This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
What do I mean by miscellaneous? Miscellaneous is a collection of commentaries on various issues whether political, social, economic, religious, scientific or otherwise. I like to describe issues in a thorough fashion. Living in the 21st century is a great blessing since there is a high level of truth being spread around, yet there is that responsibility to be accurate, to be precise, and to be mentally firm in developing our own personal identities. There is nothing wrong nor strange about expressing an unique personality. It‘s strange to witness the unfair bigotry in the world though. That is all the more reason to use our voice, our influence, and our strength to not only stand up for ourselves, but stand up in assisting toward our fellow human beings. Doing these deeds don’t manifest in token talk, it amounts in promoting human survival. For
cooperation and true tolerance can never be manifested unless there is a persistence of a world where all people irrespective of their standing in life exist with honorable, unalienable rights that our forefathers & foremothers bled and died for. The truth surely never dies, yet ineptitude & evil always crumble in the end.
It's been a hot summer and the truth hasn't cooled off though. Fall is transpiring very soon. Events swirl around in this day and age. This is a highly technological world and many people are waking up as information fluidly advance. It can be good thing to embrace real technologies. Technology ought not to be manipulated to advance nepotism either. The WikiLeaks scandal and other cultural changes in the world are interesting developments. Yet, the same goals of liberty, and
equality are still fixed here (that we should all share and promote). The BP disaster is still going on with the well being filled with concrete. The media says that all U.S. combat troops are out of Iraq. Yet, military bases are still in Iraq that are controlled by the U.S. Although, it is fine to allow troops from brigades to come home. John McCain is easily a political shill today. He's apart of the CFR or the Council on Foreign Relations. Now, John McCain introduced 2 bills in the Senate. They are Machiavellian. One is S.3081. It will authorize the federal government to detain American citizens indefinitely without a trial. S.3002 is a bill that would authorize the federal government to regulate vitamins, minerals, and virtually all health plus natural food products. According to Examiner.com, “John McCain introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate which, if passed, would actually allow U.S. citizens to be arrested and detained indefinitely, all without Miranda rights or ever being charged with a crime.” The Examiner reports says that the bill isn't conservative at all. It would take away our right to trial. It would allow the federal government to arrest and imprison anyone the current administration deems "hostile." Recently, the DHS called veterans, retired law enforcement, Ron Paul & Chuck Baldwin supporters, and conservatives as equivalent to terrorists. McCain has issues with promoting our Constitution. People have the right to a speedy trial by jury and the constitutional right to habeas corpus. Not one of these rights should be invalidated under the names of national security and the war on terrorism. On February 3, 2010, John McCain introduced to the United States Senate the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. This act compares supplements to radioactive enriched uranium. Vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and botanicals can help people. The Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010 has supporters from many liberals in Congress. It allows the FDA to have broad new powers that Europe has. It approved supplements that the government allows. There is nothing wrong with legitimate oversight, but not equating vitamins to poisons. McCain wants a tougher global warming treaty. He claims to be for economic populism, but he won't condemn derivatives. McCain told the Hoover Institute in May 1, 2007 that if he were President, he would created the international organization of the LD or the League of Democracies. In advancing the LD, McCain said, “We should go further and start bringing democratic peoples and nations from around the world into one common organization, a worldwide League of Democracies.” He then added, “The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order . . .” The LD would be similar to the U.N. McCain is trying to play both sides of the immigration issue like Lindsey Graham. So, McCain is promoting policies that are against the constitutional freedoms and liberties that people respect and love. Iran is desperate in trying to make accommodations to prevent a war in that nation. Iran is offering America chance to build nuclear power plants. The Obama administration probably won't take Iran on its offer. Iran doesn't benefit if it uses nuclear technology for military uses, but the neo cons still want to invade Iran. The Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast said that Iran is ready to cooperate with any nation (even America) in building nuclear power plants in Iran. This has been exposed in Press TV. He want these facilities to incorporate high standards. This can cause more competition among different countries according to Ramin. These economic projects are not convincing among some who want a reckless attack in Iran. In May of 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dismissed an offer made by Iran to swap some of its enriched uranium for reactor fuel. Clinton said that the Iranian offer (this was an attempt to prevent the bombing of Iran) was just a transparent ploy to avoid a fresh round of U.N. Security Council sanctions on Iran. The swap offer was negotiated by Brazil and Turkey, which are opposed to new U.N. sanctions on Iran.
