http://www.lptn.org/news/articles/96
Kind of late on this ruling. Didn't know it happened on June 24th. Amazing.
"The 5-4 ruling, issued on June 22, 2005, declares that local governments have the authority seize private property against the owner’s will in order to allow some other private organization to use the property for “economic development” purposes. The 5 majority judges were John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Bryer."
Our most basic right as Americans, gone. The right to own property. This is the plan they use, it's unbelievable how people have trouble seeing through the lies. They write the Patriot Act and say it's for our protection, they take away our right to own for "econonic development", they control it all and give us bullshit excuses to support them. There is no Constitution anymore even if they say it's still there. When the time comes we'll know these mesaures are not for our protection, but for our apprehension. Why would they protect us? Do you think they really care about us? They won't even talk about the Genocide in Darfur on any News channels because hey it's not their problem, right?
What do we do to fight back? I don't know, criminals fill Washington. 5 our of the 9 Justices are Communist bastards, Congressmen allowing any of this to happen should be fired for not doing their job, and the President impeached for treason. They're everywhere. I think the only part able to lead this Government the way it should have been are Libertarians and it's not limited to them only so don't think I'm some extremist. I can change, but this makes too much sense it hurts. When you think about it, do you think this is a part of the God's plan? I think so. Here is a list of 50 signs before Judgement Day. http://www.ummah.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-1651.html
Sign 22 reads: Trustworthiness will be lost, i.e. when authority is given to those who do not deserve it. I think that sign is talking about America and the people in charge. The problem I've been having for the past ten minutes is reading the signs of the future, it doesn't talk about or make slight references about a Police State in any way after Sign 22. So America probably won't last long or just be another short-lived modern Nazi germany. Well, that only means the people will prevail, I hope so. I have to shower now, talk to you later.
Tuesday, August 30, 2005
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
Finish me
http://infowars.com/articles/London_attack/brazilian_police_tube_firm_odds_cctv_footage.htm
Interesting. Men in military garb invade a party in Utah. http://www.utrave.org/showthread.php?t=19971
Some comments posted on the forum talk about how unnessecary that act was, "This event was 100% legal. They had every permit the city told them they needed. They had a 2 MILLION DOLLAR insurance policy for the event. They had liscenced security guards at the gates confiscating any alcohol or drugs found upon entry (yes, they searched every car on the way in). Oh, I suppose I should mention that they arrested all the security guards for possession."
It's all progressive, I don't understand why the media doesn't cover this? It's happened a few times and it's "forgotten." At this rate our rights are going to be "forgotten" as well. Hell, what rights do we still have? The Bill of Rights has been raped, figuratively speaking. Having permits for something we have a right to do is unconstitutional, you can't argue with me or anyone about that because it's true. Let's talk about the Bill of Rights while we're at it. The first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." This allows us to talk about whatever we want, whenever we want.
I want to clear something up first before going into the first amendment fully. After thinking about a comment by Alex Jones I don't think having a political label is important. I say this because I've recently said I was a Libertarian, but here's a quote I'm starting to go by. "Although labels are ulitmately meaningless, I consider myself to be a classical liberal, in the vein of Thomas Jefferson or George Washington. I believe in the Second Amendment and National Sovereignty."
And before you say, "Oh A Liberal!" Here's a definition: "Classical liberalism is a political and economic philosophy, originally founded on the Enlightenment tradition, that tries to circumscribe the limits of political power and to define and support individual liberty and private property." For some reason I don't like the word liberal. I never really have, but put classical alongside it and it seems a little better.
OK, now back onto topic. I'll be using Good To Be King as a source here on the interpretations the Bill of Rights. "It is often said that we should never talk about religion or politics in public places. Why not? It is unfortunate that expressing our opinions has been deemed socially unaccaptable. If Americans were more willing to discuss religion and politics with their friends and aquaintances, I doubt we would have the political problems that currently exist in Washington." The point is, TALK! It doesn't matter what it's about, and according to the first amendment it doesn't matter if it's offensive or not. That's the point of it. We have the right to say whatever we want, even if it offends you. If you don't like it, who said you have to listen to it? I do believe in civil arguements as well because it's more classy and respectable. However, if the need arises we can be more assertive and yell about it, there's nothing wrong with that.
Will update later, this isn't finished.
I guess I won't finish it.
Interesting. Men in military garb invade a party in Utah. http://www.utrave.org/showthread.php?t=19971
Some comments posted on the forum talk about how unnessecary that act was, "This event was 100% legal. They had every permit the city told them they needed. They had a 2 MILLION DOLLAR insurance policy for the event. They had liscenced security guards at the gates confiscating any alcohol or drugs found upon entry (yes, they searched every car on the way in). Oh, I suppose I should mention that they arrested all the security guards for possession."
It's all progressive, I don't understand why the media doesn't cover this? It's happened a few times and it's "forgotten." At this rate our rights are going to be "forgotten" as well. Hell, what rights do we still have? The Bill of Rights has been raped, figuratively speaking. Having permits for something we have a right to do is unconstitutional, you can't argue with me or anyone about that because it's true. Let's talk about the Bill of Rights while we're at it. The first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." This allows us to talk about whatever we want, whenever we want.
I want to clear something up first before going into the first amendment fully. After thinking about a comment by Alex Jones I don't think having a political label is important. I say this because I've recently said I was a Libertarian, but here's a quote I'm starting to go by. "Although labels are ulitmately meaningless, I consider myself to be a classical liberal, in the vein of Thomas Jefferson or George Washington. I believe in the Second Amendment and National Sovereignty."
And before you say, "Oh A Liberal!" Here's a definition: "Classical liberalism is a political and economic philosophy, originally founded on the Enlightenment tradition, that tries to circumscribe the limits of political power and to define and support individual liberty and private property." For some reason I don't like the word liberal. I never really have, but put classical alongside it and it seems a little better.
OK, now back onto topic. I'll be using Good To Be King as a source here on the interpretations the Bill of Rights. "It is often said that we should never talk about religion or politics in public places. Why not? It is unfortunate that expressing our opinions has been deemed socially unaccaptable. If Americans were more willing to discuss religion and politics with their friends and aquaintances, I doubt we would have the political problems that currently exist in Washington." The point is, TALK! It doesn't matter what it's about, and according to the first amendment it doesn't matter if it's offensive or not. That's the point of it. We have the right to say whatever we want, even if it offends you. If you don't like it, who said you have to listen to it? I do believe in civil arguements as well because it's more classy and respectable. However, if the need arises we can be more assertive and yell about it, there's nothing wrong with that.
Will update later, this isn't finished.
I guess I won't finish it.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
Music
I thought of something interesting a little while ago. You know, with Emo music. I've been listening to FuseTV's Emo music video's and they're honestly all about the same thing. They're always singing about how they can't live without their girlfriends and how "depressed" they are, then some even go on talking about hurting themselves by something like slitting wrists. What I thought was, Emo music is the same trash as Boy Bands. It's the same damn little kids who are now a little bit older and now they're so sad but years ago they sang, "I wanna be with you" to the next album's, "Show me the meaning of being lonely." Now after they got older and realized how terrible these songs were they found Rock, kept those feelings, but now sing them with a new tune. That sounds about right, and what's pathetic is most of these kids are terribly unoriginal; they just hop on the bandwagon and see how far it takes them. Make some sense. Enough with my crappy rant, that's just "The Truth" in my mind's eye.
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
On L.
I've been reading a lot about Evolution vs. Creation and it's VERY fascinating. Although I am a creationist, I do read both sides with an open mind and try to give both respect. Through experience in the topic the only thing that could ever change me is the presence of "missing links" even though no one has found any yet. If evolution is such a rational and right explanation, don't you think there would be more evidence and less observations? We've done SO much excavating and with that we should have found things like half-bats or other links, but we haven't found anything at all. After seeing things like fossils of ants who haven't evolved for the past 100 million years or dragonflies for the past 135 million I can only conclude it can't be real. Until there is hard evidence and not, "It makes sense because everyone says so" I can't believe it. I guess if we haven't found it yet the chance of finding missing links in the future would be impossible. Well anyways, enough talk about evolution/creation. I've got more to talk about now below.
Since this is a new idea I've been developing I warn you this won't be well structured so give me advice.
Well, after hearing a few things about some people and unused advice from some other people I'm starting to doubt if there is true love. What do I mean? It's pretty deep, but it's an interesting thought. Having to choose between contradictory beliefs, I find myself doubting if love is actually that great a thing. Love is a strong feeling with additional hormones to emphasize the feelings. There can't be such a thing as true love with another human being (but I do believe in true love with the higher being). Since there's only one God(assuming you believe what I do), and He has infinite power you can love him through fear, gratefulness, or both. With humans it's different.
One piece of food for though is even if you're in love with one person, you can fall in love with another or many others. It's known that the hormones of love fade away after about 3 years with the partner because you know them personally and not as the sexy counterpoint you didn't know. After those three years, it's all up to your mind and your sense of loyalty to stay with that person. Assuming true love is with one person: Loyalty and true love go hand in hand, without one you can't have the other. There can't be a destined relationship between two people, the couple is only together because they both are extremely loyal(or one is materialistic.)
The advice I get from close adults is interesting, they say have as much fun as you can with as many girls as you can before you marry. But another friends word is, "In the end you'll be a lot happier if you are a virgin and marry a virgin. These people who go around today screwing all in sight won't be happy at all. It's better for you." Using these two opinions I tried inventing what I'm writing about now, but I'm not so sure that it's going to work out the right way. Will I actually be happier with opinion one or two? How do I know for sure if I can't do one over the other? Some people talk about "onegina" and how marriage is a terrible bond, why? According to the masses, polyamorous relationships rules while monoamorous may be more boring. I also ask, when has the public ever been right? Right now, my decision is monoamorous because I feel like I'll live life with a storybook ending even though my first attempt was so stupid and pathetic I don't even want to talk about it. The only deciding factors on choosing between the two is: "Is it really that good?" and "What does Religion say?". From what I've heard, some people say it's not that great while others say it's fantastic. Is it really that good or are you so sex-crazed that even your brain has become a sperm-manufacturing facility? What does Religion say? Well I already know. I don't really care about how good it is anyways, what's the point of doing it so much to make yourself happy if it's not that amazing. If it is amazing, I guess that whole situation explains itself. Life is short so I suppose doing whatever you want with one person you trust and know is a much better feeling in your heart, mind, and soul than it would be with a bunch of "towels." So about this whole true love thing, don't use the heart only because the heart is much more prone to mistakes than your driving force: the mind. Use both and choose wisely. If you can keep yourself loyal with one person and have as much fun with a special other that's better than any storybook ending because it's real. Purity is a rare find to come across these days, when I or anyone else finds it I hope for only the best. I talk about love like I'm actually going to fall for it. I'm like Nikola Tesla in a way, even though he was a virgin his whole life I feel like I might be too because I can care less. Wow, I just found out Tesla also read a book I loved and memorized it, "At that age [24], I knew entire books by heart, word for word. One of these was Goethe's Faust." Wow, word for word... That's something you think humans can't do, but damn I can't believe he loved that book as much as me. What can I say? Great minds think alike. Well, anyways I feel really inspired to read so I might as well do that before my little inspiration timer runs out. Bye
Since this is a new idea I've been developing I warn you this won't be well structured so give me advice.
