buying ads in the major media. That's how the reputation of Spitzer as a defender of the little person is created. When clearly, Spitzer and Clinton go out of their way to applaud murder of an atheist, and drugging and electrocuting nonviolent citizens. This is one of the fatal flaw with representative democracy as opposed to full democracy: that representative people are easily corrupted by money that they need to finance ads to trick people into thinking that they are pious and therefore get votes. Maybe I am going on for a long time here, and not being as concise as I would like. Then look at the issue of 9/11. Only Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul (and the Alaskan democrat Gravel) have said they support a new investigation, and they are ridiculed for this opinion, not only by Republicans (who clearly orchestrated 9/11)...but by Democrats. Then in addition both Kucinich and Paul have the compassion for those nonviolent drug users rotting in prison where under the Clintons more people were jailed under Reagan's mandatory drug minimums than any other president. So clearly Kucinich and Paul represent progress and compassion, where Clinton and Guilliani represent business as usual: a continuing coverup of the truth about 9/11 (Hillary going so far as supporting the Iraq invasion based on the fraudilent 9/11...Kucinich took the less murderous, more honest peace path), protecting of Fiorini, Thane Cesar (still very much alive in the Philippians), the psychophama system, and the recreational drug war. Then look at the monarchy aspect of the mainstream candidates: of 300 million people, people are going to elect the wife of a former US President? This is after many voted to elect and even reelect the son of a former US President. For this, thousands of people died in the War of Independence to be free of kings and queens? This battle is a classic battle of the status quo versus reformers. I definitely count myself among the reformers, the status quo is a monsterous system of secret murders, total dishonesty, massive injustice, total idiocy...I don't know where to begin. If you are not religious, you owe it to yourself to vote, if Democrat for Kucinich, if Republican for Paul, not that they are not religious, but that the mainstream Democrats and Republicans are major members of the cult of Jesus and all the lack of logic, fairness and honesty that accompany that corrupt and ancient belief. Those in the cult of Jesus like to claim that anybody who does not go to church is evil. But the ideas of good and evil are not ideas that we should simply believe based on one person's say so, we need to evaluate people's actions and judge for ourselves what is good or evil. For example, in my opinion evil as humans understand it can be reduced generally to violence against other humans, dishonesty, and things of that nature, not simply to rejection of religious theories, or somebody's claim of good or evil. So this paragraph is really a call out there to the nonreligious, the educated, and educators, to get aware of the evil of the religious majority who are not like you, who have a very backward set of views and values, who are not supporters of science, evolution, religious tolerance, etc. We like to think that everybody is like us, friendly, supporters of human rights, compassionate about stopping suffering, interested in science and evolution...but we have to open our eyes and understand our place in history...the cult of Jesus, and ever larger, the cult of God, still holds a majority as they have since the time of Socrates and Anaxagarus. The popularity of religion will pass, and religion will fall, being replaced by science...so let's be aware of that truth, let's harden our minds, and defend science, pleasure, free thought, free speech, more democracy where we get to vote directly, the things we believe in. We need to know our place in history, we have an opportunity to drop the religious status quo now, that brought us 9/11, Thane Cesar, the largest prison population of any nation, and move towards a more progressive, democratic future with Kucinich or Paul.
My Mom was murdered by one of the people in the secret camera-thought-neuron net who is in a group of people who tormented her over the years. One time they tried to murder her by purposely moving her muscles to make her fall down the stairs, and they very nearly suceeded. My Mom's knee bone protruded out of her skin, she walked around in a daze. Amazingly (A-maser-ingly), a friend of hers, an insider too, happened to call, and took my Mom to a hospital where my Mom recuperated for a few weeks. It's shocking, the vicious Christians that control the camera-thought-neuron technology, in particular in NY State. I think there are some really vicious people in NY, obviously, to allow 9/11 to happen...that was a perfect opportunity to capture controlled demolition wiring up the WTC in the act like Watergate...but not in NY, and this is a northern state we are talking about. An episode of the Simpsons seems to present an analogy for outsiders who might be aware of the inside network. It's the show where the people at the bar all play tricks on the bartender, Moe, and these are vicious tricks, like Barney lights the bartenders tie on fire, then Homer abuses the bartender, but all the others suprisingly are offended by Homer's joke, and vote to ban him from the bar. Maybe it's a paradigm for how, the evil controllers of the neuron network abuse atheist and intellectual outsiders (most of whom are outsiders, because, the technology is controlled by the cult of Jesus and cult of God)...but sometimes the "joke" (I mean a joke or comedy if you are a twisted violent criminal perhaps) one will go too far resulting in the murder of one of the outsiders, and the others might then get upset. But in my experience...you know...it seems clear...many insiders hinted that people laughed and applauded when my Mom was push-button neuron-muscle murdered. There is video of how Bush jr applauded the second WTC 9/11 plane impact. Charach hinted that people applaud murders in my video interview with him. Other insiders have said that people laugh and applaud the various murders they watch like prime time television shows in front of their eyes. The spectacle appeared funny to them. The insider murderer did nothing. This reminds me, for those who saw the John Pilger story about the year zero and Pol Pot, there is a part that is really classical, when Pilger is interviewing those in the Khmer Rouge who murdered many people. It's a foreshadowing of the interviews of those in the Pupin neuron network who murdered hundreds and perhaps thousands of people after the system is exposed. Pilger even goes so far as to use the word "thoughts" to draw a clear comparison to our own societies. The murderers say that if they did not murder, they themselves would be murdered by the higher command, which is no doubt true, but what is the excuse for the neuron net murderers? Clearly they were not forced to murder, they had every choice and opportunity to say no, but chose not to. And for that, they need to be jailed for life at least.
It's stomach turning that I probably will be faced with the decision of voting for Hillary Clinton against Rudy Guliani. Because, on the one side is a person who openly celebrates and allowed the murder of my own mother who was my best friend, and on the other hand, a person who more vigorously supported and actively participated in the mass murder of 9/11. I may vote for Kucinich in the primary, and then libertarian if Hillary wins. I want to support a first female president, but not a person who is part of the witchtrial mob who murdered my Mom. I think voting for the murder-loving, cult of Jesus, Hillary is one more vote in the effort to move the 9/11 plotters out of the government. I don't think Hillary was a plotter of 9/11 (as many republicans, and a few democrats were), but clearly actively went along with the aftermath, even supporting the openly fascist lawless invasion of Iraq. It's going to be a stomach turning nausiating vote in 2008, and all because the public doesn't know the truth.
I would like to start a cool magazine: "The Outsiders: Seeing, Hearing, and Sending Thought, Secret Technology Exposed" and perhaps chat group. But time is so precious, I don't have enough time or money to do that, maybe when I get older.
My Mom was so cool. Because I am vegetarian, she got into vegetarianism too, and tried new recipes, bought vegetarian cookbooks, and veggie burgers, etc. I was really looking forward to taking her to all the vegetarian restaurants in Southern California, and giving her a lot of the veggie grocery foods she can't get in New York. But all that ended when she was murdered in an instant. I got the autopsy report by the way and, she was in fine health, very few if any problems at all. Without the hypothermia, the cause of death would be unknown, although all the insiders and even many outsiders know the truth about how my Mom was push-button neuron-muscle murdered by a violent murderer, one of the thousands, like Pol Pot's minions, in the secret camera-thought neuron net.
It's kind of funny the top search strings that reach tedhuntington.com:
1 186 12.14% rfk
2 175 11.42% big breasts
3 89 5.81% sirhan sirhan
4 41 2.68% biggest breasts
5 39 2.55% rfk assassination
6 34 2.22% beautiful breasts
7 30 1.96% thane eugene cesar
8 23 1.50% robert f kennedy assassination
9 22 1.44% large breasts
10 20 1.31% frank sturgis
11 18 1.17% rfk dead
12 18 1.17% ted huntington
13 17 1.11% robert f. kennedy assassination
14 16 1.04% assassination of robert f. kennedy
15 12 0.78% mary moorman
16 12 0.78% stop violence
17 12 0.78% thane cesar
18 11 0.72% jfk and rfk
19 11 0.72% jfk killing
20 11 0.72% robert f. kennedy
big breasts, biggest breasts, beautiful breasts...generally sex is the most popular.
The other connections are rfk, jfk, stop violence...evidence that I am largely active in the stop violence movement, seeing "ted huntington" is nice to see...it means people are looking specifically for info about me. I do this all the time, it's basically a "what's the deal with this person I've heard about?" search in google or other search engines.
Of my songs, its generally the songs with some sexual word in their title, which shows that peopela re searching for sex and finding my songs with sex words in the title, not necessarily fans of the songs themselves. Or maybe just clicking on songs with sex word titles. There are some execptions though:
# Hits KBytes URL
1 1228 1.60% 62997 0.25% /hkh.htm
2 1215 1.58% 7500 0.03% /
3 988 1.29% 54488 0.22% /video.htm
4 859 1.12% 1160 0.00% /favicon.ico
5 675 0.88% 15021 0.06% /squirrelmail/src/read_body.php
6 483 0.63% 5946 0.02% /squirrelmail/src/right_main.php
7 339 0.44% 2102931 8.47% /mv_psychology.rm
8 294 0.38% 598906 2.41% /tayf5.mp3
9 199 0.26% 327862 1.32% /tayf3.mp3
10 182 0.24% 322611 1.30% /svts/saywhati.mp3
11 179 0.23% 219266 0.88% /bachflutef.mp3
12 162 0.21% 496215 2.00% /vivaldif5.mp3
13 144 0.19% 234784 0.95% /cfoai/30_lockheedf.mp3
14 142 0.19% 225940 0.91% /cfoai/41_sexstory.mp3
15 140 0.18% 2078 0.01% /squirrelmail/src/download.php
16 139 0.18% 213492 0.86% /cfoai/28_jerkoffv2.mp3
17 138 0.18% 190387 0.77% /absolutelynew.mp3
18 137 0.18% 185494 0.75% /cfoai/10_sexoperav.mp3
19 136 0.18% 177348 0.71% /herzund_2f.mp3
20 136 0.18% 377290 1.52% /svts/absolut.mp3
21 136 0.18% 349410 1.41% /svts/beautif.mp3
22 135 0.18% 290254 1.17% /svts/saywhatiB.mp3
23 129 0.17% 386020 1.55% /partitabfinal.mp3
24 123 0.16% 138487 0.56% /9th_2f.mp3
25 119 0.16% 10358 0.04% /bim.htm
26 113 0.15% 13162 0.05% /ulsf.htm
27 111 0.14% 400529 1.61% /svts/tp.mp3
28 109 0.14% 182977 0.74% /cfoai/13_igotthatv4.mp3
29 103 0.13% 87369 0.35% /cfoai/25_fuckalluv.mp3
30 101 0.13% 6539 0.03% /songs.htm
This is just for May 2007. The order changes each month. tayf5 and tayf3 have consistently been near the top, which is nice because "need a lot of love" is listed before that, but apparently people must like this song more. It may appear as a mystery for those excluded...the tv starts watching you...you are their show too? what does that mean? In addition, insiders might not feel as bad about letting it circulate because unlike other songs there are no blatent hints, or sex-related material. You can see how even trivial songs like "glory of the sex story" that I just threw together are up near the top. All this popularity of sexuality makes me think I should go into the sex industry, but... most of it is illegal, except for porno...but that worries me because free info seems inevitable...as time continues people getting paid for photos might be more difficult, look at utorrent and so on. I celebrate it. Some brave people might try to go into the kissing for money business...it depends on interpretation of the law, clearly massage is legal. More about tayf: my brother hinted a few weeks after it was popular but I didn't think much about it. There are some nice lyrics there, I like "they all god", it has at least two meanings...they think they are a god, and secondly they are all addicted to the god lie...in other words...its like their brain is gone to the cabbage for people who watched sctv....some people refer to it as "baby those aren't your friends", kind of cute. The fascists in the eye net make it "those aren't your friend" to imply I'm an oddball with no friends, that I'm not a team player, that my kind of life results in isolation. People like the classics to a funky drum, that surprises me, but a while ago there was some professional effort at that...I can't remember the CD has a catchy title...I can't remember, but it's kind of funny. Say What I want to, is a total mystery to me, why that is popular. That was one of my Mom's favorite songs which I couldn't understand either. For whatever reasons, the recording didn't go well and the timing wasn't perfect, but as always with my songs, they are rough versions that should have been developed by a team in a studio. It's like the form of a recording a member of a band would bring in for other members to decide if a song is worth developing. It's about a person having their own mind, thinking for themselves, rejecting the orders of so-called superiors, and just generally, a person who wears whatever they want...that rejects societal standards. All this in typical cockney british verbage. Many people laugh about the last line, "and I will keep, me Jame waving free and standing tall, attached to me, atop me balls", and refer to it by using the word "atop". People appear to listen to absolutely nothing, then Beautiful people then that's it, they don't make it to chimpanzee...
Here's a funny story about one of my music videos, "Psychology", the buttocks actually descending to drop a poop was suggested by Michael Moore via beam, before I had just a buttock dropping turds, so there is a TP music video moment.
Email to NY Governor Spitzer (and all people of earth):
The State of New York won its battle in court to order even more forced electroshock for Creedmoor Psychiatric Center inmate "Simone D.,"
I certainly want my vote counted against forced treatment, and in particular electrocution or so-called "electroshock" therapy without consent. The Nuremberg laws were made to stop such unconsensual treatment. What is shocking is that as humans the people in the NY State government can condone such abuse.
Electroshock treatment is pure fraud. Electrocuting people has no positive effect on the human brain. It does not take a genius to see that electrocuting people is not going to solve any problems, many of which are caused by deep societal traditions that are not easily cured with a pill or high voltage. But the main issue here, is that no person, imagine you or I having to be subjected to this torture, no person should be electrocuted without their permission. The Nuremberg laws were created for this very reason, to stop, in particular, experimental druggings and surgical procedures on non-consenting people. Imagine you being forced to have a lung removed. It is absolutely against the most simple and basic principle of a human's right to their own body.
I am somewhat surprised to see that electroshock is still being done. Mainly people are being drugged. I wonder now if lobotomies are still being done? That is where parts of people's brain is removed...I mean that is absolutely illegal in my opinion, and more importantly viciously brutal and a complete violation of human rights.
07/10/07: update: Spitzer bought a NY Times "news" story about how his family suffers from his being governor because of the attention. If I could buy a NY Times "news" story, I would buy one about how it is rumored that Mihalo Pupin figured out how to see what eyes see from behind the head in the infrared, just like Yan Dan did with electrodes at Berkeley. How Pupin is not alive to comment, and his family could not be reached for comment, but how Columbia Universities officials catagorically deny any such claim, but do admit that Pupin did work that is still classified as a government secret. I would then have the news story suggest that Pupin may have even been able to see, not only what a person or any species sees, but images that they think of, or at least this is what many people are claiming on the Internet. But there simply is not enough money to pay the NYTimes to print such a story. They will not accept money for such an honest piece of news. Or perhaps I would do an innoculous story on how many people are talking about the idea of people getting to vote directly on the laws, quoting one political science professor (who we could scrounge up) as saying "people may sometime realize that they should not have to live under laws they never have the opportunity to vote on". Again, though, the NY Times, or LA Times, it is doubtful that they will accept a few hundred thousand dollars to print such text on paper or electronically.
One thing people will not be able to hide, is that their ass was inside. As the public gets informed and takes over the camera-thought network, probably a new second class citizen will take their place and that will be the former insiders.
If we could see in the camera-thought net we would probably see what a Victorian-style era this is, and how insiders talk in powder-puff talk, like "you've done all you can...and have made a mammoth effort" and pat each other on the back for the tiniest, most miniscule effort...ridiculously small efforts.
Like any illegal addictive product, everything you associate with illegal drugs, associate with the camera-thought network. People beg for murders of loved ones to be stopped, for loved ones to be included, to be able to tell loved ones that they hear their thoughts, for insiders to stop misleading loved ones with bad suggestions, etc...begging these brutal nazistic police and military controllers who usurped Pupin's invention, people must beg them, as the camera thought net controllers fuck and suck their daughters and wives...their daughters and wives suck and fuck them probably to see even tiny little bits inside people houses and to hear a few more minutes of people's thoughts...just like a cocaine fix. People clearly pay thousands for the precious images and audio from inside people's houses and heads. It's very nice to hear what people think. I will be glad when the curtain is pulled off and the public gets to see all the evil insiders. It probably looks like a Rube Goldberg-like mechanism: the illegal drugs come in through the official government growers, dealers and distributers, the police take their cut of the money, the military takes their cut. Independent, non-government dealers play an important role: they can be arrested, their drugs and money taken...care to investigate where the money and drugs go after the bust? People claim the drugs are burned (I doubt it), but what about the money? Then the people in the government can buy a media ad/news about how they made a big drug bust, the outsiders are happy thinking that the drug war is being won. This also temporarily removes some competition from the government pipeline. Behind the curtain young females do sexual favors in order to see and hear thoughts from the violent criminal cam-thought net controllers. This system has been happening since 1910, and there is no sign of the outsiders catching on anytime soon. You have to realize that the controllers of the camera thought net are proud of what they did on 9/11, they applaud that mass murder and many other murders, so a blowjob, theft, assaults...those are nothing, after all, they celebrate murder of innocent lawful people.
How hard is it to believe that what eyes see can be seen from the back of the head? Apparently, it is tremendously hard to believe, in particular without any physical evidence other than a 1937 book, a Pupin dollar, a Robin William movie, and a few other tiny pieces of evidence.
I see that I am truly in a tiny tiny minority. My views on full democracy without representatives, free information, evolution, science, atheism, pleasure, etc represent about 10% of the planet, so all the military, all the police, the business owners, the public all form a different side-a side for secrecy, for apathy about murder, for the current system of government, religious, creationists, antiscience or ignorant of science, antipleasure, traditional...and so its going to take centuries for full democracy, for the public to see thoughts, to see the evil murders in the millions of this century...just a very very long time for people like me to hold a majority. But the Internet replacing telvision may accelerate things, people moving into orbit, the moon may accelerate things slightly. But clearly, both major sides of democrat and republican are on a different side from me...my views on full democracy, free info, etc represent about 10% of the public, but I think it seems inevitable that these views will grow and become the majority views eventually.
If you think that there is some massive smart intellectual group out there looking out for smart people, to include them into hearing thoughts, seeking out other atheists, and wise people, you are sadly mistaken, there is no such group...or else as an educated person, and atheist or agnostic...why wouldn't you be seeing, hearing, and sending thoughts? Why would you have never ever heard of Frank Fiorini, Thane Cesar, etc? Its simple logic to realize that the vast majority is monsterous and there is no wise, smart, massive group who cares little about including violent, religious, people who care little or nothing for science. Basically, there are only tiny scattered smart people, very few even recognize the truth of evolution. And smart people are probably the number 1 victim of the fascists that control the camera-thought net. These thugs purposely seek out smart and popular people, beaming terrible suggestions using the shockingly powerful and influential neuron activation technology.
One scary idea is that there must be underground sides, where people control lasers above ground but are not subject to lasers below ground. And this paints a scary picture, because when underground republicans (the first strike people of this half-century) decide to kill democrats above ground, the democrats underground have no choice but to laser-kill republicans above ground, because they cannot reach the people who control the beams underground. And so, this could actually be a stratagy for sick republicans underground to remove fellow republicans above ground...simply by laser push-button murdering many democrats above ground, the democrats underground would then, of course, return fire by laser push-button killing many republicans above ground, and what would remain is a nasty "underground earth" existence, where people would probably not go above ground for fear of being laser killed. The underground facilities have to be well guarded to keep out lasers. Maybe not though, perhaps even there lasers are installed. I really don't know. But the invention of small low cost lasers and in particular the neuron muscle controlling technology has created terrible additions to the arsenal of war. For example, powerful lasers are now a reality that people may use in war...there are limitations to how far a laser can reach, from a satellite, it can reach only one hemisphere of earth, on the ground it can only reach in a spherical radius. But the lasers are far more dangerous than conventional guns, being much faster, not running out of ammunition, cutting and killing instantly at the speed of light. The addition of neuron firing beams, and cutting lasers has made life on earth very dangerous, and our survival as a species is seriously at risk, not only because of the secrecy surrounding these inventions (and therefore the lack of democratic control over them), but also simply because of their dangerous powerful instantaneous destructive capability. Those with control over the lasers certainly enjoy flaunting them by zapping people as a reminder to all observers of the unpleasant possibilities, or simply as a sign of their unimpeded control over the public.
I wonder if Bush-Cheney made a secret campaign promise to the defense industry contractors to get elected, perhaps a promise of a war within a year, but then delivered late...maybe even a promise of 9/11? Or perhaps 9/11 was cooked up after they were elected. The Northwoods document makes clear that there are twisted people in the US military constantly hatching up these bizarre false-flag operations...probably since the beginning of Pupin's invention, but no doubt even back to the first printing press newspapers.
I hope there is some President that goes before the people to make a statement similar to this:
"My fellow citizens, I have come before you today to tell you something that is very important. What I have to tell you about is a secret. A very powerful and dangerous secret. This is a government secret, and a secret that also involves business, and every one of you. Many people would like this secret to remain a secret. I ask you for your opinion. Do you want to know what this secret is? Or would you rather not know?"
(after the votes are counted)
"Thank you for your votes. As I think everybody expected, you have overwhelmingly voted to be told about this secret. 90% of you have voted to be told what the secret is, knowing that telling you will change your life tremendously. There is no easy way to tell you what this secret is. This secret is probably one of the best kept secrets in history. Many of you may not even believe it when you hear what it is. I can tell you that this secret, is a very old secret that was found in 1910 by a professor at a university, and that it has to do with science and technology. I can tell you that this secret is an invention, and that this invention radically changed the way that people communicate. One important implication of this invention is that in an instant you will know the truth about many murders. You will know for sure, without any doubt at all, who murdered who, and like me, you will demand and vote for those murderers to be captured and jailed. All of that will probably happen. But just knowing what the secret is, is the first step in this process of informing you the public about technology you should have been informed about decades ago. Now this invention has upset many people. Many people are bothered by the changes this invention has caused. In some way, we might compare this invention to the first atomic bomb, but to set people's mind at ease, this invention is not destructive in any way. I am simply saying that this technological advance is one that will cause a large amount of controversy and strong opinions. I can tell you that there is more than one invention that has been kept secret from the public, and in particular there are two major inventions that I am going to tell you about. The first, as I told you was invented in 1910 by a professor at Columbia University in Manhattan, New York. In some ways, you could say that this was a second "Manhattan project". It was a terrible mistake on the part of the people at that time, to choose secrecy instead of informing the public. The invention of photography back in the 1800s was not kept secret, the first finding of X-rays was not kept secret, the atom bomb, the most massive destructive power known to life was not kept secret, but people in 1910 made a very bad choice, a very bad choice indeed, and that mistaken decision has continued until the present time. The second invention happened two years later, and this invention while related to the first invention, has even more radical implications for communication for life. So without further delay let me end this 100 year old secret, a secret which has plagued mankind for a century, causing unprecedented misery and injustice. Ironically the secret is terrible and the scourge of humanity, but the technology itself is very wonderful, and therefore should never have been kept secret in the first place. So I must remind you that when the truth is revealed to you about this secret invention, many of you will be shocked, and perhaps worried, but I want to reassure you that this invention is wonderful, and promises to make life much easier for all of us. So at this time I will reveal the first secret, which has been kept for 100 years without the poor public ever being told. This secret is that in 1910, Professor Michael Pupin, working at Columbia University, was the first to record an image of what a person sees from behind their head in infrared light. It seems so very simple to say it, and many of you might be thinking to yourselves...'that is all?...that is the big secret? that a person figured out how to see what a person sees from behind their head in infrared light?' and truly it seems like only a small wonder at first. And no doubt it is only a small wonder, and reveals to us, that those people in 1910 were very wrong in thinking this invention to be so scandelous. And those people in subsequent years, so very wrong in viewing this invention as too shocking for the public. Many people at the time viewed such technology as being useful against other nations, and this argument carried a lot of weight among the distrustful. But this argument was washed away like so many grains of sand when in only a few short years, every major government had reproduced the same exact technology. You can see, that among the great powers of earth, there are actually very few secrets. It was only the poor public, those who are not as well-to-do that were not told of this invention. So Pupin figured out how to see what people see from behind their head in infrared light. And it was instantly recognized that one could then see what the other animals were seeing too. And as you might expect, the other species see the universe quite in the same way as we humans do. So what do you think of that? What do you think about the fact that we can now all see what each other is seeing from behind our heads, without seeing the front of a person, without seeing their eyes directly from the front? Isn't that grand? Isn't that spectacular? I hope you share my excitement. Now there is more to tell you. The wonders of science did not end there. In fact, this is really only where the story of this terrible secret just begins. Tomorrow night I will bring you more information about this terrible secret and miscarriage of justice. But for tonight, let us rest on that thought, of what I have told you, that in 1910, Professor Mijalo Pupin, working at Columbia University, in Mahattan, New York, figured out how to see what a brain sees from behind the head in infrared light."
I saw some of the live earth shows and that was an impressive organizational event. There were some very nice duets. I couldn't help but see my own ass there shocking people with my jaw dropping lyrics and guitar laden riffs, running around in either stars and stripes or cherokee costumes. But I realized that my material is too hot even from my own living room. I don't have many environmental songs, but maybe I would have performed "Earth 2 U", "People of the Earth", and/or "Diminished" maybe my new one "don't let them bring you down" or of course "we need a lot of love". Perhaps a big-ol ship could have been put together for a pumped-up rendition of "Journey to Centauri". I don't know, what ever the people want, that is what I would give them, and of course, as usual much much more. I could have showed a preview for my watered-down "Democracy of Earth" film epics. I was thinking that I could be just the stablizer that that show needed.
In fact, I thought of a cool idea, why not have more rock shows with cool causes such as:
1) stop violence
a) stop murder show
b) stop assault show
07/11/07 update: this stop violence idea is ripe and filled with creative possibilities, here are more:
c) stop death penalty for non-violence crimes
1) money goes to produce freely distributed videos for the people of nations where people are executed for "crimes against chasitity", "homosexuality", "drug trafficking", "theft", etc. expressing that this punishment is far too harsh for the crime, since the crime is nonviolent. A complete list should be made and the public should be informed about what is happening and where.
2) total free info
a) we could give cool facts like: "while nobody has died from copyright, many millions have been pissed off by it."
3) total constant democracy
4) decrim the prost
5) stop the drug war
6) against racism
7) for gender equality
8) bi, gay, les, and straight tolerance
9) for science
a) highlight history
b) money goes towards science history video
10) against forced treatment
a) could add segment just against using psych meds, probably we could count out big pharma sponsership at that point
11) Develop the Moon show
a) Develop Mars show
b) Space exploration show
12) Walking robots show
a) money goes to support walking robot development
13) Benefit to expose Pupin, seeing hearing and sending thought
14) Future show
a) money goes to free public DVDs about timeline prediction about future
15) End hunger show
a) money goes to provide free food and water for those dying of starvation and dehydration, in addition to showing how the money is used in a free public video on the web.
16) Free utilities
a) money goes to free/gov subsidized web video encouraging people to vote for free utilities such as high speed internet, water, heat, electricity.
17) End Sales tax show
a) money goes to web video to end sales tax
18) End taxes for those earning under $100k show
19) Free clothes show
a) money goes to free clothes for low income people
20) Expose Frank Fiorini killer of JFK show
21) Jail Thane Cesar killer of RFK show
22) 9/11 Inside Job show
The Live Earth show was certainly a score for Gore and the Democrats. It's interesting how, terrorist acts help the Republican cause, while fun musical benefit shows benefit the Democrat cause. Maybe the Republicans will put on a show, maybe a "Global Warming isn't a fact" show, or a "Bomb Iran" show, the Republicans could try out this form of advertising and reaching the public with their messages and beliefs.
Similarly to how hard is it to believe that, like Yan Dan at Berkeley, but without the electrodes, people figured out how to see what a person sees, how hard is it to believe that there evolved advanced life out there with the simple capacity to move stars into globular clusters as I have shown is so easy to do with even a single planet?
Pupin, in his books talks about "resonance" alot. Perhaps the method he used was to make arrays of tiny resonators. Pupin was primarily an electrical person, and not a photographic person, but he did work with fluorescent screens. So probably seeing thought and eyes was first done using electronics, but photography can't be ruled out either. Electrical resonators are built in a variety of ways, some people use capacitor and inductor oscillator circuits, crystal oscillators can be used. It would seem like a lot of work to make even a small array of tiny oscillators. It would be nice to make them easily adjustable (like a radio tuning dial, which is a variable capacitor, the turning is geared and brings one capacitor plate closer or farther from the other), but I don't know how that could be done for an array of oscillators. I would encourage people to experiment with simple oscillators trying to send and receive photon signals of specific frequencies (radio) and adjusting those circuits. It might be more simple to make an array based on a single frequency of light. If I were to chose a wavelength, I would choose one around 10-50cm, since this is what the people holding out their arms are showing. With this electronic method, you can be sure that you are capturing a specific wavelength of photons, as opposed to electronic light detectors which might pick up a wide variety of wavelengths (and possibly diffraction gratings might not diffract long enough wavelengths to isolate one 10-50cm). Basically what this is, is an 2d array of radio receivers all tuned to the same wavelength. It's like a few hundred or thousand radio receivers all packed together in a 2 dimensional array square.
my email address email@example.com (and probably all from tedhuntington.com) is banned from sending to hotmail.com addresses (but not google gmail.com or yahoo.com, better for people to switch to google probably, Microsoft is a total dinosaur ...and the stuff they do is out there...radically different from out of nowhere, not progressive...not like opensource where things get progressively better and if they don't a new project splits off and maintains the progessive nature...but it's rare because most people who develop software dont waste time with radical cosmetic redesign changes...for example look at Vista how they removed "my computer" from the desktop...a million people are now like 'how do I get to my file?'. Vista is basically XP but the icons were repainted and now they can charge another $100 for all those people who paid for XP.). Banning email addresses is a useless antispam technique in particular because too many non-spammer people are punished. Even with my tiny hand-made spam program I don't do that. I can ban certain email addresses, but I mainly ban links in emails, and keyword combinations. Because almost 90% of spam uses "spoofed" (simply enters in a fake address...you would think the email system would have electronic MAC addresses with each email, or some method of knowing the exact location of every email just like a post office timestamp) email addresses, banning an email address is stupid and useless...it bans too many potentially legitimate email addresses. I don't have any personal problem with Microsoft, I am simply stating facts. In fact, I certainly support Bill Gates' work to end starvation, and his comments skeptical of religion. It's just a simple fact that copyright is a complete failure in the face of the camera-thought network and simply in principle and in practice. And the amazing fact is that unlike the Caryle group that is now taking it's taxpayer funded massive new earnings to buy up other companies, Microsoft has not produced a single hardware physical property product, ... they could have built computers, they could have built robots, but instead perhaps true to the info-only-money form, they have stayed with info only products, and so if copyright is ever voted down by the public, Microsoft would almost definitely collapse, maybe they could continue providing support for legacy Microsoft products at that point. Where other info companies who divested in physical property might survive a total free info society. Dell and Gateway for example would probably easily survive a total-free-info society, as would HP, Sony, and other hardware manufacturing and assembling companies.
That news that the people of China executed a guy who took bribes is amazing, I thought it was a typo...executed? That is overly harsh. Even life imprisonment would be too harsh. Just give back the money, and let people know that this person cannot be trusted without a camera-thought network system where all people can see and hear thoughts to prevent such fraud. We in the US probably don't hear about 99% of the executions around the earth. People are routinely killed for drug trafficking.
Speaking of trafficking, ever notice how the anti-prost people always buy news stories that talk about "trafficking" in sex slaves? It's definitely biased, because like people who work at McDonalds, Walmart, that clear toilets, etc. maybe the sex industry is not glamorous, but certainly a large number of people consent to working in it. If there are exceptions, by all means, no body should be forced into labor, and there are plenty of laws and popular opinion against that. But it got me thinking that you know what? There actually is trafficking in slave labor, and do you know what? It's in the militaries of earth...think about it...those people are forced to work, if they leave they are charged with AWOL, if they quit they can be jailed by a military court and locked into a military prison. So there most definitely are kids trafficked on earth, and they are the young men and women that are forced by illegal contracts (not being able to quit a job is illegal as far as I know). The simple answer is to make the military more like a legal job that people can quit. Beyond the legal human rights labor law issue of right to quit, no body should have to be fighting for a cause they don't believe in. In addition, its time to abolish all military court systems. Now I have put together two proposed laws stating just those principles at tedhuntington.com/vote so let's get those proposed laws rolling already.
There is a good video about executions of young girls in Iran at:
16 year old Iranian girl is executed for a 4th count of "crimes against chastity"
. To me the issue is less about age, and more about killing a person for a nonviolent crime that is not even a crime.
By no means, does this kind of violence justify invading a soveriegn nation, and I am not advertising that in any way. I simply think this is cause to use free information to inform and educate the public about this injustice.