Iran has not dabbled in a nuclear weapons program since 2003 and according to a U.S. intelligence report issued in 2007 is not likely to be able to produce enough enriched uranium for a bomb until 2010 to 2015. Some in Israel and America don't care about the facts. Some of them want Iran to not develop nuclear technology, but create a pretext of war in Iran. The neo cons expressed their intensions of doing this before even 9/11. This is similar to Hitler's Mein Kampf. This PNAC document have proposed the war in Iraq and the Iraqi war killed over 1 million people. This document says that: "...Over the long term, Iran may well prove
as large a threat to U.S. interests in the [Persian] Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region,” the neocons stated in Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century, dated September, 2000. Republicans and Democrats support the pro-neo AIPAC group as well. AIPAC and its allies promote the deception that Iran wants to create a nuclear bomb to attack Israel. That would be a death wish on the Iranian nation if they attempt to do this. The Bush era neocons and some in Congress realize that Iran can't build a nuclear weapon now. Iran isn't going to preemptively attack Israel even with conventional weapons. Iran isn't run by nihilistic or those with a death wish. Some believe that Israel and America will attack Iran (for the reason of making it a puppet state of the West). Iraq was leveled, it civil infrastructure was harmed, etc. Its population is now witnessing disease, malnutrition, and cancer created by depleted uranium. That is why the Pentagon under Bush targeted Iraq's water and sanitation system. That is why hospitals and schools were targeted when they aren't a military threat. So, if Iran is bombed, civilian places will be targeted not just military locations. The criminal neo cons want Iran to be harmed. Both Republicans and Democrats are talking about invasion in a bi-partisan affair.
Some believe that Google wants to takeover the Internet to make it malleable for its own ends. There is the net neutrality ending deal with Verison going on. The Internet should be free and open. People shouldn't control the Internet under the elite and force independent media websites, radio, and TV shows to cease to exist permanently. Verizon made an agreement with Verizon to speed certain Internet content to users. This opens the door to the complete sterilization of the net as a force for political change. Google's plan according to its critics is to make the Internet seem like cable TV. This is where independent voices will be silenced and the entire Internet will be brought up by transnational media giants. People who want to run a simple blog will be priced out of existence online TV, and radio show will cease to exist as the Internet is slowly being swallowed up by the corporate borg. True net neutrality deals with independent news outlets who attract an audience (by telling that the truth can compete with corporate giants like ABC, CBS, and CNN). The Google/Verizon pact will end that level playing field and in turn eliminate everything that is outside of the mainstream. “A non-neutral Internet means that companies like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon and Google can turn the Net into cable TV and pick winners and losers online,” writes Josh Silver. Silver said that ending net neutrality will make the net act like a limited accessible information superhighway. Content will be shifted away from the handful of massive media corporations that currently control the television and radio dial. That Internet will cause people to pay money to get in on it. It's like a cyber toll road. The pact gives Google and huge ISPs the power to block certain websites on wireless networks. Some have concerns that this can set the stage for the CIA back Total Information awareness program to monitor Twitter accounts, blogs, and websites (plus other websites left by individual users) aiming to use the data to predict the future including controlling the behavior plus lives of people. Google CEO Eric Schmidt in conjunction with the CIA is trying to be the ultimate Big Brother clique that will: "...will know so much about its users that the search engine will be able to help them plan their lives” by constantly tracking their
location via smart phones and telling them where to go and what to do. Google have long lines with government spy networks. Google is one of the corporations that work with the government to promote the cyber security agenda that wants to limit the free Internet. Google have worked with the NSA and the CIA. There has been the recent scandal of the company's street view roaming vehicles accessing the wi-fi details of internet users. They are mapping their online activities and have raised serious questions over intelligence links and abuse of privacy laws. The free Internet shouldn't end and we should fight for it. Charles de Gaulle is one of the most well known historical figure in the 20th century and world history. Sarkozy is no de Gaulle. Human civilization and human progress are important to maintain. The views of Charles de Gaulle rescued France from disaster twice. More than 70 years ago in June 18, 1940, de Gaulle wanted the French to resist Nazi occupation and to continue their struggle in WWII. He founded the anti-fascist Free French Movement. He was courageous in