Well, after hearing a few things about some people and unused advice from some other people I'm starting to doubt if there is true love. What do I mean? It's pretty deep, but it's an interesting thought. Having to choose between contradictory beliefs, I find myself doubting if love is actually that great a thing. Love is a strong feeling with additional hormones to emphasize the feelings. There can't be such a thing as true love with another human being (but I do believe in true love with the higher being). Since there's only one God(assuming you believe what I do), and He has infinite power you can love him through fear, gratefulness, or both. With humans it's different.
One piece of food for though is even if you're in love with one person, you can fall in love with another or many others. It's known that the hormones of love fade away after about 3 years with the partner because you know them personally and not as the sexy counterpoint you didn't know. After those three years, it's all up to your mind and your sense of loyalty to stay with that person. Assuming true love is with one person: Loyalty and true love go hand in hand, without one you can't have the other. There can't be a destined relationship between two people, the couple is only together because they both are extremely loyal(or one is materialistic.)
The advice I get from close adults is interesting, they say have as much fun as you can with as many girls as you can before you marry. But another friends word is, "In the end you'll be a lot happier if you are a virgin and marry a virgin. These people who go around today screwing all in sight won't be happy at all. It's better for you." Using these two opinions I tried inventing what I'm writing about now, but I'm not so sure that it's going to work out the right way. Will I actually be happier with opinion one or two? How do I know for sure if I can't do one over the other? Some people talk about "onegina" and how marriage is a terrible bond, why? According to the masses, polyamorous relationships rules while monoamorous may be more boring. I also ask, when has the public ever been right? Right now, my decision is monoamorous because I feel like I'll live life with a storybook ending even though my first attempt was so stupid and pathetic I don't even want to talk about it. The only deciding factors on choosing between the two is: "Is it really that good?" and "What does Religion say?". From what I've heard, some people say it's not that great while others say it's fantastic. Is it really that good or are you so sex-crazed that even your brain has become a sperm-manufacturing facility? What does Religion say? Well I already know. I don't really care about how good it is anyways, what's the point of doing it so much to make yourself happy if it's not that amazing. If it is amazing, I guess that whole situation explains itself. Life is short so I suppose doing whatever you want with one person you trust and know is a much better feeling in your heart, mind, and soul than it would be with a bunch of "towels." So about this whole true love thing, don't use the heart only because the heart is much more prone to mistakes than your driving force: the mind. Use both and choose wisely. If you can keep yourself loyal with one person and have as much fun with a special other that's better than any storybook ending because it's real. Purity is a rare find to come across these days, when I or anyone else finds it I hope for only the best. I talk about love like I'm actually going to fall for it. I'm like Nikola Tesla in a way, even though he was a virgin his whole life I feel like I might be too because I can care less. Wow, I just found out Tesla also read a book I loved and memorized it, "At that age [24], I knew entire books by heart, word for word. One of these was Goethe's Faust." Wow, word for word... That's something you think humans can't do, but damn I can't believe he loved that book as much as me. What can I say? Great minds think alike. Well, anyways I feel really inspired to read so I might as well do that before my little inspiration timer runs out. Bye
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Oh Washingingtonienne!
"By popular demand, I have finally created a key to keeping my sex life straight.
In alpha order:
AJ=The intern in my office whom I want to fuck.
F=Married man who pays me for sex. Chief of Staff at one of the gov agencies, appointed by Bush.
J=Lost my virginity to him and fell in love. Dude who has been driving me crazy since 1999. Lives in Springfield, IL. Flies halfway across the country to fuck me, then I don't hear from him for weeks.
MD=Dude from the Senate office I interned in Jan. thru Feb. Hired me as an intern. Broke up my relationship w/ MK (see below).
MK=Serious, long-term boyfriend whom I lived with since 2001. Disastrous break up in March, but still seeing each other.
R=AKA "Threesome Dude." Somebody I would rather forget about.
RS=My new office bf with whom I am embroiled in an office sex scandal. The current favorite.
W=A sugar daddy who wants nothing but anal. Keep trying to end it with him, but the money is too good.
Shit. I'm fucking six guys. Ewww.
"By popular demand, I have finally created a key to keeping my sex life straight.
In alpha order:
AJ=The intern in my office whom I want to fuck.
F=Married man who pays me for sex. Chief of Staff at one of the gov agencies, appointed by Bush.
J=Lost my virginity to him and fell in love. Dude who has been driving me crazy since 1999. Lives in Springfield, IL. Flies halfway across the country to fuck me, then I don't hear from him for weeks.
MD=Dude from the Senate office I interned in Jan. thru Feb. Hired me as an intern. Broke up my relationship w/ MK (see below).
MK=Serious, long-term boyfriend whom I lived with since 2001. Disastrous break up in March, but still seeing each other.
R=AKA "Threesome Dude." Somebody I would rather forget about.
RS=My new office bf with whom I am embroiled in an office sex scandal. The current favorite.
W=A sugar daddy who wants nothing but anal. Keep trying to end it with him, but the money is too good.
Shit. I'm fucking six guys. Ewww.
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Good Luck Iran
“Vice President Cheney’s office has specifically told the Pentagon that the military should be prepared for an attack on Iran in the immediate aftermath of ‘another 9-11.’ ”
Guess where we're going next America? Of course Iran won't have anything to do with the next "9-11" either. This is so bad, so bad. I really really hope the Sears Tower isn't next on the to-do list, but I have a feeling it is. What has this world come to? "The Iran matter seems very serious to me -- it may trigger a major international crisis because, if Iran doesn't go back on its decision, then Iran will be, I would say, in a purely unilateral position," French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told reporters after a cabinet meeting chaired by President Jacques Chirac." It doesn't even matter if Iran pulls the plug on that because we're going in there no matter what. All I can say is, "Power is temporary." If there is a WWIII , I hope we follow CATO's lead and re-create our government the way it was supposed to be: limited.
I also hear that Syria is coming after Iran, not surprising is it?
It's early.
Guess where we're going next America? Of course Iran won't have anything to do with the next "9-11" either. This is so bad, so bad. I really really hope the Sears Tower isn't next on the to-do list, but I have a feeling it is. What has this world come to? "The Iran matter seems very serious to me -- it may trigger a major international crisis because, if Iran doesn't go back on its decision, then Iran will be, I would say, in a purely unilateral position," French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy told reporters after a cabinet meeting chaired by President Jacques Chirac." It doesn't even matter if Iran pulls the plug on that because we're going in there no matter what. All I can say is, "Power is temporary." If there is a WWIII , I hope we follow CATO's lead and re-create our government the way it was supposed to be: limited.
I also hear that Syria is coming after Iran, not surprising is it?
It's early.
Monday, August 01, 2005
Care
Found this on maddox and thought it was pretty funny:
"Warblog: A blog that primarily deals with war. Filled with whiny blow hards who are fixated on their stubborn ideas and conspiracy theories. For example, there are countless hours pissed away by conspiracy theorists who think the WTC towers were demolished by bombs planted by the government. These armchair engineers write endlessly about how the physics of the collapse was impossible, how the temperature wasn't hot enough to melt steel, and how the planes were carrying missiles. Of course, the one thing they don't postulate is a REASON.
My personal favorite warblog was one that had a flash animation with people who were quoted as saying "it didn't sound like a plane to me... it sounded like a missile." Thank you Joe Nobody for giving me your expert opinion on what missile sounds like, because gas station superintendents are usually the best people to ask about the sonic signature of ballistic missile thrust."
I thought it was funny becuase in a way he represents the nations ignorance. There is a reason behind it too, just follow where the money goes and you'll see the reasoning behind it all. One thing I don't understand is where someone said the "planes were carrying missles." I've never read that anywhere and so I figure he only brands this subject as stupid is because he got his information from the wrong place. I like his writing a lot since he's hilarious and never serious. So it could be, instead of a dis, some sort of recognition. But no, probably not he sounds pretty firm in it. If instead of reading some insane 40 year old dude's blog he saw a credible video, he might change his mind. I'm not offended at all, why should I be? That's something one of those bitchy soccer moms would do, she'll blame society and have them change their rules just for her. Anyways, it has to be true: Buildings do not fall because they're "on fire." It doesn't matter to him anyways, "Warblogger: Like all other bloggers, an idiot. Usually a self-righteous prick with a political axe to grind. Tragically, these dullards fail to realize that nobody cares what they think. And no, the 2 comments per post you get on average doesn't count. Get some real opinions, then maybe you'll get some real feedback." He's right though, "nobody cares what they think." I should just give up, I mean it's not like I'm doing anything about it anyway. I'll keep my eye out but my mouth shut, untill he comes back to tell me that I was right all along. Then again, what if I was wrong? I can't believe that, after seeing the evidence from these movies nothing can really change my mind. I'm here trying to save you all, but you're all the same. Why was there so many people against Jesus even though what he was doing was right? I sort of feel like I'm in that position, but I don't believe he was on the cross. Who knows, I should change what I write about now anyways. Warblogging is pretty inane when it's saying the same stuff over and over and hope people believe you. If we can't do anything about it then why do we try? Media has screwed up everything, and I'm tired of writing this stuff when now I begin to see no one cares...
Sunday, July 31, 2005
Truth in rambling
"Pull out of Iraq" is the talk right now of the press. Bush says if they do give us a timeline on when to pull out, the terrorists will just wait until then and then re-claim everything like in Vietnam. I know there are a few terrorists in this world, but after doing my own research it's made that number so much smaller. The event known as the 'airlift of evil'(you can Google it) is simple. 'The United States took the unprecedented step this week of demanding that foreign airlines provide information on passengers boarding planes for America. Yet in the past week, a half dozen or more Pakistani air force cargo planes landed in the Taliban-held city of Kunduz and evacuated to Pakistan hundreds of non-Afghan soldiers who fought alongside the Taliban and even al-Qaida against the United States.' What am I trying to say? Most of the people you hate are paid by the money you send to the IRS. So when people say drug dealing supports terrorism, I say "so does paying taxes."
Oh, and another note about drugs. After we took over Afghanistan isn't it interesting that Opium growing has skyrocketed? What's also funny is how Afghanistan manages to grow more than 80 percent of the worlds supply. If drug dealers only sell drugs and get caught, why aren't the guys making the most money growing them caught? Or why isn't there a sort-of War on Drugs over there? Oh that's right, I'm sure the government regulates it in one way or another. Check out the lyrics from the song Peruvian Cocaine
I talk about this stuff so often now it's unbelievable; and to think this is "America: Land of the Free." Well, "Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore." I feel so obligated to do something about this all, but it sucks feeling like I have no power even though in a real America I should. Wherever there's "sovereign individuals" there's peace, that's the truth.