The BBC narrator exhibits all the usual backwards views, calling szex between the young girl and the cab driver "rape", when probably it was consensual. The sad thing is that it takes a cab driver to introduce the young female to sex, instead of an advanced society educating people and introducing people to all the pleasure and sex they could ever want. Coaching them, guiding them, explaining to them that physical pleasure, such as touching is a wonderful natural part of nature and life on earth, introducing them to all the other people, encouraging them to pursue their interest in kissing, in sex, at their own rate, making strict precautions against STDs, pregnancy (if not wanted), violence, and any and all unconsensual activity, and mainly letting young people join the stream of people participating in sex, be it oral, anal, vagina, masturbation, just gentle petting, genital touching, kissing, etc...not learning from some old guy in a cab (unless that is a person's particular interest), but from your peers, and adults, tasting the variety of sex openly, all together, and accepted as a natural million year old process. Even frogs get erect penises, the erect penis is millions of years old, but people today...act like it is something completely new from another planet or something....not one statue, very few paintings of erect penises or sex have survived through history. In the video, their big defense is that the girl is 16, not that murdering people because of "crimes against chastity" is shockingly vicious, the punishment far outweighing the perceived crime, which is a nonviolent crime to begin with. How about the part where these people are whipped? An assault that leaves life-long scars and immense pain...again for nonviolent crimes. They claim that the girl has "psychological problems" I think "yeah send that psychological gibberish and total rubbish at them...see if that confuses the shit out of them", but really, I think a more honest and worthwhile approach is arguing that such punishments for nonviolent crimes and crimes which are hardly crimes at all is too brutal. In the Arab nations, people argue that Muhammad could not make mistakes, being divinely guided, but since there were many people who lived before Muhammad, and Muhammad was only a human, isn't it entirely possible that Muhammad and the writers of the Koran (or Bible for that matter) were mistaken or under a bad influence themselves to some extent? Or just simply wrong or the victim of bad traditions. Al-Razi only a century later was critical of Islam, citing other poetry as better than the Quran. Without a doubt, they were wrong about the sun going around the earth, and so, it seems very clear that they might have been wrong on many other issues too. And those arguments should be taken to people living under Sharia laws, and perhaps sent through the postal system or air dropped, because those places are too dangerous for open discussion or tourism probably until the power of secular law replaces the power of religious law and religious leaders. I'm not saying that to be racist or mean, because I am not racist, and I oppose racism (I support racial variety as a healthy goal), I see every person as different, and care most about their internal views. It's the violence and jailing done to nonviolent people all over the earth that worries me. In the West, things were very similar for centuries, until the secular laws protected people from religious fanaticism. My concern is the violence, and the imprisonment done to nonviolent people all over the earth. Europe and America has only had protecting from execution for "blasphemy" and "heresy" for just over 200 years. People were executed and miserably, burned alive, in the West even as recently as the 1700s. The execution of nonviolent people makes traveling to the Arab nations (even Egypt where people are very interested in seeing the ancient Egyptian monuments, and Turkey) dangerous for people used to the rules of life in the West. The West certainly has large amounts of barbarism too. People are jailed here for centuries for consensual sex with young people, for selling drugs, many are locked indefinitely in psychiatric hospitals, tortured, restrained, electrocuted, drugged, without any democratic trial, no sentence, without any contact to the outside for decades. So the entire earth is awash in violence and injustice. I would like to visit all those nations and of course the other planets and moons too, to see many of the archelogical and historical artifacts, but it's too dangerous. This is one reason why I am working for change, and these issues of violence in other nations and in our own nation fits perfectly into a stop violence movement's activities, such as producing free videos, giving benefit shows, recording votes, recording and exposing the names and images of violent people, and general free info activities.
It seemed like, and correct me if I'm wrong (me getting a single email is highly unlikely but I call for them anyway), that people at the Live Earth show were giving out "yes"s and "no"s, to what might be old Asimov's technique of ending on a y or n for those scientists who thought the public should be told about seeing and hearing thought, versus those scientists who voted against telling the public (yes being "tell them" and no being "dont tell them"). Because Lenny Kravitz clearly ends with "yes!", as did others. Many people used the word "yall", what could that mean? It's "lay" backwards. Maybe "y" in yall = yes tell them. Sting sang a loud "noooooo!", but who knows, people morph the sounds on the television all the time, they probably morphed the 9/11 phone calls, I know they morph sounds around me, because it's apparently easy to change the sounds we hear in our head beaming to screen 3 and 4. Maybe he was saying 'how about the "no" people? Have they got a bad view or what?' Only time and the camera-though eye vids will show the truth. Sting stood up against aparteid in Africa so it seems inconsistent to be simulateously in favor of aparteid as pertains to seeing, hearing and sending thoughts. Unless you can see a person's thoughts, and potentially even then, I wouldn't be sure of anything. They might not even being refering to that Asimov game, but to some other game or technique.
See my paper:
"Are Photons Matter, and Do They Obey Newton's Law of Gravity?"
Here is the first link I have ever found suggesting that the Pound-Rebka experiment might be evidence for a change in the velocity of photons"
Explanation number 2 is the most likely in my opinion.
The simplest answer is to simply measure the speed of light in the up-down direction relative to earth. To make a measurement, a large distance probably has to be covered, and electronic counters of very high speed used (the fastest I know of can only go microseconds).
In the far future, people will probably have far more interaction. For example, two popular people might have lunch together, they can then put that lunch on their "resume", the popularity of one person potentially adding to the popularity of the other person and vice versa. And so it probably will be with sex too. When one popular person has sex with the other person, there won't be any possessiveness, jealousy, ridicule, or emotional trauma, it will probably be more like a fun popular event that everyone enjoys. Then each person will have the other on their resume and will grow more popular because of their experience with other popular people.
I've said it before, but clearly in the USA, we should be number one in all the sciences and number one in space exploration, but we are not doing that. We could have spent money we don't have in a similar fanatical way that money is being spent on the pointless and bloody Iraq and Afghanistan occupations, by developing the new "new world" of the Moon and Mars. What a jewel in our treasure chest having a few Moon and Mars satellite States would be for the USA. That real estate is prime real estate, and unlike earth, there are very few if any environmental issues, no species habitats to worry about or protect, because the Moon and Mars are basically lifeless desert wastelands, waiting to be developed. Anybody in real estate knows the tremendous value of any land, and the amount of land available for life of this star system is finite and relatively small in quantity. Any person who projects life into the future, sees how important the surface of the Moon and Mars is. Why isn't the USA number one in health sciences? We in the USA clearly have the number one military on earth, our military is far and away the most funded and largest military of any nation. Why don't we have the number one sciences? We aren't leading the way in health science, robot and computer technology, alternative fuel technology, stopping of violence, ... I would like for people to be told 'when you enter the USA, you chances of being murdered, assaulted or wrongly imprisoned decrease dramatically 100 times most other nations'...but that simply is far from correct...in fact, statistically speaking, the second you step over the US Canadian border into Canada your chances of survival increase dramatically. I would like to see the USA lead the way in democratic reform, and democratic government...we could be setting a good example for other representative democracies thinking about going full democracy. We don't lead in the sciences, I think, because people in the USA are more concerned with how many points are scored on a playing field, and are too fanatically absorbed in religions. We should care much more for science than we do.
There is a news story about the death of Jim Morrison, and people are saying that he died of an overdose on a toilet, but I think clearly the camera-thought net images from his eyes and the eyes of people in the governments will show the truth. Maybe it was an overdose, but it might be possible that they pulled a "sylvia" with "remote neuron activation" while Morrison was in the bathroom stall. Just simply causing some critical muscle to contract until the person dies. Any heroine found in the system would cover a cause of death. I was just saying that, what people will clearly find, when all the camera-thought network images are made public, is that a ruthless bunch of murderers killed many of their heros. Without doubt these people staged 9/11, they murdered JFK, and RFK (by conventional technology) and openly covered it up protecting Sturgis and Cesar, all indications are that they have push-button muscle murdered many many fine nonviolent people, in particular liberal intellectual and artistic leaders. Morrison never injected but instead snorted herion through the nose. I question whether, in particular by that method, if people would not be able to judge their level of intoxication and stop if overloaded. I tell people not to use and in particular not to get addicted to drugs, but for sure, nobody should be jailed if a person does use or become addicted to drugs. It's entirely possible to simply plant suggestions into people's mind to use drugs too. Every aspect of secret technology is abused by evil people in power to combat truth and justice from happening in my experience.
I think an awesome potential money-making and fun idea is making a web dating site that not only includes: "religion", and "attends services", but "breast size", "buttocks roundness", "penis size", so people can save a little more time in sorting through thousands of people. The insiders obviously have already done this decades ago.
I think government health care is a good idea, although maybe how to implement it is a difficult issue, but clearly, for me, the basic truth is that, no person in the USA should be starving or dehydrating, and from there, a person is basically talking about government health care to create a bottom line standard of living, just like nobody should be murdered. I think a private only government structure might work, the main key is that everything has to be democratic, and full control has to be in the hands of the majority of each nation, city, town, etc. So when I say private structure, like I envision a libertarian philosophy, I think that ultimately since it has to be democratically ruled, we are talking about a democratic government anyway, since the majority is overseeing all aspects of what they are getting for their money. But anyway, clearly there needs to be a basic standard of living, and basic health care (perhaps guaranteeing some basic services, such as teeth cleanings, treating broken bones, etc, or a monetary limit per person of $10k/year or something, which perhaps could accumulate over the years if not used). One thing I definitely vote against is government money funding "psychological problems", and in particular the psychological drug industry, because much of psychology is inaccurate pseudoscience and simply outright fraud, in particular the theories of "psychosis", "neurosis", "schizophrenia"...and as for the new major "diseases" of adhd and depression...those simply are not important enough to be considered covered under "basic bare bones health care" in my opinion...those are trivial ideas...and well within the range of normal and lawful behavior, beyond that, the theories behind adhd and depression are very abstract and non-diagnostic. One of the best proofs of the experimental and abstract nature of psychology is the idea that there are no known diagnostic tests for any psychological disease, unlike tests for cancer, bone fractures, etc. And so government health care could open the door for taxpayer funding, government-pharmaceutical industry corrupt alliances based on pseudoscience, deception and fraud. The public has to pay billions, that go into the psychological pharm companies pockets, in particular when you add the element of unconsensual treatment...then people being injected with psychological drugs, based on fraudulent pseudoscience experimental theories without any diagnostic tests, has to be done by law to them, even without their consent in clear violation of the Nuremberg laws established to stop just such experimental treatment abuses, and to pour salt in those people's wounds, the tax payers have to pay for the entire ordeal....funding these drug injectors, the hospital owners, the pill prescribers, and everything else. And let us always remember, that these are "patients" who are being drugged without consent...so it's like creating a law "10% of the people need to be drugged, and so 100% per cent need to pay the drug, hospital, and physician people and companies"...it's like an automated deposit system from the taxpayer's pocket into the big pharma industry at the expense of these poor victims who don't want the drugs to begin with. So there are many arguments against psychology. I was glad to see that recently John Travolta gave his opinion that using psychology-based drugs is not a good idea, and I think that is good advice, I don't think people should be taking drugs based on theories of psychology because it is highly experimental, and there is a large history and quantity of inaccurate theories in psychology. So one fear of government health care is the psychological aspect. And clearly all the big people, Hillary, Moore, anybody you can name aside from the Scientologists who have taken a view against psychology to their credit (I should mention that I am not a supporter of scientology, or many of the views of L Ron Hubbard), support and deeply believe in the far-fetched, experimental, and/or trivial theories of psychology. What is already happening is that the majority, who is totally wrong on this issue, are also believers in psychological theory. And so, this terrible system is definitely going to be rubber stamped...and I have to wonder of those big supporters of psychological unconsensual treatment....how many are getting money from the psychology drug sellers?...pfizer, j&j, etc. (Interestingly, a drug company like Merck, we should all be proud of and hold in high esteem, in regard to their not participating in the multi-billion dollar psychological drug industry). I'm not saying that nobody is delusional, most people are inaccurate in many ways...for centuries people claimed that the Sun goes around the Earth, that Jesus rose from the dead, etc. or has unusual behavior...we all have our unusual lawful behaviors. I am simply saying the theories of psychology are inaccurate, do not heal or help the perceived problems, and the vast majority of psychological theory and treatment is purely inaccurate psuedoscience. I think psychology is a science, but a very experimental science that addresses very abstract problems, and uses the results of drug experiments (in addition to shockingly, electrocution, physical restraint, and invasive surgical procedures) to judge whether these abstract problems are cured or not. The worst part, as I said, is that, many (and perhaps most...there is not much research into this issue) of these people who the drugs are injected and forced on, do not consent, and even object to such invasions of their bodies. I can see, a free and open market for all drugs, even psychology drugs, but the key to everything, is that there has to be consent. So I am definitely for government health care programs, the USA should be number one for health care on earth, and care much more for health science, and science in general than people in the USA do. I'm looking forward to seeing Michael Moore's "Sicko" video and getting some good info and arguments for government a comprehensive health care system. Moore made a good point in the video of him on the Larry King show tieh Sanjay Gupta, that here we are spending billions each month for a brutal and pointless war...but we can't spend that much for healing and health care? It's shocking to me that the public is willing to fund and support the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, what terrible mistakes.
Our justice system is so messed up. Now a majority of 9 people decide everything for everyone. And 5 of those people are shockingly backward and conservative. I hope the 9/11 trials of the people who refused to settle exposes how 9/11 was an inside job, and how the WTC building could only have come down in a controlled demolition, how the Pentagon hole is too small, start to subpoena videos people in the government confiscated, and start to question employees of Controlled Demolition, inform the jury and public that there was molten metal, and ask 'how could there possibly be molten metal in a gravity-only collapse?', and start to work their way up to find all those involved in 9/11, perhaps the worst planned mass murder in US history. But you know...how far can they go, when the highest jury possible, is 9 people of which 9 are on the take of the camera-thought net, and 5 or more who are going to allow murder of innocent people? They ought to be able to sue people in the government, because that is where most of the planning and execution happened, but certainly Controlled Demolition is not government. Again, this idea of money compensation is I think something I don't really support strongly, the key is exposing and jailing those involved. It's interesting to see that the government paid $6 billion to 2,880 families (that is $2 million a family...I mean how many people have ever had $2 million dollars...those people are now millionaires). People can't put a price on life, and I can see to a certain extent, some kind of monetary compensation possibly, but $2 million dollars per victim? That is a huge amount. In particular for the molestation trials...there I don't think one penny should be paid, because it's like an assault that actually causes pain...just expose and jail those involved, maybe they could be made to pay money to their victims, but a reasonable amount...certainly to cover health expenses that the victim had to pay. Doesn't this payment by the government imply that they are involved or at least negligent in the murder of these people? I have to applaud the 41 people who didn't take the money and who are publicizing the injustice done to their loved ones and are not going quietly (I'm not sure of the terms of the settlement but probably the victims can not speak about 9/11, who knows). There is financial harm suffered (which for murder can only be possibly how much money that person might have given the plantiff), and punitive damage (money the defendent should be made to pay as a punishment for wrong doing), and there the door is always wide open...I guess in my own mind, it might have to do with how much of a money fine would teach a person that what they did was wrong (again for many people no amount of money fine would ever change their mind), or would punish them in a way that is similar or equivalent to the way the plantiff (and or victim) suffered or experienced loss. It's complex, but I hope over time, some logical system can be made clear to all and easily accepted by a majority of people.
That was nice to see Michael Moore expose CNN for being one-sided on the Iraq invasion. The major media is unquestionably biased and corrupted by money. Major media are more or less advertising companies for the highest bidder, it just so happens that the honest don't have a lot of money. Maybe honesty isn't a money maker. Another example of the millions is how CNN is now saying some person who helps get girls out of prostitution is a hero, while to me the real heros on the prostitution issue, are those fighting to get girls out of prison for prostitution. Again, exposing and freeing people in labor they cannot quit without punishment is a noble cause, and let's include letting people quit the military here in the USA without punishment too.
Of course I fully side with Google over Viacom in this latest suit. My vote is for total free info and against copyright.
Many people do not know that currently, in the current incarnation, the republicans are the white supremecists and represent white power, while the democrats represent multiracial toleration for the most part. The republicans represent a direction backwards, generally speaking, more religion, less rights for women, basically like going back in time, while the democrats represent progress, more rights for women, less religion, generally speaking, I mean it's not black and white, there are many gray areas, and generally speaking most people in this time are very uneducated. So, for example, this is why we never hear about that Republican female senator, that Asian, Black, or Hispanic Republican. Many people have figured out the basics of the two sides, but of course there are always those exceptions trying to break new ground on both sides, in addition to those public figures designed to give the appearance of some other reality. I can imagine if republicans got their way, women would lose the right to vote before the hundreth anniversary of women getting that right in 1920. Yes, in 1920...women got the right to vote...pretty progressive nation eh? Probably republicans would like to see women forced to wear a veil and stay inside unless accompanied by their husband, not to speak in public, not to take jobs from the men. This is why women and pro-women rights supporters should vote Democrat almost always (unless there is some fluke like Ron Paul, Larry Flynt, etc ... some decent person is running as a republican), they should have voted more for Ferraro and Mondale...I can't understand why people sell-out their own interests constantly.....probably they are beamed on. who knows? only the insiders know, and they ain't saying!
Did you know that every single phone call you have ever made is probably recorded by the phone company. Do you remember the first phone call you ever made? The phone company does!
Many people were outraged when Brittany Spears' crotch was photographed, but none of the people in the major media were at all impressed, none viewed this as an example of "vagina power", which is how I see this, or at least as a freeing up of the view that the vagina is somehow ugly or should be hidden. Instead of headlines such as "Vagina 101" or "Cunt Power", there was nothing but derision, nothing but hatred for the vagina, disgust, that a vagina should be seen publicly, and I think we as a society should think about that, and realize that the common belief about the vagina is wrong, that the vagina is a natural part of anatomy that evolved, part of nature's design, and we should celebrate it not celibate it, publicize it not privitize it. For sure let's take brain power to the top, and also take cunt, ass, balls, tits, and dick power to the top too.
In addition, there was the unending belief that a person that would show their genitals has too much sex, and that regular daily or weekly sex is unhealthy. I reject the labels of "slut", and "whore" for people mainly because consensual sex is perfectly natural and healthy, it's inaccurate to think that sex is wrong or should be kept to a minimum and done privately. But also those labels are anti-women, they generally don't apply to males. So, of course, I did not, and am not going to hop on any kind of "slut" bandwagon for any human, because there is not nearly enough sex and physical pleasure on earth for me.
I think these low level attempted murders/explosions in the UK might be the neocons preparing for the 2008 US election. This might just be the very beginning of a more intensive campaigning. Because, is there any question at all, that these attacks help the terror-hysteria? And therefore, they help the republicans who are big into the "war on terror", but not surprisingly not into the "war on violence". When people can see, hear and send thoughts, it seems very likely that they can send suggestions or fail to send diversionary suggestions (such as images of females of interest, or food items, etc), in addition to simply not pulling them over earlier on the highway, since there is little doubt that those people's thoughts are watched, and images of any kinds of plans seen well before they might happen.
You can see that the neocons want to invade Iran, and they will probably use the excuse that attacks in Iraq are linked to Iran.
It's interesting that browsers do not have the built-in ability to change fonts (or font size, etc) when entering text, so far as I know.
One thing I hear a lot is "police" instead of "please", and I think it's people showing unthinking support for government police in their entirety. To me this is just like racism, it's so stupid and simple. Because there is a better line to draw, that depends nothing on a person's occupation, clothing, weight, appearance, etc...and that is: murderer, or non-murderer. Another big distinction in dumb people's minds is "right and left"...and shockingly what we see, is people unthinkingly supporting the neocon 9/11 false-flag acts of murder with the excuse of ... supporting the "right", as if this idea of a right and left is more important than murder. With the excuse of "cop" or "right", all the sudden murder becomes acceptable to millions of people, and this is no exaggeration. It's just like the idiocy of racism...people see the skin color, and all decisions are made...what a person thinks or does does not matter. And so it is. usually when people say "police" instead of "please", I think "yeah the one's that don't kill so much". But it's more like "It is shockingly 1+1=2 simple: There are just murderers and those who stop them...uniform, employment, nationality, race, gender, weight, sexual preference, religion, political side, matters nothing". 07/05/07 I thought of a good example: How many people care if the Green River Killer was a Democrat, Republican or Libertarian? How about his victims? Most people probably care very little about the political views of a murderer or the victim of murder. And for the Texas Tower killer Charles Whitman, probably the majority of people don't care if Whitman is republican or democrat, simply identifying the important characteristic of Whitman as being his murdering, and the important characteristic of his victims as being murdered or injured. So it is interesting that people seem to think that people that do not support the 9/11 murders are somehow not right-wingers, or somehow traitors to the right wing. It's like saying, ok well the Green River Killer was republican, why don't you protect him for the right wing cause? I guess some people put a "war spin" on murder, justifying the mass murders of 9/11 as acts of war done by the rightwing in the interest of furthering their goal of increasing the size of the US military and taking over other nations, and therefore, those murders are excluded from normal everyday law. That is the way people view the murdering in Iraq, once you stamp "war" on something, law goes down the drain, and murder is ok. Ultimately we need to evolve into a society that views all murder of humans as a bad thing, and a very important thing to stop and punish.
I was walking back to my car yesterday, and this older obese white woman shouted "stabb'em!". And I instantly thought...'no...let's stop violence...you know...violence is wrong', and then I thought of how ... here these people can see inside people houses, can hear their thoughts...can beam suggestions directly onto people's eyes without any choice by or even knowledge of the victim....and what kind of people are they? The kind of people that yell and cheer for violence....I mean it is shocking to me that such criminals and violent people are allowed to see inside people's houses and heads...and think about the shockingly chaotic and violent influence these shitheads have on society at large on a daily basis. The conclusion I've drawn in the past also appeared as a recurring memory to me then, that, we really live in a society, where criminals, and I am talking about violent criminals...like a Jesse James gang of killers....but not even just thieves...or nonviolent molestors, I mean I'm talking about violent people...violent criminals...those involved in murder, assault and torture of innocent nonviolent lawful people. Just a massive massive violent criminal organization with members in the absolutely highest positions of government, business, and wealth...not every person in the governments of earth and businesses...many insiders and outsiders are against violence, but the number of killers and their supporters is phenomenonally large, and the outsiders definitely do not realize this. The insiders know this, but do very little to nothing about it. It may be that, what they see on the inside of the pupin camera thought net is that, they are up against a wall with a gun pointed at them...there is not much they can do to stop these insider murderers. But clearly, simply showing the images of these people and their murders is one simple nonviolent thing that they can do. But they fear reprisal, they fear the penalties the outsiders might inflict on them. But nonetheless, the is little question, that those people who dominate the camera-thought networks are simply violent criminals of the worst kind, and a massive number...a massive number and a growing number...they are growing larger not smaller, thanks to people voting for Bush, definitely a member of this violent criminal group (although, a conspirator of and accessory before the fact to multiple homicides, probably not an actual murderer himself, although that can be debated)...where for example, I think there are many insiders who are for stopping first strike murder, who obviously are not included in the massive violent criminal empire that grows like a secret cancer on the earth.
I probably have written it before, but what pisses me off, of the many things that do, is how the camera-thought net is the perfect tool for hooking up...no pickup lines are needed, you know instantly if there is a love connection from the thousands of people to choose from, but as an outsider, you can forget any chance of scoring because you have to make endless hours of small talk, and then around much of the earth, you are probably trying to pick up a person who is already included...and for them...understandably they will probably not want to date you because it's like dating a deaf person...they hear your thoughts, but you have no idea what's on their mind...it would be too frustrating for all but the most dedicated insiders. So the camera-thought network, secret only from the public...all major governments had it decades ago (so national security is a farse...its for public manipulation)...to do eugenics...to only allow like-minded conservative Christians to reproduce, having their pick of the planet, while outsiders are lucky to battle for a kiss, while avoiding herpes and HIV possibly even sent at them by evil insiders. It's total aparteid (that is probably a double meaning with what Jimmy Carter is refering to in his book, for how the planet is now divided into 2 distinct groups, the insider cult of lavish benefits who routinely see, hear and send thought images and sounds and the excluded serfs who are lucky to get a crumb). Then, for the outsiders, not to even know what has happened. I hope they some time soon get the faintest idea of what happened way back when with Pupin and how wealthy people absent integrity and wisdom took over from there.
A funny retort to antisexuals with their constant antisexual buzzwords is the counter-buzzword "oooooo", like sexuality is some shocking thing.
I had a bunch of good comments but somebody deleted them from my computer. I can't remember all my comments, but there were some about the supreme court, how they basically are just like average people who always vote their own personal opinions, just like we all do. No knowledge of law is necessary to decide your opinion on any issue. And here 9 people decide the laws for 300 million people whose votes are not counted, but easily could be.
One was about how 70% of the people are for ending the Iraq war, and that their opinion is not happening proves this isn't democracy.
All about the Freedom From Religion Foundation supreme court decision, I'm not going to retype it.
I want to ask people in science, in particular physics: "Do you accept that a photon occupies space?". Most people would think logically that yes, of course photons and light occupy space, it is unlikely that photons do not occupy space in the universe. And is the claim then that photons do occupy space, but yet have no mass? Anybody with any common sense, I think, would say, anything that occupies space has to have mass. When I hear people state the popular opinion that the photon is "massless", I think many people have to know that we are in a transition in science...there is no way the photon being "massless" is going to last.
I hope that love wins, to put it simply, and that violence loses.
Many businesses and governments fit into two models of organization. Top ruled, or Bottom ruled. Top ruled is a monarchical structure, and Bottom ruled is a democratic structure. What we see in top-ruled structures is that, when there is cost cutting, those decisions are made by those at the top, and so the salaries and jobs to be cut are at the bottom...they rarely lower their own gigantic salaries in an effort to trim cost. When there is cost cutting in bottom-ruled organizations (this structure is rare on earth, being that there is no business or government that is fully and constantly democratic, but certainly some democratic opinion is felt in many organizations), the cost cutting probably would come from the top salaries more. So, the top-down model is lop-sided because not many people who control the decision of whose salary or job gets cut are going to lower or cut their own salary or job. There are rare stories of some CEO going without a salary, those are very rare. In my experience, what we see is an upper layer run amok. They vote themselves grandiose salaries, because ultimately they are the one people who decide what everybody's salary is going to be, while people at the bottom get very little, because they have no vote over how much money is paid to anybody. As I have said before, what we see is an exponential salary curve, not a linear curve. The salaries go: $30k, $40k, $50, $70k, $100k, $200k, $400k, etc, not $30k,$40k,$50k,$60k,$70k,$80k. And that in my opinion is evidence of the unchecked upper wealth. In particular I think when it comes to taxes, I think anybody earning under $100k should not even have to pay taxes, because think about it...what does a person who gets $1 million a year care about having to pay $100,000...that still puts them 10x over the annual income of the vast majority of people. If the majority was smart they would be electing representatives who promise to do things like that. But what we see is that the big money people find a person who is going to protect them, and then use their money to propagandize for that person, and the public buys it, because you can only elect the person you see on television, and to be on television costs millions. So get smart poor people is what this paragraph is about, and go for full democracy, free info and taxes only for those with annual income > $100k.
I mean I hope love, as in physical pleasure, care and compassion for self and others wins.
That and a Hadean amount of stopping violence, free info, free thought, full democracy, exposing all lies, and stopping of drug and prost wars wins too.
With the London defused car bomb, could that have been one of Blair's car, perhaps purposely forgotten? They were big into false-flag terror, 7/7 being the prime example. What are the chances of an exact bomb simulation being run at the exact same place and time? With all the cameras in London, if the person who did this is not shown to the public driving in the car, I would say that this too was probably an inside job that either the new PM (on his first or second day no less...clearly a change of the guard has resulted in something) and crew exposed and stopped early, or were a part of. If stopped early...if only the Democrats in the USA had been more brave and caught the WTC demolition crew in the act, it would have been another Watergate, and a wonderful Watergate, as the media and public traced the demolition experts all the way up the chain to Cheney and the Bush family. I used to be that New York State was part of the Union and a desegrated state, now they appear to be run by the 9/11 murderers. Let's hope that they at least have public video of those doing "maintenance" on the WTCs. Maybe some WTC tourists have captured explosive placers on video without even knowing it. Were you video taping near the WTC the week or two before 9/11/01? The claim is that somebody saw smoke coming from the car. Maybe it was a bomb that failed. With all the technology, seeing, hearing and sending thoughts, cameras in every London house and apartment that has a phone, for the people in the government and wealthy people to not know who is doing what is hard to believe. Who is the UK "Controlled Demolition"? Perhaps CD has a UK chapter? I think this could be related to me seeing the 1980s movie "Brazil", which has English people and a terrorism theme (which is eerily timely now), and those spartan fascists in government military and police see things and see an opportunity to use their massive explosives and weapons to try and make liberals look violent. It's ironic, because, here they are the very terrorists that they make a big stink about trying to stop. They give excuses to other insiders (perhaps...but then maybe they don't even bother with excuses by now) such as "sometimes a small amount of evil needs to be done for the greater good", etc. Trying to manipulate the outsiders is simply wrong, no matter to what end, and the end is certainly a bad one always. Look at the example of 9/11/01 in the States. Now we have ~3000 killed citizens, 3000+ killed kids in the military that were not allowed to quit, thousands of injured and disabled, a practical genocide happening in Afghanistan and Iraq, with more than 300,000 people murdered, women, children, a credit card bill of $300 billion or something for all of this criminal carnage that went right into the defense industry owners pockets, and the planet is a much more dangerous place. And how could it be otherwise when sheep have elected wolves into the highest positions of power in the USA? One of my thoughts was 'halleluja that the UK government military are trying this new technique of simply "finding" a bomb, instead of detonating them...and that does do a great amount of scaring in itself (as of course gratuitous scaring of the public appears to be necessary) with the plus that nobody gets hurt'.
I hope for a time when people care less about black or white, and more about wrong or right. And of course, we should recognize, enjoy and celebrate every positive aspect of race.
If ever a war does start between the laser people, my advice to the stop violence faction is first to zap the "first strike violent murderers", because that is probably the way to end the war the fastest; simply by capturing or killing those who have or try to start violence against nonviolent people. The rest, no matter how bad, probably won't murder or assault, even though they may call for murder and assault, and even those people perhaps should be captured or destroyed because of their influence on the weak minded that might be tricked into doing violence by following their orders for violent attack of nonviolent or stop first strike violent people.
When I was younger we played "spin the bottle" and "ten minutes in the closet", and everybody got kissed and fondled, there was no harassment, no law suits, no marriage, no certificates, nobody's reputaion was ruined or even altered, everybody had a fine time and there was no harm done. But how many adults do that? None, after they reach age 18 everything turns celibate and monogamous, no more kissing everybody, no more 10 minutes in the closet games, or spin the bottle, they are then expected to pair off with a single person for life, and that path is torturous in my opinion. Many people want the immense pleasure of reproduction and raising children, but don't want the brutal stagnation of uninteresting sex that is the primary characteristic of monogamy. To me, humans have it entirely wrong, because the fun of pleasure and sex happens always as a new experience, with a new person. Nonsexual physical pleasure is a constant want, but variety, I think is a very important component. So love and sex in my opinion is something of the moment, where the current view is that love is developed over a long period of time with one other person, that the best path is a single partner for life, and throw away any excitement of sex for the desire and enjoyment of a responsible family. There really are only 2 main issues involved with physical pleasure: 1) is there any STD? and 2) is there a plan for pregnancy? If kissing, massaging, masturbating, oral sex, clearly 2) is already answered and you don't have to worry about that. Once you know that 1) is answered, and 2) is answered, by all means enjoy yourself and have as much fun as you want in my minority opinion. I reject the claim of others that there is 3) your reputation as promiscuous, because to me, sex once a day is simply good health, it's completely natural, it's like eating or pooping once a day. Also, people add a 4) once you kiss or have sex with a person you are then "assigned" to that person for an indefinite amount of time, but that time must be a long time, at least a few weeks, and you will take on the moniker "boyfriend" and "girlfriend". I reject that claim of 4) and think that a kiss is just a kiss, as the song goes, ... nothing more, it doesn't mean that one owns the other, that the two must enter into a vow of monogomy, not looking at other people, not kissing others, etc. That "ownership" possessive aspect of physical pleasure is like a disease in my opinion. People are routinely killed because of that. The main issue is responsibility about pregnancy (again only for penis in vagina sex) and STDs. But I see the natural method as...youz two are attracted to each other, you think each other is hot, you want to kiss, you kiss, etc...you get naked, you do the oral sex, or the anal-penile thing, maybe the vaginal-penile, roll around and enjoy each other's bodies....then...if you are looking to make a kid, you have already planned that, if not, you already planned that too...when the thrill is gone, in a few minutes, hours, or days, if no pregnancy that is fine...keep moving on to your next love, your next conquest, your next happy feeling, ...but if on the rare occassion there is a pregnancy (and let's really try for planned everybody...I mean we should put together some foresight because we know many people will eventually screw and there is the morning after pill, condom, at least 2 choices if not more), that's fine too, its wonderful to make another human in your image, and on a planet where humans are protected from starvation, money is not even a major concern, but most people, as I said, should be well planned for a planned pregnancy. And the key is that, people can parent and still enjoy kissing, fondling and sex with different people, sex is entirely apart from the responsibilities of teaching, feeding and cleaning a young kid. I know people at this time are not ready for that, but I think eventually they will be, maybe in 500 years. The kid is going to be fine, in particular because of planning which includes who is going to feed and change, etc the kid. After age 5 they are in school all day being taught. A kid is definitely a shackle on free time, but that is what you should have planned for and be ready for, and no reason to not enjoy the natural system of physical pleasure. So we can disagree, but clearly there is one system which is natural (people physically turned on by each other) and another which is stagnant and formed by society (marriage, monogomy). The two in my opinion conflict with each other, and I think the natural path is better...it seems more logical to follow our natural wants, and pursue that system than to enjoy the benefits of a stagnant beaurocratic system designed for people hysterical about a guarantee of reproducing, and forcing two people together that might not stay together otherwise. Parents can divide the responsibilities. There just is a time in a person's life when they decide that they want to reproduce (for some that time never comes), just like there is a time in a person's life when they want sex, or a kiss, etc. you know, they see some attractive person and think...'yes I would like to kiss that person', etc. Those who follow the monogomy have to block those thoughts out their mind, they have to try hard to keep any kind of natural love with other people from growing in the interest of being firmly on this major path of reproduction through marriage. Look how a child born out without a marriage is labeled "illegitimate" as if they were less than a full human, as if they were not legitimate, that is so wrong, in particular because true love doesn't need any kind of formal ceremony or binding contract (although perhaps contracts with clear stipulations are a good idea to know what each other expects). Maybe this isn't the clearest way of putting it, but I am going to continue to try to figure out and explain the more natural system and expose the traditional system as unnatural and unnecessary for real physical and sexual pleasure, in addition to the real pleasure of reproducing and caring for and raising happy kids. So much of the equation is time and money because both are sacrificed when a person reproduces. But that should never stop natural physical pleasure, simply use birth control or only have other sex and touching without penis-vagina sex.
How about a law that prevents those who voted against stem-cell research from benefiting from any new discoveries that spring from the stem-cell research they voted against? Because here we are on the verge of figuring out how to end aging so people can live for millions of years, simply finding a way to make some sequence of DNA repeat itself staying at some stage forever like bacteria, and these shithead murderous backward idiots claim to be quezy about working on zygote and ovum cells, but not nearly as quezy about killing US citizens and then lying about it for centuries.
Imagine just beaming the desktop display onto all the people's eyes at once...all the outsiders...what would happen? Many people would probably call police...but what do they say? "there is video in my eyes?"..."and I can't get it out..."
ever notice how the fbi can only handle minor crimes? they cant prosecute murder or assault, recently they busted some ppl cheating in Vegas. They are big into punishing people for copyright violations...we are all familiar with their unceising dedication to copyright enforce,emt to the expense of all else. While they cant publicly work on the big crimes (they have to say a person's "civil rights" were denied when they were murdered) probably they are big into the pupin technology making sure that innocent ppl get murdered while many times funding and instructing the murderers like so many other camera-thought net elites.
new proposed law: public can initiate criminal procecution. This is when in particular a district attorney refuses to prosecute as was the case for Thane Cesar the murderer of RFK, and Frank Sturgis, the murderer of JFK.