rallying he French nation to defeat fascism. De Gaulle was a great statesman. He was the prime minister of the Fourth Republic in May of 1958. He defeated a number of planned coup d'etats. In the early 1960's, he survived various coups organized by military forces and subversives. These people didn't like his elimination of colonialism of Algeria. De Gaulle gave a speech in Phnom Penh in Cambodia during 1965 in opposition to the pro-war policies of the Johnson administration. He provided alternatives to situations like promoting Middle Eastern peace, wanting the independence of Quebec, having nuclear deterrence, etc. He was a French nationalist and was patriotic. He was beyond the left/right paradigm. He was socially conservative and economically progressive. Charles de Gaulle wanted Mexico and Latin America to have productive situations beyond American or Soviet control. The state can be used to modernize society. Of course, Charles de Gaulle was a dirigist. This philosophy was popularized by French Finance Minister from 1665–1683 under Louis XIV, and known as one of the founding fathers of modern protectionism and mercantilism, inspiring Alexander Hamilton. Colbert built the Canal du Midi to link the Mediterranean with the Atlantic in what was one of the greatest works of civil engineering in the world up to that time. de Gaulle had his brand of dirgism. de Gaulle wanted private-public projects for the immediate future to modernize French society. He wanted the French people to have a voice in finding solutions. This isn't the monetarist and neo-liberal economic thinking from the Chicago or Austrian schools. de Gaulle would never accept financial speculation, derivatives, etc. He cracked down on speculators. One example is that some French financial interests went into Monaco in the French Riviera (to have gambling, hot money, and organized crime. It was a French protectorate or apart of France). Prince Rainier refused to crack down on flight capital. De Gaulle increased postage rate on letters coming out of the principality, and later ringed the borders of the enclave with French gendarmes and tax collectors. French security forced blocked the roads going in and out of the principality. Rainier capitulated and didn't hoard wealth, create flight capital, and have tax evasion. Charles de Gaulle accurately pointed out that the state shouldn't place people in a yoke, but harness its progress. It handles national policy and infrastructure, but it inspires private industry to have research too. His dirgism worked wonders for France. It has a great aerospace system, it has great trains and roads, and its electrical power grid is
These policies relate to the New Deal and the New Frontier of the late President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. De Gaulle wanted nationalism, but he believed that nations worldwide should help each other out to benefit human civilization in general. Today, the reactionary and Austrian-libertarian opinion are very strong here in America to promote the lie that the government can't do anything right apart from the military. For these deceivers, the government can never be reformed at all. The Left gatekeeping extremists deny much of the need for human civilization improvement. They legitimately expose genocide, slavery, and oppression as evils, but ignore many unsung heroes in the West that tried to fight against these injustices on many times. The Right Gatekeepers ignore the pro-slavery views of Adam Smith and the extremist views of von Mises then expect us to support monetarism (& the
war on terror). That’s silly to me. We should follow some of de Gaulle's example of national power, but international tolerance to achieve a better world. This doesn’t de Gaulle was perfect when he failed to adequately deal with the demands of workers in the May 1968 strike in France. Some people want a totally socialist solution to economic problems and others want the status quo (or a corporate based or Austrian economic plan that definitely don‘t work historically). In America, you have millions of square miles, you have urban and rural communities, and you have tons of infrastructure. Total government control over every aspect of our lives or no government whatsoever in our lives isn‘t going to solve our issues. Maybe, the solution aren’t both extremes. Maybe the solution is to have safeguards, have individual liberty, and have public plus private instruments to solve our problems (instead of an one size fits all plan). Individual and collective efforts are purely necessary to improve our society. These safeguards are having clean drinking water, having labeling of food supplies, having medical insurance, having quality air standards, seat belts, food safety standards, and even promoting an affordable public transportation system. These policies aren’t extremist as some reactionaries believe. It’s just plain commonsense. So, if you think that you‘re a self made man or woman and you didn‘t rely on no public or private services, you‘re kidding yourself. People have to be wise to the game. One thing is for certain that people from across the political spectrum adhere to. We don’t want the international banksters to dictate and control our financial systems at all. Evil austerity measures are evil, corporateinstituted programs (that threaten our savings, our jobs, and our other resources) and that’s easy to witness.