Now there's the London bombings, and as usual with terrorist events, you'll see many contradictions. Why? Sadly enough it had to be set-up too. Enough with the truth, the public hates it and I hate the public for that. They're too busy drinking and smoking their minds to a pulp, let them have it. Besides the public when people say this quote, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." and think they're special because they read books, that's not much more different. Unless you really know what's happening in the world, you're not part of that small group of thoughtful citizens. If that's too harsh, it has to be because everything you know and all the work you've done could be in vain. Why does it seem that where Truth should be, propaganda and lies are filled to the brim? It's like Truth is in the muddy waters on roadsides that cars run over and spray pedestrians. What's the reaction when the average joe/sally is on the recieving end? "Get it off of me!" I think truth isn't something that's exactly hated though like that quote may seem. People sometimes "just don't know" like me. If you're born tabula rasa it's probably going to be hard for everyone to find what I have Our lifestyles are different, and that has to be the main contribution to ignorance: Some people just don't care. In the end as I read over this rambling on, I might as well stay informed but stay to myself. I've been thinking about writing my own poems and songs of sorts because it would be a nice change, trying to be creative is something people have been doing since the beginning. The problem I have is with my vocabulary, I hate being able to understand a lot of words but not being able to converse with them. The solution is: Learning through synonyms. That's the easiest way, so I should start sometime soon.
Oh, and another note about drugs. After we took over Afghanistan isn't it interesting that Opium growing has skyrocketed? What's also funny is how Afghanistan manages to grow more than 80 percent of the worlds supply. If drug dealers only sell drugs and get caught, why aren't the guys making the most money growing them caught? Or why isn't there a sort-of War on Drugs over there? Oh that's right, I'm sure the government regulates it in one way or another. Check out the lyrics from the song Peruvian Cocaine
I talk about this stuff so often now it's unbelievable; and to think this is "America: Land of the Free." Well, "Toto, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore." I feel so obligated to do something about this all, but it sucks feeling like I have no power even though in a real America I should. Wherever there's "sovereign individuals" there's peace, that's the truth.
Now there's the London bombings, and as usual with terrorist events, you'll see many contradictions. Why? Sadly enough it had to be set-up too. Enough with the truth, the public hates it and I hate the public for that. They're too busy drinking and smoking their minds to a pulp, let them have it. Besides the public when people say this quote, "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." and think they're special because they read books, that's not much more different. Unless you really know what's happening in the world, you're not part of that small group of thoughtful citizens. If that's too harsh, it has to be because everything you know and all the work you've done could be in vain. Why does it seem that where Truth should be, propaganda and lies are filled to the brim? It's like Truth is in the muddy waters on roadsides that cars run over and spray pedestrians. What's the reaction when the average joe/sally is on the recieving end? "Get it off of me!" I think truth isn't something that's exactly hated though like that quote may seem. People sometimes "just don't know" like me. If you're born tabula rasa it's probably going to be hard for everyone to find what I have Our lifestyles are different, and that has to be the main contribution to ignorance: Some people just don't care. In the end as I read over this rambling on, I might as well stay informed but stay to myself. I've been thinking about writing my own poems and songs of sorts because it would be a nice change, trying to be creative is something people have been doing since the beginning. The problem I have is with my vocabulary, I hate being able to understand a lot of words but not being able to converse with them. The solution is: Learning through synonyms. That's the easiest way, so I should start sometime soon.
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Jefferson was right.
"That government is best which governs least." Some people say it's misattributed, but that's not important. "Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have ... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases." History is the the only "Google" you need to figure out what may happen in the future or in our case: what's happening now.
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." That's for you Rosie O' Donnell and all of those Hitler-esque gun-control psychos. No, I don't think she's insane like Hitler at all. I think She's confused like the majority of uneducated Americans. Now am I educated? That I can't answer, I don't have the arrogance to yell yes nor the humbleness to say no, but what really is education? A high school graduate degree, or a Ph.D? One has a general knowledge of all things while the latter is extensive knowledge in one or few things. I don't have the extensiveness yet, but I feel like both certificates reside beside me and more.
Anyways here's another one: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies…if the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency...the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent that their fathers conquered.” The Federal Reserve is not affiliated with the government, check out the blue pages--it's not there. I feel hopeless, the only thing I can do is sigh knowing these things and feel even worse feeling like I can't do anything about it. There is hope and the only test is time, no one's ever beat it and nothing ever will(even the Universe the only thing that can is God). Power is temporary: "What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure." Power corrupts, so I hope we follow Jefferson's schematic instead of Hamilton's next time around and see what we we should have been. The men in power of our country today do not reside in the White House anymore, God help us. "On matters of principle, stand like a rock."
"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." That's for you Rosie O' Donnell and all of those Hitler-esque gun-control psychos. No, I don't think she's insane like Hitler at all. I think She's confused like the majority of uneducated Americans. Now am I educated? That I can't answer, I don't have the arrogance to yell yes nor the humbleness to say no, but what really is education? A high school graduate degree, or a Ph.D? One has a general knowledge of all things while the latter is extensive knowledge in one or few things. I don't have the extensiveness yet, but I feel like both certificates reside beside me and more.
Anyways here's another one: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies…if the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of currency...the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent that their fathers conquered.” The Federal Reserve is not affiliated with the government, check out the blue pages--it's not there. I feel hopeless, the only thing I can do is sigh knowing these things and feel even worse feeling like I can't do anything about it. There is hope and the only test is time, no one's ever beat it and nothing ever will(even the Universe the only thing that can is God). Power is temporary: "What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure." Power corrupts, so I hope we follow Jefferson's schematic instead of Hamilton's next time around and see what we we should have been. The men in power of our country today do not reside in the White House anymore, God help us. "On matters of principle, stand like a rock."
Thursday, July 21, 2005
65
There's so much to say, this post will probably be unorganized the way all of the others have been. First of all, I've discovered this new artist and he's great. His name's Immortal Technique and is already my favorite rapper. Why? He speaks what I think is the truth," Cause opening your mouth to question my validity Is like trying to contradict the theory of relativity." I don't know how to prove it to you, I've been reading a lot and have changed my thoughts on many things. The thoughts I've switched to are the thoughts Immortal Technique also believes in. People say he's a super weird eery conspiracy theorist, but that's bullshit. Having seen a video in slow motion of WTC going down, what more evidence do you need? Well, there's also the firefighters that are still alive today who have all said they believe bombs were in the building. Now they have shutup, it's sad to see what the government can do. Hell even Silverstein(the guy who bought the entire WTC complex) bought out a huge insurance plan before 9/11 on all of the buildings. He also said in an interview that they had to "pull" building seven, meaning implode, meaning everything you've heard is bogus. Buildings like the WTC don't fall down from "being on fire," it doesn't work like that. It takes weeks to set up the bombs in a building and Silverstein says it like it takes a few hours, but it doesn't. There was a photo taken one second into Building seven's collapse, in the middle of the building there was a "crimp." If we look at other controlled demolitions we see that they first blow the central columns so the building falls in on itself. If you don't do that, the building falls outward and has a wider collapse radius and damage other buildings. In building seven, a controlled demolition was the case. No airplane hit it, the fires weren't very strong it was basically fine. What was in there? Information, just like the Murrah Federal Building which stored stuff on Waco. Building Seven was also like that, it was practically a command center for the whole operation and had the information. Silverstein owned only Building seven but two months before the attacks, he bought out the whole complex and took out a record insurance policy on it. Even worse is the seismographs, the bombings of Towers 1 and 2 registered 2.1 and 2.3 with the "classical pattern of a controlled demolition." Basically 9/11 is a huge coverup and it's bull. Immortal Technique, in one of his more recent songs says, "Bush knocked down the towers." I don't know if Bush did this or not, but I do know someone or few people did and I still can't believe it.
It's late, there are the facts I've harvested from Alex Jones' 9/11- Rise of the Police State.
It's late, there are the facts I've harvested from Alex Jones' 9/11- Rise of the Police State.
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Money
Murray N. Rothbard
"Since 1980,the Fed has enjoyed the absolute power to do literally anything it wants: to buy not only U.S. government securities, but any asset whatever, to buy as many assets, and to inflate credit as much as it pleases.There are no restraints on the Federal Reserve. The Fed is master of all it controls."
Currency backed by Gold is better than the current system, that's the truth. I just watched some film about The Federal Reserve, and it's true. The only reason we have our system is when we are in war. Presidents have called upon TFR and use it to print out extra funds instead of increasing taxation. A system with Gold is stable and any American can put their trust in there. If we follow this system we're currently in, our future is dependent on one special person. The government that uses a Central Bank takes another step on the road to absolute or great power. Therefore, in order to limit the power of our government, it's necessary to impose a different non-central bank. Thomas Jefferson was against a Central Bank because a smaller government is better. He was right, because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That's why I'm basically a Libertarian/Constitutionalist, the government is supposed to be very limited. Our administration has figured out how to dismantle the Constitution and Bill of Rights by using a simple scapegoat, terrorism. The funny thing is, they're the terrorists. All major "terrorist" events were done by the government, not only ours. 9/11, Madrid, London, Bali, it's sick... Their attempts to cover up is so transparent and pathetic, they are a bunch of lunatics. The Patriot Act passes without even having Congress vote on it, and it's disgusting. They've taken away so many rights away from us even if you don't recognize it. There are no terrorists, there is no Al-Qaida, unless you think of it as "Al-CIA'da" because it's their invention. The CIA uses whenever they want to do something. Damnit, this shouldn't be happenning. I wonder, how could we fix it? There's one way, the easy and dangerous way, but I don't know if the effects would be good or bad. That way is to assassinate these top leaders, but who would do that? All the criminals are making money and no one would want to do that. Exposing the truth is tough to do, especially with the controlled media. I wish there was some way we could regain the media, that would be the best way and probably the only other way. Why would it be the only other way? Because the last way would have to be having control over the judicial system, which they already have. We just need to learn how to say "no" to the government, they set up this illusion that they have power and if you do say no they'll hurt you. We should also educate the police all of these things, since they have to be the most misinformed to be protecting these assholes. The sad thing is, the only truth anyone can find is not on the TV or newspaper, rather, it's on the internet. Thank God for the 'net because without it, who knows what would become of this world? Damn how did I go from money to this? Anyways, I just hope the transition was good. I really have this deep yearning to become a politician to help change our course, and marry this other girl who wants to be a politician to set up some sort of double threat. Kinda crazy? I don't know, I wish sometimes there was a crystal ball that would show me. Perhaps there isn't a set future so there isn't really destiny, but then again there is the Qu'ran which provides us with a list of events to occur before The Last Day. Major Bloodshed is on the list and looking back at the past 100 years there has been an enormous amount of it, I really hope this New World Order doesn't workout but then again it probably will. One of the other signs of the last day is Jesus' second coming and when he comes back, there will be a collapse of all society. Now if I can deduce my own idea from those last 5 words, I think society will have to become terrible if it just collapses because Jesus will return when there is terrible longing for him. Half-life 2 may seem like it's far, but just like "1984" I don't think it's that far away. I really pray and hope he comes soon, torture is terrible and the media is now saying "oh it's not so bad." What bullshit, evil is disgusting but apparently it may be inevitable. I'm going to post before my computer restarts, good night.