One of the funniest "news" ads I saw on CNN is the one they are running with the headline "Bush warns...to curb spending". I mean is that the funniest of the bogus news stories the AP and CNN are paid to print? Because obviously, although the media is paid to keep these facts from the public, and I myself don't know the actual number of money spent by the Bush administration, Bush has clearly and far away spent the most money in any term of any president in the history of the USA...our children's children's children will be paying for the billions in dollars Bush charged to our credit card for the idiotic war in Afghan and Iraq. It's amazing that rather than just print more money and hand it to the defense industries, they work this bizarre deal where they do false flag murders like 9/11, and then charge up the taxpayer credit card...we are the biggest funders and victims of these war-maker companies and people. Think of what all that money could have bought instead of 1 million dollar missiles, $200 toilet seats, etc....we could have a moon city for that price, with walking servent robots, free phone, free high-speed internet, free food, sodas, clothes, rooms, etc. In some way, it's like total government and big military companies. One video explains how Musolini said that fascism is basically corporatism, where corporations own the government, and that can happen when the public is uninformed and uneducated. That headline "Bush threatens to curb spending" is so bizarre...maybe it is supposed to be comedy, but I think it is an obvious reminder that much of the public can be told what is true without any worry about them checking or remembering even simple things. There should be a "Drum riff/rim shot" after this news item is announced. "And I'm stopping any excess spending" (bidat -tish)...."And the liberals are so violent..." (bidat -tish)... "And gayness is the big problem not murder..." (bitdat-tish)...
When I was thinking about the truth about 9/11, a thought occured to me, that we live in a time that is so backwards that the killers arrest the police or in other words those who would stop them.
There is what looks to be a potentially minor victory in the war to make psychology consensual only: the latimes.com reports on how LA County mandated the "reduced use of restraints on youths". For me, I think restraints may very well be ruled "Cruel and Unusual" or possibly "torture" by a majority some time if not already. In particular when applied people without any crime committed or with some kind of nonviolent crime committed.
The "Lyra" device is only a digital recorder and player not a digital video camera, sorry, the "Flip video camera" is a good choice though, and that is a video camera. Actually I would probably rank the $100 digital flash cameras as:
1) Aiptek MPVR 6MP MPEG4 Digital Camcorder with 4x Digital Zoom $132
+rechargable battery standard Nokia 8210 batteries
+records and plays video input (here you get what the Lyra does)
+can add 2GB SD flash
-Microsoft asf video format (may have to convert to mp2 or something)
2) RCA EZ201 Small Wonder 60 Minute Point-and-Shoot Camcorder $100 (circuitcity rebate)
3) Pure Digital Technologies, Inc. F160W Flip Video Camcorder: 60-Minutes (White) $140
-no SD card
As an outsider, you might feel safer with a chepo $100 video camera in your bag at all times (or on your cell phone).
I'm glad for the "love" movement and love message, and I want to add that there is also another aspect, perhaps on the other side of this spectrum where on one side there is pleasure, love and so on, on the other side I see stopping violence and pain as an important message. Just as promoting love and pleasure is a good message, so I think we should not forget the opposite side of stopping pain, suffering and violence.
I like a little sweet thing after a meal and I have found that the little caramel dip things are nice to dip in various fruits in particular apples, pears, .. I tried banana and melon and they are ok. I think I may get tired of the same taste. Like a song I usually get tired of the same thing after a few times. I could see little "fondue" containers with cheese and chocolate fondue for dipping, that would be sweet.
I'm surprised there are not more portable digital telescopes that might have an 8" array of CCD and then a digital zoom, maybe the pixel or dot size of CCDs is still too large and a mirror can magnify with better detail? actually why not take advantage of a mirror or lens to focus light, except for the added weight of a large lens or mirror. In theory, the amount of light entering the telescope is the same and so in theory a digital array should be able to digitally magnify as well if not better than any lens or mirror.
It's interesting that there are some subtle points about young people and sexuality that people should recognize, I can think of at least 2:
1) That maybe the first door to be opened is for young people to actively decide for themselves that they want to touch genitals, buttocks, breasts, have sex, etc...keep the door closed for adults who solicit minors, but keep it open for minors who solicit adults...why deny young people's right to pleasure by their own choice?
2) Probably the door of legalizing young male and older female sexuality will open before the door for older male and younger female, because sex for a young male involves no pain whatsoever, where with a young female there might be pain the first few times. Although for oral sex pain is obviously not an issue.
Again, I am not involved with any kind of young people and sexuality other than giving information and advice to the public, and am mainly old and mostly impudent. In any event I know very very well not to touch young people obviously and advise others not too because of the massive massive punishments being handed out for anything remotely involving pleasure with minors...people young and old ought to make themselves aware of what is going on in that regard. The way people are being sentenced for decades for a blow job, or having even consensual sex with a minor, chatting with a minor about sex, showing a minor sexual images, owning images of nude minors, etc even activities that many people might think are trivial and far from crime, are getting decades of prison time, and then ofcourse the person is marked for life as a sex offender even if a nonvoilent one-time thing, so by all means don't participate in anything remotely questionable and keep yourself as informed as possible. If there are minors, make sure all genitals are properly covered and fastened within their garments. When wiping a minor' bottom who is not potty trained, never touch the genitals even accidentally and try to work as quickly as possible, try not to do this in public as to not jeapordize yourself and any other innocents walking by who might get roped into something that authorities might label a "ring". Keeping a radius of at least 1 foot (10 feet is better) from any minor at any given time is one way to lessen the possibility of incarceration. Keep hugs, kisses and other touching of minors to an absolute minimum, again total abstinence from touching is going to be your best way to avoid prosecution for lewdness and other crimes against minors. Although this may produce cold and unfeeling minors, better to protect your freedom even if it comes at the expense of the minors and society in general. If touching of minors is a necessity, by all means do not touch in any kind of unusual ways, absolutely no "this little piggy" king of games, no toe sucking, no finger sucking, no kiss on the face (no kiss on the lips of course goes without saying), no ear nibbling, no hair caressing, no hand rubbing, no kind of "hand games" such as with strings, rings, etc, no talking on the phone, no patting of the bottom, no wiping of the minor's body in any way in the event of spilled food or drinks, don't hire any minors to do work, no handshakes or hugs if at all possible, reducing any kind of physical contact at all is going to be the best way of assuring your freedom from prison sentences that start at 15 years per count, with many antisexuals chomping at the bit to send people involved with minors away for decades. Make sure all dolls are genital-less, fully clothed, and not in unusual positions. Better to not use a computer around minors because an Internet window with pornography might pop up, perhaps whatever needs to be done with a computer could be done with a calculator instead, or a computer without an Internet connection. You may want to verify the age of a minor, because if 18 you can worry less, but then, asking such quesitons might draw attention to you and a conviction might be at hand. In addition, even any kind of touching of a human of 18 years might be enough evidence to suggest that you entertained similar touching ideas, but with minors. In the event that you are a doctor that must touch a minor's genitals, I think we all understsand the massive amount of risk that is involved there, so you may want to make parents sign a waiver, but then that might call attention to you and a conviction might be forthcoming. There are no easy answers for that one, perhaps people should abandon any plans of being a doctor simply for that reason alone. I think at this time, those who do day care must be so arrogant to think that nobody is ever unfairly punished under the lewd guidelines. It's like people who work in an explosive factory never noticing the risk they face every day. Certainly in the future the public will come to their senses with lewd and minor touching, free information will help to prove people's innocence, the court system will be open to the public and fully democratic, but obviously we are far from that age.
How about the story where US missiles killed 3 children, that is one reason why missiles don't need to be fired on earth ever, the camera-thought net technology is more than adequate, plus walking robots, to apprehend people. Then of course yesterday 75 people killed in a mosque in Iraq, typical news.
Another Bush jr stem cell veto. Bush jr probably has been awarded a PhD in antiscience for his efforts to totally stop and delay natural progress in science.
Here is kind of a violent paid-for allusion "news story":
"Rats! Look who's getting tipsy Reuters - Wed Jun 20, 11:23 AM ET"
It's possible that "SP" and "CP" (similar to SP in sound) are people that the blood-thirsty fascist camera-thought net monsters are hinting are people who might try to kill me or who knows what other innocent lawful liberal people. They have already killed so many people, they are not at all squimish about killing innocent people and even sacrificing young children in the US military for their twisted goals. But this shows how corrupt and evil the AP and Reuters are. They basically are ad-houses, who take money from monsterous murderers in the inside camera-thought nets to "work their evil" murder on the outsiders and even many partially included. With their "headlines" you can see just how important my latest video "Seeing, Hearing and Sending Thought" is to those evil people in power who have abused those excluded from this technology for 100 years. They have had 100 years to oil and refine their secret system of abuse. They obviously want to kill "rats", people that rat them out, by telling the public how they have been seeing, hearing and sending images and sounds to brains for 100 years now. They are not the cub scouts, they have done many murders of innocent people. And you know, the public has to wake up and recognize that, and start the clean up operation. Right now, though, it's an interesting stage of fascism, because there is an information (video) revolution happening on the Internet, and I think it's caught the fascists off guard. It's almost like, they have been in such an advantageous position for so long, never the tiniest threat of being exposed, and the fear and intimidation is so high, that nobody has ever told, very few people, for example, tell the truth about Frank Sturgis and Thane Cesar. So, it's almost like, people thought there was a fence holding them in, and we are finding out that no such fence exists, and we can say and show any videos that we want basically, and I'm waiting to see insiders start to pour out the thought images...it seems very likely that those images are going to reach the web very soon, within a decade or two perhaps. And if that were not enough for the fascists that control the camera thought net, smart outsiders are getting more and more info about how to duplicate seeing thought all the time, it's only a matter of time because the instructions on how exactly to see, hear and send thought is public. But to me, just like so many clear up operations on the earth, let's never forget those scummy bastards who murdered and lied to the outsiders for the majority of their life, let's make sure they do get exposed and punished once we all see what they look like and find out their names. It seems a no-brainer that these insiders can kill innocent people with the push of a button, simply contracting some critical muscle, like they did with Sylvia, the heart for example, they constantly make our epiglotus contract at the wrong time when drinking. And in addition, I am sure many of the insiders do not want ULSF this wonderful video of the history of evolution, science and the future. There has never been a history of science video, and that is shocking, why wouldn't there be one by now? There are millions of dollars in universities...perhaps the Christian and Godder majority spends more money to stop any such efforts. In any event, I am hopeful that everybody can live in peace, and that together, those of us survivors, can put a stop to all violence on earth, I think we can do it, but not by sitting around on our duffs.
There was a story in the ocregister.com about a guy who was sentenced to 15 years after a Lakewood minor he had some kind of sex (they don't say directly that it was penis-vagina sex in the story), hung herself. And it is so sad that a young female would kill herself like that just over some guy who rejected her. But with the Pupin camera-thought net, you know, I would not be at all surprised if she was murdered by insiders just for effect, just to fan the flames of antisexual hysteria. Maybe not, but think about this: without a doubt, the insiders gathered around to watch her hang herself, they could have beamed anything on her brain. There is very little question that life for an insider is hopping from murder to murder, and suicide to suicide, because of course there is usually a lot of time before hand. Think about the murder of John Lennon, a typical example, of course Chapman was beamed on with images and audio, and for weeks people can see the plan shape in Chapman's thoughts, how he runs through his murder. Decent people would prepare to stop him...pull him over take his gun, intercept him in the moments before, etc. And so it is with this girl's suicide, by the time she started to connect the belt or rope or who knows what, many dozens of people were tuned in to her eyes and ears, perhaps some insiders even begged other insiders to go intercept her...to go talk to her...to try and stop her, but probably they know by now, it's wasted breath, because the monsters in the camera-thought net will absolutely not use the technology to stop murder and suicide. And I think the videos will reveal the exact opposite, that they relish murders and suicides as shockingly entertaining, but also as very useful to steer the majority who are excluded. Couldn't they have sent some images, changed her mind, offered her visions of a happy future? Of course they could have.
Looking at this 3D 9/11 WTC plane crash, it appears that only maybe 10-20 core columns (of 47) were supposed to be cut, and all in maybe 4 rows. Clearly that is not enough, and was not enough, to destabilize the WTC. Interesting that people at Purdue did this, because their reputation was tarnished when, as I recall, I'm not the expert and all this data needs to be organized and disseminated, but ASCE which in my opinion is totally discredited now, supported the ridiculous, I mean obviously and absolutely ridiculous claim that the WTC building were not controlled demolition, when there is only overwhelming physical evidence to the contrary. The head of ASCE was somehow connected to Purdue.
This is typical of how CNN is used:
to sell lies to the public. CNN gets, a few million from Republicans to sell this filth, they all know a missile hit the Pentagon and 9/11 was an inside job. And I just hope the public has a real eye-opening awakening some time soon, and sees how dishonest and how Hitlerian, so many people are in the USA, including our bogus "media" who just takes insider money to spew unending lie after lie. They refuse to take money to tell the truth even, perhaps they know in the short-term there is far more money from the liars and murderers who do 9/11, 7/7 and so many other murders. I hope the public wakes up, and remembers, who lied and who told the truth, and let's never forget who participated. The fact is that this is without question an accessory to many counts of murder after the fact on the part of all those involced, from those who pay people at CNN, to those who even participate in the filming of such videos, because clearly, by definition, they are assisting and protecting murderers. Certainly some people at CNN have done some good things, and I don't know what the majority's feelings are about accessory to homicide after the fact, maybe they feel like that is freedom of information, the freedom to lie and purposely deceive people. Currently the way the law is, the law and typical interpretation of the law does not look kindly onto those who are accessories to murder after the fact. Generally people who are caught as accessories to even a person with one count of murder, do get jail time, although usually under 1 year. Maybe the majority is for changing or removing altogether the accessory to murder after the fact law. Even so, that is almost always a scummy, low-life kind of activity to be involved in. Protecting a friend who murdered somebody, is not something I would feel comfortable with, even for money, because murder is wrong and I feel sympathy for the murder victims too much, and of course, we as a society should not let murderers go unpunished, because it increases the possibility for more murder of innocent people, in particular by those who have already murdered, because since they haven't been jailed for their earlier murders, they feel less risk about murdering again. And then, if they are caught (which the current way of life on earth would rule against), it matters less because they already have so many murders that they would be jailed for life if caught anyway, just for the first murder. So once these insider scum have one murder and are facing life in prison, they care much less about committing a second murder because what is the sentence going to be 2 life sentences? And in that case why would they care?
I don't think people should pretend for a minute that we do not live in a medieval time of massive violence and shocking injustice. For example, we don't get to even vote on the laws we have to live under, the laws are decided by 9 people, created by 200 people, thought was seen and heard back in 1910 and then a group of murderous criminals quickly swooped in and took control of the technology and have been abusing and murdering the public ever since...then add to that the fact that many people are simply murdered and assaulted every day, because it's entertainment for the fucked-up insiders, and violence is loved in this century, it's physical pleasure that is the big crime. The prisons are full with nonviolent people, most for simply using drugs. Then look at the psychiatric system...people can be picked up hospitalized for life, no trial, no jury, no charge, no sentence, tortured, drugged...maybe that won't happen to me or you, but what's to stop it from happening to me or you? nothing whatsoever. We are a species stuck on the surface of a planet...we have not even developed a foothold on the moon, let alone a different planet. The orbit of earth could just one day fall into some different orbit and careen out into the outer star system...and we would all be frozen quickly, perhaps we might survive such a change. But the threat to life on earth is biggest from the way these people are voting...they are putting the sickest filthiest violentist criminals in the highest positions of government and business...that is a death wish for life of earth. Realize that the majority actually reject the theory of evolution as a guide to how medieval people in this time are.
happy summer solstice everybody, may we soon get off this planet, and get off while stuck on the planet.
I'm looking forward to the first generation of people who wear video cameras with them to the store and start playing back the video of paid-to-be-rude camera-thought-net clerks on their web page, then the "privacy" shyte will hit the fan.
An interesting thing is how regular the earth orbit is. Are there any things that could change that orbit and send us careening out to Neptune, or worse, into the Sun? One thing that is interesting is that as humans continue to engineer the planet, it will change the distribution of mass on the earth, and that might change the orbit of earth. For example, if people in their effort to create more living space for an overpopulated earth, start to use the heat from inside the earth to generate electricity while building more houses underground, basically cooling the earth, making the earth a solid-core planet (the moon is thought to be solid core). That would change the mass and orbit of the earth, perhaps the orbit might become more predictable not having a fluid center. Humans separate matter in the form of atoms into photon more than the other species do, and so because of humans, the mass of earth is very slowly getting smaller, and that might affect our delicate orbit. For all these reasons and more, we need to get to the moon and in particular Mars and build a second self-sufficient home for humans.
kind of a cool idea: make atheistized versions of popular songs to remove religious mistakes, for example:
any allusion to "devil" could be replaced with simply "evil", or "the violent", how about "the religious idiots"? I constantly find myself singing songs with mistaken religious beliefs, and I tend to correct them for my own "mind" or "whistlin" version. For example, I might change something like "Stairway to heaven" to "stairway to pussy", or to Venus, or "Space ship to Centauri", or maybe "to that thought-hearin crap", etc. "sympathy for the devil" becomes "sympathy for the 9/11 killers", "Running with the Devil" becomes "Running with the JFK killers", or just simply "the Bush family", so you can see how fun and informative this gets.
I can't believe that, before I was 18 I had already used tobacco, alcohol (beer, vodka, gin, southern comfort), weed, coke, speed, codeine, LSD, mushrooms, but it was not until after 18 that I got or gave my first oral sex and got vaginal sex. I mean talk about a backward society, where sex is the big taboo and kids are funneled into alcohol and chemical highs, instead of sober and clean physical pleasure. People will look back at these centuries as like some bizarre hysterically anti-pleasure casually pain and murder-loving idiotic people lost in mystic and religious traditions and myths.
The incest charge with the sentence of 10 years or something in the south east USA seems somewhat ridiculous. Being a civil rights person, you know this is probably white anti-black racists trying to discredit black civil rights leaders. With incest, if there is violence, assault, certainly that can be prosecuted if clear evidence, but my feeling about incest is that, with full consent and no objection, while not being something I would engage in, is not a crime, and certainly not a serious crime. There is a danger of genetic malformation in any fetus formed by incest because of similar DNA, but I don't see this as a major problem with modern contraceptives, modern detection techniques and the right to abortion. Many of these things, are like drug use, and prostitution. Maybe they are things many people would not engage in, but the majority should protect the rights of the minority who does, in particular since those activities seem to me to be part of a fundamental right to a person's own body, to consensual pleasure, etc. I think with incest, what has happened is once again, as usual, the puritanical revulsion to sex and pleasure has caused puritans to make a much larger deal over a minor harmless activity, while completely ignoring major mass murders like 9/11, and massive murders like those done by Frank Sturgis, Thane Cesar, and so many others.
When you think about how young people use alcohol and all this stuff, and then look at how this poor guy, a 17 year old has consensual oral sex with a 15 year old (both post puberty) and gets 10 mandatory years in jail...it's no wonder why kids chose alcohol, tobacco, guns and drugs instead of hugs and consensual sober disease-and pregnancy-free pleasure, simply less jail time, less sex offender registry, less public persecution and ostrification for being mislabeled an uncontrollable pervert, molestor and rapist. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_on_re_us/teen_sex_case;_ylt=AmUsP6pautPz2GD2FEACxJ_MWM0F
6/12/07 when really its just a harmless young person enjoying consensual physical pleasure with another person who knows exactly what they are doing and both are making their own decisions and responsible for their own activities.
Some people may remember that old television commercial "is it real or is it memorex", and I think that phrase has a lot more meaning in understanding this 1910 "new" technology of seeing, hearing and sending thought, because any time anything happens, you drop a glass or plate, you stub a toe, some muscle flies out of control, you think of something stupid, you feel a pain somewhere, etc. people now have to ask themselves..."is that an actual real thing...or is it the camera-thought net people and technology?". And many people, mainly outsiders, do not even know the full realm of what is happening. For example, any pain, at any level, can be activated in the human (and any other species) brain. Any part of the body that can feel pain, can be made to feel pain...the inside of your spine, the inside of your teeth, under your finger and toe nails, deep in your rectum, ... this reminds me of another point I want to make. One trait of Nazistic dumb-ass sadistic people, is their obsession with sexuality. A normal healthy interest, even obsession with consensual sexuality is fine...in fact, there is nothing illegal about being obsessed with sexuality and genitals..I am just saying that this happens also to be a major characteristic of Nazistic people...but in them it is scewed. They are people that find great joy in genital mutilation...in connecting the electrodes to the scrotum, to nipples, (like at abu graib), ... and especially sticking things deep in rectums...like in the PETA video one redneck chuckles to his undercover friend 'i had that stick neigh up yea far in that pig's ass yesterday ....' and in a video about homosexuals under Nazism a death camp survivor Frech guy says "meina assen still bluden!" (my ass still bleeds) from when the sadistic misguided-sex filled Nazi guards shoved poles into his rectum. And so it is with those uneducated high school diploma thugs who supervise the camera-thought network...they focus on beaming on the testicles, in the rectum, on breasts (I mean I can imagine), on nipples, ... for some reason, genitals and sexuality are the single most interesting things to humans on earth. Other species seem less interested in them. And physical pleasure has become so scewed on planet earth because of the religions and misconceptions from receiving little science education. Humans are fascinated by genitals, and in particular the rectum and anus. Perhaps because they live sexually deprived lives, I think they are obsessed with physical pleasure because it is the one thing they want that they can't get, I don't know. Sexuality and genitals consume people's minds though, that much is for sure.
In San Diego, Wayne Albert Bleyle plea bargained for 45 years in jail for molestation, and was looking at 165 years in jail, and I think this definitely serves as a serious warning to people out there, definitely don't touch the genitals of people under 18, including the buttocks, like even JFK does in one video to his daughter Carolyn. Not that people are going to be jailed for 45 years for that, but clearly you can see that those kinds of verdicts are possible. And here, I think people need to remember that those kids don't endure any physical pain, touching their genitals and buttocks...that might be upsetting, and emotionally harmful but, I mean, should we not remember that this "crime" is a nonviolent offense? There are many things that are emotionally harmful, in particular actual physical violence, which many minors endure from siblings and spankings. I mean people shoot other people and get less time. People who touch butts are a nuisance to many, but I think people need to come to the realization that, this butt touching is not as serious as violent crime. People get less than 45 years for manslaughter, for first and second degree murder. Last Saturday on court tv a husband got 8 years for the first degree murder of his wife. Maybe that is an exception typical of the random undemocratic monarchical justice system in the US and much of the earth, but I read some data from the US Dept of Justice that shows that the majority of people spend under 20 years in jail for first degree cold blooded murder because of prison overcrowding. I wish I had the link, it's out there, search for it. And that prison overcrowding is from the idiotic drug prohibition. This kind of crime is where a person can be in the molestation or nonviolent sex offender database, and people who work with kids can go through that public list before hiring, I don't think society is served by paying for this guy's food, clothing, etc for 45 years when he is not a violent threat to society. This is just a snapshot of the constant video of life on earth, but it's worth commenting on because this rabid antisexuality is stupid, and I think the case of the kid in Georgia (10 years mandatory minimum for 17 year old consensual oral sex with 15 year old) is making some people start to become unhypnotized or something...many people are apparently starting to rub their eyes and see that the antisexual ferver and prison sentences being handed out, are maybe a little extreme compared in particular to violent crime. And here 9/11 was an inside job, Frank Fiorini never got caught, Thane Cesar is free as a bird, and there are a thousand murderers on the loose, etc. Then there is the aspect of child hysteria, where people claim to be overprotecting by denying children's rights, claiming like all power mongers that seizing control and the rights of somebody else is only in the subject's best interest. Imagine that this guy had touched the genitals and butts of adults, what would the sentence be then? I really don't know, maybe we can look around for that mystery data.
These new digital video cameras are kind of cool:
And for $100 that is really reasonable. They record over an hour of 640x480 mpeg4 video. This might be nice for a car camera to record what you see in your car in case of accidents, etc. What I envision is a wearable tiny camera that records up to 12 hours of compressed video, with the option also of streaming/sending the video over wireless Internet to a web server. This camera can record video and audio of a person's day for a number of good reasons: as a reminder of what happened and what was said on some specific day in the past, as proof what the person did and where the person was, to record unusual or special events, etc. People can see that this technology is rapidly changing. We can expect the walking robots soon, but also, I think we can see that the prices and sizes are coming down on video recording. My prediction: this group of video recorders are going to be viewed as massive and bulky in 1 year. Already at 4 x 2 inches they are not huge and fit in a hand. Maybe what is needed is a remote wireless tiny object a person can wear on their clothes that can send the video to a larger recorder in a person's bag or pocket.
I think there is a convergence happening between those fans of shows like "forensic files", "America's most wanted", real-life crime solving shows and the high level secretive 9/11 camera-thought net murderers...the public is slowly moving towards seeing those 9/11 killers on those real-life crime shows. It's only natural, that people interested is how murders are solved are eventually going to take on more major murders. So the viewers are happy when some smaller-time murder is caught on a court tv show like forensive files or crime scene and other shows, but we can see dimly off in the distance all the Thane Cesars and 9/11 murderers...all the Bonnie Bakley, Jam Jay, Chandra Levy murderers are out there in the distance, still alive, free and on the loose, unpunished, waiting to be featured on one of these reality violent crime solving and stopping shows. I can only imagine what will happen when the public reaches farther along this natural trend, perhaps to a time when there are no murders to feature or solve anymore, perhaps the shows will then take on theft, perhaps "larceny files", or "liar files" will be all that is possible then, since all the murderers will be in jail, and murder a thing of the past.
It's interesting to think how the earth would be different if people could not lend more money than they have (banks are allowed to lend much more than they have). I think then, the prices of things would be seriously reduced, since not as much money would be in circulation.
I think a cool money-making idea is making a voluntary planetary STD database where people can be shown not to have certain sexually transmitted diseases at some specified date. Like for example:
01/07/2007 HIV TEST = NO HIV
10/05/2006 SYPHILLIS TEST = NO SYPHILLIS
and then Jane Doe would pay like $10/year or as a one-time fee to have their data be publicly stored and accessible on the Internet, and a person can at any time remove their STD data. Maybe the problem with this is that not many people want even clean STD data to be made public. I think it would be nice for those who are into sex. Maybe somebody will create such a thing as a public service in the interest of stopping HIV, Herpes, etc. This also requires quick and low cost STD tests, and you know the conservative are going to try to stop any kind of health science progress like that, except maybe Ron Paul, who I think is one of the few Republicans I can vote for.
For myself, I feel that I "ain't gonna play psych-city", (nor "violent-city" nor "drug-prohibition-city" nor "protitution-prohibition-city" nor "secrecy-city") but no body should be tortured, or jailed that does so long as they do not torture or jail others. I think I have decided that I recognize some aspects of psychology as an actual science, my main concern is simply that one little switch of making it consensual only.
For me the real focus of science is really going over the Michelson-Morley experiments again, but this time comparing results with vertical measurements against the gravity of the earth to detect differences. Because it seems clear that photons are matter, and probably the basis of all matter. And if that theory is true, then there are definite results. For example, photons would be effected by gravity like all other particles are. If the speed of light is not constant than there are a number of interesting effects that might happen. If speed of light is not a constant, then it throws off some of the interpretation of some of equations that depend on c being constant such as c=fl speed of light=frequency*wavelength. Maybe the velocity of photons, in particular in beams of light, is almost always 3e8m/s because of bouncing off other photons which makes distance between two photons at a physical maximum, therefore making the force from gravity at a physical maximum. One interesting thing about one of Newton's laws, about how an object will maintain the same velocity until there is another force applied to it, is that clearly, in the universe there is always going to be the gravitational force of other matter and no object really is even unaffected, or experiencing no force of gravity. So if photons are matter, there must be a constant influence of other matter on them, although at some base level scale, there are only other photons influencing photons. Clearly photons appear to change direction from gravity, but do they change velocity too? I think the Mossbauer experiment is evidence that photons do change velocity as particles of matter under the influence of gravity. Still, all experiments may show that there is no measurable change in velocity ever in photons, and then people would need to make new, different interpretations of the Mossbauer experiment, and other phenomena. If there is no difference in velocity detected ever for photons, even against very large gravity sources, then perhaps people might interpret the law of gravity as not applying to photons. It's far more intuitive to presume that the law of gravity applies to photons too. One interesting aspect of this is that there appears to be very little change in direction of photons by gravity, the massive mass of our sun only bends them slightly, photons from distant galaxies are only bent slightly around other galaxies, for example those that show the galaxy as 2 images. But the gravitational effect on a single piece of matter is determined only from other pieces of matter and their distance. The mass of the individual particle doesn't matter. Presuming the mass of all matter to be equal to 1, and for each piece of matter to occupy 1 cubic unit of space makes for simple simulations. One interesting thing is that photons can only move 1 space at a time, they can never, for example, skip over some space, they can only pause at some space while time ticks away. So really the velocity of particles can be described as, how many time ticks do they pause? One major question is does time ticks faster than a photon can change location or move? And it seems logical that probably time does, but maybe no, maybe time ticks exactly at the same speed that a photon changes locations with, in other words a photon moves from space 1 to space 2 as time ticks from unit 1 to unit 2. The other theory, which I think is probably more likely is that, time units tick by while a photon is still in space 1 before moving to space 2...in other words, a photon at maximum velocity only moves from space one to space two and then to space three, etc. every 100 time ticks for example. In other words time changes faster than matter changes spacial location. The universe might be statically frozen from all movement for some time, the only thing changing being time. So again, this is looking at velocity as how much time any given piece of matter is not moving in addition to any force inparted to the piece of matter from other pieces of matter at that instant in time. This leads me into the debate about: is there momentum, which of course most people think there is, but how can we deny the idea of a particle's velocity being determined anew each time? How could a particle remember a previous velocity? It's not simple in my opinion, because we are talking about macro-effects of trillions upon trillions of far beyond micro particles. But much of this stems from the idea that photons are basically particles of matter and are therefore influenced by gravity...and the interesting thing to me is that maybe the equations of gravity need to be adjusted and refined because of this new realization that photons might be effected by gravity after all, but maybe they are ok as is. This is what I am trying to figure out among other things.
Possibly people may want to allow people to "check-in" to non-violent offender no-forced-labor prisons for a week, 2 weeks, etc because there may be people out there who commit some crime just to get the benfits of free food in the prisons, so why not just give them the option of checking in without having to commit any crime? In fact maybe some kind of social program can grow from the prison system since the rooms, cleaning and food services already are in place there. One major difference would simply be giving a person there own key to their room. If we stopped jailing those who use drugs that would free up a lot of space.
It's funny the way most humans actually try to give off the vibe: "oh no we dont like pleasure, pleasure feels bad!, no body likes pleasure!", it's such a lie, or just a messed up view that results from tradition and mass delusion.
I saw an interesting video "zeitgeist",
is the link.
the stuff on the recurring themes in religion is good, although I am having trouble verifying all of the claims, for example, I doubt seriously that Vishnu was "crucified" but was instead murdered somehow, and the same for others. Crucifying, to my knowledge was done mainly by Romans, but I am a novice of history like all people. Another point is that the council of nicea (325) isnt the beginning of the christian myth, of course the gospels are perhaps the earliest writings about Jesus, and in addition there are 1st and 2nd century writers, Pliny the Younger, Clement of Alexandria, Justin Martyr are a few. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Christianity has some info. In addition, clearly this myth does not fit for Islam which is evidence that religions can start from an individual person/preacher. That the Jesus legend fits so closely (born of a virgin, 12 deciples, rises again after death) is strong evidence that the entire myth may have been created based on earlier myths. I think one question about Christianity is how many of these similarities were added later by Romans to make the Christian religion appear more like Paganism and how many were part of Christianity originally? I think it's unlikely that people just created a guy named Jesus. Clearly all the "miracle" stories are 99.9% lies that almost certainly never happened. Perhaps the story of Judas, the last supper are both lies added to the story later. Maybe Jesus was just a preacher of Judaism who was executed, and those who were angry about the murder made up most of the stories about his life, perhaps Jesus even claimed to be receiving messages from a diety, from "Yahweh" or "El" the Judaism diety. The procession of the constellations is really interesting and compelling info...the idea that somehow astrologers conjured up a new messiah (or god) and religion because of the changing of epochs. People did certainly create dieties, like Serapis was an invention that was supposed to replace Apis. Maybe Jesus replaced some diety such as Mithra. Much of this boils down to: clearly much of the christian stories and myths are fabricated, but was there an actual human named Jesus who was killed and served as the seed for much of the myth? Clearly, Jesus left no writings, and to my knowledge there are no contemporary writings about Jesus, but that Jesus was said to have a brother named James, is evidence that Jesus may have actually been a human who lived and was executed by Pilot. That is another point, that clearly Herod, Pilot, and other characters of the Jesus myth seems to be actual people, so clearly there is a historical context for when Jesus was supposed to have lived. The one thing I think many people should be able to agree on is that, whether real or made up, the Jesus cult, and all other religions, and religion in general is stupid, and science, the search for truth, physical and intellectual pleasure is where everything good is. Science and engineering is the thread that continues through history while religions and governments rise and fall. So the info on religion is good, and the 9/11 stuff is really good (this is one of the most concise editings of the 9/11 evidence I have seen yet), the third part about the federal reserve is good in its concise editing, but some of the views I disagree with, like I see no problem with a north american currency, an amero, but it needs to be democratically supported in my opinion. Who likes going through a border and being hassled? Then, you know, we have to realize that there already is a global currency and its VISA/MC, but we have to pay extra fees when in other nations. And we have to realize that humans are going to live on the moon, mars...thats the view that appears to be missing from so many anti-globalists, is the acknowledgement that, yes, there may be nations on the moon very soon, and a moon currency, and maybe those people on the moon may also have democratic government, or inherit the government structure of earth, and the same for Mars, Venus and Mercury. What I think will happen is that there probably will be some kind of star system government that is fully democratic if any government at all. Maybe governments will still be a patch-work of nations even on the moon, mars, venus, etc. but it seems more likely that the majority of people will want mainstream standards (for governments, law and court systems, property, etc), but who knows? Some of the concepts get a little abstract in these money talks. The false flag of the lusitania for WWI I think is interesting...I am interested in hearing more about that. I think clearly sinking it was not a good move on the part of the German leaders, but the question is, was the ship in German waters? This is the first I have heard about false-flag for the US entry into WWI, I wouldn't doubt there was a false flag. For WW2, this so-called false-flag I think is highly doubtful, because, even if there is economic boycotts, that is no excuse for a massive bombing on a nation. Unlike 9/11 it is highly doubtful that the US government faked the hundreds of Japanese airplanes. There is no excuse for bombing Pearl Harbor, and that was just stupid of the Japanese leaders to do. We will have to wait for all the eye movies after 1910 to see what evidence there is for both. Clearly though, the Gulf of Tonkin was false flag, 9/11 is 99.9% obviously false flag without any doubt at all, WTC93 was most likely false flag, Oklahoma city may very well have been false flag (and this is the first time I have seen an argument about legislation...it would be similar to the VT thing...30 murders allowed just to pass a bill closing the psychiatric record gun law...plus perhaps a national wave of as always apparently "indignation"). But then go on to some of these other things where I think people on the inside must want to vomit when they see this stuff. Like the Cole maybe being an inside job...if you think about it...clearly bin Laden is the patsy for 9/11...maybe all of the stuff where bin Ladin is the person claimed guilty are false-flags...it is very logical to presume so. Then they said the Pan Am plane...that is vicious if true. So much of this stuff, you have to know that with seeing eyes, hearing thoughts...is there some bomb plan those in the camera-thought at&t net would not be aware of? Here these people casually comment on our latest thoughts about our toiletries and underware drawers, but they can't see people planning violent acts in their thoughts? David Ray Griffin said it so well, when you see the Northwoods document, you can see that these people are not squimish about killing innocent people, and nobody can deny that. I picked something else up off of a recent Griffin lecture, and maybe I am hearing wrong, but he kind of hinted that...there is not one photo that disagrees with the story the insiders all have about 9/11, the WTC, all of history....he was perhaps hinting that...of all the independent sources...mainly most are probably AT&T, but there have to be others for hidden videos and audio...there is not one fabricated video among all of them, they all show the same video and have for all recorded history. That would certainly be nice. Maybe those who capture video are concerned about having a good reputation for accuracy, maybe it is a waste of time and money to try and fabricate video when most people can see and find out that it was fabricated (although clearly there have to be dark rooms where nobody can see inside of...and such places and people have to be probably not trusted and discredited among the included who have keep no secrets). So that is an interesting piece of data that it very well may be that of all the independent video sources, and the vast data the insiders can choose from...all of it tell the same exact story...there is no effort even to try and cover it up, or if there are efforts to fabricate video they are so minor and worthless as to fool nobody. The bin Ladin video might be evidence of faked video (although not graphically faked, but actors acting), and of course, the insiders would see things like that without much trouble probably, easily getting video of the actors, of the producers, the camera people, all involved.