There is a debate about Greenbackers and gold bugs. We all agree that the Federal Reserve should be extinct. I'm more titled to the Greenbackers economically. There has been a debasement of the dollar. Some believe that the FED may end its reign according to Black Swan author Nassim Taleb plus others. Now, it's time for more solutions to America's currency. This is an important issue. I don't believe in a global currency. The elite via the Federal Reserve (along with other foreign private central banks and the IMF) have had plans for a global currency. This isn't conspiracy fiction. The IMF pushed for the Bancor global currency as exposed by Lew Rockwell (even though I don't agree with him on every issue). There is a recent international currency war. Some want to use this to create some currency for international trade. The elite want more centralized control. There is the currency debate in America. Some want a Greenback approach and other wants the Gold Standard approach. The Gold standard lover Gary North (who wrote "Honest Money") use many false accusations against Ellen Brown. Ellen Brown is a Greenbackers and wrote her book called "Web of Debt." North used sample in her book to compare her agenda to Hitler since she believes in a public bank. North is a liar of course since it was Hitler that hated unions, hated gun rights, and hated civil liberties. North claimed that the
Greenback movement is fringe. Regardless of what the lies of Gary North claims (who is a Dominionist I might add), the Constitution allows money to be executed by Congress. Anthony Michgel rebutted North. Interest bearing gold currency alone don't work. The banking elite have always promoted a gold currency and it didn't work since gold can be volatile in its price level. Interest free money (that's printed debt free by the government or via interest free credit via private organizations or by the State) is proven time after time again. The FED is a corrupt group. North is arrogant to assume that people in the liberty movement are ignorant of economics. Ellen Brown's public banking movement have worked in the state bank of North Dakota (It has the lowest unemployment and the only budget surplus of the United States). We oppose the FED since it's not even constitutional and it exists as a private monopoly (that rules our financial security). Fractional based money backed by gold can still have high debt. Big international bankers use interests in a profit motive privately to control nation and driven wars. However, the Constitution says nothing of allowing a fractional reserve gold standard run by private bankers which is promoted by some Goldbugs. Furthermore, some Constitutionalists still maintain the strange notion that the government should belong to the people. Therefore, if we were able to restore the Constitutional principle for a government of, by and for the people, it would seem that interest-free currency issued and controlled by our elected government would be considered more constitutional than the current system. Gold is a limited resource and people can hoard it. Congress can control banking since Congress is made up by and for the people. Goldbug extremists don't want fiat currencies, but don't see the motive behind the interest and supply manipulators. I certainly don't agree with a debt-based, private monopoly controlled, and fractional reserve lending system. I believe in a debt free economic system wherefore Congress controls the amount of currency in circulation. The physical economy has value. That is why we need to have back up food, clothing, shelter, weapons (to protect your family not only yourself), etc. (and be willing to help others if they need it. That's apart of God's commandment you know). Certain people don’t like these truths to be exposed publicly.
If you want changes in society, then you even have to deal and debate with people that hate you. The reason is that showing the truth isn’t always during the time when it’s convenient. We should promote the truth in season and out season (or when people want to hear it or when people don’t want to it to be reminded that true power lies not in unwise words, but by faith & loving deeds). If you want something legitimately, you need to go for it without hesitation.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.