"Since 1980,the Fed has enjoyed the absolute power to do literally anything it wants: to buy not only U.S. government securities, but any asset whatever, to buy as many assets, and to inflate credit as much as it pleases.There are no restraints on the Federal Reserve. The Fed is master of all it controls."
Currency backed by Gold is better than the current system, that's the truth. I just watched some film about The Federal Reserve, and it's true. The only reason we have our system is when we are in war. Presidents have called upon TFR and use it to print out extra funds instead of increasing taxation. A system with Gold is stable and any American can put their trust in there. If we follow this system we're currently in, our future is dependent on one special person. The government that uses a Central Bank takes another step on the road to absolute or great power. Therefore, in order to limit the power of our government, it's necessary to impose a different non-central bank. Thomas Jefferson was against a Central Bank because a smaller government is better. He was right, because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That's why I'm basically a Libertarian/Constitutionalist, the government is supposed to be very limited. Our administration has figured out how to dismantle the Constitution and Bill of Rights by using a simple scapegoat, terrorism. The funny thing is, they're the terrorists. All major "terrorist" events were done by the government, not only ours. 9/11, Madrid, London, Bali, it's sick... Their attempts to cover up is so transparent and pathetic, they are a bunch of lunatics. The Patriot Act passes without even having Congress vote on it, and it's disgusting. They've taken away so many rights away from us even if you don't recognize it. There are no terrorists, there is no Al-Qaida, unless you think of it as "Al-CIA'da" because it's their invention. The CIA uses whenever they want to do something. Damnit, this shouldn't be happenning. I wonder, how could we fix it? There's one way, the easy and dangerous way, but I don't know if the effects would be good or bad. That way is to assassinate these top leaders, but who would do that? All the criminals are making money and no one would want to do that. Exposing the truth is tough to do, especially with the controlled media. I wish there was some way we could regain the media, that would be the best way and probably the only other way. Why would it be the only other way? Because the last way would have to be having control over the judicial system, which they already have. We just need to learn how to say "no" to the government, they set up this illusion that they have power and if you do say no they'll hurt you. We should also educate the police all of these things, since they have to be the most misinformed to be protecting these assholes. The sad thing is, the only truth anyone can find is not on the TV or newspaper, rather, it's on the internet. Thank God for the 'net because without it, who knows what would become of this world? Damn how did I go from money to this? Anyways, I just hope the transition was good. I really have this deep yearning to become a politician to help change our course, and marry this other girl who wants to be a politician to set up some sort of double threat. Kinda crazy? I don't know, I wish sometimes there was a crystal ball that would show me. Perhaps there isn't a set future so there isn't really destiny, but then again there is the Qu'ran which provides us with a list of events to occur before The Last Day. Major Bloodshed is on the list and looking back at the past 100 years there has been an enormous amount of it, I really hope this New World Order doesn't workout but then again it probably will. One of the other signs of the last day is Jesus' second coming and when he comes back, there will be a collapse of all society. Now if I can deduce my own idea from those last 5 words, I think society will have to become terrible if it just collapses because Jesus will return when there is terrible longing for him. Half-life 2 may seem like it's far, but just like "1984" I don't think it's that far away. I really pray and hope he comes soon, torture is terrible and the media is now saying "oh it's not so bad." What bullshit, evil is disgusting but apparently it may be inevitable. I'm going to post before my computer restarts, good night.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
All Falls Down
I'm already half-way done with Candide, I checked it out of the library today. Not a very long story but a very interesting one. So I'll be done with it tomorrow and I'll keep reading after that. This conspiracy theory site about the government and everything is damn crazy. I'd be surprised, but not That surprised if America actually became the next great dictatorship like Nazi Germany. It would obviously be a bit different than 50 years ago but still have many common things. The warfare used will be mostly psychological because the media owns countless souls and the elite will constantly keep everyone fearing. I'll just keep my eyes open and mouth closed and point my finger hoping the real culprits get blamed. Conspiracy theory is not really my kind of thing so I'll leave it up to guys like Alex Jones, to keep fighting his good fight. After seeing the video of the Twin Towers going down in slow motion, and seeing what looks like bombs exploding as the cloud of dust from the building heading south, I can't believe the towers fell because "they were on fire." The film 9/11 Rise of the Police State showed its evidence, and it's crucial. I say you download or support him by buying it and see for yourself. Basically, it says there were bombs planted in all 3 big buildings: 1, 2, and 7. Hell, Silverstein even admits he "pulled" building 7(meaning implode) so it wasn't by a fire you could see by the way it fell down, the center blew first so the building fell in a tidy rubble pile. The same thing happened in towers 1 and 2, they planted explosives all over the buildings. There's just so many signs. I thank God as well, for basically helping shoot down Flight 93 which was on it's way to the Capital. It probably was going for the White House so Bush could have called for total Martial Law, but since they screwed up and God foiled their plans, they've got a lot to cover up. Don't worry though, there will be another attempt at Martial Law, I'm sick of this. "Al-CIAda," and everything. I'm just dissapointed with the world, you know? I thought these "adults" would be a bit more "mature." They've got control of all the funds with communist things like the Central Bank, it's insane. Now there's gun control, and dumbass moms like Rosie O'Donnell who adamantly support gun control, just like Hitler and these other murderers. I just hope if America falls, that we follow the Constitution the way it was meant to be, with presidential candidates like Badnarik to guide us with his knowledge.
It's already 3:30 I'm going to sleep, later.
A slogan I've seen on the internet:
"Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!"(Referring to Hitler, Stalin, MaoTse Tung, and even here in America where our 2nd Amendment is trampled on.)
It's already 3:30 I'm going to sleep, later.
A slogan I've seen on the internet:
"Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!"(Referring to Hitler, Stalin, MaoTse Tung, and even here in America where our 2nd Amendment is trampled on.)
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Loose Change
http://propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/060705controlleddemolition.htm
"On The Record: The Controlled Demolition Of The WTC"
It's part of a documentary named Loose Change, and it's scary as hell. I think this is the most profound clip you could watch that would change your opinion on 9/11. It basically says that the WTC was bombed not only by airplanes, but with supplementary charges throughout the building. The film talks about how strong the steel was, even if the airplane hit the buildings without the charges it wouldn't have fallen or melted. The problem though is, when you watch the video, there are slow motion scenes which show charges blowing up as the building heads on its eternally nostalgic trip South. It also interviews firemen and they say they heard many other explosions other than the impact. It was was pulled off professionally, like imploding broken down Casino's when someone wants to build a new one. You need to watch it, this is the kind of stuff news channels wouldn't show in a 1000 years, or until America crumbles. Power is temporary, I hope America doesn't prematurely "end" at all. The Constitution was well written but has been loosely interpreted, which shouldn't have happened. After all of these years of loose interpretations, the government has powers that it shouldn't have in the first place. After hundreds of years of these interpretations here we are: Screwed and on the verge of death-- hey maybe that's being planned too? The government's supposed to be controlled by the people, not the other way around. It's sad to see it become the way it is, but that's corruption for you.
I'm even reading things that say there's no such thing as "al-Qaeda." I hate to think of myself as a deep conspiracy theorist because I've read other stuff before and it's total bullshit. I'll be done reading stuff soon, I hate getting "too into it" with these things. Since I don't really want to be a full-time conspiracy theorist I praise the people who do it with hopes of showing the "real truth" to the public and succeed. If only we had more "Deepthroats" that would snitch. Rap songs really have a low regard for snitching, but in today's government it would be damn good. I guess for their gangs snitching is bad, but I'd like to see it in the government. If not that, at least have the Libertarians win more political spots to show the public the way it's supposed to be. Then we can rise up and put the government in the positition it's supposed to be by serving us, not the other way around.
I've only got one question for Libertarian's since I don't really know the answer: If we can speak freely and say whatever we want, what happens to sexual harassment and other "speaking limits"?
A lot of things have been happening, back to reading though. I'm going for Voltaire's Candide now, I should get it at the library tomorrow. After that I don't know maybe I'll finally finish the Divine Comedy or something. Who knows? I'll just choose whatever is available. I'm going to bed, peace.
"On The Record: The Controlled Demolition Of The WTC"
It's part of a documentary named Loose Change, and it's scary as hell. I think this is the most profound clip you could watch that would change your opinion on 9/11. It basically says that the WTC was bombed not only by airplanes, but with supplementary charges throughout the building. The film talks about how strong the steel was, even if the airplane hit the buildings without the charges it wouldn't have fallen or melted. The problem though is, when you watch the video, there are slow motion scenes which show charges blowing up as the building heads on its eternally nostalgic trip South. It also interviews firemen and they say they heard many other explosions other than the impact. It was was pulled off professionally, like imploding broken down Casino's when someone wants to build a new one. You need to watch it, this is the kind of stuff news channels wouldn't show in a 1000 years, or until America crumbles. Power is temporary, I hope America doesn't prematurely "end" at all. The Constitution was well written but has been loosely interpreted, which shouldn't have happened. After all of these years of loose interpretations, the government has powers that it shouldn't have in the first place. After hundreds of years of these interpretations here we are: Screwed and on the verge of death-- hey maybe that's being planned too? The government's supposed to be controlled by the people, not the other way around. It's sad to see it become the way it is, but that's corruption for you.
I'm even reading things that say there's no such thing as "al-Qaeda." I hate to think of myself as a deep conspiracy theorist because I've read other stuff before and it's total bullshit. I'll be done reading stuff soon, I hate getting "too into it" with these things. Since I don't really want to be a full-time conspiracy theorist I praise the people who do it with hopes of showing the "real truth" to the public and succeed. If only we had more "Deepthroats" that would snitch. Rap songs really have a low regard for snitching, but in today's government it would be damn good. I guess for their gangs snitching is bad, but I'd like to see it in the government. If not that, at least have the Libertarians win more political spots to show the public the way it's supposed to be. Then we can rise up and put the government in the positition it's supposed to be by serving us, not the other way around.
I've only got one question for Libertarian's since I don't really know the answer: If we can speak freely and say whatever we want, what happens to sexual harassment and other "speaking limits"?
A lot of things have been happening, back to reading though. I'm going for Voltaire's Candide now, I should get it at the library tomorrow. After that I don't know maybe I'll finally finish the Divine Comedy or something. Who knows? I'll just choose whatever is available. I'm going to bed, peace.