Just quickly there appears to be some kind of conflict between Steven Jones and Jim Fetzer where they split up from ST911, and then Fetzer and Morgan Reynolds questioned Jones' work on thermate. I got this from 911blogger.com, which is a good source for keeping up with the 9/11 truth movement. From an outsider opinion, it looks like Fetzer and Reynolds might have taken some monies from the conservatives, because, you know, there is nothing wrong with what Jones has found out with thermate. The video evidence is somewhat strong in my opinion, where the molten metal is dripping down the building, and just that there is molten metal at the bottom...I mean...maybe it isn't thermate but I think that is a strong possibility, clearly explosives were used too. I see this a lot, the 9/11 killers pay people to lie... fetzer and reynolds are probably being paid to try and discredit Jones' work on thermate, which implies that the Jones' thermate evidence is something the 9/11 plotters fear. I saw earlier where Fetzer apparently took money to say that people were shooting at JFK from the sewers, which seems unlikely to me, but can't be ruled out. It could be beams, like fetzer and reynolds are beamed on and fall for the suggestions...like it is classic for the nazis to try and set the opposition against each other and they do that by beaming images and sounds on brains. A classic example shown in the above video is the nausiating thing that the British did...they sent two of their soldiers dressed as Arabs with explosives, shooting at people...then broke them out of jail...I mean how much evidence does the public need to know that people in the US and British government are murdering people, blowing up mosques and so on, to cause conflict between the two Arab sides? It's totally gross...it's purely evil...if anything is evil murder is...don't you agree? Anyway, so without trying to be rude, and just guessing based on my experience, Fetzer and Reynolds took a mess of money to so-called "sell-out" some aspects of the 9/11 truth movement, or they got scared and sold portions out for free out of fear...and I think everybody should accept why people would be scared....these 9/11 people are killing innocent people left and right... It's similar to what Greg Palast did recently...he too came after Steven Jones...which clearly has to be beyond coincidence, pointing out that Jones believes in very unlikely Christian theories (which is maybe an accurate criticism, but, I view those criticisms as unhelpful to educating the public about the truth with 9/11...I accept Jones' findings with the thermate, and his honesty on his findings even if he honestly believes some unlikely religious myths). So clearly it's not coincidence that these people are all picking on the same individual person...and it's unusual because, in my opinion the best and most convincing of the 9/11-truth people is David Ray Griffin...he's the person that tells the story most clearly and effectively, but maybe my opinion is wrong, maybe Steven Jones is the big danger to the 9/11 official story people, because clearly they appear to be trying to discredit him. But with Palast...and even with Fetzer and Reynolds what happens in my mind is that...in particular with Palast...any person who can get onto national television, is connected enough to know 9/11 was an inside job...and it doesn't take a lot of looking around to figure it out even for outsider, which Palast is clearly not one of, Palast is most likely included, and so any body who publicly rejects the 9/11 story is either too scared to tell the truth or is paid to mislead the outsiders. With these 3, it's hard to know for sure, I kind of have to lean towards being paid, but I can't rule out being scared. And what results is: unlike Barry Zwicker's work, David Griffin's work, Steven Jones' work, and others, with Palast I start to kind of doubt the integrity of his news reports because...clearly he lied about 9/11...was he lying about the Florida election fraud? I kind of doubt it...but his statements on 9/11 show that he is corrupted by fear or by money...and if money might he not have taken money to lie about other things? It's just like Penn and Teller and Popular Mechanics, when they try to debunk the truth about 9/11 so actively, and without doubt Penn and Teller had to be for money...I doubt they said what they said about 9/11 out of fear. Then it casts a shadow of doubt over the rest of their work, some of which might be valid work, for example there efforts against religion, and against the drug war. It puts them into a catagory of people that have dubious integrity. Not that I am 100% sparkly clean and honest, but these people definitely have sunk down on the imaginary totem pole for their obvious large public lies. So, it's like movie, product and other ratings ... some get 9 of 10 stars, others get 7 or 8 of 10 stars. Still they are no where near those who did 9/11 who are down at 0 to 1 star out of 10. And that probably is the key thing to remember in all of this is that: no matter how bad a person lies or misleads within the 9/11-truth, the JFK-truth, whatever-truth, without any doubt whatsoever, those who did the actual murdering and plotted it are by far the more evil, far far more evil than any liar or misleader. These people that did 9/11, that killed JFK, and have done all these false flag murders are the masters of murder, and very evil people, while those people exposing the truth about 9/11 truly are major heros of this century, even if flawed. Whatever flaws there are, are very minor. Many times when I see people talk I think "don't even waste precious time on any kind of criticisms of we on the liberal, 9/11 truth etc side...it's too insignificant to bother with and use up precious time with", and that may be true, but perhaps it might be worth identifying some of these minor differences. Barry Zwicker had some good criticisms of Chomsky and other so-called left gate keepers, and perhaps that info and those perspectives have some value for those of us who want to reach the public with the truth about 9/11 and so many other murders. For me the main focus is on concise videos of the physical evidence for all major murders made available to the public.
To me this is amazing: You can get into a cell phone for $30:
"Prepaid" is the key word to opening the door of low cost cell phone ownership. The only reason a person would not have a cell phone by now is fear of technology. Here is a $4 phone and 3 months of calls, up to 130 minutes total. This is not a paid for ad, I just think its amazing that it costs so little to just start using a cell phone, which might be a time saver on the road if your car breaks down or if you need directions or a phone number on the road. Plus having access to 911 with you at all times, although, I mean honestly, does anybody think the people in police would arrive in time? Still, maybe they would at least know where to find the body. It's tough to know who is the liberal and who is the conservative, probably all the wireless companies are vile, now tmobile has "stick together" which is kind of violent, remeniscent of "stick it up..." now where else could it be? reminds me of my joke about my condoms saying "stick together" in this era, it's going to be a long time. Before verizon had the soccer guy kicking with right leg. I think Verizon is in Texas, but maybe they are Ron Paul/Alex Jones kind of Texans. I think this one is going to come down to who is the least expensive and that is going to be TMobile. Actually I may have spoken too soon, there appears to be a one-time $35 activation charge. Maybe that can be avoided by buying a used phone on ebay. I find that the Samsung E315 may be a good phone for the money (about $40 on ebay), because it can capture video. As I recall, TMobile does not have autorefill as Verizon does, but TMobile is $25 for 3 months, and Verizon is $15/month ($45 for 3 months). That is so bizarre the way TMobile wants refilling to be a hassle. I think that might be the way to go, buy an unlocked phone on eBay ($40), a sim card ($10) and then $25 prepaid cards, but maybe the activation fee still applies, I don't know, I doubt it.
As an update on the 7/7 people, against as always from an outsider, maybe those 'good old boys' arrested were actually paid for and funded by the people who actually planned 7/7, that seems more logical...if you have shitloads of tax money to spend, it's much more morally confusing to have poor pawns do the actual dirty work, then those who pay for it, just sit back as if they are not responsible for the murders.
Clearly "CP" is somebody. Colin Powell is one set of initials that fits. Maybe this CP is the person who did the neuron activation. As I said this person is a major figure in science. C is probably Charles. Who that neuron activiation person is and when are important pieces of info in the history of science.
I want to report that I did see the videos of the Democratic debate and what a nausiating experience. I feel compelled to report here with unbiased analysis because looking at the main street media, there is not going to be any actual analysis, it's all paid-for ads disguised as actual news or independent opinion.
First I can summarize this all important Democratic primary by saying that the smart people are going to vote for Kucinich and the dumb people for Hillary Clinton and Hillary Clinton will probably therefore win the nomination, because we are a very dumb nation. It's going to be many people who want to have a female as President without really examining the internal values of the candidates. In some way I am glad that we may actually have a female president in the USA, even one who is a vicious, blood-thirsty, unenlightened and dishonest as Hillary Clinton, because like having the first black male President of the USA (and black female) we will be over "the hump", and may then be able to dismiss the issue of "first woman president" and "first black president" and examine the candidates based on their values.
My analysis of this debate is this: it's a complex bunch of events, but it definitely can be explained fully for those included and excluded, but I can only give you just a bare-bones summary. I just feel compelled to spend just a few minutes to explain this, because as I said, there is no actual honest reporting on this debate in the mainstream media, and I think the public should look carefully at what happened there.
The candidates basically, to make things easier, can be grouped along a line in terms of progressive and it goes like this in my mind:
I can only group them together, because I don't know enough about them.
least progressive ---> most progressive
Richardson Biden Dodd Clinton Edwards Obama | Gravel Kucinich
Maybe one of two people could be switched, but generally there are two groups, those who say that the Afghan and Iraq invasion were wrong to begin with (Gravel Kucinich) and those who went along with 9/11 and the subsequent invasions (Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards...Obama says there should be more ground troops, says Iran with nukes is major threat [but not Pakistan with nukes under a military coup general, or any other nuke nation such as China, India, South America, etc]). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution#Voted_in_favor_2 to see how Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards all voted for 9/11 and even the openly fraudulent illegal and murderous Iraq invasion).
So am I wrong in saying that there are basically two groups, those who play along with 9/11 and those who don't? Isn't that a neutral characterization? Isn't that a distinction the major media will not make?
So how did the candidates line up on this major era defining issue of 9/11, which only a person living in a cave for the last 6 years would not know was an inside job. Even celebrities like Rosie ODonnell and Charlie Sheen have publicly expressed doubts about the official 9/11 story. But even simply opening up video.google.com or youtube.com brings any person face-to-face with "Loose Change", "In Plane Sight", David Ray Griffin, Webster Tarpley, James Fetzer, Alex Jones, Steven Jones, and all the other 9/11 truth people. So how did the candidates align:
Those who said absolutely nothing about 9/11 without even hints (again maybe I missed something so bring it to my attention if I did). In other words, these people can be counted on to not raise a new 9/11 investigation, are either too scared or too complicitous with 9/11 to make this mass murder of 3000 innocent people an issue, they are clearly not outraged enough about the murder of nonviolent people to express anything.
Expressed no concern for 9/11 being an inside job:
Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, Richardson, Gravel (although did mention problem of Military Industrial Complex)
Those who may have hinted some outrage about 9/11 being an inside job:
Obama ("dismantle these networks...(of terrorists...but could mean indirectly 9/11 inside job network)")
Those who clearly expressed outrage about 9/11 being an inside job:
Dennis Kucinich (paraphrasing "open handed", from "In Plane Site" 'we offer an open hand, and not a closed fist')
There wasn't a lot of real wisdom among any of the candidates. For example, the word "science", "evolution/evolve", "violence" were not mentioned by any of them. In particular, the question about "war on terror and the republicans making the US safer"...first I have to hold back a vomit...the republicans make the US safer?! They did 9/11, it's like handing over the keys to the gentle lambs to a bunch of vicious wolves. The republicans did 9/11 and who knows what else, them in power is the only thing that is making life unsafe and dangerous in the USA, then of course not even to mention how the genocide in Afghanistan and Iraq is not lowering murder, violent crime has gone up in the USA, because they have no program to stop violence, and care little about stopping violence. And here we have a very very simple statement. The "war on terrorism" is only a subset of the "war on violence". We need to get serious about stopping violence and even identifying those who are wiring up explosives, murdering people with guns, knives and fists, all over the USA. I said "Now we in the USA has a history of violence...like JFK and then suspicious coverups like the bogus Warran Commission...with Dulles at the head...a guy JFK had fired...well you know that is corrupt then...and anybody that has seen the Zapruter knows that Oswald probably isn't the person that killed JFK...and so it was for MLK and RFK...and then more recently John Lennon...let's not forget him and how he was murdered in the streets of the USA...and there are so many others....9/11 is just another example of unstopped violence....now we have to get tough and smart...we need to start opening up the information and we need to start cracking down on violence." None of the candidates could identify this simple truth.
At first Hillary had some positive comments, echoing a version of my statement, that the difference between democrats is small, but between democrats and republicans is huge. I basically stated that, the decision between democrat and republican is a decision between the murder of 300,000 humans including people like my Mom, the 9/11 victims, and those killed while on duty in Afghanistan and Iraq versus those 300,000 humans living. It really is a major life and death decision for hundreds of thousands of humans on earth, the decision between voting for a democrat or republican, but I don't think the public, in particular the underinformed outsiders know this, but how could they not know it? Perhaps they don't understand that 9/11 was an inside job, but even so there never were WMD's found in Iraq. But then Hillary turned somewhat nasty, and definitely lost points in my opinion. As time wore on, Hillary revealed her unenlightened, blood thirsty inside, by saying something about welcoming "people who want to sell more stakes", and raising her hand up like driving a stake through a vampire's heart. It's tough as an outsider to analyze exactly what this means, but in my opinion, this is saying that the murder of my Mom is wonderful for Hillary, is a good thing for her. After all Hillary is the Governor of New York, allowed the murder of my Mom to happen, and has done nothing to punish any person who murdered my Mom. And what I think Hillary is saying there is that, she is reaching out to christian insiders, to say "let's keep murdering those who are not christians like us"...basically "bring on more stakes!" there are more "vampires" and "witches" to kill. Maybe I am wrong, what is the insider analysis of this "steak" statement. Then I think about how these insiders may even, as Kurt Cobain hinted "choking on the ashes of a runaway" before he was probably murdered, that they actually have "human steaks". Maybe not, I don't know. Maybe Hillary was just saying, "what about those people on the republicans who do that? I'm not like them." I'm interested to hear insider analysis of the "those who want to something... steaks". Maybe she was saying "I'm a meat eater...Kucinich is a vegan". Killing cows and eating their muscles is nasty anyway, but I will set that aside for now. But it seems clear that a "stake through the heart of a witch" metaphor is clear. Maybe Clinton is just trying to reach out to blood-thirsty intolerant christians, and doesn't actually believe people like my Mom should be murdered. I finally kind of settled on the idea that Hillary is basically "weak" and simply finds it easier not to stop or interfere with murder, her job is to parade around and puff air, not to actually do anything, and so it was with Bill Clinton who passed the Sony Bono law copyright extension while seeing any copyrighted material he ever wanted without paying a dime, including our thoughts, and doing nothing about those suffering in prison for drugs under the Reagan mandatory minimums which Bill Clinton left completely intact over 8 years of shocking and miserable treatment of those caught with drugs. And this is another statement about Hillary Clinton, that she is "disconnected". Disconnected from people's suffering, where Kucinich and Obama are more connected. But just quickly Obama did not fair well and lost a few point in this debate in my opinion, his planned media statements are far better than his on-the-spot comments, and like Clinton, at least one blogger actually identified it that both Clinton and Obama "try to please all people", for example, one obvious statement was how Obama is for more troops on the ground but also for ending the Iraq war...in the same sentence almost, and how Hillary Clinton voted for 9/11 and to invade Iraq 2 years ago, but now there is all this "new" information...and she changed her mind...again this weak wishy washy flip-flopping spineless no-integrity view that is absent from Kucinich who is consistent in his views. I can't over state this idea of electing a known commodity, a person who has been consistent. Kucinich said "maybe in her stake (state)" at Clinton, and I think that was very smart, and on his toes, although maybe that was just morphed on my computer and I should go back and look again at the video. Am I the only person who heard this conversation going on? Kucinich saying...something like "think about that....about a person who is celebrating the murder of 69 year old woman and is saying bring on more...more murder of the elderly...all-be-they of a different or no religion than christianity....is that what you honestly want?". How different is my Mom from your Mom? I doubt there is a big difference, my Mom was a gentle nonviolent person who happened to not subscribe to any religion, and who didn't deserve to be murdered. But let me reassure the females of the USA that it seems clear that no matter what Hillary does, she is going to be the nominee that wins the important democratic primary, because people want a female president and they don't care about the person's values. I think history will prove me correct that Hillary will get the "dumb vote", those people underinformed about 9/11, those people who reject evolution, etc. plus "the women", while Kucinich will get the "smart vote", those who set aside gender and are more concerned with the issues and progress. I don't know about Obama, I'm not the expert, I'm just giving my views as an outsider. Obama will probably win the votes of many black people and other non-whites. Obama did use a smart word...I can't remember...let's see..."cane"? a hint that he empathizes with those in jail (mainly black people) in this brutal drug war. I can't remember, but it was a smart word that has 3 or 4 levels of meaning. But also getting back to the "disconnected" of Hillary. Hillary is typical of these wealthy wealthy insiders who care very little for the suffering of those murdered in 9/11, those in jail for drugs, those in psychiatric hospitals without any basic rights. This psychiatric system is a clear issue. And let me make what seems like a very complex issue: the psychiatric system, very simple. It is so simple. It is basically one tiny little switch. All that needs to be done, is to simply switch the lever to "consensual treatment only". That is all that needs to be done. And then think about what would happen, all those underage kids whose parents and doctors force treatments on them, who inject them with drugs, all those disobedient housewives whose husbands get the police to commit them to psychiatric hospitals even though they have violated no law. It comes down to inaccurate thinking being legal, to making delusion legal, which is the right to free thought and belief, even if inaccurate, delusional, abnormal, and/or unusual. The question about VT was what made this lack of empathy and wisdom in Hillary obviously clear. The conservative democrat statement on VT should be something like "now here again is another example of how the Bush administration has failed on this issue of stopping violence. Now they failed on 9/11...they had hours to deploy the airforce...and here again...this murderer was walking around for 2 hours...chaining up the door...whatever system for stopping violence this administration has in place is clearly not working...and why? because this is a group of people who cares very little for stopping violence...look how the FBI just released their report that violent crime has gone up in the USA..not down...and here they are secretive and they have all this information...they have tapped all these phones...and they can't stop violent people when they have hours to do it? there is something wrong with those insiders...." but Clinton and others took the issue of "mental problems" and keeping guns out of the hands of those with mental problems. In other words, violent people is not the issue, people with mental problems is the issue. And you have to understand why they express these backward beliefs. The young kid being tortured on the table in 4 point restraints, the housewive being drugged, those people who are ordered by a court to buy psychiatric experimental drugs, are not the ones funding Clinton's campaign...those people are Johnson and Johnson, Novartis...are the big pharmaceutical industry...basically the psychiatric drug kingpins. And when it comes to human rights (the right to trial, to prove your innocence, to a finite sentence, to freedom of movement, freedom from drug injection, etc...) versus money...I am sad to say that money wins out, we have a system where basically those on television are going to be those who could afford the time. And so these backwards disconnected views of the uber-wealthy Clinton versus those people who languish in prison cells and psychiatric hospitals is noticable at least to me. Plus the missing concern for stopping murder...I mean why does no candidate say "I promise to try and lower the homicide rate by 10% in 4 years", murder is not a concern at all.
Other ideas, it is interesting that there is at least one female human, one black or african american person, one person with native american ancestry, whereas the republicans are all white males. With Richardson, my conclusion is that with the candy-cane tie, and rising to power in a red state such as New Mexico, he is basically too far off into the conservative do-nothing or worse realm. He did mention an interesting idea of a 3 part government in Iraq, which may be the result of people discussing the idea of full democracy, and the problems that a full democracy might bring to the USA. The claim is that the majority would decimate the minority and that is not happening with the current 3-part system. I disagree with this claim, although it is complex. The idea they are talking about is how a minority would have some guaranteed right that could not be voted away to protect minority opinion from being eliminated by a majority. One clear example I can give of how this kind of "compensate for and protect the minority" does not really apply is the entire court system of earth, in particular the court system of the USA. There is no reason at all to have anything other than a fully democratic opinion where the majority wins all court decisions, that is simply the way a court system operates. A person is either found responsible for some crime or is not, and that is determined by 12 people or a single judge, there is no logical place for some kind of 3 part minority-helping system. Simply the majority view determining the sentence, etc seems like a simple and the most fair approach to our terribly random and unfair court system. Full democracy will smooth out the inconsistancies in sentences being handed out by individual judges with different philosophies and interpretations of the laws, etc. My view just to summarize quickly is that we are already under majority rule, but a very slow majority rule, where the majority finally wins out but only after decades. Kucinich was the only candidate to publicly support the international court system, which could possibly convict the 9/11 plotters if it was supported, that it is not democratic would be frightening, but still, it might stop the final authority of the 9 people on our supreme court...9 people deciding the laws for 300 million...I hope people wake up to that truth soon. You ought to be able to live under laws you get to vote on.
To her credit Hillary is putting forward a health care plan, as is Obama and Edwards. Edwards is disconnected too, thinking about raising taxes. I'm with Gravel....just scrape the modest budget overruns from the military industrial complex...nobody needs that much military. Already taxes are being wasted everywhere, we need to be getting much more for our taxes. Interestingly health care is a major issue, where ending starvation, free rooms for the roomless, free access to showers and soap, stopping violence (a registry of violent offenders, etc), moon stations to develop the next new world, etc don't seem to be big issues for this group. With the health care, it is interesting, that it could be done through insurance companies, but it could be done directly to doctors. You know Hillary, the big business rep, is going to go with the insurance industry, not with directly paying the doctors. For example, simply defining some dollar amount per person, and paying doctors directly for those who need health care...that will not be done. in addition, possibly fully paying for all immenent life-threatening care. Basically there is the emergency care (heart attack, stroke, cancer), maintenance care (non-life threatening disease), and routine check-up care (dentist, xrays, etc). Then evaluating people depending on what they can afford. It's not impossible and through science and logic we can flush out these main issues.
Then think about Hillary wins 2008, 2012, and as usual the pendulum swings back because people oppose the encumbants and republicans win in 2016 and start war again. What did we get from Hillary? Nothing, absolutely nothing...no wait, universal health care insurance, and that is absolutely it, nothing else....maybe a balanced budget...but nothing else whatsoever. Nothing science, nothing drug war, nothing prostitution, nothing free info (free info may even be in worse shape), no "consensual" psychiatric system
And there are also mainstream issues. The defining issue of this time is 9/11, just like abolishing slavory was in Lincoln's time. There are 2 groups, those who publicly said nothing about 9/11 and those who spoke out publicly about 9/11 being an inside job. So how did the candidates fare on the 9/11-truth issue? This most major litmus-test good-evil pious-unpious allow-murder/stop-murder issue?
I can summarize Hillary Clinton in a few words, but as an outsider, maybe I am inaccurate, maybe I don't have all the facts, but one word is "weak". And I would apply this word to Bill Clinton's presidency too. Clinton increased the copyrights, did not remove the reagan mandatory minimums, allowed Oklahoma City (controlled demolition was involved so it probably was dirty and insider) and WTC the first bombing (couldn't control the FBI probably) to happen. Clinton only looked like JFK, he was a weak president with weak Southern Baptist values that look the other way from people's suffering, not a strong minded, enlightened person with a solid education and spine. Clinton did very little for liberals in those 8 years. He balanced the budget and gave us a surplus to his credit, violence went down under his reign, but he did nothing about anything else, and weakly supported science. His administration was a christian marshmellow regime, and a somewhat vicious violence one too. Biden said the idea that we don't need to invade nations in unrealistic, and I am glad he flared his blood hungry teeth, because I wasn't sure about his views. He's a chameleon and a professional politician (read "do-nothing" like Dodd, not a visionary or leader). Because I think it's obvious that we as a society need to move toward "policing" (where people get trials) and away from military solutions (where people get "off'd"). There is no reason for 1 missile to ever be fired with the current technology. We need to be policing, working with the other nations...and the biggest most powerful violent people are here in the USA, we need to start here in our own backyard to even simply identify murderers and then convict them, we can start with Frank Fiorini and Thane Cesar and then go from there.
I really ask people to look again at Kucinich. Here is a person that most likely would win the electoral votes (20, a very large number) of Ohio his home state, and like the last 2 elections, the Democratic nominee will no doubt win the electoral votes of California, Washington, Oregon, Illinois, PA, and all of New England, which is enough to win the presidency when you include the votes of Ohio. Can Hillary win Ohio? Sure she will win the 3 Pacific states, New England, and Illinois, but can she win Ohio or any southern states? Kucinich is clearly unhappy about 9/11, Hillary implicitly supported 9/11. But yet, Hillary gets 40% and Kucinich only clears 1%, what is the difference? What do people see in Hillary and not in Kucinich? To me it's somach churning. Here one of them made a remote hint that they were aware that 9/11 was an inside job and a mass murder of 3000 citizens in passing....the 1 percenter! All the others will be remembered historically as people who said nothing publicly about 9/11 being an inside job and died with that and many other secrets of which only fragments of recorded memories will reveal to the public many centuries later.
Look at the background of the candidates too, Obama and Kucinich are northerners, midwest, Clinton Edwards are south easterners, and the rest are New Englanders and one South Westerner (but a red state).
How about the evolution question for the Democrats? How would Hillary answer that? Probably with some wishy washy please-all answer like she believes in both.
With that Hillary stank stake thing, I think many religious Christians may feel like...I'm not Ted's Mom, I'm not a 9/11 victim and I don't know any 9/11 victim, I'm not a person killed in Afghanistan or Iraq and I don't know anybody who was, so I don't really care...it does apply to me that those people are murdered...I'm not murdered. And you know as a person interested in survival and wisdom, I can't vote for Hillary Clinton in the primary, definitely I will be voting for Dennis Kucinich in the primary, because I can't possibly support somebody who not only stood by and watched my Mom get murdered, is doing nothing to punish the person responsible, and possibly even approves of such a thing requesting that more such murders happen. But you know, how different are those victims of murder than you and your loved ones? Not very different. I would have hated to been in those towers when Controlled Demolition flipped the switch, from that one phone call it sounded very painful. Getting back to that issue of consistency. We are going to want a consistent president, not somebody who flip flops around, in particular about mass murder. I may have to vote for Hillary if she wins the primary because the person who sits back and does nothing while people murder is less worse than electing the murderers. I think Hillary and the others who don't mention the truth about 9/11 (basically all those except Kucinish, Obama and Gravel) are sending a message to those that did 9/11 basically "we will not challange you", "we will get out of your way", "we will not present any kind of road block to your future false flag operations", " I was optomistic to hear what Hillary was going to say, but it all came back to me relatively quickly, all the problems with Hillary...how she is a brutal puritan, how she, like so many other insiders, has the blood of the innocent dripping from her mouth; is a blood thirsty person or at least blood and murder tolerant, how her puritanical backwards religious upbringing is a tremendous handicap, this is a person who includes the word "sin" in her routine vocabulary...I mean what century is she living in? What millenia might be more appropriate to ask. Sin? and soul. The belief in soul despite all the science and anatomy, still this old belief of soul, like the 4 humors...lets see there was bile...and I dunno... I couldn't figure out why Tarpley expressed such a displeasure with Hillary, stating that she was in favor of violence. I thought maybe he took Repub money, but it seems that she is somewhat brutal in terms of allowing violence to happen, nobody should forget that she went along with 9/11 and the Iraq invasion. Imagine Hillary's "defense" of my Mom applied to the USA. Here I might be voting for a person that is going to allow me to be murdered, and the killer(s) to go free, nice. I thought Kucinich's performance was conservative, but he did say some good things, one was how he said that he stayed with his beliefs even when unpopular, and that is a key issue. People like Hillary and so many others bank on the idea that people will forget and that investment generally pays off. Remember how Hillary authorized the Iraq invasion that has killed 3000 people...killed...those people are not coming back...is that the person you want for President? really? invaded Iraq, blew up neighborhoods, remember the images of the children in "Fahrenheit 9/11?" with all the scars? And then that 9/11 was actually an inside job...so the Iraq invasion was 100% pure first degree murder (and it is anyway since there is no reason...I mean people might entertain the idea of freeing nonviolent people from immenent murder, but it's doubtful, because they don't for China, and many other nations). And of course Hillary, Kucinich, and other insiders knew and know this, but Hillary supported it, and Kucinich rejected it. I don't think it's a good idea to forget how Hillary went along with 9/11 (and still does to this day), and in particular the Iraq invasion. It is one thing to be silent about 9/11 (as Kucinich has for the most part), but a very different thing to go along with the 9/11 murderers plan to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. I have trouble myself remembering this kind of viciousness, and I am glad this debate helped me to remember. All this debate did for me was strengthen my resolve to vote for Kucinich in the democratic primary. At first Hillary sounded good with her 'major difference' quote, but then the outer shell wore off and I could see what we are getting for our vote which is more of what I have described above. Kucinich has expressed his dissatisfactino with the drug war, that and his vote against the invasion of Iraq, provides the liberal progressive voter with much more for their vote than Hillary can provide. But as I stated, I don't think anything I say matters, it's probably going to be Hillary and Rudy in the final showdown and from there our next 4 to 8 years look bleek.
for polls for 2008.
Probably if the election were held today Hillary would be President.
It's interesting that, among republicans, if history is correct, they tend to like the most blood-thirsty and Nazistic, and while Guiliani is blood-thirsty and Nazistic, he clearly is not nearly as vicious, rabid, violent and evil as Bush jr, so that may cause dissatisfaction among the republican voters. Maybe somebody like Jeb Bush will appear, or somebody more vicious. Guiliani is definitely a monster and vicious, but he doesn't have that just-lawless animal run amok kind of style that the Republican voters tend to approve of, and that probably spells defeat for them unless some new vicious uber-criminal can be found, perhaps from death row? from the ranks of neonazis? I think Jeb is about the closest they have that I am aware of. 06/06/07 Maybe McCain, now there is one old crusty violent bastard, but is he twisted and violent enough for the republican voters?
On a different topic, I think Hugo Chavez's decision to not issue a license to the opposing television station is probably heavy handed, he could have simply identified those who made threats or allusions to violence and prosecuted them or fined them.
I wish Barbara Boxer would try for President, she voted against doing a 9/11 and the Iraq invasion and then women and pro-women's rights people like me would be happy too.
With the Scooter Libby, my vote is no jail time for telling about Plame, but perhaps jail time for involvement with 9/11, for example accessory before, conspiracy to commit, accessory after times 3000. Maybe those are not directly violent crimes, only related to violent crimes, but still I can see the public voting jail time for that. I am against government secrets as I have said before. 2 years for telling a government secret? That seems overly harsh anyway. All "information crimes" should be protected by law, and that is one potential law I have put forward. I don't think Libby and this administration are good people, I mean clearly they are scum bags, but telling secrets is no crime, the public should focus on punishing violent crime.
I still am saying keep your eyes open for some kind of reichstag false flag event. Maybe the republicans will pull Osama bin Ladin out of a hat, but then of course they will need to replace him with some other pretend "super villan", perhaps a second in command, or another wealthy Islamic person. I am thinking that this event will happen in NYC, or DC, certainly it could happen elsewhere too, it's all up to the republicans, the cia, and the rogue military and defense industry leadership, and as for a time, I think just before the election in November...probably any time after June 2008, so about a year away. In fact they might be in the early Wannsee conference planning stages now. Is this the "9/11 2008 conference?" people with badges might be asking, and maybe "do we have the minutes from the original 9/11 wannsee conference?". Maybe not because they are already well fed, they have had 8 years to walk away with billions of the taxpayer's money and the most massively giganto overfunded military of any nation in history, so massive, they have to make up "pretend attacks" because no actual attacks stand a chance of succeeding what with the seeing, hearing and sending thought machines and all.
with the military judges' recent decision. There is no need for military courts, judges, anything like that, and any kind of military court system needs to be ended and integrated into a unified set of laws for all people civilian and military alike. At least let's see how people vote on such an idea. I think most people think military courts are a sham, everybody but the defendent has the same uniform on, it's all fixed in the camera-thought net by those in power.
I think so many people, as I said, are looking for a self sustaining system that runs independently of any individual people or events, that basically is geared to shutdown violence. My main concern, as I said, is that none of the nonviolent people alive now get hurt, and in general that nobody still alive gets hurt at all. We need a system and society that stays true to that belief of exposing and stopping violence no matter what chaotic circumstances, trickery or complexity is going on.
When I say that Hillary is "weak" I mean weak against the murderers of the republicans. I don't know if the republicans are strong or weak, but clearly most are murdering criminals, honestly, and we need a strong person to stand up to them. The republicans definitely are making the USA weak with all their murdering.