Friday, July 08, 2005
London
Wow, these bombings in London are a scary sight. What's even scarier is this link: http://www.thesimon.com/magazine/articles/canon_fodder/0889_what_behind_london_attacks.html
Wow man, who would have thought? Our governments do this dirty work and hurt their own people and say "terrorists" did it. It's all a front for war, the article says Islamic radicals have no reason to attack England. They've already agreed to pull out their troops and that's good. With this guise of Islamic terrorism in London I hope people don't fall for it and have a blind hatred like we did after September 11th. Read the article and think about it, I can't f'ing believe that the government would do that. I guess this is the way God orchestrated it all to be if we're on a set path. It's all so interesting, I will love every moment when our government's corruption crumbles. God damn, it's so sad to see these kinds of people in power. There's this sense of rightousness in my heart to go out and become the president and end all of this, is that what I was destined to do? I'm unsure, but I have this feeling that I can make a difference. Or can I? It would be fun to see the world crumble, but then again it wouldn't be. I love this country and its history too much to see it crumble. My heart's been set on fire with a passion for Liberty, what do I do? That would be scary, to see myself up there trying to be a goody two-shoes. It's a responsibility and there are so few good people in the government. Is there such thing as destiny? Damn, I can actually see myself trying to be like that, helping people out and keeping out corruption. What's sad is, moments after I can see myself also being killed by those who are corrupt. It's a good reason to think twice about it and ask myself is it really for me? I've always said that I want to be remembered in history, ever since I was small. So should I? It's not instantaneous but Damn it's a scary thought. Questions, questions... I'll just keep myself occupied with books before I make that decision, good night.
Wow man, who would have thought? Our governments do this dirty work and hurt their own people and say "terrorists" did it. It's all a front for war, the article says Islamic radicals have no reason to attack England. They've already agreed to pull out their troops and that's good. With this guise of Islamic terrorism in London I hope people don't fall for it and have a blind hatred like we did after September 11th. Read the article and think about it, I can't f'ing believe that the government would do that. I guess this is the way God orchestrated it all to be if we're on a set path. It's all so interesting, I will love every moment when our government's corruption crumbles. God damn, it's so sad to see these kinds of people in power. There's this sense of rightousness in my heart to go out and become the president and end all of this, is that what I was destined to do? I'm unsure, but I have this feeling that I can make a difference. Or can I? It would be fun to see the world crumble, but then again it wouldn't be. I love this country and its history too much to see it crumble. My heart's been set on fire with a passion for Liberty, what do I do? That would be scary, to see myself up there trying to be a goody two-shoes. It's a responsibility and there are so few good people in the government. Is there such thing as destiny? Damn, I can actually see myself trying to be like that, helping people out and keeping out corruption. What's sad is, moments after I can see myself also being killed by those who are corrupt. It's a good reason to think twice about it and ask myself is it really for me? I've always said that I want to be remembered in history, ever since I was small. So should I? It's not instantaneous but Damn it's a scary thought. Questions, questions... I'll just keep myself occupied with books before I make that decision, good night.
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
The Communist Manifesto
Only a few minutes after my last post, but I had to finish this post before I would forget about it because: Don't do something tomorrow if you know it can be done today. This is going to be taken from Badnarik's book so I hope he doesn't mind(but it's copyrighted, so he will.) Anyways, I'll take it from the book:
"Do you recall the John Adams quote concerning property? It is: "The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence."
Clearly, if communists intend to abolish private property, they do not consider it "as sacred as the law of God." Without property, you have no rights. That is why communism is evil. A closer examination shows that the first plank describes what communism intends to do, and planks two through ten describe how they intend to do it.
Let's take a brief look at each plank. As you read, keep track of how many of these policies already exist in the United States. Keep a tally on a seperate sheet of paper, or put a check mark along side each paragraph that describes an agency or policy here in the land of the free.
The Communist Manifesto
1. Abolition of private property
America's war on drugs has prompted government agencies to establish asset forfeiture laws which allow the arresting agency to take all of the property belonging to someone suspected of being involved with drugs. Frequently, the arresting agency is acting on an anonymous phone call. The property is then sold at auction for a fraction of a cost, and the arresting agency keeps the money.
Whenever our government invokes eminent domain to take someone's property, they are demonstrating their lack of respect for private property, and acting just like any other communist regime.
2. Heavy progessive income tax
A progessive income tax means the mor emoney you make, the higher your percentage of tax. In the United States the IRS determines the perecentage of our progessive income tax. Those percentages are included as a table with the instructions with your 1040 form. If you make enough money, you may be lucky enough to fall in the 50 percent tax bracket. The strongest slaves are lucky enough to carry the heaviest rocks.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance
If your parents die without a will, the government may take half of everything your parents owned before you and your siblings are allowed to divide what's left. Even with a will the government can take a percentage. This prevents future generations within a family from accumulating a significant amount of wealth. What justifies this tax on dying?
4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels
Anyone who travels internationally must declare whether he or she is carrying more than $10,000 in money, stocks, or bank notes. Friends of mine who intend to relocate to New Zealand have been told they cannot take their money with them.
5. Central bank
The Federal Reserve Bank is a private company and not a part of the American government any more than Federal Express is a part of the U.S. Post Office. You can prove this for yourself by searching the blue government pages in the phone book. When you fail to find it there, try looking in the white business pages. When you control the printing of money, it doesn't matter who controls the government. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is completely, totally, and unquestionably unconstitutional.
6. Government control of communication and transportation
The Federal Communications Commission controls all radio and television signals in the United States. The Federal Aviation Administration, National Transportation Safety Board, and every state department of transportation and motor vehicles control every aspect of transportation in this country. You cannot travel, ship, or broadcast anywhere in the United States without getting government approval.
7. Government ownership of factories and agriculture
Government doesn't actually own factories, but it also has no business bailing out Chrysler and savings and loan associations when they get into financial trouble. The recent collapses of Enron and WorlCom have suggested innapropriate connections with the government. The U.S. Department of Agriculture controls and regulates nearly every aspect of the food chain, from farm to table.
8. Government control of labor
Innumerable government agencies within the United States regulate nearly every facet of every kind of business. Although there is no formal government agency that directly controls unions, they are strongly influenced by federal agencies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration(OSHA).
9. Coroporate farms, regional planning
In the not-too-distant past, most farms were owned by small families. Now they are owned by large corporations and merely leased to the original tenants.
Every large city in the United States has a regional planning office. Austin, Texas, has a Planning and Design Office, a Planning/Enviornmental and Conservation Services Department, and a Planning and Economic Development office. Check your phone book to find similar agencies where you live.
10. Government control of education
There is no point arguing wheter or not the government controls education in this country. The Democrats and Republicans are falling all over themselves to be the ones who control it best.
When the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare(HEW) was established in 1953, American students ranked number one the world in the fields of math and science. Students from every other country were eager to come to the United States to get a good education. Eventually the Department of Education became a seperate entity, but as of 2003 this country has experienced fifty years of government control of schools.
Statistics now rank American students as twenty-first in math and science. Our schools are now filled with children who can't read or write, and we spend ten times as much per sutdent as we did in 1953. Even if the Department of Education was constitutional, which it is not, it should still be eliminated for doing such a terrible job.
So what was your total? Eight? Nine? Ten? I have always held that if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is probably a duck, regardless what the crowd around me is calling it. If the United States is already practicing all ten of these communist principles, then we must be living in a communist country. Does that give you a warm, cozy feeling inside, or are you suddenly concerned about the people in Washington who have promised to protect your rights?"
Amazing book you really should buy it, Good to be King by Michael Badnarik. If you can't do that and you have a high-speed connection then you can just download his Constitution Class, which is basically the same thing at: http://www.archive.org/details/Michael_Badnarik. This is the kind of stuff you don't learn in our governmentally controlled schools, good job Gov' keep it up!...
"Do you recall the John Adams quote concerning property? It is: "The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence."
Clearly, if communists intend to abolish private property, they do not consider it "as sacred as the law of God." Without property, you have no rights. That is why communism is evil. A closer examination shows that the first plank describes what communism intends to do, and planks two through ten describe how they intend to do it.
Let's take a brief look at each plank. As you read, keep track of how many of these policies already exist in the United States. Keep a tally on a seperate sheet of paper, or put a check mark along side each paragraph that describes an agency or policy here in the land of the free.
The Communist Manifesto
1. Abolition of private property
America's war on drugs has prompted government agencies to establish asset forfeiture laws which allow the arresting agency to take all of the property belonging to someone suspected of being involved with drugs. Frequently, the arresting agency is acting on an anonymous phone call. The property is then sold at auction for a fraction of a cost, and the arresting agency keeps the money.
Whenever our government invokes eminent domain to take someone's property, they are demonstrating their lack of respect for private property, and acting just like any other communist regime.
2. Heavy progessive income tax
A progessive income tax means the mor emoney you make, the higher your percentage of tax. In the United States the IRS determines the perecentage of our progessive income tax. Those percentages are included as a table with the instructions with your 1040 form. If you make enough money, you may be lucky enough to fall in the 50 percent tax bracket. The strongest slaves are lucky enough to carry the heaviest rocks.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance
If your parents die without a will, the government may take half of everything your parents owned before you and your siblings are allowed to divide what's left. Even with a will the government can take a percentage. This prevents future generations within a family from accumulating a significant amount of wealth. What justifies this tax on dying?
4. Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels
Anyone who travels internationally must declare whether he or she is carrying more than $10,000 in money, stocks, or bank notes. Friends of mine who intend to relocate to New Zealand have been told they cannot take their money with them.
5. Central bank
The Federal Reserve Bank is a private company and not a part of the American government any more than Federal Express is a part of the U.S. Post Office. You can prove this for yourself by searching the blue government pages in the phone book. When you fail to find it there, try looking in the white business pages. When you control the printing of money, it doesn't matter who controls the government. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is completely, totally, and unquestionably unconstitutional.
6. Government control of communication and transportation
The Federal Communications Commission controls all radio and television signals in the United States. The Federal Aviation Administration, National Transportation Safety Board, and every state department of transportation and motor vehicles control every aspect of transportation in this country. You cannot travel, ship, or broadcast anywhere in the United States without getting government approval.
7. Government ownership of factories and agriculture
Government doesn't actually own factories, but it also has no business bailing out Chrysler and savings and loan associations when they get into financial trouble. The recent collapses of Enron and WorlCom have suggested innapropriate connections with the government. The U.S. Department of Agriculture controls and regulates nearly every aspect of the food chain, from farm to table.
8. Government control of labor
Innumerable government agencies within the United States regulate nearly every facet of every kind of business. Although there is no formal government agency that directly controls unions, they are strongly influenced by federal agencies such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration(OSHA).
9. Coroporate farms, regional planning
In the not-too-distant past, most farms were owned by small families. Now they are owned by large corporations and merely leased to the original tenants.
Every large city in the United States has a regional planning office. Austin, Texas, has a Planning and Design Office, a Planning/Enviornmental and Conservation Services Department, and a Planning and Economic Development office. Check your phone book to find similar agencies where you live.