I have to come up with more new phrases beside "ohmigod", "holy shit", and other 1200s phrases, but "Ay caramba", did you see the republican debate? I saw parts of it. Nonholy cow, did you hear the answers on evolution? First they are all white guys in neck ties, one guy (Huckabee) claimed that he thought a god created humans, but wasn't sure if it was in 6 days because he wasn't there, that god created humans in his image, that such a question was an insult, ... and I thought...that is so ridiculous...and that if people want to believe they came from a primate that's ok...I mean come from monkeys...I mean we descended from bacteria, from some fish-like ancestor, one of all of our distant relatives...I mean we are directly descended from some wild worm....from a frog like creature....from a mouse-like mammal...it's so obvious, but it sounds maybe shocking, but its so obviously true, you know evolution is very simple and there is tons of evidence to verify the truth of evolution. And I thought...'what an uneducated person...I can't believe that...that is so sad'...but then I was shocked even more after this person was done talking....the audience roared with applause to those statements about not knowing if a god took six days, and that first god created the heavens, and so on...they actually supported that...and agreed...I mean that is unreal. I have to thank those people who have the courage to ask that question...it shows all of us...such a simple thing...that maybe people probably presume is false...just how dumb so many of the people are and how poor education is in the USA. I think its wonderful to have these people explain their views on evolution. Of course those views are very relevent, teaching of evolution and science if something I expect from a president, and to promote those ideas, and of course I don't want to elect a person that does not think evolution is a fact, that is too shockingly uneducated or poorly educated.
Just more info I forgot to mention that, the health insurance plan for the USA is definitely going to cover unconsensual psychiatric "treatments" and experimental drugs for pretend problems. So what we see happening, and Elliot Spitzer recently passed a law that anybody can be drugged by force, which is a total violation of a person's right to body, against drugging and assault laws. And they do this so the drug companies, the psychiatric hospital owners, and psychiatric doctors can continue to get money for these products and services. Imagine if people some day vote to flip that tiny one-bit on/off switch and insist that all health treatments be consensual (I mean imagine somebody extracting a rib from you without permission, etc), including those of psychology (as was declared by the Nuremburg laws after the human experimental atrocities of WW2 were uncovered) ...imagine how the money and "customers" of psychology would be drastically reduced....'wait you mean I don't have to stay in this hospital? I don't have to buy and use these drugs?...well of course I am not going to...I'm going to save my money, I don't have any mental diseases', and of course, if they violate some law, by threatening violence, by causing a disturbance, by public nudity, etc. lock them in a prison, charge them with the crime, let them have a public defender, let them have a jury trial, allow them a safe and comfortable enviroment, a room, free food, clothing, access to a shower and toilet, safety from violence, perhaps even offer then free counceling, advice, drug advice, etc. Basically legalizing psychology, and making it consent only. The income to pfizer, johnson and johnson, all the major psychiatric placebo-and-worse drugs would lose billions and billions of dollars from forced drugs and treatments. Nobody likes to be drugged, nobody likes to be forced to buy and take drugs, nobody likes to be inhumanely physically restrained. I think it's going to be a long time for the public to work through their knee-jerk fear of mythical psychiatric diseases and labels such as "psycho", and in particular when those labels are used to protect or cover for a violent person...well no wonder people associate violence with psychiatric labels, for those people "violento" or "violentophile" is more specifically related to the big problem that everybody hates. Simply speaking, violent people need to be identified, caught-in-the-act on recorded images, sufficient evidence made available, captured and jailed, and those who are never violent need to be free. And while the public is busy trying to figure out that, evolution, and basic addition, these drug companies and psychiatric doctors and hospital owners will continue to enjoy the massive income from drugs and services forced on lawful (and unlawful) people without any consent. Maybe it's not you that is being forced to use drugs now, but it very easily could be since psychiatric disorders and stigma can absolutely be applied to any person.
The Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPS) stem cell find is amazing: that stem cells can be changed from unipotent mouse skin cells to pluripotent cells (and no doubt soon, even omnipotent cells...it's not as if there are probably serious differences with the cytoplasm and cell wall between cells). To me this thing is just fantastic. In addition to actually see it in the news and published in Nature...even just that may have been a major step forward. From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluripotent Pluripotent cells can "differentiate into any of the three germ layers: endoderm (interior stomach lining, gastrointestinal tract, the lungs), mesoderm (muscle, bone, blood, urogenital), or ectoderm (epidermal tissues and nervous system). Pluripotent stem cells can give rise to any fetal or adult cell type. However, alone they cannot develop into a fetal or adult animal because they lack the potential to contribute to extraembryonic tissue, such as the placenta." So that is wild to know. How this was done was simply by adding 4 genes into the cell DNA that produce 4 proteins known as transcription factors (transcription is the process of copying DNA to RNA by an enzyme called RNA polymerase, a transcription factor is a protein that works in concert with other proteins to either promote or suppress the transcription of genes.) I wonder if this relates at all to the theory that DNA is like a computer program that does not sun sequentially, but instead runs from step to step (or in stages) from some starting proteins that activate the genes needed for the next stage or step. For example, first proteins a, b and c are produced, these in turn activate/unblock genes for proteins d, e and f which cause developmental changes in the cell, and in addition activate genes for proteins g,h and i while perhaps blocking the gene for protein a. And so, the cycle of aging moves along in this way. If this is true then perhaps people only need to somehow create a custom made DNA strand that stops the development at some stage and constantly cycles at that final stage to have an "ever-living" organism, like a bacterium. Perhaps it's more complex than that, but this find clearly shows that 4 simple genes turn the cell back to an embryonic stage. The most exciting possibility (although this probably is in the future and not yet figured out) is that maybe people and other species with genetic and physical problems could be healed, and beyond that, possibly, our own DNA, those of us already developed could possibly be inserted with DNA to make our cells all pluripotent so we can grow back limbs, etc, and possibly this might lead to understanding how to stop development and hold an organism at one stage of development (for example age 20) without aging farther. My only worry with this new finding is that all the assholes alive now in this time might be alive forever, but still all the good people living theoretically forever, might offset that. Hey screw wasting our time going to church, synogogue, mosque and temple, and let's work more with this stem-cell science stuff.
there is a gradiation of violence, starting with murder...murder needs to be stopped first, then assaults...even any I might do, and then from there...probably the next biggest evil enters into the nonviolent realm, is anything related to violence, theft. So a poke, touch, drug use, prost, that stuff is minor, a shove or unconsentual spank is a little worse, but still a very minor assault, people have made tiny little touches and similar activities (many times beamed on suggestions) to be so serious ... even more serious than murder, assault...it's amazing. I think many people focus on one tiny part in their brain where they think...'oh...poking a person...oh fondling...that is so bad!....' and that part of their brain is not connected to the part that thinks 'oh murder....oh assault...that is so bad!...' and so they are not able to see the entire spectrum at one time. (It's really the "cease sees" phenomenon...the hey how about punishing those murderers in the camera net? How about at least excluding them? Aren't they people who should be chastized and not allowed to see, hear and send thoughts? I mean murder...ayiyi...are those the people that should be able to see people in their houses? while the simply poker or toucher who hasn't hurt anybody should be excluded? it's bizarre...but basically many insiders see murder and assault as ok or not a big deal) They have to be reminded about the murderers and assaulters in the camera-thought net, then they reach a very interesting thing in their brain...as the two concepts...two entirely different parts of their brain are temporarily connected....but then quickly dissapate, and they fall back on the main paths worn over in their mind for years....of violent crime not being serious...of pleasure being the big evil...not remembering that violence is worse.
Barrack Obama confirmed "hop" in a media statement recently, so that gives more weight to the all the passengers put onto a single plane at CHIA and shot down over PA theory.
Hey we should stake our claim to some US moon cities in the new world, and Mars cities, now lets go, lets stop wasting time in war, and conquer the moon and mars...other nations are already moving ahead of us, we who are sunk in the mud in Afghan and Iraq. We get to the moon and have to learn Chinese, Russian, and Spanish and then get passports to visit and rent.
we don't see an asian candidate, that is kind of unusual. We need a good atheistic, science-loving, pro full-democracy asian lady and guy up there. Can you imagine a white person as president of China? or a black person or woman as president of russia? That is one reason the USA has a certain advantage over other people, just as Pupin had the smarts to figure out seeing eyes, and he was an immigrant, integration is good for a nation and people, in particular for new science ideas and approaches. How about a white woman as President of Japan, only in Chile will you see that kind of thing. Now I would like to see even more integration in Canada and South America.
Guiliani doesn't appear like a tough guy to me, although I am sure he is vicious, because it's the lisp...I can't imagine him giving out threats like "...perhaps you might want you should have some trouble ...what with making your sandwich there hm?..." etc...probably people instead of feeling threatened would roar with laughter, but we know for sure that those 9/11 victims aren't laughing.
People think Russia is terrible, and China, and so many other nations are so terrible, and without doubt there are terrible things happening in every nations around the earth, reporters like Anna Politskaya are murdered with millions watching and the killers never punished, political dissidents like those in Tiananmen square are jailed for years without any major crime, but think about this: How many nations have done a 9/11/01 to themselves...to their own people? There really are very few. Has Russia blown up 3000 of it's own people? It did have the terrible Beslan school massacre that killed 350 people, but I don't think that was an inside job, perhaps, with seeing, hearing and sending thought, it's hard to imagine people not being able to stop violence before it happens, but perhaps. Has China done a 9/11 to its own people? no. Has South America? no. Did Canada? no. France, Germany? no. Spain? no, unless the Madrid bombing, but then that was very small, similar to 7/7, the British false flag operation...not nearly a 9/11 by any stretch of the imagination. Has India blown up 3000 of its own citizens? not yet. Sweeden, Switzerland? no, not yet. Australia? no there has not been any 9/11 inside murdering there as of the moment. So a very good argument can be made that the worst regime in power, the most destructive and oppressive administration, is the one currently in the USA. The leaders of Russia, China, and other nations are brutal and callous, one might even say vicious, but none are so vicious as to murder 3,000 of their own citizens in a false-flag operation, that kind of vicious lawless murdering and violence, only the USA under Bush jr is capable of or are believers in. Even the Communist nations are not so murderous to their own people, and Communism is grindingly slow, brutal and constantly corrupt. Even monarchies such as Saudi Arabia are not so brutal to their own citizens, murdering them by the thousands. This is the only nation to murder more than 3000 of its own citizens since Hitler (not to mention hundreds of thousands of non-US citizens). I think people like to think that other nations are the asshole of the earth, but looking at 9/11, none are that monsterous to their own citizens, and I think we must realize that we are circling around the black hole of earth; that asshole of crime, dishonesty and violent mass murder is here...in our nation at least at this point in time. We need to seriously clean up the USA and have needed to since the murder of JFK. We need to take back our nation and make it a lawful anti-violence nation. What has happened to the people in the USA?
Who can understand the G8 protests? Is that idiocy? Who gives a shit about international conferences? There are so many other things and people to protest like 9/11/Controlled Demolition, Frank Sturgis, Thane Cesar, the phone company pupin network, the major media pupin network, the police secrecy, not being able to see the police cameras, for full ass democracy all the time, against the drug war, for total free info, against copyright, against violence, against the prostitution war, against unconsensual psychiatric treatments, for an "evolution" movie, a "history of science" movie, a "future" movie, against religious persecution and secrecy about past persecution, about the lies of the religions, etc. G8 who gives a shit? They don't decide or do shit. There isn't even a planetary court system, the united nations is far from democratic or effective...they did nothing about 9/11, the afghanistan and iraq illegal invasions, what good are their doctrines then? The UN and NATO seem to be to be mostly US govt-run organizations (although again no US citizen has any control over them or their doctrines which are barely worth the computer memory they are saved on). I'm hopeful for full democracy in every city, state, nation, planet and star system we grow to, but I don't think that is what these G8 protesters are protesting about. They simply throw out that they are "anti-globalization", and to me, that is stupid, open the markets up, VISA and mastercard are already global currencies, how about some standardization in laws...I don't want to be jailed in south america because I said something impolite, or murdered in Singapore for chewing gum, or in Taiwan after being planted with drugs, etc. I think some kind of planetary democracy can't possibly be a bad thing. I can see a planetary majority bullying the minorities, but as I have said before, let the city majority always rule over the national majority within the confines of that city. The California medical marijuana issue is a perfect example of how Bill Clinton and Bush jr should yield to the State majority. We are moving to other moons, planets, and stars...this planet is going to be left in the dust in a thousand years, as a way overpacked wall-to-wall skyscraper planet without space to sneeze. To me the thing to be protesting and upset about is the murdering. Abstract issues like globalization are not serious problems, the secret murdering is. There must be a cool camera-net video and I want to make one for the outsiders that shows all the murders from 1910-2007, the victim(s), the murderer(s), quickly going through them all, the capture/verdict if any, etc. to show the massive violent history of the USA.
How about this latest Kansas murder of Kelsey Smith? What a beautiful young female with most of her life ahead of her. Certainly the insiders know who did it, but did they know who was going to do it? This is another example of how decriminalizing prostitution, removing the stigma of promiscuity, real sex education that lasts much longer than 1 hour on 1 day, a new focus on stopping violence, and punishing the violence. For example, without much doubt the person that did this murder should get life, there is very little doubt that this was anything other than a first degree murder. And this happens all the time, people care very little about murder. Recently Bill Mahr did a Larry Hagman joke and it reminded me about my statement in FYRN-Violence that the public cares more about the pretend murder of an actor on tv than the 20 real murders a day in the USA, and that is just in one day. Murders of wonderful people, and there looks to be no change anytime soon.
This article is evidence that the military probably has room after room of highly trained walking robots and has since the 1950s. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6729745.stm
Interesting why people say "take a dump", "take a crap", "take a shit", because really it should be "give a crap", "give a shit"...you are not taking anything, you are giving something, giving it to the government to process and reuse. We're going to "take a piss", but more accurately we should say "give a piss" or "piff". It's at the government end where the person would say they are going to "take a piss" or "take a shit", since they are on the receiving end and not the sending end of piss and shit.
Kind of interesting link about Dorothy Buck, a woman who was foribly injected with drugs in psychiatric hospitals and forcibly sterilized for shitzophrenia in Germany: http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/media_oi.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10007014&MediaId=5092
There seems to be a lot of excitement about Ron Paul, the Republican candidate for President, which raises an interesting question about the current voting system, because if so many people are supporting Ron Paul, why do all the polls only show him with 1% support? We know how the major media is controlled (obviously they don't mention about seeing, hearing and sending thought, nor how 9/11 was an inside job, nothing about Frank Fiorini or Thane Cesar), and no doubt so are the major poll companies. That's probably what is happening, basically a small wealthy powerful group that controls the pupin neuron/camera thought network pulls the strings and they don't want anybody who might threaten their all powerful control over people's minds, they certainly don't want this thought technology available to all people to enjoy. But anyway imagine if Paul did win the Republican nomination, it seems clear that even if overwhelmingly popular, Paul can't because of these controllers of the Pupin net with all the money and literal control over people's minds. Wouldn't that be an amazing battle between Ron Paul and Hillary Clinton? Because I think many smart people would have a tough time voting for Clinton over Paul, here Paul is for removing the Ferederal Reserve Bank, of course Hillary will have nothing to do with that...the Federal Reserve is a disaster, a few elite secret people control how much money is in circulation and are shockingly brutal, they create depressions, and all kinds of economic problems for their own advantage, there is a good video on google, I think it's "the Money Masters". Hillary Clinton is not going to do anything like that for the people of the USA. Then Paul is for getting government out of the drug war. Clinton will never support that and is probably like so many on the illegal drug money take. Paul has a good interview on youtube with a person at NORML about the drug war: http://youtube.com/watch?v=G8t7jqis2Mc. I think I would vote for Ron Paul over Hillary Clinton just for ending the drug war and federal reserve system alone. Paul actually spoke with the scholars for 9/11 truth, Hillary won't talk to them, and is probably planning the next 9/11, or certainly how she will do nothing when the military cabal does the next 9/11. I am for getting government lasers out of our houses and government employees out of our minds. Ron Paul is a doctor, and therefore clearly a person who supports science and a smart person, I wonder if Hillary Clinton is even an evolutionist, she's no engineer, professor or doctor. What about Ron Paul versus Dennis Kucinich? That would be a tough battle. You know they ought to take each other as VP running mate. I think if Paul does win the Republican nomination (because it seems like there is a lot of support for him) it's going to be important who he chooses as VP. Maybe somebody like Alex Jones would be a good choice, probably he will choose a similar like-minded person, but are there any? certainly not among the other republcan candidates, those people are out there.
The new Paul McCartney video is on youtube and I think that's nice that he is providing free videos. Is it me or does he sound kind of thugish? like "hey yo....here's my new video..", maybe it's that he is older and his voice is deeper, but he sounds pissed. Then he tells the post worker to "stick it" instead of "set it gently" or "put it" which is kind of pro-violence language, but it's minor. The message, have fun or dance, that's fine, but for me, I like to hear a more progressive message, about Pupin, about masers, about 9/11, about Sturgis, Cesar, seeing thought, all the violence, for free info, about full democracy, for science...I mean...there is so many things that need improvement. It's nice that he allows all the comments to be posted, and there are some nasty comments there. I think it shows that many people are generally angry. It's probably the effect of living a pleasure-free life, coupled with religious idiocy, and constant beams on their head that makes people constantly angry and rude. Then McCartney does the "crazy" sign around his ear, and to me, that is kind of brutal and nasty. To think about how people are being tortured in psychiatric hospitals, locked in these places indefinitely and without committing a single crime. Then to see how innocent perfectly normal people are labelled insane...it's what is keeping the truth about Pupin a secret..."you say people hear your thoughts? well you are a psycho and paranoid!"...and "oh no not another person who claims there was JFK or 9/11 conspiracy!...those wackos". It's what keeps the truth from being accepted. psychology is a terrible stigma, it's a brutal belief as is religion. For centuries people were murdered because they rejected the obviously stupid and false claims of the religions, and psychology is a similar tool used for persecution and torture of the innocent. Definitely there are people who are very innacurate, look at the deeply religious...who believe Jesus is coming back and the earth will explode, and ... who reject evolution...I see it all the time...but you know, I don't view it as a disease, as much as a poor education, as poor thinking skills, inaccurate beliefs, poor decision making skills, rudeness, violence, those kinds of things, not as psychosis, or some kind of psychological disorder in particular knowing how people are being drugged, and tortured who are accused of such diseases (and those who torture themselves believing the claims of the brutal psychologers that propagate the myth of psychiatric diseases and that they need to be forcefully unconsentually treated). There are those who told publicly that seeing and hearing thought might be possible...those people are very few, in fact I only know of 2, and there are those who said publicly that 9/11 was an inside job, those, even among the included are actually a significant number of people, there are those who revealed that Frank Sturgis was the killer of JFK, or at least that the official story is probably false, those who implicated Thane Cesar as the killer of RFK, I only know of a very few people, but more than those for Pupin, and looking back in a few centuries, people will judge people on these questions...did they publicly support evolution? did they publicly support science, moon cities, going to other stars? And sadly for the vast majority of the wealthy and famous, there will not be one checkmark in any such column. I'm glad I have publicly spoken out for all those ideas and more, even simply supporting the stopping of violence, for teaching science, against the drug war, for free info, for full democracy, for physical pleasure, exposing the lies of the religions, for decrim the prost...I mean these birds and gents werk their arses off and then get jailed and fined for that even when porno is legal? I don't understand it, it seems brutal, callous and unfair, etc. In my eyes, this ULSF project is where it is at, everytime I hear people struggling and unaware of the facts of history I think...'this is exactly what ULSF is going to address....making people aware of the current understanding of the story of evolution, of the rich and interesting history of science, and the amazing story of the possible futures for life of earth', and it amazes me that I am alone basically except for a very few other people in being involved in this kind of project, and without any kind of funding or assistance whatsoever. Maybe wealthy people are paying tons already just to protect me so that I can tell this story, and if that is true, we live in a very sad and desperate condition. I expect this total lack of any kind of interest in ULSF to continue, and its shocking to me, but perhaps more shocking is the silence of those in power about the shocking violence of recent history in particular. I hope not to be angry and bitter as a senior citizen if I live that long, but perhaps it's a physical thing that people can't help. I probably will be saying 'get the hell away from me with that robot camera...' and so on, generally being crotchety and unruly. Hopefully, I will be mellow and positive, and even in old age be able to convince females to blow me after paying them a reasonable and fair reward. I think many people are interested, myself included, to see what wealthy people with access to millions of minds are thinking and creating, but I wish the public would be more interested in progressive ideas. It's not as much the fault of rich people who say nothing about anything that matters, as it is the public who continues to pay to hear them when other people like the 9/11 truth people, those against copyright, against the drug war, for sex, against religion, etc. are saying so much more, being far more honest about the true state of life on earth. The public should be familiar with the model of how a person gets wealthy by saying controversial honest things and taking on excess risk, but then stops revealing anything controverially honest because they are already very wealthy, there is little competition, they don't need to compete...they are already wealthy and set for life, only a moral drive would cause them to take on unneeded and dangerous risk by making truthful and progressive statements that are unpleasant for some. So when this happens, and this is constantly happening, I think the public should be smart and say "ok, your have been doing less than others for our purchasing dollar, and so I am more interested in what these more honest people are saying". It should be a natural phenomenon...you know...the public should want to hear about those people telling the truth about 9/11...so many won't ... well forget them...we know they are lying or saying nothing about it...and that added attention should, in a free market, result in increased wealth for those people, from advertiser who want many people to simply see their products, from ticket sales of people to see the person publically talk, to meet them in person, etc. But what we see, is that the public is not much into thinking. They far prefer to be spoon fed by the major media, and told what the truth is from major media and wealthy celebrities. Those few people who do tell the truth are either not heard (because they are rejected by the major mainstream media many times because their message is antimajor media manipulation), ignored, or labeled insane, heretical, perverted, etc. Once a person is recognized by the public as a celebrity, it seems almost like, they will be forever in demand...it doesn't matter how little they say, how bland and uncontroversial their message is, their image is like burned into people's minds, and it's like Chairman Mao and so on...the content of the person's character is far less important than the number of people that recognize their face, where I am saying, people should focus more on content. Again, it should be natural...why support somebody who is going to lie to you or leave you in the dark? Why would you not support and take an interest in somebody who wants to include you and to reveal to you all the secrets people have kept from you? Everybody likes to follow the heard, or at least feels more comfortable following the herd, and there is nothing wrong with that, when the herd is well informed and shuffling quickly towards truth, stopping violence, full democracy, free info, etc. (which there is of course a herd going in that direction, for the truth about 9/11, etc.), but the major main stream herds, are going in terrible directions, in particular those who supported aor support Bush jr now, that are following the religious herds, violent herds, etc.
Talking about unconsensual psychology, one insider was rude to me, and so I asked him "do you support unconsensual treatment?" and he turned livid (he was giving a presentation) and basically said "no", so it's a good idea to call the psychologers on this issue, because by default if nobody asks the torturous illegal system continues unquestioned and unnoticed.
What I think we are seeing is really an interesting phenomenon. It's an awakening of the public, mainly the outsiders, the consumers. They are slowly turning the cameras back on their oppressors, on the murderers, the secretive, the dishonest who are now in power. This is not a new process and has been happening for as long as history records. But at this time, and probably not really until 2 or 3 hundred years from now, is this latest reversal going to be complete. Now, not only does the public see the scum and villany that beam on them from on high, that kill people with the push of a button while minions cover up all the violence, the public does not even see them, doesn't hear them, doesn't know their names, knows nothing about them, but slowly, we are going to see walking robots, the public insisting on access to government street cameras, private industry street cameras, etc, people (and their robots) walking around with tiny cameras and microphones that beam video and audio up to wireless Internet depositories....and you know...slowly this massive secret evil cult of camera-thought net is going to be exposed for all their murders, lies and illegal activities. We are far far from that now, but we are just in the very small beginnings and it's exciting, but disappointing that it will take so long to finally see all the killers and the other monsterous humans in the camera-thought net, I can only imagine the violence and injustice they have inflicted on the outsiders without the tiniest bit of exposure or punishment. What those people hundreds of years from now probably will see is a massive bunch of democratic arrests, mainly of the insider murderers, and those who participated in murders...which is in the thousands upon thousands of humans. But I think a nonviolent majority, finally properly informed will not have much problem jailing them all. So this is really an eye opening awakening, where consumers are turning the cameras and microphones back on the phone company, back on the government, the police, the military, the major media, and slowly cleaning up the massive blood spill that continues to grow and the massive injustice and massive lies.
I have 4 new poblic access shows! This is going to be the first time many non-Internet users that are cable tv watchers are going to see some of the history of seeing and hearing thought, loose change, david ray griffin and john hankey's jfk2.
Michael Moore's "Sicko" is going to be released and I hope it will be entertaining. I will definitely see it when it goes to DVD from a public library. One thing I think is for sure, that Moore is a person who believes in psychology and I doubt seriously he is going to address the obvious brutality of forced psychiatric treatment, nor how the big pharma companies benefit from lawful people's suffering at the hands of a psychiatric system that violates the Nuremberg principle of consensual treatment and human experimentation only. Moore has said some nice things I am sure, but in his youtube videos he echo's the "sit down" of many wealthy insider elites with traditional values. I definitely support any skeptical views about the 9/11 official story such as those presented in Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11". I certainly hope and vote for free basic health care for all people of earth, and an end to starvation and violence.
Regarding the idea that the changing perihelion of Mercury might be due to the changing perihelion of earth, it's clear that any changing perihelion of earth would affect the measurement of the positions of all other planets relative to the earth and not just planet Mercury, so perhaps that can be ruled outas to a cause for the changing perihelion of Mercury. If this change in Mercury's orbit is consistent every year then I would look for other explanations. Clearly, the imperfection of the spheres of the Sun, Mercury and the other planets and moons, in addition to their variable densities has to cause unpredictable effects. So why don't the experts reveal this to the public? It is suspicious that they rarely if ever report this phenomenon of not being able to accurately predict planetary motions for more than a few days(? or like earth's cloud system, is even that too long to be exact?). One other thing that is interesting to me is how, any object we measure, we can only measure relative to the position and movement of the observer, and in addition, the earth, because we are stuck on this planet. We only measure the motion of other planets and stars compared to our own motion. In addition, determining a 3D vector, the direction of motion of some other object is difficult from just one angle, we can measure the difference in x and y, but measuring the difference in z is more difficult. We can measure the Doppler shift, but then, that may only be a component of the z velocity since an object might not be moving directly towards or away from us. Measuring the location and velocity of other objects is an interesting problem, in particular for robots who have to map each object they see in 3D. Again one key question is: what is the annual change in the orbit of earth relative to the Sun? That is a basic question but where is the answer? I still think people may be confusing the wobble of the earth and the earth's orbit's precession. The wobble would only change the appearance of stars relative to the earth's axis, where a change in orbit position would change the actual position of the appearance of the stars relative to the Sun's axis.
Thinking more about the consensually trying to stop people's violent reactions to same-gender touching, I think really the better idea (my original idea of consensually restraining people and making them see gay things is just a joke) is to expose young people to same gender relationships, so that they come to accept such phenomena of nature without becoming violent, in addition, to instructing them about violence, the laws against violence, what to do if they see violence, threats of violence, what is a threat of violence, etc. Not to mention a thorough explanation of all myths and objects that probably don't exist such as ghosts, goblins, magic, Santa, Easter Bunny, witches, superstitutions, etc.
One that question of "is Bush jr the worst President of the USA in history?" I think the answer is definitely yes, in terms of most murders. Nixon was bad, Bush senior was bad. I think there must be a lot of info on other presidents. On in particular is 1909-1913 Taft who kept Pupin's seeing thought a secret, but no president has murdered on the scale of Bush jr as far as I know. But another question is: "Is Bush jr the worst leader of history?" and for that I think the answer is no. Probably the worst leader in history is Adolf Hitler. Stalin was no prize. Mao was a butcher. There are others in history, Alexander the Great killed many people (although the gains of Greek science were a positive result, still to have won those through integration and stopping violence would have been more positive), Ivan the Terrible, Caligula, there have been other leaders, but I think Bush jr is on there, and has to be near the top for worst leader of recorded history, but so far he has not toppled Adolf Hitler in the top spot. The systematic mass murder of millions of people orchestrated by Hitler surpasses the 9/11, Afghan, Iraq orchestrations in scale. In terms of those murdered and jailed by Stalin, perhaps there are probably more simply because Stalin had much more time.
I have a bad feeling about this next election, it might be rigged for Guiliani by the Nazis that did 9/11 and currently rule the US through the Pupin thought-net and the fear of violence from the push-button neuron activation murder. It's interesting that not everybody in the cam-thought net is a conservative Nazi, but those who control who gets included are. What I think is happening is that those in change of the pupin-cam-neuron thought sending network are vicious monsters, but many consumers of the technology are not as monsterous. David Griffin has a good talk at Vancouver minutesasaguest.com, and a good video interview on the web with Alex Ansary. Ansary asks a good question about Rudy Gulianni and his connection to 9/11, which is important because here Guilianni might be the next king of the USA, the most powerful position in the USA and perhaps even on earth...I mean I think the public ought to at least ask about Guilianni's involvement with the mass murders of 9/11. And Griffin gives a very good answer. There has to be endless videos of Guilliani's involvement with 9/11 in the secret camera-thought network, but what are the chances of video of his role being public? Shockingly, there is some video that reveals some of Guilliani's role in 9/11. Griffin describes the interview Guilliani gave on national television, where Guilliani says that they were told to evacuate WTC7 because the Office of Emergency told him the twin towers were coming down, and just the unlikely probability of knowing that the twin towers would come down, because after all, no steel-frame building has ever collapsed from a plane crash or even the most serious fires. And Griffin goes on to reveal that the Office of Emergency is under Guilliani...it was his own department as Mayor of NYC. I want to add the fact that Guilianni shipped away the physical evidence of 9/11, and independent analysis has not been able to be done (except that done by Steven Jones which reveals the use of thermate). What Guilliani's role is, is probably only known to the very included, but as an outsider, it seems that without doubt Guilliani knew about the 9/11 plan before hand, and is at least an accessory to 3000 murders after the fact because of his involvement in removing the evidence, although it certainly can be debated. It seems clear Guilliani has supported the official conspiracy theory vocally, for example at the recent Republican debates. Guilliani stood on stage during the Republican convention and openly supported Bush jr, and the 9/11 lie.
Just FYI Hillary Clinton shredded most of the comments for her youtube video including mine. This is no doubt the censorship we could look forward to with her as President, but still I have to approve of her making videos for the public on youtube. I want to take this time to encourage people to vote for Dennis Kucinich. He's not perfect, but of the Democrats I think Kucinich is probably the most vocal about the important issues of the drug war, and 9/11. There isn't a candidate out there that is going to give us full democracy, full free info, or focus on stopping violence, but Kucinich is probably the best choice of the group. Certainly Kucinich is going to get my vote in the all important primary. That Democratic primary is important.
If I were President I would try my best to at least publically identify murderers, and capture them, in particular Thane Cesar, the 9/11 murderers, and solve the many other unsolved murders, while working to lower the violence in the USA and the rest of earth, then I would free those nonviolent people in jail for drugs and prostitution, then I would make sure that all people can see, hear and send thought, or at least know that such a thing has been possible for almost 100 years, then I would work to free information, lowering the length of copyright in particular and making a law to guarantee that no person can be jailed or fined for any information crime, then I would create a system where the public can vote on all government decisions on the Internet much like a credit card charge system but where a person votes, at first these public votes would not count, but would be used to judge the public's opinions on all issues, then I would work on getting the history of evolution, science and the future in all schools. Mainly I would focus on stopping violence, freeing the nonviolent, implementing true and full democracy, freeing up information, teaching science, working to end pain, suffering, starvation, dehydration, roomlessness. My view is that either we pay this much in tax (at least 25% of our income) and get many services such as free health care, food, water, phone service, high-speed internet, room, soap, roads, postage, etc or we should not be paying this much in taxes since we get almost no services from our government other than street maintenance, law creation, law enforcement, a yearly voting system, and food stamps for the poor, which is practically nothing for what we pay. The vast majority of our money dissapears in the Pentagon and the military. I would work to vastly reduce the money going to the US military and put it into proportion with the rest of the nations of earth. This is throwing money away on $200 hammers, and idiotic useless purposes. If the US is attacked, by all means we can shift the focus to military and defense, but since the chances of this are practically none, we should focus our finite money on moon and Mars stations, and the sciences we are going to need there such as walking robots, atomic transmutation, etc. We are losing this opportunity to be the first nation to develop housing on the moon and Mars, and many other scientific firsts, by squandering our money on the military and the useless and brutal occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.
There is a feature by 60 Minutes on homosexuality titled "gay or straight?", and I think thinking people should recognize that there is a major flaw in much of this reporting in completely ignoring the concept of "bisexuality", which is typical for the uneducated, underinformed and sexually repressed people of this time. Still, I have to support an examination of the phenomena around bisexuality, and basic sexuality.
I want to remind people of those experiments where particles are "dropped" or allowed to rise against the earth's gravity to determine their mass by measuring any delay in velocity relative to their velocity in the opposite direction. Those are very interesting experiments, in particular for the photon, the electron and proton, and neutron (that might shed light on the very important questions 1) does a photon change velocity and 2) is a proton actually 1000 times more massive than an electron?)
For me, my goal is that those who have survived up to now, that we all can survive and die of natural causes, my main concern is that nobody still alive gets hurt. I know that is impossible and unrealistic, but still it should be our hope, and is the hope of all people who want to shut down violence permanently.
I definitely do play sides, but not the typical sides of democrat or republican, I support the side of those who want to stop violence, want free info, full democracy, science, for the actual accurate truth, etc. my support is aligned with the values that are found in people and less with people in an all or none sense.
SCI: Here is a cool idea that probably got done. You have a rotating iron chamber with just any matter you want to get rid off, any matter at all, it could be dookie, old newspapers, it could be old scrap metals, whatever, uranium, plutonium, etc. and then it is immersed in a tank of water. In the rotating iron chamber are beams of slow neutrons (and maybe protons, and other particles that disrupt the nucleus of atoms) that are beamed through the center at the garbage. As this thing continues, first there are tons of photons that are emitted that heat the iron and water, from this steam pressure can be harnessed to turn a generator to make electricity, but also probably protons (Hydrogen atoms) are ultimatly released from all these atoms since the protons are the lightest and smallest atom. If this hydrogen gas can somehow be collected it can be used as a fuel when combined with oxygen and sparked. Being a gas maybe it is possible to collect the gas around the neutron beamed matter in the center. There are all kinds of other alternatives possible. Simply having neutron beams sweep over the garbage on the bottom of some chamber. The protons should simply rise up (and possibly other atoms in gaseous form rise up), these can be separated by a centrifuge into each specific atom. Unwanted atoms can be dumped back in for more neutron beaming. So this has to be one of the simple things that people found and ... who would have guessed...kept a secret. I mean there are so many secrets, I have to wonder how anything gets published. So that is a simple process of generating electricity (yes, the garbage in the center is radioactive, which means that photons are emitted at very high rate, but it doesn't matter because the entire thing can be contained, all the photons are absorbed in the chamber, and there is no chance of leak or explosion, but a second containment chamber can also be created around the main container. The key would simply be not dumping in the rare fissionable U235. Mainly I am talking about fecies, trash, plastic, that kind of stuff, hydrocarbon materials. So this process is simple and easy, people must have figured this out. I'm not sure how much hydrogen can be collected using this method, if any, but it seems likely that many protons must be produced from atoms of carbon, and larger atoms in garbage. Even finding chemical methods to release hydrogen from hydrocarbons might be a rich source of experiment. So reducing atoms to protons and photons is not difficult, the difficult thing is to build up atoms. That, it seems to me, must be much more difficult. Tearing atoms apart is easy with neutrons, but how do you build them up? It is possible I'm sure. For that though, just my initial impression is that the source material would probably need to be some pure atoms because people, to my knowledge, only know how to build up certain atoms into other larger atoms using neutrons and/or protons. It's probably a matter of bombarding and sorting many times, to isolate the stable atoms and throw out or back the many unstable isotopes created. This research all started around 1930 or even earlier. It really all started with the cathode ray tube.
I see the evolution of vehicles as (of course flying helicopter cars) airbags around the entire inside, cameras in every direction, and many screens (although beaming on mind is possible too). Then, when a person is pulled over, they could get pulled over by communication on the screen, or even in person, the government employee in the police can simply communicate by using the screens, through the Internet to the person in the car. This is just safer for the person in the government (maybe the person in the car has a gun or laser) and the person getting the fine (the government person might think there is a gun or laser and use their gun accidentally). Any time there is a gun involved, it's safer to communicate remotely from a distance. Beyond this, it is vital that the public insist that they get to have open access unrestricted in every way to the cameras on the streets.
Some people are like that Eddie Murphy Rick James song party all the time, but it's "angry all the time", mainly the sourpuss puritans, and no wonder, because of their puritanical life style that allows for no logic or pleasure, who wouldn't be angry all the tiiiiiiiiiiiimmmmmmeee yeah.
Just to summarize the important views some that I think are major changes in science:
1) closed case file: "evolution theory" in my opinion is a well proven fact.
2) open case file: "big bang theory" ("expanding universe theory" is probably false, universe is probably infinite in size and age, red shift is only partially from Doppler shift, but probably mainly from gravitational stretching of photons. As telescopes get larger, probably more distant galaxies will be seen, and there is no reason to think that space, matter, galaxies, end 20 billion light years away even if we cannot see that far.
3) open case file: "relativity theory" is probably false, probably Newton gravity is the more accurate physics. Time and space dilation is probably false, while not as complicated or interesting perhaps, time probably has the same value throughout the universe for any given time. Matter and velocity are conserved but cannot be exchanged, in other words there is probably no conversion of energy to mass. Photon is matter, has mass (is not massless), velocity of photon is probably not constant as evidenced by Mossbauer experiment. Space and time dilation was founded as a theory to support the aerther theory, which is most likely false. "Background radiation" is most likely photons from galaxies too distant to see, or simply stray photons moving through the universe.
4) open case file: "speed of light is constant" is probably not true, the Mossbauer experiment is evidence that the speed of photons changes under the influence of gravity.
5) open case file: "mass of photon", the photon is most likely matter, not massless as is the popular belief. The mass of a photon may be measured by measuring any delay on light particles due to a large gravity.
6) open case file: "all matter is particulate and not wave", I think all matter including photons is most likely particle in form, and that any wave attributes are composed of particles. So light beams, sound waves, electron beams, etc travel in waves, but are composed of particles.
It's amazing to think that an outsider simply producing a single image of what eyes see from behind the head (in particular an easily repeatable experiment) might possibly push the entire 100 year secret of seeing thought out into the public. It really makes the 100 year secret barrier look paper-thin. But even paper-thin, it has stood for 100 years without so much as a tear. No doubt there must be many many videos of people who have talked being murdered, and no doubt their corpses being put on display by the evil Nazis who control the camera-thought net. Those videos will be like the Nazi Holocaust videos that must be very gruesome indeed, movies from a time when barbaric people ruled much of the earth, finally freely available to the public to be grossed out to the max, but also properly informed and educated.
I think most excluded have to wonder about this latest death at Quantanamo permanent holding facility. How can people kill themselves? How can there be anything to tie something too. I am for legalizing suicide, since people should have the right to their own body. But I would request to see the body and inspect for bruises if I were the family, and inform the public. In addition, video from the cam-thought net would be probably revealing.
Far worse than the victims of psychology are the psychologers whose Nazistic system violates every principle of right to trial, sentence, to body, and to movement. Parts of psychology may actually be legitimate science, but only with consent. And even with consent, I still recommend that people stay far from psychology, because of it's drug-centered experimental nature.
Glad to see Kervorkian out of jail, that was barbaric to lock him in jail to begin with. I wonder if the public would have voted to jail him had we lived in democracy.
Think of how easy it would have been to stop the murder of JFK, MLK, RFK and John Lennon, by simply using the neuron activiation beams to "black-out" or "white-out" the dangerous violenters eye sight for the dangerous period of time in question. Even simply freezing their finger muscles. The likely murderer is unharmed and the potential murder victim is not harmed. So simple, but apparently, the controllers of the vast majority of the satellites with neuron activitation capability that most of us paid for, or the major media or corporations paid for are obviously controlled by Nazistic murderers of the innocent, and I think history and the truth will verify what I am saying as an unbiased and accurate statement.
It's interesting how doctors like to recommend no tests, no services, very little expenses in terms of diagnostic tests for health, no Cat scans, no MRI, blood tests are routine, but no genetic tests, etc. But dentists, holy shit, I've never seen a dentist that didn't pile on the unneeded services. I guess the doctor feels that they lose money by ordering batteries of services, while the dentist feels that they can only gain money by ordering hundreds of unnecessary procedures.
I think people need to remember, that yes, we may disagree with other people, we may be strongly opposed to the views of other people, including other liberals, but let us never forget who the masters of murder are, which is Bush, Cheney, Thane Cesar, etc. There are those insiders (and no doubt a few outsiders too) who murder innocent people, those who conspire and use advanced technology to force others to murder innocent people, the accessories to murder before the fact, accessories to murder after the fact, those who assault, etc. and then there is everybody else, whose "crimes" whatever they may be are far from serious, first-strike violent or violence-related. And this is an important thing to remember when murderers as they always do, make appeals to psychology, antisexuality, religious myths, etc. It's belief in the far from accurate theories of psychology (or more simply labels of "nuts", "wacko", "psycho", etc), a tradition of antisexuality and anti-physical pleasure ("gay", "perv", etc), and far from accurate religious claims ("devil(s) were involved", "god(s) did it", etc) that have protected murderers and those who advocate first-strike murder for centuries. In addition I would add appeals to a "right" and "left" philosophy to justify murder, the old worn-out claims of left-wing people being "communists" (where there never was a "nazi scare" which might have been actually helpful in removing from popularity those with clear Nazi links such as Prescott Bush).
You have to love the way in San Francisco the Republicans generally only get 1%. The Libertarians get more votes, the Greens get far more votes than the Republican party. The people of SF have figured out the deal with the Republicans; that they are murderers and Nazis basically. When you see "Republican" on a ballot, it might well as be "Murderers" or "Nazi Party", because that is basically what it is, in particular murderers. 9/11 is the best evidence lately, as an outsider I can only imagine how many nonviolent innocent excluded and even insiders have been push-button murdered by republicans in power over the 1900s and 2000s.
I think it's obvious that psychological labels such as "nut", "psycho", "weirdo", are overly harsh, many times meaningless, or simply rumor, and only for the crude and low brow. They are the number 1 tool among those who protect the killers of JFK, RFK, and 9/11, so you know it's got to be evil.
With so many beautiful females around the earth, I think the key thing for males looking to connect up with females boils down to the internal composition of females. Body defines a lot of physical attraction, but if looking for a long term relationship, the toughest thing to match is the inside, matching the values of two people to be somewhat close, in particular if your values are unusual, not popular, etc. and that can be something as simple as that you are not a member of any religion, are a supporter of some controversial issue, have different routines, etc. Even seeing a beautiful person, I think in many people's mind is the question of how smart they actually are, how honest they are, are they violent, etc. One time sex or something, who cares, but for long term grueling relationships, the kind that are most popular today, the key is going to be internal matching.
Some good rebuttles to "ped" are "pet" (because after all that is about the human rights status of most people's children, they don't get to vote, work, own property, see pornography, touch genitals or otherwise pursue pleasure, in addition, petting is hardly a crime or a big deal and something young people should have the right to enjoy at their leasure), and in addition, "kids are people too", and "kids rights", are two good rebuttles to these rabid antisexual violence and celibacy loving, pleasure stopping, neolithic nazistic people.
Top 3 slogans for Democrats in 2008:
3) "Don't cry for them Argentina!"
2) "Consider them reichstag fired!"
1) "Wake up and smell the cordite!"
I think insider (and even outsiders who know the truth about 9/11) religious conservatives should think about the fact that at least 1 unborn fetus was killed in 9/11 by Bush jr, Cheney and the neocons, and so maybe Bush jr should more properly be called "Borsh" jr. Maybe this fact will change their minds about Bush and his camp, because I know they can look past the murder of 3000 adults, but what about the unborn fetuses that they killed?
Ok hopefully these videos will stay on youtube, but if not, you owe it to yourself to copy them from a public library:
The Last Hour of Flight 11
Flight 175 - As the World Watched
In these videos watch for the air traffic controller who says "threat", the airforce pilot who says "scare", the husband who lost his wife ends a sentence with "BT" for "bomb threat"...that appears to be the story of the 4 planes...they were told to land because of a "bomb threat/scare", and the wife of one of the pilots say that he was "skilled" which probably means he was killed. You have to understand that many of the people murdered by the neocons in 9/11 were liberal intellectuals, atheists, artists, smart people, probably thorns in the side of the nazistic neocons.
Inside the twin towers
World Trade Center - Rise and Fall of an American Icon
Anatomy of 9/11
Notice the "AO", notice also, how the building creator ends with "LOL" which much mean that Bush, Cheney and the neocons laughed out loud at the misery of those murdered in 9/11...we all can see Bush look up and applaud the second airplane collision.
The names of 9/11 are interesting. One pilot's name was "McGinus", was this a warning to Letterman? Maybe it's just coincidence, but clearly they could pick from the liberal "litter" by simply assigning people they don't like to a "death plane". Maybe they just want them to spice up their comedy, or not play the same music all the time. Two people were named "Sweeney" (one "assigned" flight attendent) was this a warning to Julia Sweeney and others thinking about dropping religion? Because when Bush and these 9/11 plotters put together the 9/11 plan, there underlings can choose from many different people. And they purposely tried to kill intellectuals. Let me tell you I saw some really interesting videos on youtube.com (see above links) from the History channel and Lifetime or some other channel, that went through the supposed story of flight 11 and 175 and these videos, while espousing the bogus official story, talk to the families of those murdered and it is really really insightful. First, let me say that it is unbelievable how many people hint to outsiders, and some of these people may be outsiders themselves (since clearly their loved ones were either outsiders or only partial insiders). They almost all hint, and maybe that is because history channel are liberals and intellectuals, but I think it is more like, 70 to 80% of people are basically against 9/11. There were only like 20% of the people in these videos who do not hint, or hint using words like "gay", and other bogus nazistic crap. And so, I said, the big thing about these planes are that they were called down as bomb threats, so look for insiders hinting about bomb threats by using the initials "BT", "BS" (bomb scare). I thought...there is no way...this is an outside remote chance, but while I am watching...why not try to pay attention...and it is a hassle to try and spell their words together, but they plan and reherse their 2 or 3 sentence statements carefully, and we should have the respect to listen to them fully and try to understand what they are trying to communicate to us outsiders and simply other people of earth. And I can't believe it...many people hinted...one spouse, I think, was clearly angry, and definitely ended right on "B" and "T". Then an air traffic controller used the word "threat"...it has to be "bomb threat". One of the pilots said "you don't want to 'scare' them"...has to be "bomb scare". So, this story, of these 4 planes being directed to land at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport is kind of taking shape for we excluded. I was looking for CHIA, HIA, "hop", but there was nobody that really connected on that, so I don't know. But I am mainly going on what the "Loose Change" people revealed that something very unusual was going on at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport on 9/11...people were forced to walk out of the airport, and the report of one of the planes landing there with a bomb scare. So it seems that the 4 planes were directed to land at CHIA (it has other initials CLE too which I did not scan for), then all people were loaded into one plane and shot down over Shanksville, just as the Southpark story revealed, and others have hinted, Bob Bowman definitely says "shot down" in one presentation, and there are others who have hinted about this aspect of 9/11, those who have identified the Happy Holligans, Loose Change "2nd edition" probably hints that "nd" north dakota...it's an important part of the 9/11 story, they could have used "second". The wife of one of the pilots says very poinently that her husband was "skilled", it doesn't take much to understand that this means "killed". In terms of patsies, it looks like they only got 4, Atta and a few others (if even them). They didn't bother to kill 13 CIA/ISI operatives...maybe it seemed like overkill? Did Atta actually go to Boston? You have to go from the little physical evidence that has reached the public. Clearly there are photos of Atta and maybe 2 or 3 other people from some airport. But yet, the hijackers are not on the passenger lists, so that indicates that they were not on board any of the planes. Atta and others had to go to Cleveland if they were to be murdered, and maybe the images are of them flying out of a Florida airport. I don't know, I doubt the plotters would take that kind of chance, and it seems that it would not be difficult at all to instruct Atta to go to the Boston airport. The briefcase with Atta's stuff is all clearly faked. All the phone calls have to be fake because it was shown to be impossible to call people. Were their phone calls? The one family witness shown indicates that their probably were phone calls. So since these calls could not possibly have been from people on planes, my conclusion is that they use real-time (or millisecond delay) voice altering technology and some other person stood in for the relative....even up right until the plane flew into the WTC apparently. One spouse hints at this (perhaps without trying....done by the muscle moving technology) by saying "o a" very quickly in between words. Maybe I am wrong, but it seems logical to conclude that this is what is being communicated. Then another issue is interesting...the missile into the Pentagon...why didn't they just send another big jet? Obviously if it's the taxpayer money, they specialize in wasting it...so why not go the extra 3rd big jet? Why the missile? Maybe there was a worry about a bad fake paint job being revealed on the lawn? Maybe remotely flying a big plane into such a low target posed problems? It's interesting that they went for the Pentagon portion at all. They probably really wanted to kill some liberals in the Pentagon. It seems clear that 9/11 was designed...by these sick nazi neocons....with secondary or tertiary goals to murder liberals and other targets of opportunity. The pilots to be murdered were probably hand picked for murdering....probably thorn in the side people whose wit or who knows lowered the neocon popularity...look for wealthy young smart people as targets (like the Israel software guy). It was probably no coincidence that when certain people were booking their flight (probably by themselves using the web), "flight 11", and "flight 175", "Flight 95" and the other, appeared as available, while for outsider conservatives they did not appear, or other flights appeared as options. One thing that is really wild about seeing any video that talks in detail to victims and survivors of 9/11 is that....they have to be outsiders, or only partially insiders....clearly they were not told about 9/11 and did not know. Some of them have to have figured it out, or if partially insider, were shown after. Many of them actively use the "end the sentence with the important initials" technique, and also use important "keywords". I think that is really the conclusion I have from these documentaries about 9/11 when they talk to the victims and loved ones of the victims is that it is inevitable that the truth about what really happened on 9/11 kind of comes out of many of them or is expressed by them. And that is maybe a simple truth that, when anybody starts to examine any of these bogus false-flag murderous events, by talking to the actual people involved, the people effected by the murders, you find out many times much of what really happened, that the story that was supposed to be told is not infact the story that is being told, in some way, probably because the victims have had years to think about their loved ones and the circumstances surrounding their deaths. On the surface, they are telling the fraudulent official republican version, but underneath, the actual material of the story is filled with people hinting about the actual story, many times people who are filled with contempt, anger, and sadness, and rightfully and justifiably so. From such people, many times comes the hints of what actually happened.
I think people need to remember that Bill Clinton was impeached. Bill Clinton was, in fact, impeached, for lying about an extramarrital affair, not for murdering 3000 US citizens, not for lying about weapons of mass destruction that resulted in the death of 3,000 and counting US citizens and 500,000 Iraqi and Pakistani citizens. And then Bill Clinton was impeached, but not one person was harmed in any way, and the only physical evidence of the "crime" was the testimony of Clinton and Lewinsky themselves...not a single video of the "crime", which is the exact opposite of 9/11, where there is abundant video of the crime, of spools or squibs of smoke coming out of the towers, just the simple video of steel frame building collapsing at free fall speed is enough, the molten metal left for weeks, the hole too small in the Pentagon, the molten iron dripping down the side of the WTC, the video of the collapse of WTC7 itself, ... plenty of physical evidence. So much evidence of 9/11 being an inside job, that I have to conclude that there is in fact a new species of human, because the difference between people has become too significant to ignore. There is the one human who recognizes that 9/11 was an inside job, and then a different species that is a knuckle-dragging neolithic breed that continues to vote republican. There really has become a tremendous difference between democrats and republicans in my view, it's not a difference between taxes, big government, anything like that, it's a difference between very few people are murdered versus hundreds of thousands are murdered. And so, in particular on this issue of a president being impeached for an affair, but a guy who orchestrates 9/11 doesn't get impeached....I mean we are not talking about a minor difference between people and values, we are talking about a very major significant difference between people....one group whose biggest crime is an extra marrital affair, and another group for whom mass murder is ok.
In looking at this 2008 election, there are some things to think about. Probably it will be rigged again as usual, rigged for the republican to win. And look how they chose Guiliani...there are plenty of nazistic republicans to choose from....why Guilianni? Because think about it, how can the neocons be sure that they will not be prosecuted for 9/11? The best way is to find a person who has been so dirtied by 9/11 that they have to continue the cover-up, somebody who is up to their neck in the coverup and mass murder of 9/11...Mitt Romney isn't such a person, McCain is not up to his neck in 9/11 so far as I know, although he is as vicious and nazistic war mongering as any republican is....no it has to be Guilliani, because no body else can be counted on to protect Bush and others, the military cabal, from prosecution. But, perhaps a Democrat may win, it can't be ruled out. In this case probably Hillary Clinton would be the primary winning candidate, and with her we can expect no new 9/11 investigation, and probably a very bland 4 or 8 years, where the most I would expect is seeing the major media, and independent media stepping up with more explicit exposure of 9/11, and other republican crimes because of less fear of those in power. Those are the two main possibilities...there are other interesting possibilities like Ron Paul or Kucinich or some other person as of yet not in the lead of the pack. One thing that hangs like an ominous cloud over the USA is evidenced, whatever it is, by the fact of Oklahoma City, 9/11 1, and 9/11 2...the fact that, here in the USA, we have some kind of "other government", which is most likely some kind of military/defense industry/FBI/CIA government. They operate on their own, murder whoever they want to, and must be very difficult, and basically impossible to expose, to stop, for a president, congress, or media etc. I think we have created a military monster in the USA, and it will take centuries to defuse it. It's driven by the people in the USA's lack of logic and perspective on what is required, being vastly underinformed, secrecy, claims of national security, tolerance and support for violence, and greed. So no matter who is elected (and we should as a people be looking for a teacher not a preacher anymore), there is always the spectre of this invisable major murder group waiting to spring more false-flag destruction on the USA. And we in the USA have reached a very interesting stage in technology. The camera-thought network...the ability to see, hear and send thought, has made the information to those insiders so robust and full, that of course they see all violence, .... the technology is so advanced that they have to "create crime" such as Oklahoma City and 9/11...because they see all thoughts, all eyes, etc. No mouse can go undetected for a meter. They have to create crime, but of course, many murders happen all the time, they know, they know it all, they know every little detail about who did it. Think about it, a murderer of course remembers their murder, they remember it all the time, then even simple street cameras can be used to figure out who killed who...so basically those insiders just simply allow murders to happen. I know it sounds shocking, it seems unbelievable...but yet...it has to be true, there is no other possible explanation.
In all the stomach turning events of 9/11/01, one thing that stands out to me (beyond the phone calls, which are really below and beyond a Stalinesque kind of thing), is the Osama Bin Ladin video. Since 9/11 is clearly an inside job...I mean a few glances at any "collapse" video...just search google, the squibs, the molten metal, the pentagon hole, etc...it's obvious...since 9/11 is an inside job, the Osama bin Ladin video has to be: 1) a paid-for actor, 2) a paid-for Osama bin Laden acting 3) just coincidence...it is or is not OSB but they are not talking about 9/11 or are claiming 9/11 but have nothing to do with it or 4) something else... and because the facial metrics of the person in the video don't match OBL, it seems possible that this person is an actor. But think about that, if that is true...I mean that takes hutzpuh or just brazen unleveled stupidity...to pay an actor that looks like OBL to chat with friends about doing 9/11. Perhaps the plotters felt that they needed some kind of smoking gun...this is typical among these crooked insiders...look how they pulled my Mom's pants down to represent supposed paradoxical undressing that sometimes ... and I think the key word here is "sometimes" and probably even "rarely"... occurs with hypothermia...they feel that they need to make some kind of smoking gun to stop people from questioning and doubting their version of the story. And so they created this OBL video tape. But when a piece of evidence like that is produced, many times it might open up a can of worms, more questions that it originally intended to stop. For example the paradoxical undressing...it is so rare that it might actually raise more questions among excluded than just a dead clothed body might. And so it probably is with the OBL video, because who are those people if not OBL? Are those OBL's "right hand" men? Who are they? There are other problems...he eats with the wrong hand (Loose Change goes through many of the differences, Steven Jones and others have shown that the facial metrics are far off from other photos of OBL). But just in summary, that takes some kind of Stalinesque hutzpuh to assemble a fake video to convince the public. Probably this video will be in the 9/11 museum (or should be called the 9/11 nausium) of all the "fake-9/11 artifacts" the neocons created...the technology so the museum visiter can "talk like Mark Bingham" and so on...the fake NYTimes and other papers and television headlines about 13 terrorists, the fake luggage, fake passport of the hijackers, the videos of the wiring up of the WTC and the detonation, video of the original o.g. neocon plotters, etc.
When people come at me with that snotty camera-net fashy bratty: "yeah it's crazy dude" or "yeah ... it's weird" I tend to think "is it weird like addition boi?" "yo iz it weird like air?" "yo iz it crazy like a clock yo?" "Is it weird like a beard?", "Is it insane like a plane?" "Is it crazy like gum yo?" "Is it weird like a calculator?", "weird like a computa?", "weird like numbers?", "crazy, like learning the alphabet?", and so on, to make the point, that, you know what? for things being weird and crazy, they honestly aren't that weird, or crazy. Sometimes a simple "yeah boi it's overwhelming..." or "yeah...its more than your brain can handle yo". 05/22/07 This also works for "whoa", to which I add "yeah when when it comes to false-flag terra", whoa "yeah when it comes to first strike violence", whoa "when it comes to secrecy", whoa "like did you just see 4 + 7?", whoa "did you try to learn division?", ... and you can see how the fun ensues from there.
I was thinking, wouldn't it be cool to just have a big container that you fill with water and plug in that uses electricity to separate out the Hydrogen and oxygen gases? Then you just fill your car with that hydrogen gas. Perhaps just an electric battery might replace hydrocarbon gases. In any event, it seems inevitable that something (nuclear fission made electricity, or hydrogen gas) is going to replace hydrocarbon gas in the near future.
In some way, I think we need to go through "fag training" with many liberals, and no doubt conservatives too. This is where we consensually-only hold them down and introduce words like "gay" to them, to make sure they don't go violent, and are able to withstand it. And so slowly we can work our way up to showing them actual gay people touching, holding hands etc, slowly giving them more room to move as they learn to control and dissipate the anti-gay feelings that they have been brainwashed with, while they are keeping control on their violence and anger, in order to integrate them into society. This too may also need to be done for even just sexuality in general, slowly introducing them to images of nude people and images of people having sex while maintaining a nonviolent composure.
One thing that people should be told about is the way almost all of psychology is fraud, and in particular that psychosis, neurosis, schizophrenia, ahad, and many other so-called "diseases" or "disorders", have no biological tests which can prove them (I reject the claims of MRI proof for those so-called "diseases", etc), and are too abstract to be real or useful. In particular, this important item: that it is very unlikely, in my opinion, that any drug can cure these so-called psychological "diseases" although people are welcome to try any drugs they want to in my opinion. And the vicious thing I think people would see if we could see behind the curtains is that the phamaceutical companies, and the PhD doctors themselves bilk innocent healthy normal people out of thousands of dollars to sell products and services that people don't need and might be ultimately be harmful to them. So with that said, it might be no surprise that most dentists run up services that people don't need if you view your teeth like this: 1) you want to have all your teeth when you die and 2) you want no pain from your teeth, gums, etc. As long as you brush daily (I do twice, once in morning once before sleeping) and floss everyday at least once (some people brush and floss after every time they eat), you should basically experience 1) and 2). Maybe some of the procedures most dentists recommend: root planing, scaling, crowns, braces, gum holes (I don't know the name), false teeth...are all unnecessary, although I do not have a PhD degree in dentistry, this is just my opinion, and even might cause unecessary pain, if you simply want 1 and 2 and don't care about having perfect teeth. I question whether root scaling really is beneficial in the long run...I mean bacteria is only going to return there...the plaques going get you back jack. Maybe it might be shown to slow tooth or bone loss, by all means show me the xrays and studies done then. But in particular watch out for crowns and false teeth. Routine fillings I can see paying for (which is $100/each with insurance) even though there is no pain, and then I would go with the plastic, make sure they point out on the xray the cavity and you should be able to feel the probe stick into the cavity on the tooth...have them demonstrate that. Don't be worried about being called cheap or pissing the dentist off...they should explain everything and there is a lot of fraud in dentistry because average people have never had a course on consumer awareness...it would be like having legal council and experts on your side in the dentists office...."I'm not sure my client needs this...studies have shown that they will keep their teeth and not experience pain if they live an average life of 100 years without this procedure. Here are classic examples of cases where dentists defrauded patients with unnecessary services.". For example, my poor Mom actually paid to have all her front teeth removed and false teeth put in just because the dentist told her that was required...I mean people will disagree with me, but I am sorry, there is no way in the universe, that my Mom needed to have her teeth pulled and replaced, she maintained regular teeth care of daily brushing and flossing. Think about your front teeth...they almost never have cavities because they don't chew the food, it's always the molars. Plus the gum around the front teeth is almost always fine, it must be the last to go if ever. Here is another argument I want to give to you, neaderthal skulls, astralopithicine, monkey skulls have been found with all their teeth intact...and can we all accept that those mammals NEVER even brushed or flossed, ok and they kept almost all their teeth until death. In the hundreds of years of modern dentistry and record keeping, by now, people should know that most people keep most of their teeth until they die around age 80, in particular when they simply brush and floss once a day, and probably even when they have poor and inconsistent cleaning habits, but certainly, the vast majority keep their teeth until death. For me, I am looking to prove this, once I reach age 80, and still have all (or certainly the vast majority of) my teeth. I will then document this self study farther by tossing my own two cents into the accumulating data, because I am skeptical of dentists, and if there are those who doubt, take a look at the psychological doctors...I mean their drug perscriptions and diseases are 99% fraud, so it's strong evidence that PhD doctors are only too human and make as many and maybe more mistakes than those without PhD degrees. Many of the euthenizers of the Nazis were PhD degreed doctors. I am simply saying, judge each person individually, and in particular be skeptical about psychiatric doctors looking to sell products and services, and also dentists. With dentists, I think there is many times outright fraud, but sometimes the deal is that it's like automotive services...would your car be better off if you got the $1000 worth of services? maybe, but is it going to be ok without them? probably. Watch out for that "hole in the gum" procedure most dentists like to do for deep pockets. They will say it's to allow you to get access to the gum with floss, but it creates a food pocket that food gets trapped in, regular dentist cleanings will clean deep pockets, and that is a better (and probably not coincidentally a $0 cost) answer. And 1) and 2) will be maintained as long as you brush and floss daily, with cleanings 2-4 times a year. Will the pocket get worse? Either way, with the hole or not, it will get worse, it's just simply the nature of the human teeth and aging. My advice: stay away from the "hole" operation, brush and floss once a day, and only approve minimal things such as plastic fillings (maybe deep cleaning if you believe it helps, I am skeptical, but perhaps, but then is it worth the money considering 1 and 2?). In fact, teeth are really a flawed design in some way, eating is a high maintenance system, perhaps a better system will evolve or be designed by genetic designers in the future. In some way the psychiatric and dentist people are fanatical, it's like automobile people too...they are all salespeople, they always try to toss on more and more services that people don't need. Someday I expect to hear..."Ted, we need to completely replace your head". 05/24/07 Another field is optics, the way everybody needs glasses. I would avoid glasses except when there is a problem reading, seeing...an actual vision problem that limits your body in someway, for optomotrists everybody gets a prescription for glasses, even if there is a tiny astigmatism, unsymmetrical eyeball or lens, and people simply don't need glasses in that case, and it might actually change their eye muscles and eye in a way to make things worse. I don't have a degree in optomotry, but then, think about how they have all kept silent about seeing eyes, so nobody is perfect. I think a good idea is to shop around, I periodically change doctors when one has called me "ped", "perv", "gay", too many times, and what I find is that there is a lot of variety. They all have different routines, and in seeing more doctors, I can see which practices are best (at least in my opinion). For example, some dentists use computerized digital xrays others use the old photo kind, people argue about which is better, but I personally feel better with a dentist who is not afraid to use a computer, and I can't imagine there is a big difference in image quality as one dentist claimed to me. In addition, the images are digital and can be copied and passed around more easily.
I'm proud to be one of the only people to defend kids' rights, because I remember how it felt to not be able to see an R rated movie, to not be able to have a job, to be restricted from seeing nude women, from buying alcohol, tobacco, etc.
Stanley Miller died, I always have to wonder who was killed by way of the Pupin lie. This data is very interesting. Do you know how many people were killed by secret technology? Millions upon millions...I'm not bullshitting....many many people have been killed with what is still secret technology. My Mom was, many many people were and many more will be in the future. I wonder about George Sarton, he was probably killed, 2 books into his history of science. Dan Wallace recently died. He was a son of one of the 9/11 firefighters who was killed in 9/11. Wallace starting speaking out, saying 9/11 was an inside job, there are videos of him on youtube. So I think this may be yet another of the million "push-button" murders. Why they chose Wallace is a mystery, no doubt to scare other 9/11-truth people, but why him I don't know, only the insiders know. Perhaps the Nazi elite just saw Wallace as one of the many millions of enemies and when making an example of the other side, simply chose him, maybe because he reached more people, but could be just random. How often does a 30 year old heathy guy just drop dead in their bed? There was another 9/11 truth guy, a graduate student, no less, working with Dr. Judy Brown, that was shot and murdered, and there is very little media coverage of either murder. I can only imagine how many other murders are swept under the rug, thousands and thousands, while people only hear about the latest sports scores, or some meaningless crap.
How about the way the Democrats in the US Congress completely caved in on ending the Iraq occupation? Even when they hold most of the cards, they fold. Maybe they are worried about angering voters for the 2008 election. It would come down to no money for the people in Iraq, and I'm not sure what would happen then. What would the public think? Would they blame Congress or Bush? If they blame Bush, his ratings couldn't go any lower, they are already at 30% or something. Still, they could have made a stink about the Iraq war, and a stand. My vote has consistently been to end the Iraq occupation, not to start any occupations, and to jail Bush, Cheney and others for conspiracy to commit, and accessory before the fact to 3000 homicides on 9/11/01. So my votes are consistent, and haven't changed for a long time.
It's interesting that many times people who are included will hint to me that the reason I'm not included are generally "pervert" and "psycho", but it seems clear to me that there really is no ethical test for admission into the camera-thought network, because as Tarpley said "Ceez Seez"...that is that many thousands of murders, and first degree cold-blooded murderers are members of the included, and routinely see and hear thought. When there are many people that have murdered...Thane Cesar, Frank Sturgis, the 9/11 people...and those are just the one's I know about....I can only imagine how many thousands upon thousands of murderers are included. Since murder is the worst evil, there clearly is no basis of ethics for being included. Any basis for ethics that is declared is totally fraudulent, because if you include murderers, you be default have to include those who have not murdered, no matter what their crime is, because murder is obviously the worst crime. Any claims of an ethical limit is completely false, and obviously so, when confronted with the truth about thousands of murderers that have been members for years (but somehow many included people need to be reminded, or somehow forget this perhaps). Maybe sometime there will be an ethical standard for admittance into seeing, hearing and sending thoughts, which would clearly start with exclusion of murderers, but I think I should make clear that, in my view, all people, large and small, of all ages, of any and all gender and race, with no regard to crime, even mass murder, should at least be aware that thought can be seen, heard and sent...anything else is monsterous; to not even inform people that the thoughts in their brain might be beamed there by people in the camera-thought network is monsterous. What we see is the worst possible abuse of the Pupin and mystery Stalin-suppressed-scientists' technology of seeing, hearing and sending thought, which is of course, using this technology to get away with murder. And then...you know...where do I start? In any event, here is a relevent thought: I can't believe that the insiders could not steer the murderers out of the network, into prisons, out of power...I mean that is amazing...simply by speaking out against the murderers, not voting for them, exposing them by using external sources, or internal sources that could be viewed by excluded as external sources (such as video...who knows how big the camera that captured it was?), would have gone a long way, it's hard to believe there are so many insiders who support murder. Then think about the information they have access to...and they still reject things as simple as evolution, accept religion, are shocked at nudity and bisexuality, etc. after years of seeing inside people's minds, seeing evidence and technology, we excluded can only dream about, and still to have such backwards views about evolution, science, sexuality...it's something that confuses me to say the least, how could it be? It's funny because I was thinking...well if you believe in psychosis and perversion (I don't for the most part, inaccuracy and sexuality, yes), all that really matters is the violence, it's the violence that might result from a belief in psychosis and perversion that people don't like, it's the violence that is the big problem, so if you include a person you suspect of psychosis or perversion (not violentitus, violentosis, violencia, antisexualosis, antipleasuritis, antidrugfervosity, religyitis, or other diseases), include them, and if they do violence, or try to, you will see it and be able to stop them. But then think about that for a second...if they do violence...as a result of perversion or psychosis...or for any other reason...those in the camera net would stop them.....but wait...we know that there are countless murderers that see, hear and send thought that have never been stopped or punished...so wait...again...there seems to be no entrence exam, no qualification score, no limit on ethics...any and all are welcome in the camera thought net, because obviously murderers are. To think about those Thane Cesars, and Sylvia killers out there...it shows how dirty and violent many of those in the camera thought network, and how random and backwards those in charge of entrance into the network are. Basically, they are a criminal empire, that includes a minority or generally powerless and wasily duped nonviolent people. Maybe someday there will be reasons why people are excluded, certainly murder, many assaults, maybe even theft, but as I said it is monsterous not to inform people and demonstrate the technology, or else people can hardly be fully responsible for taking the terrible suggestions beamed on them.