10. Government control of education
There is no point arguing wheter or not the government controls education in this country. The Democrats and Republicans are falling all over themselves to be the ones who control it best.
When the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare(HEW) was established in 1953, American students ranked number one the world in the fields of math and science. Students from every other country were eager to come to the United States to get a good education. Eventually the Department of Education became a seperate entity, but as of 2003 this country has experienced fifty years of government control of schools.
Statistics now rank American students as twenty-first in math and science. Our schools are now filled with children who can't read or write, and we spend ten times as much per sutdent as we did in 1953. Even if the Department of Education was constitutional, which it is not, it should still be eliminated for doing such a terrible job.
So what was your total? Eight? Nine? Ten? I have always held that if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is probably a duck, regardless what the crowd around me is calling it. If the United States is already practicing all ten of these communist principles, then we must be living in a communist country. Does that give you a warm, cozy feeling inside, or are you suddenly concerned about the people in Washington who have promised to protect your rights?"
Amazing book you really should buy it, Good to be King by Michael Badnarik. If you can't do that and you have a high-speed connection then you can just download his Constitution Class, which is basically the same thing at: http://www.archive.org/details/Michael_Badnarik. This is the kind of stuff you don't learn in our governmentally controlled schools, good job Gov' keep it up!...
Guises and Sizes
"The earth's a prison--one can't get away
From it, whatever clothes one wears.
I'm still too young to lack desires,
Not young enough now for mere play.
What satisfaction can life hold?
Do without, do without! That old
Command pursues us down the years
Endlessly echoing in our ears--
The same old hoarse repeated song
Heard hour by hour our whole life long!
With each new dawn I wake aghast,
My eyes with bitter tears are filled
To think that when this day has passed
I'll not have had one single wish fulfilled,
That even my presentiments of joy
Will die of nagging scruples, and life's mess
Of trivial impediments destroy
My active soul's creativeness.
When the night falls, I seek my bed
With anxious fears, with many a sigh,
But find no peace: with sights of dread
Wild dreams torment me as I lie.
And though a god lives in my heart,
Though all my powers waken at his word,
Though he can move every inmost part--
Yet nothing in the outer world is stirred.
Thus by existence tortured and opressed
I crave for death, I long for rest."
Faust
I've finished my second book, Faust, and still crave for more. A damn good book, but what do you expect when the author took 30 years to write it? I put this quote here for a sort of feeling I have, the same feeling Faust had in that verse. It's probably wrong but I just feel I'll never be able to affect the world in any way that I've thought before, people just don't care. Whatever.
I've been thinking recently and want to show all an observation I've made. It's funny when people talk about making peace and love with each other, give out aid, be selfless, when there's mass approval or liking of songs and other things that involve killing others, selling drugs, raping women, pimp-slapping hoes, and whatever else fits here. Do people really believe the things they're saying? It's weird, but I'm like that and I don't. It's all an illusion to strike fear into other men's hearts, and for rappers to make an insane amount of cash. People are so bent on making sure they look intimidating and act violently. When I see a bunch of guys in a car looking at me while listening to loud rap music, I do feel a bit different. But what's the point? I'm sure those people are just like anyone else and love to have fun, drink, and revel like it's their last day alive. It's dumb, when people look scared you're self-esteem rises and it's like a cycle until you hit the climax of a brawl. Why does there have to be this violence and motley species of pompous assholes? Have fun, be friends with everyone and let everyone else do the same. I can visualize a place in my minds eye where we could drop our Lord of the Flies type of guise and be real. It'll take a lot of change in today's train of thought so it's bound to take a very long time, or something like Jesus' second coming...
My next book is in the library and I'll probably go tomorrow if I'm compelled enough, there's a quote from Faust that I can't find but I remember had something to do about that. It was like "If you at least take a few steps, you'll be compelled to complete the rest." I've done it to myself and proven it true. When you're done with a book, there's a really nice sense of accomplishment. When I read the last line and close the book, I take a look at it from the side and gaze wearily at the sublime feat accomplished. Instead of writhing like a worm and giving up and out, you build and "workout" your mind, just like you would the fiber cells of a bicep and grow to grand heights. If you stop "working out", both mind and a muscle can be bogged and dispersed. That's why a routine is the only thing it takes. Some people think you can take some pills, get huge, and stay that way without any real work. No it's a plan, not even that, it's a lifestyle. Understand that and you'll be successful at whatever you want. That's a great thing about being human, they have this ability to be good at anything all you need is the will. So basically you could carve a baby into anything you want, pro athlete, intellectual, saint, whatever. If they have the will it's almost a done deal. My will now is to read more and incorporate it into my lifestyle. Soon I'll also be doing that with weight lifting and my life will be a bit different, but for the better. I hate how the curse of laziness can affect a man's body, so I'll start out the way Goethe told me to: with one step.
peace
From it, whatever clothes one wears.
I'm still too young to lack desires,
Not young enough now for mere play.
What satisfaction can life hold?
Do without, do without! That old
Command pursues us down the years
Endlessly echoing in our ears--
The same old hoarse repeated song
Heard hour by hour our whole life long!
With each new dawn I wake aghast,
My eyes with bitter tears are filled
To think that when this day has passed
I'll not have had one single wish fulfilled,
That even my presentiments of joy
Will die of nagging scruples, and life's mess
Of trivial impediments destroy
My active soul's creativeness.
When the night falls, I seek my bed
With anxious fears, with many a sigh,
But find no peace: with sights of dread
Wild dreams torment me as I lie.
And though a god lives in my heart,
Though all my powers waken at his word,
Though he can move every inmost part--
Yet nothing in the outer world is stirred.
Thus by existence tortured and opressed
I crave for death, I long for rest."
Faust
I've finished my second book, Faust, and still crave for more. A damn good book, but what do you expect when the author took 30 years to write it? I put this quote here for a sort of feeling I have, the same feeling Faust had in that verse. It's probably wrong but I just feel I'll never be able to affect the world in any way that I've thought before, people just don't care. Whatever.
I've been thinking recently and want to show all an observation I've made. It's funny when people talk about making peace and love with each other, give out aid, be selfless, when there's mass approval or liking of songs and other things that involve killing others, selling drugs, raping women, pimp-slapping hoes, and whatever else fits here. Do people really believe the things they're saying? It's weird, but I'm like that and I don't. It's all an illusion to strike fear into other men's hearts, and for rappers to make an insane amount of cash. People are so bent on making sure they look intimidating and act violently. When I see a bunch of guys in a car looking at me while listening to loud rap music, I do feel a bit different. But what's the point? I'm sure those people are just like anyone else and love to have fun, drink, and revel like it's their last day alive. It's dumb, when people look scared you're self-esteem rises and it's like a cycle until you hit the climax of a brawl. Why does there have to be this violence and motley species of pompous assholes? Have fun, be friends with everyone and let everyone else do the same. I can visualize a place in my minds eye where we could drop our Lord of the Flies type of guise and be real. It'll take a lot of change in today's train of thought so it's bound to take a very long time, or something like Jesus' second coming...
My next book is in the library and I'll probably go tomorrow if I'm compelled enough, there's a quote from Faust that I can't find but I remember had something to do about that. It was like "If you at least take a few steps, you'll be compelled to complete the rest." I've done it to myself and proven it true. When you're done with a book, there's a really nice sense of accomplishment. When I read the last line and close the book, I take a look at it from the side and gaze wearily at the sublime feat accomplished. Instead of writhing like a worm and giving up and out, you build and "workout" your mind, just like you would the fiber cells of a bicep and grow to grand heights. If you stop "working out", both mind and a muscle can be bogged and dispersed. That's why a routine is the only thing it takes. Some people think you can take some pills, get huge, and stay that way without any real work. No it's a plan, not even that, it's a lifestyle. Understand that and you'll be successful at whatever you want. That's a great thing about being human, they have this ability to be good at anything all you need is the will. So basically you could carve a baby into anything you want, pro athlete, intellectual, saint, whatever. If they have the will it's almost a done deal. My will now is to read more and incorporate it into my lifestyle. Soon I'll also be doing that with weight lifting and my life will be a bit different, but for the better. I hate how the curse of laziness can affect a man's body, so I'll start out the way Goethe told me to: with one step.
peace
Thursday, June 23, 2005
Back to school
School's out and I've already begun reading. I finished reading Badnarik's Good To Be King after I got it yesterday. I only need to memorize the Bill of Rights and I should be done with that. It's almost 11:50 and I'm going to start reading Faust soon until 2 am, or should I? I don't know, it's hard. I thought reading would take more time but I'm surprised and it means something good: I'll probably be reading more than I expected. It's going to be interesting to see how effectively I can teach myself. I definitely need to enlarge my vocabulary, there's no worse feeling for me than not knowing how to express the way I feel. The end result I'm hoping to achieve is to, I guess, write better because that's all that really matters. I love writing, while I'm at it, I love everything. I have a natural sense of curiousity and I have a part of me that is attracted to knowledge, whatever it may be. Hard sciences, mathematics, religion, writing, every damn thing. In a few moments, the hands will strike at 12. Well that's my time. I'm going to leave you with this: "Even if the Department of Education was constitutional, which it isn't, it should be eliminated based on it's inefficiency." -- Michael Badnarik
Saturday, June 18, 2005
To: Paul
Here is a little reply to his comment on one of my previous articles: ""Absolutely no evidence in support of creationism? How would he know..."
So, present some. Evidence, I mean. You know, in favour of creationism. Just one piece. "
So here's some evidence "you know, in favour of creationism" Just it's not going to be one piece:
-The fact that they haven't found any "missing links". In short, the fossil record shows that living species emerged suddenly and perfectly formed, not by following a process from primitive forms to advanced ones as evolution claims.
-Probably the biggest hit: The CHANCE of even the SIMPLEST PROTEIN or CELL being formed is about 10 to the 950th power. If you don't understand let me put it in perspective: That's the same thing as finding a winning lottery ticket on the floor! Everyday, for 1000 years!!! That's just for the most simple building block of a being, so look at the numbers and think how much more impossible it is to create the great human being "by chance."
-The fact that they've found fossils of insects like ants and other species that are still the exact same as today's species.
-If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?
-It is obvious that mutations are solely a destructive mechanism. Pierre-Paul Grassé, former president of the French Academy of Sciences, is quite clear on this point in a comment he made about mutations. Grassé compared mutations to "making mistakes in the letters when copying a written text." And as with mutations, letter mistakes cannot give rise to any information, but merely damage such information as already exists. Grassé explained this fact in this way:
Mutations, in time, occur incoherently. They are not complementary to one another, nor are they cumulative in successive generations toward a given direction. They modify what preexists, but they do so in disorder, no matter how…. As soon as some disorder, even slight, appears in an organized being, sickness, then death follow. There is no possible compromise between the phenomenon of life and anarchy.24
So for that reason, as Grassé puts it, "No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."So for that reason, as Grassé puts it, "No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution. 24 Pierre-Paul Grassé, Evolution of Living Organisms, Academic Press, New York, 1977, p. 97, 98
-As we have seen, mutations are harmful to living things and no example of a beneficial mutation has ever been observed. The examples put forward by evolutionists as "beneficial mutations" all actually consist of distortions. In none of these examples have the benefits necessary for the evolution of an organism-that is, an increase in genetic information-ever come about. Let us now examine why the instances of "beneficial mutations" put forward by evolutionists are not actually useful at all, and cannot lead to evolution.