The way I feel about life on earth is that they basically are getting an "incomplete" on their current report card. They haven't jailed Frank Fiorini, they haven't jailed Thane Cesar, the 9/11 killers, and a million other things, but I'm hopeful that they may someday. They may turn in one of their assignments. It's entirely possible and that is why "incomplete" is the current score.
The guy jailed for 8 years for trying to sell coca cola secrets is ridiculous. The answer to that is simply to deemploy them. How much were suggestions beamed on his head?
What is the annual movement of the perihelion for all the planets? In particular for earth? I doubt seriously that earth holds a perfect ellipse around the Sun. Probably more likely, the earth's orbit changes position relative to the Sun every year, probably like Mercury, orbiting slightly forward or backward relative to the Y axis of the Sun. Might this explain the unexplained 43 seconds of arc per century in Mercury's orbit? How does a person measure the changing orbit of earth? I think people have confused the precession of the equinoxes, lumping together 2 phenomena: 1) the earth's wobble, and 2) the precession of the earth's orbit around the sun. But as always maybe I am wrong. So what is the precession of the earth's orbit if any? (again a 0 arcsecond precession is very doubtful). The influence of other planets, changes in the distribution of the mass in the Sun and planets, change the earth's orbit. But also probably all the orbits of all planets do not describe a persistent ellipse with each orbit. In my modeling simulations, never does it happen that a point of mass holds the exact same orbit for even two orbits, and that is with point masses, imagine with massive mass-shifting masses such as the Sun and planets. Wouldn't that be convenient if the changing perihelion of Mercury could be explained from the changing perihelion of earth? What is important is of course always only what is true and more accurate. I don't think people measured this perihelion of Mercury relative to some point on the Sun (other planets or stars), but probably relative to the earth. But beyond all this, as I have said numerous times, this changing perihelion of Mercury is probably within the realm of error for Newton's gravity, I have a tough time believing Newton's law of gravity suddenly fails for some specific instance. This is .43 seconds of arc per mercury year I think, a very minute quantity. Perhaps when the moving perihelion of earth is added, this margin of error will be closer to that expected. But maybe no, of course I could be wrong, but perhaps no.
The Pope said that drug dealers are facing punishment after death for selling drugs, and I have a lot to say about that statement, because I think that is really wrong. First of all, the Pope goes clear past violence, clear past those who murder and assault, past those who sell guns, those who lie and are dishonest, those who steal, those poor people suffering in jail for years just for being addicted to drugs, or for prostitution, and throws his face right into the yao. Always with the drugs, never anything about 9/11 being an inside job, that Pupin saw eyes and thoughts in 1910, nothing about violence, about dishonesty (but then religions are built on supernatural phenomena that most reasonable people recognize as impossible)... and this railing against those who sell drugs by the Pope only fuels the injustice of the drug war, because eventually people are going to decriminalize drugs, and this only delays that inevitable justice. Recreational drugs are just like alcohol, tobacco, fatty foods, coffee, so many other addictions...at most they only hurt the self...they don't hurt others. And if people hurt others because of their addiction, by all means they should be punished for those crimes. But to think that a person who sells alcohol, cigarettes, guns, knives, or fatty foods is going to face eternal damnation? I really doubt it. And so it is for those who sell drugs. Guns and knives are far more dangerous items than drugs, and can inflict far more damage on other people than drugs can. It's the demand for recreational drugs that drives the market more than those who sell and try to drum up customers I think, but it's open to debate. Those who sell drugs, like those who sell alcohol are only giving customers what they want, they are only helping people in need out. I advocate decriminalizing all recreational drugs, and at least lowering jail sentences for those nonviolently involved in the illegal drug market. Being locked up for drug addiction should be more like being locked up for drunk and disorderly...a few days, not 10 years! Within a few days or a week a person addicted to drugs loses their addiction and can have a fresh start. People drop drug addictions all the time, I am living proof of that. And with a drug addiction, there is always a chance that the person will stop using drugs and embrace sobriety. But with violence, many times, there is no chance for the loved one to come back, which is why violence on earth is a much more serious problem that illegal drug selling, buying and using. What is going to be next, is the Catholic establishment is going to take on Johnson & Johnson, Merck, and the other "drug" dealers? Never mentions those being drugged legally by the psychiatric industry, those lawful, nonviolent citizens tortured in psychiatric hospitals, drugged, restrained, operated on without consent. No mention about free information, nothing about full democracy. Of course, nothing in the interest of science, evolution, consensual physical pleasure. In short, the Pope and his speech writters and like-minded leaders are just beating a dead horse, the drug war is a terrible thing. This kind of opinion that drug sellers are going to face punishment after death is narrow minded, and a constant theme. I wish they would be more creative and wise. They could be addressing so many other important issues as I have indicated in this paragraph. It's interesting that many people like to belong to clubs. The Jesus club is one of the largest (as is the God club), with far more members than Weight Watchers, MADD, American Atheists, the Shriners, or any other group. It's like the Shriners, and the Pope is the Grand Poo Ba. I wish people would stop thinking the Pope has a special connection to any diety, or magical powers because he doesn't. Beyond that, they have oppressed science, women's rights, sexual freedoms, bisexual rights, free thought, free info, democracy, so many positive things....one might guess that if the religious are against it, it must be good, but I think, of course, the religious are free to believe what they want, to speak freely, and I commend the feeding of hungry people, and sheltering of poor people, that many religious are involved with. It's my hope that people in science can create a system that helps the poor and hungry, and also a system where like-minded people can meet, do things together, and find mates, etc. But, I think one problem is that, there will probably never be a "church" of science, but perhaps there may be some large science groups with regular voluntary (those who do not attend will not face eternal damnation) meetings and shared values. I hope religious people are ready to work with together with us non-religious people to help stop people's suffering from the drug war, and I think that the best way to reduce the suffering is to lower the penalties on those involved with illegal drugs, and move towards ending the prohibition on recreational drugs, because making it illegal has created an unnecessary illegal market with very high prices for the drugs, and with those high prices and the risk of long prison sentences comes violence. The smart answer is to work nonviolently to end people's addiction consensually (or even unconsensually through small amounts of prison time, enough to become sober and dry out), to educate people about the dangers of drug addiction, not to lock them in jail for decades for nonviolent activities. We should focus our tax money on stopping violent crime, not getting involved in the drug market where, like tobacco, guns, alcohol, fatty foods, they aren't good for people, but the only harm is done to themselves if anybody. And the same goes for the sex market, if there is not consent then we are talking about violent crime, but if consent, we should not be throwing away valuable tax money to stop the free market in pleasure. In terms of what happens when a human dies, from the beginning of recorded history, 5300 years ago in Mesopotamia, the people believed in a "Netherworld", a place where all dead people live after they die. The Sumerians believed in a Netherworld, the Akkadians did, the Egyptians also believed in a Netherworld, the Greeks did (Hades), and the Romans initially did until Christianity. Only the Christians changed the view 1700 years ago, to be that some dead go to a Heaven and others go to a Hell. The Netherworld, or Underworld was changed to a place for bad people. Before this view, Heaven was the place where the gods lived, sometimes human heros could become god or part-god, but generally speaking, all people, when dead, went to the netherworld, not just bad people. There is an interesting Babylonian story, I think it is the last tablet of Gilgamesh, where Enkidu tells about the underworld, and explains how one person was not there because people who are burned (as I recall, I'm just explaining this from memory) don't have their body, and so therefore are not in the netherworld, but sure enough, he did see many of Gilgamesh's dead loved ones. So the Christians some where in history changed this belief, when this happens is an interesting point of research. The Christians (or possibly their predecessors believers in Judaism) changed this view so that all good people go to Heaven and only bad people go to the Underworld. In some way, perhaps all Christians were viewed as heros in the Greek sense. I honestly think that the name "Hell" which is supposedly of Germanic origin, was used by the early Roman Christians to promote the idea that the ancient Greek tradition of science and sexuality was evil, and I can't believe that there is no connection between "Hell" and "Hellas" (Greece in Greek). Romans must have know instinctively and instantly upon hearing the word "Hell" in relation to an Underworld where only evil people go, that this Underworld of evil people shared a very similar name to Greece. This link has some history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell Eastern Orthodox Christians consider Hell to be a different place than the Underworld. The important thing through all these interpretations of an afterlife is that they are all very unlikely. The more likely scenario is that people die and the atoms and photons in their body simply decay, mainly are consumed by other species and ultimately probably radiated out into the rest of the universe as photons. So in my opinion, we should drop the ridiculous notions of afterlife from the past, and evaluate death from a scientific viewpoint. Beyond that, there are good reasons for doing good, such as stopping violence, being honest, pursuing physical and intellectual pleasure: people do good things for our own benefit, for enjoyment of life, not because we might be punished after we die for violence or other evil acts. I think the universe is an amazing place, and have a certain amount of awe for it, and so I think it is worth trying to understand it and our place within it, and for me, religion is of no value. I reject any kind of supernatural events.
That is so wrong, the US government blocking the use of youtube and other video web sites from military employees. I was thinking about the unknown scientists of the past who figured out how to see thought and activate neurons using beams, and it occured to me that the USA, around the 1900s became a lot like a Communist state, like Russia under Stalin or China under Mao, the individual and truth, an educated aware society, means nothing to those in power, Pupin lived as an unknown in this nation, we outsiders still don't even know who heard thought and who figured out how to make neurons fire remotely using beams. They rename nameless, like unknown soldiers, but they are unknown scientists. Beyond that, outsiders should think about the many people who lost their lives trying to expose violence, the murderers, the secrets, etc.
It's somewhat obscure, but just for my own record and those out there who might have obsessed over this for days. If you are a user of Mandriva and do not get the "restart" or "shutdown" computer option on the start menu. The answer, at least for me, was to comment out this line in /usr/share/config/kdm/kdmrc:
(and possibly the line:
This starts a display manager that blocks kdm, the display manager that has "shutdown" and "restart" as part of the start menu.
On the death of Falwell I have to amplify Ellen Johnson of American Atheists' words, and add that of course there will be more from an unending supply of charletans who promote the lies of religions and accumulate great wealth in that trade. Religion is a total fraud, it's like priests that lie about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, etc. The televangelists are the worst in being multimillion dollar scam artists. It's free speech, but it's certainly not good speech....it's 99% lies and inaccurate information. So much of their talk is not against violence, but against consensual sexuality, recreational drug use, against science, etc., never for full democracy, total free info, against violence, for science. Speaking of being "galvanized", I am sure that Falwell celebrated many murders of nonviolent lawful people. Certainly as an included who heard and saw thoughts, he must have known the truth about 9/11 being an inside job and said nothing, and the same is true for knowing about Frank Sturgis killing JFK, Thane Cesar killing RFK....he probably celebrated and helped to use the secret advanced technology to murder innocent wise people like John Lennon, all because they helped to reveal the truth to the public.
I have to come up with good rebuttles to "psych" buzzwords such as "skits" (it's), such as "which" as in believer in witchcraft, "heebee geebees" a new ligitimate psychaitric disorder, "gout" (got) now there at least is a real disease, "I can sir" (again a legitimate disease), "coot" (could) as in "cooties", "lent" violetitus (for those few who feel violence such as that done by conservatives is something to be concerned about), unicorns, vampires, goblins, ghosts, dragons, etc.
I would add psychosis, neurosis, scitzophrenia, attention surplus hypoactivity disorder, adhd, and manic depression. Psychology is chuck-full of mythical disease.
In addition, there must be older inaccurate diseases, I was thinking of "dropsy" but I think that is just an old name for an actual condition.
Let's not forget the many many mythical beasts that the easily duped believe in:
lochness monster, yeti, angels, spirits, lizardman, mothman, mermaid, medusa, troll, warewolf...all good words to work into a vocabulary when experiencing rudeness from the easily duped and rude believers in psychology and demons.
I'm a person that thinks we should focus on enforcement of the violent laws. It's important to have a good updated set of fully democratic laws and then enforce them.
I think people should not let religious beliefs or excuses cloud their judgement about violent crime, in particular murder. First degree murder, such as those committed on 9/11/01 is definitely wrong, and there is no excuse, religious or otherwise to explain or excuse first strike violence.
occassionaly I get a "sit!" people comparing me to a horny dog, but think about the violent dogs...aren't they much worse? I mean violence is the worse thing on earth, a little horniness is probably normal, harmless and natural. So I have to come up with some rebuttles to "sit". Some are "tranq" (thank, rank) because some of these violent people need a tranquilizer dart, "dart", "struck me" is a good one...it says hey what about these violent aholes with the layzaz? "stand" is a goodin, why don't they ever stand up. I can't understand, for example, why the democracts behind closed doors in the camera-thought net didn't all agree that their party line was going to be to express doubt about the republican version of 9/11. It's a sad fact that at that time in their conferences they agreed on a party line of agreement with these nazistic murderous fascist republicans. Now, when Lincoln was a republican, I can see supporting that, but this group is pure nazi filth and violent crime.
One other important point to add whenever the Pope visits Mexico, Central or South America is this: how can a native people feel strong allegience to a European religion that was forced upon them at gun point? The native people of America should know about the past, and it does not begin with the Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors but certainly that is an important part of history. The polytheistic native religions that existed were stopped by violent conversion, many people who refused to accept the Jesus-based religion were murdered and their murderers never punished. Nowadays the Jesus religion people don't force people to convert, they can no longer murder those who reject their theories. So what I think we are seeing is the slow gradual learning that the religious claims are false, and that they were forced on people.
It's interesting that Christianity, the Jesus-based religion, like Islam is one of the stupidist religions...I mean for the polytheism of the Sumerian people, the origins are very murky and unclear, people could easily claim that that religion is eternal...since the main evidence against is the theory of evolution...but for Islam and Christianity, these are relatively recent religions....we can know the history before Jesus and Muhommed, so they are shockingly stupid. Christianity in particular is so ironic and simply fucked-up, because here they technically are Judaians, because Jesus called out to Jahweh and/or Eloi, the god of Judaism, of which he was a member and believer in. But ironically, the rise of Nazism and the systamic murdering of Jewish people in WW2 is clear evidence of the anti-Jewish feelings of many Christians....and it's so ironic because their own founder was Jewish. So how could people of the same race as their leader be so selectively hated? This is one of the many reasons why Christianity in particular is a confused and ironic idiotic religion, but then all religions are based on supernatural beliefs and therefore of little or no value except as fictional stories for storytelling and entertainment value, but the audience, I think, should always be told, that we can imagine supernatural events, but we should understand that they don't really happen.
I'm very interested in the future, it's really exciting in my opinion. In particular knowing that we are going to be the last group of humans after 4 billion years of evolution that only live to 70 or 80 years old. We are the humans that only lived to 80 years or whatever and then died. Very soon, within 1000 years, I think people will figure out how to stop the aging process at age 20 (or whenever) and create humans from zygotes, customizing the genome, to live without aging past 20. Maybe that involves simply stopping the program of proteins triggering other proteins at some certain protein that is produced after puberty, but probably it is much more complex and involves fully understanding the nature of omniopotent and totipotent cells and their difference from other cells; why they can regenerate a limb while other cells cannot. But to know, that we are never going to get there because so many people still give allegience to religions, to the Pope, to people like Falwell. And it's interesting, we should be busting our ass to get to Mars to the Moon to other stars, to understand aging...but the current effort by people is far from "busting ass". Most people donate huge sums to religious organizations instead of into efforts to develop the moon, mars, to move between the planets and stars. And when I think about it...when have you ever heard a religious leader talk about going to the moon? When have you ever heard a religious leader talk about developing planet Mars? Or any leader for that matter? The religious, generally, appear to know and care little about our future as humans. If you look at our position relative to the advanced life probably in globular clusters, or even just thinking about some advanced life that has grown over a few star systems, we are really a tiny tiny backward life form. We have a lot of potential, but we have to accept that we are like algae in being stuck on one tiny planet. Some other advanced life stumbling on our star system in the midst of expanding and growing their own empire would look at us as probably typical of many stars they run into. They might regard humans as perhaps exceptional and promising, but probably compared to them, it would be like ants to humans, they would look at us like pets, or possibly threats. They might look at us as competing for matter in the galaxy, and like we do to so many other species, simply contain and regulate our growth in an unfair way that greatly restricts our right to create more humans (the exact analogy is what we do to other lesser species in the competition for limited amounts of space and food). But within a few thousand years, if we don't destroy ourselves, and clearly the way people are voting, that can not be ruled out, we will become an interplanetary species which would indicate to any other advanced life growing through our star system that we are much more likely to survive, that we are at a stage of expansion and growth ourselves although not yet between stars. Once we are moving in between the stars, perhaps in 10,000 years, or maybe sooner, perhaps only a few thousand years or even less, humans would be viewed by other advanced life developing neighboring stars, as nearly equal or certainly at a high level stage of evolution and would probably be looking more at cooperation, allowing us to take certain stars, and we allowing them to take certain stars, growing together to form either our own globular clusters or together to form a single globular cluster, ultimately destined to move out of the Milky Way plane and towards the center which is where the others are for some reason. Maybe they feel that that position is safer, with the rest of the matter on the outside. If invaded by some other globular galaxy, they would be the last matter to be converted to the conquering form of life perhaps. Maybe it just takes less time to communicate and trade with each other near the center of the galaxy.
We have moved from a society where going to church was mandatory and school voluntary to school being mandatory and church voluntary. Ultimately I think we are going to be a society where even school is voluntary. In addition, the people in religion and temples are trying to get people to believe things on faith without physical and logical evidence, where those in science and schools are trying to get people to get people to do the exact opposite, to only believe in things that are proven by physical and logical evidence, and so there is a conflict in goals there; the one that requires people to reject logic and their senses and the other that requires people to reject anything but logic and their senses.
History is interesting, we can't possibly learn about a million years of history in 100 years of living. It's impossible to relive a millenium in a century. So we humans walk around, really all of us, even the so-called "experts", as amateurs and novices of our past. It's physically impossible to be anything but an amateur in history.
It's important to me to get out this ULSF project as soon as possible, and maybe I am being somewhat reckless in putting out these other projects first, but I need to come up with 4 more shows for my public access show and that is what these will form. But after looking at the masturbation video I don't think I am going to put that, or my next "sex" video on public access, because it might cause local hostility, which I have experienced before. Twice young males have held out there hand like a gun at me when they passed by in cars. Sometimes I find dead rats on the path I am walking (4 times so far). But honestly, I think the worst is behind me. This "seeing thought" vid is going to be the last video on seeing thought for some time, until ULSF, and then ULSF is not going to be centered on seeing thought, but only describe seeing thought in a chronological context (although there will be a heavy duty focus on it within ULSF). I just got some ULSF mugs made, and I am going to add them to the web page, even though the project is not nearly done, I am pumped for releasing it, I love science, evolution and the future...and of course the universe...it is interesting, and then it's on to building my walking robots after that, but I doubt I will stop the ULSF project...there is so much to learn about the past and future. The controversial stuff mainly is going to be behind me with the "sex" video being really the last of the controversy, then it's smooth sailing into retirement. I'm going to do one small 9/11 video. I doubt I will do more. I may do a video on recent history, on the history of religious persecution, I don't know...I want to get going on the walking robot so that will probably be the main project for me for a long time.
With this latest video "Pupin Seeing Thought", I have forgotten some important aspects:
1) wire tapping, and the possibilities there. I think theoretically people digging into a telephone wire might be a rich source of information, and might create a massive illegal industry, but the more I think about it, the more unlikely it is. Clearly very little is secret, and AT&T allowing people to unofficially tamper with their wires (in a major way, as in digging up the line, or attaching items up on the top of a telephone pole) I kind of doubt, and if it was official "tapping", why not just work together? Because the wire is insultated it would have to be cut and connected back together quickly, any cut would probably be detected, and any non at&t wire connected would be quickly disconnected. I suppose a person could simply strip away some of the insulation and solder a new wire onto the existing wire. Then I would probably go with a wireless signal because any wired signal would be ridiculous...you would have to run wires to your recording equipment...and for that you need to own the land or it needs to be abandoned...you would need a long lasting battery. It can't be ruled out, but it's highly unlikely the phone company would not know exactly who is trying to attach to their wire. I can't imagine something on the current scale (300 million customers for hearing thought) that would be all from millions of non-AT&T approved wire solders.
2) how many of the public got included. This involves analyzing a theoretical curve. There are reports that currently 300 million people hear thoughts (although clearly, the amount of service people receive has to be highly variable, 9/11 is evidence of that). So from 1 in 1910 to 300 million in 2007. I need to work that curve out and see what the future probably is.
3) That the storage of images and audio has to be finite. The movie "The Final Cut" hints at this, that at the time of a person's death, many of their videos are going to be deleted for space, perhaps a few years after they died. There simply is a finite amount of storage for information. Most of this video is of little value anyway, routine video of people eating, pooping, showering, etc. routine thoughts, uneventful thought audio and video memories or dreams.
4) possibly the screens are not dual and square in nature (I am just hypothesizing and then also trying to make it clear) but are single and circular. For example, perhaps screen 1 is a circle on the outer back layer of the brain, and screen 2 is a circle just inside of it. That would be logical because when I think of an image of a triangle it appears possible that it is in the same plane as screen 1 where I see the outside universe. And the same for screen 3, a circle around the ear, and then another circle inside of that for the inner ear where we think of songs, etc.
It's kind of funny if you replace the word bitch, binch, bia, or other words, although perhaps not friendly words, although bitch has come to mean anybody female or male, where a popular song uses "woman", "lady" or even "man", etc. Such as, for "Babe" by Styx, "Bitch I'm leavin'", etc. Hey how about Journey "Just a small town bitch". Lennon's "Bitches" (Woman). It's out there as a funny technique of improving many modern songs. Another technique I find entertaining is changing lyrics to be talking in the infinitive, in particular for the verb "to be". For example, babe would then be "you know it be you binch, giving me the courage, and the strength I be needing, etc.", "Bitch I be loving you". Sadly, som people might view that playful harmless fun as racist, but I can't believe that. It's not racist, it's simply fun word play. These type of word changes are done purposely I think, to enhance a dull language, to add a funny twist to boring language. Instead of just saying something boring and straight (although in this society, you might be better off, because they are too judgemental), adding some joke or flavor to it makes a person more interesting. Many times it might make a serious mood lighter. Another technique, is to Latinize it, by just adding "us" to all verbs and nouns while dropping any articles, perhaps mixing up word order. "knowis itis youis bitchis", and old english "thou knoweth it is thine bitche". Perhaps a song lyric can be spruced up with a "mutherfucka" or two. So putting it all together: "you knowus it be you betch, you muthafucka, be givenus thou thine courage and thine strungth thou be needing"
The religious (and defacto religious, those who have inherited their missing logic) are kind of funny, because for example, you can say something is "crazy"...and what many people might not know is that by propping up psychology (for which there is not one biological test, and the claims of CAT and MRI scan I think has to be fraud like the "Osama" 9/11 video, maybe there is some identifiable feature in some people, but I seriously doubt it is "scitzophrenia" or "psychosis", it's probably some other aspect of the human brain), including involutary psychology (which is the majority probably) where people are drugged, tied to tables, generally tortured without a trial to prove their innocense. And that must be a ok for most people to support such a system. But then rebutt, or confirm with "yeah it's stupid", and that is like overly harsh for them...to call something or somebody stupid....calling them crazy...oh no problem, they can then be found crazy, tortured, drugged, and locked away for life without a trial or charge, but oh no, don't call them stupid....! Even though there is no punishment, torture, drugging for being rightly or wrongly appraised as stupid.
I have to tell you people about this place: http://www.discountphotogifts.com/promo60/
I just got 2 ULSF mugs and 1 ULSF plate from them. There are others, but this place allows people to buy just 1 mug, etc. I'm going to get a mug with a photo of my Mom on it, as a way to say "here's to you", and toast her with each sip of coffee. There are other places, I may get some clear glasses too. I wonder if they put porno on there too, I doubt they actually look at the photo. Check the color changing one. I was thinking it would be cool if you could have one photo on the outside of like people who are terrible, and then when the mug is hot it changes to a photo of a pile of shit. That would be awesome. Maybe sometime in the future when technology allows. It would be kind of like a huge parade with a big float of a woman and man that get caught on some wire that rips off their clothes leaving a big pair of tits and boner flying in the wind.
It's interesting that one of the oldest written stories known to the human species is the story of Gilgamesh, and in that story is a lot of sexuality. It doesn't seem that sex was something that the Sumerians, or later Akkadians/Babylonians felt embarrased to talk about. In the beginning, most interpretations describe that Gilgamesh will not leave the young women alone, that basically he has sex with them. Then when Enkidu is sent to earth, Gilgamesh instructs a hunter to send the wild untamed Enkidu a prostitute (by most interpretations I have read so far, possibly a promiscuous woman, one uses the term "harlot", which is basically a female prostitute) to civilize him. The woman is to show Enkidu her body by the watering hole, they have sex and Enkidu is civilized so that the animals of the plains do not recognize him anymore. From this document, it is likely that prostitution was a legal business for the Sumerians. I think it is likely that it implies a sort of common-knowledge belief that sex calms the savage male, which is somewhat true, advice that many antisexual people could learn from nowadays since the rise of monotheistic religions. This story of Gilgamesh is evidence that the modern views of sex, such that they exist, are behind the views of sex people had 5000 years ago. People will reject that and claim that the view of sex 5,000 years ago was barbaric, women were slaves, etc. But I think history will vindicate that statement as being true. People were more comfortable talking about sex then than now, sex was viewed more as a natural part of life then, than it is now. I don't doubt that the views of sex were barbaric then too, and there is only room for improvement in terms of making sure everybody who wants sex gets sex and any disease and unconsensual violence are removed from sex. It's interesting that there is no record of any payment made by the hunter to Shamhat (or Shamshat), the prostitute. Enkidu and Shamhat have sex for 6 days and 7 nights until Enkidu has had his fill. It's interesting the parallel with the story of Eve and Adam in the Garden of Eden.
the view of Sumerians and ancient people about females is interesting because how can a female be viewed as a slave and also as a goddess? Interesting that the Sumerian "Inanna" the God that controls Venus was named "Isis" by the Egyptians, and "Aphrodite" by the Greeks, "Venus" by the Romans, and of course, the idea of more than one god ruling nature ended with Christianity.
Here are some videos a friend sent me about Scott Enyart's story:
If you are a lawful citizen and want to get pissed about the corruption in police and government, this video is for you.
The Enyart story is one of the main reasons why we should enact a law stopping employees of the government from being able to legally confiscate film, but still require film owners to provide accurate copies to the government. Or even, we can enact a law requiring the FBI and police to make public copies of all films confiscated within 1 week, and be held punishable for any missing or tampering, but honestly, if you know the government and police like anybody who looked into what happened to RFK like I do, you will support a law to forbid police and FBI from confiscating captured images from the public. But this is one of the millions of laws that people could and should enact if ever they woke up and gave a damn.
Jim Fetzer has a nice quote in the History Channel show TMWKK, I would watch all three episodes if I was the average outsider person. Fetzer says at the beginning of episode 1 part 1: "If the presidency of the United States is being decided by bullets fired from rifles rather than ballots cast by citizens, we have, indeed, been taken over by a whole new form of government."
That was the quote from Valenti that was in my mind that "Valenti is to nonviolent people what Frank Fiorini was to JFK", because that Jack-the-ripper quote about the VCR is highly hypocritical and back-ass backward, after all here these JFK murderers and coveruppers were watching people in their houses's and casually listening to the people's feckin thoughts no less. Privacy and copyright to people like Valenti was like shit to toilet, unless they were using it to punish any competition then it was gold.
Adding to the Jimmy Carter talk notes, Carter said "all candidates should be asked ..." about their opinions on the Middle East. And quite possibly this refers to my statement that we should ask all Presidential candidates (if not all major government employees) if they think evolution is true or not. And then, perhaps by no coincidence, the Republican candidates were asked this question about creationism or evolution and 3 were caught creationist-handed. As a society it is shocking that only 33% think evolution is supported by the facts. The theory of evolution, in my opinion, is one of the most simple theories; it's obvious to me, where the "big bang", the "expanding universe", the "massless photon", "time dilation", all are far from obvious and, in my view, although they are mainstream beliefs, I think they are all false. So, it's interesting that evolution, to me, is a bedrock theory of science, there is no doubt in my mind of it's validity, while the big bang, the general theory of relativity, and other modern theories, currently viewed as bedrocks of science, are probably wrong in my view.
One thing that was interesting was that in going through all my Mom's books I couldn't find the copy of "The Thought Reading Machine" that I sent her and which she enjoyed, and I looked at every book she had.
One great response to the antipleasure people that think everybody but them is a perv are things that allude to how frigid they must be in terms of their own sex, because you know that is true; people who put down others for being overly sexual are not comfortable with sex themselves. So words like "warm", "cassinova", "cold", "frigid", "mmm...I can warm up to that!", "love", "fun", "romance", "you so romantic!", "pur/per", "mmm cuddly", etc
One good thing about having a walking robot that captures images of you at all times, or your own in-house security web cameras is that as long as you have at least one image of you every second of your life, there are many crimes you can never be charged with or found responsible for, because the images serve as a very good alibi. Video is very difficult to fake, although when an image is actually captured is sometimes not easy to determine, in particular if inside, but if the images are consistent I think most people would believe the image is untampered with. As it is now, people looking to frame you or charge you with bogus crimes have to make sure the crime happened when you were not on any camera.
I think the camera-thought network is going to be uncovered mainly by outsiders, because unlike insiders they cannot be denied the cocaine the insiders are so addicted to, the camera-thought net service. I don't doubt that even junkie insiders will contribute something to exposing the AT&T phone company government public spying programs, but mainly I think it will be outsiders reproducing the technology through free communication with each other over the Internet.
Here is my recent 5/1/07 letter to the investigator of my Mom's death and the coroner:
Department of Health
Ronald A. Brunelli
Office of Medical Examiner
100 Elizabeth Blackwell Street
Syracuse, NY 13210
Referencing: Sylvia P. Huntington, Case #07-0278
To Ronald Brunelli & Mary Jumbelic:
I am sending this formal request for three main reasons:
1) I am requesting a copy of the full and detailed autopsy record of Sylvia P. Huntington, Case #07-0278, be sent to the above address as soon as it is complete. An electronic copy is fine.
2) I want a copy of the full investigative detailed report, in addition to the complete set of crime scene photos and videos sent to the above address. An electronic copy is fine.
3) I am requesting that the official time of death for my Mom, Sylvia P. Huntington, be changed to the more accurate time of: March 4, 2007 10:00 pm EST, instead of the absurdly inaccurate March 9, 2007. If this, March 9, 2007, date of death, a full 5 days after the actual time of death, reflects your common practices, I think your accuracy in determining day and cause of death in other deaths ought to be seriously questioned. Even the tiniest amount of investigation would show that Sylvia collapsed on March 4, 2007 around 10:00 PM while talking on the phone with my brother Tom Huntington. After that time the phone remained busy until she was found dead by my Dad, Peter Huntington 5 days later on Friday, March 9. The finding from the autopsy of “hypothermia” and the “paradoxical undressing” added later, would indicate a very quick death of a few minutes at most. You are, of course, welcome to continue this practice of inaccurately labeling time of death. But if you do, I certainly hope that this error is exposed to the public, and all past mislabeled deaths are publicly corrected.
I can see outsiders putting out ads saying "We will pay up to $1000 (and then later up to $5,000 or $10,000) for video evidence of people in phone companies, major media, or government watching people's thoughts." There have to be people out there, perhaps that have been excluded, or are looking for money that have video they are holding on to that reveals what those in the camera-thought network routinely have been doing for almost 100 years. Perhaps there are some insiders willing to sell video of people "seeing eyes" to us.
The funniest thing about exposing seeing hearing and sending thought is that, people like me, atheists, people with unpopular views or sexual indescretions, or for whatever reason that are excluded from seeing and hearing thought...and that has to be many many people...clearly the overwhelming majority (although not around where I live here in southern California, most people are included...at least I guess they are), many of us tend to be on the smarter side, and so, it is a natural evolution that those excluded outsiders are eventually going to figure out how to duplicate seeing and sending images and sounds because they tend to be the intellectuals and educated, where the insiders are usually uneducated, thug-type of people, high school graduates at best, nazistic crew-cut followers, slaves to tradition and the wealthy. So in excluding so many brainiacs, the insiders are assuring their own downfall and total exposure. I am actually somewhat enjoying exposing their secret history...it's better than being a slave to the service, and watching them murder innocent people in the millions without breathing a word of it. The only major disadvantage is not being able to get sex or reproduce, or having to use outsider methods to hook-up which, with insider females is impossible, and also not knowing who the violent are around me...not knowing who is probably more friend and who is more foe that is only a few meters away from me. But it's a small price to pay to speak freely and totally expose what these evil insiders have been doing for a century. How much will be done by the camera-thought-crack-heads? They don't want to risk losing their dealer and constant supply of camera-thought net crack, where the outsiders have no such addiction, or fear of losing the support of a camera-thought-net-crack dealer. Now I am for deciminalizing drugs too, because creating an illegal system around addiction like that is not a smart idea, it makes for nasty injustice, while the drugs or camera-net-info harms only the self if that anyway.
One person in the History Channel JFK TMWKK video has a nice statement something like "how many people figured it out?" "zero", which implies to me that I (sometimes refered to as zero) may be one of a very very small group of outsiders who has figured out...probably that thought can be seen, heard and sent to and from brains. But this next video I am releasing should help to inform and educate many thousands of other outsiders.