Sickle-Cell Anemia:
The only instance evolutionary biologists give of "useful mutation" is the disease known as sickle cell anemia. In this, the hemoglobin molecule, which serves to carry oxygen in the blood, is damaged as a result of mutation, and undergoes a structural change. As a result of this, the hemoglobin molecule's ability to carry oxygen is seriously impaired. People with sickle cell anemia suffer increasing respiratory difficulties for this reason. However, this example of mutation, which is discussed under blood disorders in medical textbooks, is strangely evaluated by some evolutionary biologists as a "useful mutation."
They say that the partial immunity to malaria by those with the illness is a "gift" of evolution. Using the same logic, one could say that, since people born with genetic leg paralysis are unable to walk and so are saved from being killed in traffic accidents, therefore genetic leg paralysis is a "useful genetic feature." This logic is clearly totally unfounded.
Bacterial resistance to antibiotics:
Another example of evolutionists' "beneficial mutations" is the resistance of bacteria to antibiotics. Like all the other examples, this one, too, is a deception. It is no secret that bacteria gradually develop a resistance to antibiotics over time. What happens is this: Most bacteria subjected to an antibiotic die, but some remain unaffected by it, and multiplying rapidly they come to comprise the entire population. In this way, the entire population comes to be immune to the antibiotic.
Evolutionists, however, claim that bacteria evolve according to the conditions in which they find themselves. The truth is, however, rather different. The Israeli biophysicist Professor Lee Spetner is one of the figures who have carried out the most detailed studies in this area. Professor Spetner explains how this resistance comes about by means of two separate mechanisms, neither of which makes any contribution to evolution. The two mechanisms in question are:
1) The transmission of already existing immunity genes in the bacteria and
2) The building of resistance as a result of losing genetic data because of mutation.
The first mechanism is no evidence for evolution:
In a 2001 article Professor Spetner describes the first mechanism in this way:
Some microorganisms are endowed with genes that grant resistance to these antibiotics. This resistance can take the form of degrading the antibiotic molecule or of ejecting it from the cell... [T]he organisms having these genes can transfer them to other bacteria making them resistant as well. Although the resistance mechanisms are specific to a particular antibiotic, most pathogenic bacteria have... succeeded in accumulating several sets of genes granting them resistance to a variety of antibiotics.12
This is no proof of evolution, as Professor Spetner describes:
The acquisition of antibiotic resistance in this manner... is not the kind that can serve as a prototype for the mutations needed to account for Evolution… The genetic changes that could illustrate the theory must not only add information to the bacterium's genome, they must add new information to the biocosm. The horizontal transfer of genes only spreads around genes that are already in some species.13
In other words, there is no evolution here because no new genetic information appears. All that happens is that genetic information that already exists is transferred among bacteria.
There is no instance of a mutation that "improves genetic information," and the immunity mechanisms in bacteria do not represent evidence for the theory of evolution. The basic process in evolution is just not possible.
-All mutations have proved to be harmful. The evolutionist scientist Warren Weaver comments on the report prepared by the Committee on Genetic Effects of Atomic Radiation, which had been formed to investigate mutations that might have been caused by the nuclear weapons used in the Second World War:
Many will be puzzled about the statement that practically all known mutant genes are harmful. For mutations are a necessary part of the process of evolution. How can a good effect-evolution to higher forms of life-result from mutations practically all of which are harmful?20
-Every effort put into "generating a useful mutation" has resulted in failure. For decades, evolutionists carried out many experiments to produce mutations in fruit flies, as these insects reproduce very rapidly and so mutations would show up quickly. Generation upon generation of these flies were mutated, yet no useful mutation was ever observed. The evolutionist geneticist Gordon Taylor writes thus:
It is a striking, but not much mentioned fact that, though geneticists have been breeding fruit-flies for sixty years or more in labs all round the world- flies which produce a new generation every eleven days-they have never yet seen the emergence of a new species or even a new enzyme.21
-
The same holds true for man. All mutations that have been observed in human beings have had deleterious results. All mutations that take place in humans result in physical deformities, in infirmities such as mongolism, Down syndrome, albinism, dwarfism or cancer. Needless to say, a process that leaves people disabled or sick cannot be "an evolutionary mechanism"-evolution is supposed to produce forms that are better fitted to survive.
-A great problem for the theory of evolution by natural selection, is that it cannot enable new organs or traits to emerge in living things. Natural selection cannot develop a species' genetic data; therefore, it cannot be used to account for the emergence of new species. The greatest defender of the theory of punctuated equilibrium, Stephen Jay Gould, refers to this impasse of natural selection as follows;
The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well.17
Another of the misleading methods that evolutionists employ on the issue of natural selection is their effort to present this mechanism as an intelligent designer. However,natural selection has no intelligence. It does not possess a will that can decide what is good and what is bad for living things. As a result, natural selection cannot explain biological systems and organs that possess the feature of "irreducible complexity". These systems and organs are composed of a great number of parts cooperating together, and are of no use if even one of these parts is missing or defective. (For example, the human eye does not function unless it exists with all its components intact).
Therefore, the will that brings all these parts together should be able to foresee the future and aim directly at the advantage that is to be acquired at the final stage. Since natural selection has no consciousness or will, it can do no such thing. This fact, which demolishes the foundations of the theory of evolution, also worried Darwin, who wrote: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
-Here is a small list of methods Darwinists use to persuade people to their side. I'll bet you've fallen to them by one of these methods namely, the second one:
Method # 1. They depict evolutionist scientists as very learned, superhuman individuals
Method # 2. Those who accept the theory of evolution are presented as respected scientists; those who do not accept it are branded as conservatives
Method # 3: They try to influence people by using scientific terms and concepts that laymen cannot understand
Method # 4: In order not to break the spell of Darwinism, they themselves do not read, nor do they want their followers to read anything that criticizes them
Method # 5: They pass over questions about evidence for the collapse of the theory of evolution with dismissive responses and later, give the impression that they answered them
Method # 6: Darwinists resort to every kind of rhetorical device toget people under their influence
Method # 7: They try to prove evolution on the evidence of irrelevant topics and discoveries
-In the end after some evidence is presented and people still don't want to believe it is because they are bigots. There is a chance they have a great skepticism for God as well, I wouldn't blame them
because I also don't like the Bible. It's been revised so many times by different sects that the actual meaning is distorted and the book has many inconsistencies. I don't mind if anyone is a Catholic or
what not, but I believe the Qu'ran is the most consistent piece of writing people should read. The problem is, they don't because they feel weird thinking about Arabs and have probably been
taught their whole life not to believe our "nonsense." I say, read what I have and learn. Ask what you want, but if you still don't believe what I say, I'll just say "so be it" and leave you alone.
I just say that because in the Qu'ran it says that you can't convert all people, if he really wanted everyone to believe in Him he would have. That's why this life is just a "test" I hope for your sake
you believe what I have to say. Life is too complex and beautiful in every way to be here by chance. So for any questions, go ahead and ask away.
So, present some. Evidence, I mean. You know, in favour of creationism. Just one piece. "
So here's some evidence "you know, in favour of creationism" Just it's not going to be one piece:
-The fact that they haven't found any "missing links". In short, the fossil record shows that living species emerged suddenly and perfectly formed, not by following a process from primitive forms to advanced ones as evolution claims.
-Probably the biggest hit: The CHANCE of even the SIMPLEST PROTEIN or CELL being formed is about 10 to the 950th power. If you don't understand let me put it in perspective: That's the same thing as finding a winning lottery ticket on the floor! Everyday, for 1000 years!!! That's just for the most simple building block of a being, so look at the numbers and think how much more impossible it is to create the great human being "by chance."
-The fact that they've found fossils of insects like ants and other species that are still the exact same as today's species.
-If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?
-It is obvious that mutations are solely a destructive mechanism. Pierre-Paul Grassé, former president of the French Academy of Sciences, is quite clear on this point in a comment he made about mutations. Grassé compared mutations to "making mistakes in the letters when copying a written text." And as with mutations, letter mistakes cannot give rise to any information, but merely damage such information as already exists. Grassé explained this fact in this way:
Mutations, in time, occur incoherently. They are not complementary to one another, nor are they cumulative in successive generations toward a given direction. They modify what preexists, but they do so in disorder, no matter how…. As soon as some disorder, even slight, appears in an organized being, sickness, then death follow. There is no possible compromise between the phenomenon of life and anarchy.24
So for that reason, as Grassé puts it, "No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."So for that reason, as Grassé puts it, "No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution. 24 Pierre-Paul Grassé, Evolution of Living Organisms, Academic Press, New York, 1977, p. 97, 98
-As we have seen, mutations are harmful to living things and no example of a beneficial mutation has ever been observed. The examples put forward by evolutionists as "beneficial mutations" all actually consist of distortions. In none of these examples have the benefits necessary for the evolution of an organism-that is, an increase in genetic information-ever come about. Let us now examine why the instances of "beneficial mutations" put forward by evolutionists are not actually useful at all, and cannot lead to evolution.
Sickle-Cell Anemia:
The only instance evolutionary biologists give of "useful mutation" is the disease known as sickle cell anemia. In this, the hemoglobin molecule, which serves to carry oxygen in the blood, is damaged as a result of mutation, and undergoes a structural change. As a result of this, the hemoglobin molecule's ability to carry oxygen is seriously impaired. People with sickle cell anemia suffer increasing respiratory difficulties for this reason. However, this example of mutation, which is discussed under blood disorders in medical textbooks, is strangely evaluated by some evolutionary biologists as a "useful mutation."
They say that the partial immunity to malaria by those with the illness is a "gift" of evolution. Using the same logic, one could say that, since people born with genetic leg paralysis are unable to walk and so are saved from being killed in traffic accidents, therefore genetic leg paralysis is a "useful genetic feature." This logic is clearly totally unfounded.
Bacterial resistance to antibiotics:
Another example of evolutionists' "beneficial mutations" is the resistance of bacteria to antibiotics. Like all the other examples, this one, too, is a deception. It is no secret that bacteria gradually develop a resistance to antibiotics over time. What happens is this: Most bacteria subjected to an antibiotic die, but some remain unaffected by it, and multiplying rapidly they come to comprise the entire population. In this way, the entire population comes to be immune to the antibiotic.