Just learning about how the actual telephone network works is interesting. In particular how it worked in the past. There was a time when a person, an operator, would basically hand connect two wires together...I don't even know if each house had it's own wire...and the operator simply connected them at the switch board? There must have been a way to use one wire for many calls, certainly by the time of digital, but it could be done with analog too. Then the rotary phone made a person to connect the wires unnecessary as circuits were connected electronically. I am only just learning this stuff now, and like so much of science, those in the know have not been entirely or even remotely forth coming with the info.
It's interesting that there was a revolution of thought and science when the invention of writing happened around 3300BCE in Sumeria, and a revolution in thought and science with the invention of the printing press (I think around 100CE), and I think there is another revolution in thought and science happening now with the Internet. Any time the amount and speed of information flow increases dramatically there probably is an accompanying advance in thought and science.
Insiders are notorius for their dishonesty and lives of lies, empty and misleading threats and allusions. But without a doubt outsiders get killed and insiders kill them, generally speaking...it's obviously not the other way around, although there is the case of insiders killing insiders, 9/11, JFK, RFK, etc being prime examples. Presumably many of the 9/11 victims, JFK and RFK were all included, but clearly excluded from the relevent video that would have protected them from being murdered. It makes me wonder how many outsider heros may have figured it out and worked to expose the insiders, just simply...who was excluded and who was included and to what extent? are what people of the future will be interested in.
I was thinking that, you know there is so much pressure on people to wear suits and ties, and long pants, and honestly, for an overweight person, or even an older person, in the heat of summer, I have to think health issues take a priority over fashion sense. It's masochistic to insist that people wear long pants to work in the 90 degree temperatures of summer. Sure, people work in air conditioned offices, but they also might have a long walk to their car, have to walk between buildings, and they certainly are going to be in their hot car until the air conditioning turns on. In addition there are shorts that are "dress shorts" that should be acceptable. We are not living under the Koran or any other religious book so shorts pants and short-sleeved shirts should be acceptable and welcomed as more healthy, less of a health risk. So I think we should look at moving towards a more comfort, health-based kind of clothing, or certainly toleration of that kind of dress. This is a time where people force young kids to dress in football equipment, slam into each other, and run double-sessions during summer, and in prison camps, where the kids definitely routinely pass out, become dehydrated, and generally suffer under unpleasant conditions.
I was thinking about the future, and you know, it might be that females and males evolve to have both sets of genitals. That would be kind of wild to see females with the peen and vag, while also interesting to see males with the vag too, and males getting pregnant perhaps. If one gender develops both genitals, the other gender might go extinct.
I think it's important for me to chastize less and educate more.
In watching Japanese animated porn, I have to say that I think the "Dicipline" series is better than the "Bible Black" series (although shorter), because there isn't as much religion and mysticism. Dicipline has a better story line that probably adheres more closely to the current situation. In Dicipline we see themes of the public's antisexuality and that is important to address. Plus, while many of the sex scenes in Bible Black are erotic, there are a few scenes that are violent and just gross...they are not arousing to me in any way...one where a person is stabbed and another where a shotgun is fired in to a person. Although maybe those things happen in real life, in particular in this spartan age, but that's no turn on. Many times I find the story tellers find an erotic situation, and then either gloss over it quickly without examining the situation fully or take it into some other direction that is less erotic. The bank robbery scene is one example, the military big-wigs getting sex scene is another that was not fully explored (that's probably what they see big wig halliburton and others doing see more below), many female on female scenes are not taken in enough depth. Again, it's interesting the way males are so hyper and uptight about male and male events, even when they are just a natural fact of life...one scene where two thugs find the two females and 1 male seems to imply that there would also be a male on male anal sex scene but while there are many female with female scenes, porn buyers must highly object to even a tiny glimpse of a few seconds of male on male even when it is in a natural setting where such a thing might happen such as two thugs finding these three young people. One male does get a female finger in the rectum, and that is about as close at it gets.
This prostitution bust, it must be interesting to see what the deal is. Probably she was competing with the official prostitution companies, or the repubs want to appear to be antisexuals. Because of course, where are all those ladies and men going to go to continue their sex work? Of course they are going to go to the new person...maybe the other side like the republican madam...maybe there are two madams who recruit mainly women but certainly males too. Prost has been happening since before writing...some of the oldest writing refers to prostitutes...in Sumeria they allowed pleasure for money, and when you think about it...it is ridiculous not too...what other commodoties would people buy, pain? People 5000 years before us, had more enlightened views about the physical pleasure/sex market than people now. People will say they were backwards and treated women as slaves, but the fact remains that eventually civilized humans will decriminalize consensual physical pleasure for money in its many forms, and we will be left with a 2000 year history of an illegal pleasure market.
I think many people in the camera-thought net would like that No Doubt song "Don't Speak" to be "Don't Think"...to take it to the next level.
Isn't that interesting how the pope is so vocal about abortion and the killing of fetuses, but says nothing about 9/11 being an inside job, and of course he knows it was...they obviously see and hear thought. The pope says nothing about lowering murder, stopping assault, or any kind of violence, stopping the Iraq occupation,... there is no serious interest in the leaders of the Catholic religion in stopping violence, so it is unusual that they are so big into stopping abortion, violence against an unborn human....if they were interested in stopping violence, why wouldn't they speak out against murder of already born adults? It's unusual to have such a specific focus or obsession, but then Christiainity is transparently based on ludicrous beliefs such as Jesus rising from the dead and being specially connected to a god, etc. when anybody that looks at history sees the many gods of the past, and many other "messiahs" such as barchokba, etc.
The Michael Moore investigation is obviously pure abuse of power on the part of the Bush jr administration. Many people would think that when a person is president they would impart a benevolent leadership, but instead with many republicans in particular, we almost always see, low-brow petty abuse of their authority. Full democracy would solve so much of this because to fine or jail a person would require a majority of the public's support, and for this petty crap there would never be popular support, or at least I hope not...pettiness and idiocy is a planetary problem, not one that is exclusive only of those in government. A law that prohibits a person of the USA traveling to some other nation is clearly a violation of their right to free movement and travel, it's overly parental, in my opinion the public should vote down any law that restricts a person from traveling anywhere or vote up a law that protects them from punishment, as I have done on my tedhuntington.com/vote page.
Mercury probably has a molten core, where supposedly Mars and the moon do not. I think the inside of Mars and the moon of earth have to at least be hotter than the outside and still emit heat. This is an interesting and helpful find. Again, I think the simple truth is probably that stars are just large planets, the process that heats stars is also the process that heats the inside of planets...it's probably not hydrogen fusion as much as the results of gravity and pressure. Particles in the sun and planets are stuck inside under pressure and held together by gravity, but particles on the surface are next to empty space and find no resistance to those directions, so that is what is happening in my opinion, it's a matter of pressure difference, and balancing of gravitation; matter in the star or planet has nowhere to go, while matter at the surface can escape to lower pressure, more empty space, etc.
I think it would be fun to make a movie about the future, and the heros of the movie could be played by the 9/11, JFK, RFK truth people, because those are the actual heros of this time, and so maybe that is what heros sound like, or might sound like then. Each of those people is interesting and has their own unique style, and above all something inside them that pushes them to speak the truth which is unusual in most people.
I figured out one of the goals of those criminals who beam on people all day is: to make sure that every minute of life is miserable. But gladly, they do not always succeed.
I was at a Kmart, and there was an unattended phone there, and I thought for a second: how fun it would be to pick up the phone, press the "intercomm" button and say "attention KMart Shoppers, 9/11 was an inside job, nuevo-once era un trabajo interior". So maybe others with more courage can sometime do that if ever the opportunity exists. They must have seen me thinking about it, because within a few minutes a woman rushed back over to attend the phone. But what could they do? It's hardly illegal.
One thing I was thinking of is how people were so fearful of the extremists on the extreme left during the red scare, but there never has been in the USA fear of the extremists on the extreme right, the Nazis. And as a result of what I think can only be called people in the left totally asleep at the wheel, the extreme right wing rose into power.
I was thinking that Bush jr really is the incubus of all the mistakes of the past, Bush jr really is the dark angel spawned from ignoring the murder of JFK, MLK, RFK, John Lennon, coupled with the secrecy of Pupin...Bush jr really is, in some way the natural conclusion of the US failure to stop violence, to free information, to expose the history of religion, to increase the peoples democratic voting power, etc all the mistakes of the last 50 years.
My feeling about sports is somewhat ambivalent and apathetic, suffice it to say that I am just happy when matter wins.
Cox stopped playing my music videos show for some reason (they are still playing the JFK II and In Plane Site vids though).
E Howard Hunt apparently said he was approached to be in a plot to kill JFK but turned it down. Obviously this is false, Hunt was there captured by Mary Mormon in the famous photograph of Hunt, Sturgis, and Gordan Arnold behind the fence.
On the 7/7 convictions. Maybe terrorists actually did 7/7, maybe many of the people like Webster Tarpley and Alex Jones are wrong in saying that like 9/11, 7/7 was also an inside job. But I think we as outsiders should entertain the other theory of an inside job (and no doubt there may even be some mystery for insiders or the partially included). It's clear that 9/11 was an inside job, there is little doubt for anybody who has ever seriously looked at 9/11. Simply put, no steel-frame building crumbles to dust from a plane impact, no matter how intense the fires are. But the case for 7/7 is not nearly as clear. There is no "molten metal for weeks after" 7/7 as there is for 9/11. 9/11 was a messy idiotic thing to do, and I think it is becoming clear that, shockingly, the gullibility of the US public may have actually been overestimated with 9/11...I know it's hard to believe....that the excluded in the USA might actually not be the dumbest more easily fooled people of history. Anyway, the smoking gun for 7/7 is that, like 9/11 it is public information that people in the UK government were running "drills" that paralleled a terrorist bombing of the subway and were in place on the very same day....that is absolutely public information that is unquestionable and not debated....the video of the person admiting it is freely available (to his credit, clearly this person has provided the best evidence that 7/7 was an inside job...and probably purposely so...they must feel that this group of murderers must be stopped, as of course many of us do). So starting from this point, it is easy to see how, like 9/11, the MI-7 or equivalent of CIA/FBI in Britain basically ran a "drill" of a terrorist bombing, but then took it live by changing a few parameters (although probably all involved strongly suspected it would be live, because of the nature of seeing, hearing and sending thought). Then there is the major question of...it's like the Blues Brothers movie...if these inside job people are the "Good Ole Boys", then who are these Arab people that were just convicted? I don't know, maybe the inside job theory is wrong and they were single-handedly involved in 7/7. But I think at least one mainstream alternate theory is that they are the Attas, that is they are the patsies who were recruited and paid by MI-7/Scotland Yard/ISI to "play the bad guys" for the simulation. How it would work is easy to see. The insiders need "bad guys" for terrorist simulations. They find poor Arab people living in the UK who need money. They hire these people...how is a real source of investigation...that is certainly an area worth looking into...how does Scotland Yard and MI-5 or whatever hire these people? I doubt they place an ad in the paper...they probably approach them in person, maybe in a mosque. The MI-5 or ISI pay these people to do stuff, like go and buy fertilizer. It may seem like an odd job for a person, but like Atta, when people are wiring you $100,000 and only request little favors, how could a person complain? Then they are told...ok you go to the subway on this day. In addition, secrecy must have been a major part of these kinds of "jobs". Anybody seen in the camera-thought net to be making a permanent record of their activity would quickly be let go...but then how many people ever record what is happening in their life? It might be a good source of info to trace who their MI-5 contact was, perhaps in their photos...but again, if it was a person who has a camera, the MI-5 would probably skip them...that kind of person is way too smart for these patsy roles. But then things must have changed when they were arrested. And that would feel weird would it not...that all the evidence points to you...the video of you in the fertilizer store..."oh!..." they must think...and it must settle in, that they were instructed and paid to be patsy's for a crime that somebody else did. So the feeling they probably have is one of being taken advantage of by locals...that is probably typical of foreign people in a place where the native language is different from their language. It's like spam and junk mail...many poor non-English speaking people fall for it because they only understand parts of the text, and it's sad. So, like Controlled Demolition probably wired up the WTC buildings, and the US airforce did the planes into the two WTC buildings, so the question is: who put the explosives in the English subway on 7/7? who put the bang in the shama-lama-ding-dong? As an aside, the UK is more camera-filled than even the USA, they have taken 1984 to an extreme, and it's only 1984 Orwellian when the public is not allowed to see which is the case here, there and everywhere. There were reports that witnesses saw the place of explosion, and saw that it came from the floor and blew into the train, the metal was turned upwards. Photos of the explosion and eye witness testimony might reveal that, and that is one source of independent investigation. But without physical evidence, that is just talk, but of course helpful in us outsiders trying to piece together what may have actually happened on 7/7. I doubt that the patsy's would be instructed to put the explosives on the trains. For 9/11 the murderers needed precision in a way that was simply easier to have Controlled Demolition, and the US air force do. For 7/7, no real precision was needed, only unrestricted access to the train while at rest. It would be better to have the patsies place the explosives on the train, but this is an interesting point. It's the WTC 1, the "first explosion" phenomenon. These patsies might not be as sick and twisted as their CIA/FBI/MI-7/Scotland Yard/ISI controllers...they might not agree to place explosives under a train. Of course they could be told that it is simply a package somebody else will pick up. That would be so fool-proof would it not? You have your Arab patsy, you have him buy the explosive stuff, (somebody else would have to actually assemble the bomb...again a source for independent investigators...how were these bombs assembled...did the patsies have the technical knowledge necessary? Where did they get it?), then the patsies are instructed to place the bomb under the train, given full permission and access to under the train, and instructed precisely when and how to attach the package. So there you have the patsy actually fastening the bomb to the train, and you could even have the patsy push the button to trigger the bomb, without even knowing that they have just killed about 50 people on a train. It's not a very complex theory to work out. It is easy to see how such a plan could be easily done, in particular with the camera-thought-neuron-activating network, and absolute control over all major media.
In one UCI video I couldn't understand what the phrase "it's a little too perfect" meant, but perhaps coincidentally, that is how I would describe my Mom's death scene with the smoking gun of "paradoxical undressing". The chances are against the cause of death being so obvious.
It's curious that there is no "image matching" search engine yet. A web page where you upload an image and it finds all identical (or in theory similar) images on the web. This would be one way of connecting up with a person you only have the photo of. You could search for their photo and find their web or myspace page. This search engine would be easy to build, you could even focus it on myspace and images.google.com. The first check would be filesize, then a simple bit-for-bit check which would be stopped the second there was not a match. If the first 100 bits match, it probably is the same file.
Another cool idea is to use cameras to determine which spaces in a parking lot or garage are free and have a real-time Internet page people can use, or put up screens with the nearest free space. Everybody should have a wireless network computer as part of their car.
One thing that I am finding is that we really shold switch to a monophonic (one sound one symbol alphabet), because language is being terribly corrupted. For example many English speaking people say Babylonia |BaBilONEu|, but it is more accurately sounded as |BoBElonEo|, similar corruptions exist for Canaan which is probably more like |KeNoN| |KiNoN| or |KoNoN|. There are endless examples of how English speaking people should have stayed closer to the actual native pronunciation. A monophonic International phonetic alphabet which seems to be inevitable will end the endless debate and variations at least for this and all future times. Certainly video from this time will inform future people, but why not clean up and improve our written language now? I can see people simply starting to hand in 2 papers, one with the fonetic alphabet, and a second in traditional alphabet. Possibly software could make it automatic.
Here is an interesting link, the lost treasures of Iraq: http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/IRAQ/SLIDESHOW/slideshow.html
Here is more info: http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/IRAQ/dbfiles/Iraqdatabasehome.htm
snappy comebacks to being called "pervert"
1) (with right hand raised in affirmation) "No, I'm like you, I'm not sexual"
2) "I'm an amateur compared to you all in the camera net"
3) "pleasure is good foo!"
4) "cut it out"
It's amazing that I must be the first to ever attempt to fight against the antisexual revolution.
One thing that is amazing is how, for example the term "violenter" is not in common use. People seem to care little to nothing about violence. And there are many people who are violenters. Who have violencia. We have a million diseases, but no violencia? The closest there is is "violent tendancies". But look how violent people fill the upper eschelons of power. Those who simply want to invade Iraq...it's violencia...they were not policing, they were murdering with missiles, and then in a first strike assault...they were certainly not defending themselves from an assault. Those who want violence litter the planet. It's amazing that the violenters number as highly as they do. The majority of people in this time...are dim-witted to not oppose violence.
What will future people say about this time? I think without a doubt they will say that people were obsessed with a historical figure...not Nebuchadnezzer, not Ceasar, not Ramses or Hatshepsut, not Tom Jefferson, not John Locke, not Isaac Newton...no they were obsessed with a Jewish guy who lived around 20CE named "Jesus". But they were also obsessed with sports. THey were bigger believers in the theory of there being a god than believers in the theory that there probaby are not any gods. I guess in some way an obsession is simply a strong interest. Certainly all these interests, Jesus, God, Allah, Vishnu, Buddha, sports, food, whatever are all legal and must always be. I am to a certain degree obsessed with getting the history of evolution and science to the public, and am highly interested in reaching people with the message that religions are not any good, that there are no demons, ghosts or witches, and that science is what they ought to be supporting and taking an interest in.
I just realized that this method of measuring the time for photons to move against the gravitational field of earth can also be applied to other forms of matter, in particular to electrons and ions. In theory even to molecules, if a single molecule could be made to be thrown up and timed to reach some height. Clearly, electrons are matter and so the effect of the earth's gravity should slow them down when moving vertically up (for example in a wire connecting the inside of earth to the surface, or in particular in a vacuum between two such points). In fact, I would say that this is one method of accurately measuring the mass of charged particles. The classic method first used at Cambridge by J. J. Rutherford and others measures both electrical charge and mass, without distinguishing which part of charge and of mass is responsible for the observed deflection of a charged particle in a magnetic field. This way, where charge is held constant, or is irrelevent, the true mass of charged particles can be measured by the delay caused by the gravitational field. It's kind of funny that when we need a big gravitational field for experimenting, there generally is only one available and that is the earth. Eventually, we will be able to do the same experiment on the moon and mars and measure differences in velocity for photons, electrons, ions, and other charged or uncharged particles moving against the gravitational field. The method of measuing changes is velocity of particles against the earth's gravitational field could be done with a long fiber optic wire (for photons) or a simple copper electrical wire (for electrons) buried deeply in the earth or extended high above the surface. Initially, simply measuring a difference in velocity in the up-down direction (relative to earth) would be important. I'm not sure how the math for this is done yet. It's not simple, because the strength of the earth's gravitational field changes exponentially as a particle moves farther away from the center. I think it is either an integral or a sum of the intervals between the transmitter/emitter and receiver of the particle. Then synchronizing the emitter and detector is somewhat complex. Basically you want to two digital counters to be on the same number simulatenously in time. Perhaps experimenting could be used to turn a switch with certain lengths of wire connected to both emitter and detector which causes them to start and stop on the same exact digital count. Accuracy into the nanoseconds might be enough to measure differences in velocity of photons, electrons or other charged particles. Interestingly, people have presumed that photons are electrically neutral, and probably they are. Perhaps this could be done to measure the mass of neutrons, and certainly of protons. This would require a vertical (relative to the earth) particle accelerator which I am not aware of ever having been being built. I can't imagine that people have not already thought of this test for determining the mass of particles which removes the effect of charge on measurements of the mass of particles.
I have many things to say, most of which I have said in my videos and in particular that I will say in Universe Life Science Future.
As people we can choose to put out a negative message, one that advocates starting violence, dishonesty, secrecy, rejecting science, opposed to physical pleasure, etc, and many people do put out these messages all the time, but how much better, more productive, and more honorable it is to put out a positive constructive message, to speak out against violence, for exposing and punishing violence, for honesty, against secrecy, for fairness, for more democracy, against the many injustices, in favor of science, in defense of sexuality. Ultimately that kind of a message is going to move life of earth farther.
Questions for Carter:
1) 1910 was an amazing year, at Columbia University, Mihalo Pupin was the first to see thought. Since then, a flurry of inventions centered on the brain have been developed. In particular the ability to activate neurons remotely. Since most of us excluded from this secret technology do not know when this most important occurance happened, nor the name of the individual responsible, can you please tell us anything about 1) what year this remote neuron activation may have happened, and 2) the name of the person that invented this wonderful technology? (What role if any did that raskel Tom Edison have to do with any of this? Did Edison only "make it practical" or is Edison [or an employee] the first to remotely make a neuron fire?) (If a Tom Edison employee, which one and when?)
2) Do you think that the public should be told about the invention of seeing eyes and thoughts? Should this technology be demonstrated to them? Should the public be told about how neurons can be stimulated remotely to move muscles, to make people see images and hear sounds? Should this be demonstrated to them publically?
3) To your knowledge, has there ever been an experiment that has shown that the speed of light is not constant as many people believe, for example the Michelson-Morley experiment but in an up and down direction, like the famous Mossbauer experiment? Does the speed of light change?
4) Simply put, cosmologically, are you an expanding universe, big banger?
5) Do you believe that evolution is a fact? Might you be the only US President that does?
6) What do you think about the prospects of full-ass democracy, you know, a democracy where people vote directly on the laws they have to live under, on all court decisions, even overriding the supreme court 9, on all government budgets (maybe then we would know where that $3 billion of the Pentagon's funds went), for Army generals, for police chiefs, opening up all government decisions to voting by the citizens?
7) To your recollection, are you aware of any experiment that has proven that particles of light bounce off each other?
8) Is decriminalizing drugs and prostitution inevitable?
9) Is violence the biggest evil and number one problem on planet earth right now?
10) What explains the missing concern about stopping violence by the public?
11) It is clear to even many outsiders that way back in 1963, another Democratic President, John F. Kennedy, was not murdered by Lee Harvey Oswald as much of the public was mislead to believe, but that JFK was murdered by Frank Fiorini, also known as Frank Sturgis. Clearly efforts were made to inform the public of this fact, what are your views on this continuing miscarriage of justice? It shocks an average mind to realize how deceitful so many hundreds of thousands of people who participate in this coverup of the truth are. With the connection between Nixon, Hunt and Sturgis, can you tell us with less knowledge, was Richard Nixon an accessory to the murder of JFK before the fact? With the relationship of George Bush Senior to E. Howard Hunt, was George Bush Senior an accessory to the murder of JFK before the fact? And can you talk about what legacy this murder and injustice has brought upon the people of the USA? What is the future of this injustice? Do you think the people will someday know the truth? Do you think anybody will ever pay for this terrible crime? Is it true as E Howard Hunt claimed that LBJ was an accessory before the fact to the homicide of JFK? Did Carter try to stop the History Channel from showing its video about LBJ's involvement with the JFK murder?
12) In 1968, 8 years before the 1976 election, Martin Luthur King jr was murdered, and my question is: Knowing what we know about Frank Fiorini killing JFK and how the Republicans and major media still lie to the public about this, is it true to the best of your knowledge that James Earle Ray was the person that actually killed Martin Luthur King? What is the legacy of the murder of Martin Luthur King jr? How has this changed the nation and planet? What steps should be taken to prevent more democratic leaders such as Martin Luthur King jr from being cut down by murderers?
13) With regard to the murder of the Democratic Senator, Robert F. Kennedy in 1968, many of us know, thanks to the brave work of Thomas Noguchi, Karl Eucker, Ted Charach, Gerald Alcan and others that Sirhan Bishara Sirhan did not kill Robert F. Kennedy, but much more likely, Thane Cesar, the Ace security guard did. What are your thoughts on this murder? What turns my stomach is the list of people who helped to cover it up, I mean, Mayor Yorty, Evile Younger, Ed Davis, Darryl Fitz, Gorden Cooper, DeWayne Wolfer, and the list continues. Is exposing the secret AT&T camera network videos, showing the public many of those videos, and demonstrating to them how eyes and thought can be seen...is this really the only answer to exposing these evil accessories to murder before and after the fact? Is there some other better answer?
14) How about Janis Joplin...murdered?
Clearly many people worked to plant suggestions in the brains of outsiders to murder John Lennon, using the neuron activation technology, and clearly this evil work continues today mainly by Republicans throughout the planet using our own tax dollars no less. Can you tell us, in all neutrality, I think most people are only interested in the truth, was Ronald Reagan an accessory before the fact to the murder of the popular leader, witty and wise John Lennon? Did Reagan celebrate the murder of John Lennon? Was the murder of John Lennon a direct result of Reagan being elected, in other words, would Lennon have lived at least until 1984 had Reagan lost the 1980 election?
Without question 9/11/01 was an inside job, there is more than enough video and other physical evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the 3 World Trade Center buildings were brought down in controlled demolitions, by Controlled Demolition. Do you and your camp estimate that there will ever be a time in the future when those responsible are exposed? When those responsible are punished? From your all's vantage point, does this seem unlikely? What kind of punishments do you think will be handed out? Who should be most punished, the actual executors of murder, those who ordered the murders, or both? Is the correct story that 2 military planes flew into the WTC buildings, a missile was fired into the Pentagon, and all passangers and some of the patsies like Atta were shot down over Shanksville by Gibney out of North Dakota?
It seems clear that even 7/7 in Britain may have been an inside job. Is that true? And are these peopel recentely convicted simply paid for patsies that didn't at first know what they were being paid to do?
Paul Wellstone, ... Republicans uh-gin?
In all neutrality, without any bias, is George Bush jr, the worst President in United States history? And by worst, I mean the most violent, destructive and dishonest? If true, why did people vote for him? Didn't they know?
My Mom was recently murdered, and many other old people seem to be dying. Is this the Republicans just push-button murdering old liberal people? Doesn't this reveal the evil and sadistic nature of the Republicans in their current form?
How is your vision and Bill Clinton's vision different?
Do you see a time in the future where all medical treatments are consensual only? What does that mean for the massive psychiatric establishment, if, like the Nuremberg international laws specify, that all medical treatments and operations must be consensual only? Does that mean that infact, all psychiatric hospitals would have to be voluntary in-patient only? Would stopping the ability to impose medical treatments on those who refuse cause serious problems to society? Would simple law enforcement, in-prison consensual counseling, consensual food, cleaning and other social programs be enough to offset imposed psychiatric treatments or will we forever be locking, restraining, drugging, people in hospitals without consent, trial, or sentence?
What about the people who tell us to "shut up"? Should we say "after you oh mity a-hole", or "open down butty!"?
What do you think about people being able to quit the military without punishment, as if they were not endentured slaves or forced labor?
Against forced labor in prisons?
What people are you hopeful for to be elected President in 2008?
Without bsing us, seriously, have any messages been received from advanced life, such as from globular clusters? again, don't bs us. Do you think globular clusters are made from advanced life? Do you think our descendents will one day form part of all of a globular cluster?
Have people figured out how to stop aging in any multicellular organisms yet? Do you think they will?
Do you support decriminalization of all drugs? (if no, how about marijuana? cocaine? heroine? LSD? psilociben mushrooms?)
Do you support decriminalization of prostitution? (if no, whats about legal kissing for money? masturbating for money? remember people can clear toilets for money. oral sex for money? ok maybe no vaginal sex for money, but how about anal sex for money then, decrim it?
Your administration passed the Freedom of Information Act of 1977, do you support total freedom of all information? (if no, do you support, total freedom of all information that is not copyrighted, patented, trademarked, a threat to national, state, or city security, or invades a person's privacy?)
How long should a copyright last? Should it only last a few minutes if that?
Are you in favor of cameras on every street? Are you in favor of people having access to seeing cameras on all streets cameras are currently on?
Should we remove the voting age?
Should we allow children who want to work the right to work?
What about young people under 18 having the right to see nudity? Should parents that allow this be protected in law? What about parents that allow young people who have vocalized a clear want to consensually touch other people in all areas and are not coerced, to do so, should those parents and participants who allow this be protected from punishment?
Do you support a free public registry which lists the names of murderers and their victims? assaulters names, nature of crime and victims? how about the name of anybody with at least one violent conviction?
Are you, as I am, against all government secrets and government secrecy?
Do you vote with me against the mandatory drug minimums put in place by Reagan?
Do you vote with me in support of ending military laws, and incorporating them into the civilian laws?
Thane Cesar jailed for life? I vote yes for this everybody.
Life in prison for all those who have murdered at least one non-murdering person? I think we may need to go on an individual person by person basis, but in principle I can see it. For some, in particular military, the issue of coersion plays a factor. Still, they could have refused to fire that missile, and certainly they should be recorded for any confirmed murder of a human that never murdered.
Is recording the public votes over the Internet the future for our government?
Do you support ending the Federal Reserve and bringing the decision of how much money is in circulation to the Government?
Do you agree with the theory that all matter in the universe is probably made of particles of light and no other particles, that larger particles are only combinations of light particles? Do you agree that light particles probably move because of gravity, that gravity is probably the only root force in the universe, and that all other forces such as the electromagnetic force are the result of gravitation? What about you betches?
Have people figured out a way to harness the photons from atoms without radioactive waste?
Have people figured out an efficient way to convert common elements such as silicon and iron into more useful elements such as hydrogen, and oxygen in bulk using particles such as neutrons, protons, etc to transmutate atoms up and down the periodic table in a systematic orderly efficient way? Why the secrecy, I think I speak for all people in saying "bust out" with that info already.
What about the problem of racism?
What about the problem of religions?
Is your vision of the future with walking robots a positive picture?
Do you have any kind of statement you want to leave for the planet and for the future? For me, my current statement is: "Get on the path to forming a globular cluster because you are not even pointed in that direction and that is the path to survival and prosparity."
ok I will let you all go with this softball set of easy questions.
I did see Jimmy Carter, and it was nice to see Carter talk. One message he definitely communicated was the idea of light colliding with a balance, and with enough light a balance might actually be made to move which implies that particles of light exhibit mass since they can impart force on other pieces of matter. That is certainly an interesting idea to think about. When I asked (in thought) to all the people what year remote neuron activation was invented there were many "2's", carter himself said "22", others had 2 fingers. So this might be 1912 or 1922. I am thinking 1912. Clearly, many insiders are saying "early" for making neurons fire remotely.
Other than that Carter said that he was oped to the aparteid within the palestinian lands not necessarily within Israel, which I had confused...I thought he was arguing that Israeli citizenship should not be race-based. I was thinking, I know of no other nation that applies racial criteria to citizenship, but no doubt there is defacto racism secretly behind the scenes in many nations, in addition, there are many nations where a person that does not fit in will probably be murdered or jailed anyway making racism defacto there anyway.
Carter said we never should have invaded Iraq to begin with and that the invasion was based on purposely dishonest or incidentally dishonest beliefs. But then, curiously said that the Afghanistan invasion was justified...I thought...that is unusual. But that is maybe the difference between why Carter and those kinds of people are on the big stage and people like me are in the audience...I can't pretend for a minute that 9/11 was not an inside job and therefore cannot possibly gain popular support...I have to be honest. So 9/11 was an inside job and regardsless of many other fine reasons why invading nations is wrong, the basis of 9/11 for any invasion is cleary wrong. So obviously my opinion is that the Afghanistan and Iraq invasions are completely illegal, idiotic and bad ideas.
Carter was a tiny ray of light in 1976 after the decade of brutality under LBJ and Nixon. And sadly that collapsed back into brutality for another decade under Reagan and Bush, creating a shockingly Nazistic and brutal half-century for those who survived 1950-2000.
UCI Chancellor Drake spoke out against hate speech. I am less concerned with hate speech than I am with protecting free speech. I think people are making a mistake by jailing holocaust deniers in Europe. We need to work towards a totally free info free speech society, which includes even thoughts of plots of violence (although I can conceed that perhaps some jail time is necessary for those who order murder of nonviolent people...after all Bush jr nor Cheney never actually pushed the button bringing the WTC buildings down, they simply gave the approval and later applause). But again, you can see that people like Carter and Drake draw their wealth and power from a different well than I do (although I am sure there are shared opinions between me and they). They draw from the power of married people, religious people, neck-tied males, etc. I draw from the stop violence, free info, pro-science, anti-religion, pro-sex, pro-honesty crowd generally.
One nice point, maybe I heard wrong, but Carter did say at one point that he can "vouge" for me. Which I appreciate. I was hoping to get some kind of Jimmy Carter endorsement in going to this talk. Carter is a powerful guy and not only am I interested in his thoughts, but clearly am happy to work together on any shared goals. Obviously Carter is a person that has the influence to make things happen. That interest in hearing what Carter has to say is balanced by the tiny amount of time we have. Time is so precious, and there are many people I would like to see give talks. I missed a talk by David Byrne at UCI, by Coretta Scott King, by Bill Moyers, by numberous others, because I need to focus my time on my ULSF project, my walking robot, reproducing...after all those things maybe I will branch out more.
I was seated in the front row of the bleechers and that was nice of the organizers.
At one point, Carter sounded like he formed the word "nuisance" which is how I describe molestation in my next set of videos. I can't remember how he formed the words, it was a combination of 2 or 3 words like "no" and "sense" or "new" and "sense". But if true, I think it shows a brave effort on Carter's behalf towards progress in confronting the brutal and illogical nature of this antisexual revolution which so slowed progress under Clinton.
All around, I think Carter has done the people a good service in touring around and speaking to the public for free.
05/04/07 Speaking of nuisance, during the talk, when we were only a few feet from former US President Carter I was laser beam assaulted at least twice. Although very minor assaults there certainly was pain. As I recall, these were 2 weeks in jail per assaults...so moderately painful. Generally a vote of one week in jail for the person beaming is for a nonpainful nuisance such as an eye muscle twitch, making a person itch, etc. A two week sentence vote involves pain, and a three week sentence involves a large amount of pain. And this should show people just how reckless and lawless those that control the lasers are, who are probably mostly conservative Republicans. Or certainly how reckless the Republicans that control portions of the lasers are. To assault people only meters away from a former US President with lasers. It shows the Nazistic, violent nature of those secretive people. When the public gets to see, they will only then realize how terrible and destructive their choices in voting over the years have been. It makes me wonder if Carter himself is not routinely assaulted by Republican lawless fascists. It's interesting that some of the cities in Orange county are reputed to be the safest from violent crime in the USA and perhaps the world. That is a wonderful position to be in if true. And I encourage all cities to focus their attention on stopping violence in particular. It must be almost impossible to stop all violence because there are very wealthy people that believe in violence and insist on doing violence, such as laser assaults, onto their philosophical enemies, and it must take a great deal of wealth and determination to oppose allowing violence like that to happen. I would like to see the liberal cities go for eliminating violence. Liberals are generally the smart educated people, I can't believe that they would have trouble stopping violence, or seeing that violence is the real evil and all other activities secondary.
The one good thing about yesterday's Jimmy Carter talk was that Chancellor Drake had to put down his comic book in order to deliver an introduction.
The choice between Democrat and Republican in the USA at this time is not a choice between similar but different ideologies, not a tri