Evolutionists, however, claim that bacteria evolve according to the conditions in which they find themselves. The truth is, however, rather different. The Israeli biophysicist Professor Lee Spetner is one of the figures who have carried out the most detailed studies in this area. Professor Spetner explains how this resistance comes about by means of two separate mechanisms, neither of which makes any contribution to evolution. The two mechanisms in question are:
1) The transmission of already existing immunity genes in the bacteria and
2) The building of resistance as a result of losing genetic data because of mutation.
The first mechanism is no evidence for evolution:
In a 2001 article Professor Spetner describes the first mechanism in this way:
Some microorganisms are endowed with genes that grant resistance to these antibiotics. This resistance can take the form of degrading the antibiotic molecule or of ejecting it from the cell... [T]he organisms having these genes can transfer them to other bacteria making them resistant as well. Although the resistance mechanisms are specific to a particular antibiotic, most pathogenic bacteria have... succeeded in accumulating several sets of genes granting them resistance to a variety of antibiotics.12
This is no proof of evolution, as Professor Spetner describes:
The acquisition of antibiotic resistance in this manner... is not the kind that can serve as a prototype for the mutations needed to account for Evolution… The genetic changes that could illustrate the theory must not only add information to the bacterium's genome, they must add new information to the biocosm. The horizontal transfer of genes only spreads around genes that are already in some species.13
In other words, there is no evolution here because no new genetic information appears. All that happens is that genetic information that already exists is transferred among bacteria.
There is no instance of a mutation that "improves genetic information," and the immunity mechanisms in bacteria do not represent evidence for the theory of evolution. The basic process in evolution is just not possible.
-All mutations have proved to be harmful. The evolutionist scientist Warren Weaver comments on the report prepared by the Committee on Genetic Effects of Atomic Radiation, which had been formed to investigate mutations that might have been caused by the nuclear weapons used in the Second World War:
Many will be puzzled about the statement that practically all known mutant genes are harmful. For mutations are a necessary part of the process of evolution. How can a good effect-evolution to higher forms of life-result from mutations practically all of which are harmful?20
-Every effort put into "generating a useful mutation" has resulted in failure. For decades, evolutionists carried out many experiments to produce mutations in fruit flies, as these insects reproduce very rapidly and so mutations would show up quickly. Generation upon generation of these flies were mutated, yet no useful mutation was ever observed. The evolutionist geneticist Gordon Taylor writes thus:
It is a striking, but not much mentioned fact that, though geneticists have been breeding fruit-flies for sixty years or more in labs all round the world- flies which produce a new generation every eleven days-they have never yet seen the emergence of a new species or even a new enzyme.21
-
The same holds true for man. All mutations that have been observed in human beings have had deleterious results. All mutations that take place in humans result in physical deformities, in infirmities such as mongolism, Down syndrome, albinism, dwarfism or cancer. Needless to say, a process that leaves people disabled or sick cannot be "an evolutionary mechanism"-evolution is supposed to produce forms that are better fitted to survive.
-A great problem for the theory of evolution by natural selection, is that it cannot enable new organs or traits to emerge in living things. Natural selection cannot develop a species' genetic data; therefore, it cannot be used to account for the emergence of new species. The greatest defender of the theory of punctuated equilibrium, Stephen Jay Gould, refers to this impasse of natural selection as follows;
The essence of Darwinism lies in a single phrase: natural selection is the creative force of evolutionary change. No one denies that selection will play a negative role in eliminating the unfit. Darwinian theories require that it create the fit as well.17
Another of the misleading methods that evolutionists employ on the issue of natural selection is their effort to present this mechanism as an intelligent designer. However,natural selection has no intelligence. It does not possess a will that can decide what is good and what is bad for living things. As a result, natural selection cannot explain biological systems and organs that possess the feature of "irreducible complexity". These systems and organs are composed of a great number of parts cooperating together, and are of no use if even one of these parts is missing or defective. (For example, the human eye does not function unless it exists with all its components intact).
Therefore, the will that brings all these parts together should be able to foresee the future and aim directly at the advantage that is to be acquired at the final stage. Since natural selection has no consciousness or will, it can do no such thing. This fact, which demolishes the foundations of the theory of evolution, also worried Darwin, who wrote: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."
-Here is a small list of methods Darwinists use to persuade people to their side. I'll bet you've fallen to them by one of these methods namely, the second one:
Method # 1. They depict evolutionist scientists as very learned, superhuman individuals
Method # 2. Those who accept the theory of evolution are presented as respected scientists; those who do not accept it are branded as conservatives
Method # 3: They try to influence people by using scientific terms and concepts that laymen cannot understand
Method # 4: In order not to break the spell of Darwinism, they themselves do not read, nor do they want their followers to read anything that criticizes them
Method # 5: They pass over questions about evidence for the collapse of the theory of evolution with dismissive responses and later, give the impression that they answered them
Method # 6: Darwinists resort to every kind of rhetorical device toget people under their influence
Method # 7: They try to prove evolution on the evidence of irrelevant topics and discoveries
-In the end after some evidence is presented and people still don't want to believe it is because they are bigots. There is a chance they have a great skepticism for God as well, I wouldn't blame them
because I also don't like the Bible. It's been revised so many times by different sects that the actual meaning is distorted and the book has many inconsistencies. I don't mind if anyone is a Catholic or
what not, but I believe the Qu'ran is the most consistent piece of writing people should read. The problem is, they don't because they feel weird thinking about Arabs and have probably been
taught their whole life not to believe our "nonsense." I say, read what I have and learn. Ask what you want, but if you still don't believe what I say, I'll just say "so be it" and leave you alone.
I just say that because in the Qu'ran it says that you can't convert all people, if he really wanted everyone to believe in Him he would have. That's why this life is just a "test" I hope for your sake
you believe what I have to say. Life is too complex and beautiful in every way to be here by chance. So for any questions, go ahead and ask away.
Friday, June 17, 2005
I'm back with some news: School is over on Tuesday. Now don't think that since it's summer I'll just be wasting time like most of the kids around here. Yea, in fact, I'll actually be reading. Why? I just want to. I'll also be studying a lot of other things like religion or law. I've already made a list of books to read, so here it is:
Dante - Inferno(Divine Comedy)
Vergil - Aeneid
Chaucer - Canterbury Tales
Homer - Iliad
Sophocles - Oedipus Rex
Voltaire - Candide
Milton - Paradise Lost
Hawthorne - Scarlett Letter
Goethe - Faust
Edgar Allen Poe - Selected Works
Thoreau - Walden
Hugo - Les Miserables
Beowulf
Badnarik - Good to be King
Damn, 14 books. I really hope I get to finish them all too, I probably will. I just wonder what I'll read after I'm done? Well, I know on rainy days I'll be here reading and probably updating my Blog for whoever's reading. In the end, I just want to learn a lot from these books and start by myself in my own personal renaissance.
I have three more final exams: Chemistry, English, and Latin. I'll be out of school by Tuesday, didn't I already say that? Yeah, I did. Well Anyways, it's Friday and like many other weekends before: I'm at home. I might as well read or do some homework. I guess I'm not the kind of kid people want to be around, I don't care, I've got the Internet and that's all that matters...
Dante - Inferno(Divine Comedy)
Vergil - Aeneid
Chaucer - Canterbury Tales
Homer - Iliad
Sophocles - Oedipus Rex
Voltaire - Candide
Milton - Paradise Lost
Hawthorne - Scarlett Letter
Goethe - Faust
Edgar Allen Poe - Selected Works
Thoreau - Walden
Hugo - Les Miserables
Beowulf
Badnarik - Good to be King
Damn, 14 books. I really hope I get to finish them all too, I probably will. I just wonder what I'll read after I'm done? Well, I know on rainy days I'll be here reading and probably updating my Blog for whoever's reading. In the end, I just want to learn a lot from these books and start by myself in my own personal renaissance.
I have three more final exams: Chemistry, English, and Latin. I'll be out of school by Tuesday, didn't I already say that? Yeah, I did. Well Anyways, it's Friday and like many other weekends before: I'm at home. I might as well read or do some homework. I guess I'm not the kind of kid people want to be around, I don't care, I've got the Internet and that's all that matters...
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Just another update
"QUOTE (Golden Arrowhead @ Jun 5 2005, 08:09 AM) It would be foolish to think we know the whole truth about anything, we're always learning new things about the universe. That said, I have no doubt at all that the theory of evolution is closer to the truth than creationism. Haven't checked the video yet but I really doubt it would change my opinion. Yeah there's gaps and inconsistencies in our understanding of evolution, but there is a lot of evidence in support of the general concept of evolution, and no evidence at all in support of creationism, unless you consider a simple-minded literalistic reading of a many-times-translated-and-mistranslated religious text to be "evidence"."
http://www.nwcreation.net/videos/a_question_of_origins.html
Check out the video, it changes lives! I can't stress how much ignorance is dumb, so if you don't already believe in creationism check out the video. It has enough of the facts to tell you, "told ya so!"
"Yeah there's gaps and inconsistencies in our understanding of evolution, but there is a lot of evidence in support of the general concept of evolution, and no evidence at all in support of creationism" Absolutely no evidence in support of creationism? How would he know... God's universe is flawless and VERY complex. I've talked about it before in past posts and I just know sooner or later this ignorance will diminish.
It's interesting to still see how no one considers the Qu'ran, only the Bible is what they're taught: "many-times-translated-and-mistranslated religious text to be "evidence"."" That's the only reason I don't really like the Bible, but some idea's they have are similar to ours so I don't really mind. I cant hate them for it, that would be dumb. Still, it's sad to see that no one knows what our Book talks about.
I've made a list of what I'm going to read this summer, and after that I'll figure out how to write a sort of book. Too big a goal? No, I don't think so. I'll improve my writing and revise my book as much as I can. Don't know what else to say, it's the afternoon and this isn't half as deep as it could be so I'll write again later.
http://www.nwcreation.net/videos/a_question_of_origins.html
Check out the video, it changes lives! I can't stress how much ignorance is dumb, so if you don't already believe in creationism check out the video. It has enough of the facts to tell you, "told ya so!"
"Yeah there's gaps and inconsistencies in our understanding of evolution, but there is a lot of evidence in support of the general concept of evolution, and no evidence at all in support of creationism" Absolutely no evidence in support of creationism? How would he know... God's universe is flawless and VERY complex. I've talked about it before in past posts and I just know sooner or later this ignorance will diminish.
It's interesting to still see how no one considers the Qu'ran, only the Bible is what they're taught: "many-times-translated-and-mistranslated religious text to be "evidence"."" That's the only reason I don't really like the Bible, but some idea's they have are similar to ours so I don't really mind. I cant hate them for it, that would be dumb. Still, it's sad to see that no one knows what our Book talks about.
I've made a list of what I'm going to read this summer, and after that I'll figure out how to write a sort of book. Too big a goal? No, I don't think so. I'll improve my writing and revise my book as much as I can. Don't know what else to say, it's the afternoon and this isn't half as deep as it could be so I'll write again later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)