Tag: education funding

‘Atlas Shrugged Part III’ Movie Review: The value of a gift–a scribble and a diamond

I have received many gifts from people over the years that were expensive, and well crafted.  However, some of the best gifts I have received came from children whose minds were just coming into their own and what they gave me was a scribble on a piece of paper that to them looked like a da Vinci painting.  To me it looked like scribbles but I saw within their gift all the hopes and dreams of their thoughts which have more meaning personally than a Rolex watch, or a new Mercedes car.  Society the world over may look at such scribbles and think them inferior to the diamonds, and other luxury items, but not me.  I’d rather have the childlike scribbles of ambition and innocence than the refinement of cultural creations.  And that is exactly how I felt walking out of the new film Atlas Shrugged Part III: Who is John Galt.   The film itself was far from technically perfect—the filmmakers themselves without the polished background of the greater Hollywood community are like children coming of age—but even their shortcomings garner superiority when compared to the standard product coming from the vast ocean of entertainment culture.  I’d rather see two or three movies per year like Atlas Shrugged Part III than twenty polished blockbusters lacking a heart and soul.

The third film in a series of three Who Is John Galt was a movie about values.  Based on the treasured novel Atlas Shrugged, it did a good job of Cliff-Noting through the most important topics of the American classic.  The famous John Galt speech from the novel to the movie was greatly condensed and enormously effective.  The sections of the movie containing the speech along with the scene between John Galt and Mr. Thompson was powerful.  Just a few weeks prior to the release of Who Is John Galt, I watched Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln and can declare that there was nothing in that great movie about the last days of the Lincoln presidency that eclipsed the value of John Galt being offered all the power of the world by Mr. Thompson and Galt laughing in his face saying, “nobody should have that kind of power.”  For me, it was the most powerful scene in the movie—one I would pay again and again to see—just for that one scene.  There is within that exchange between Thompson and Galt the keys to most modern problems and Galt has the answer delivered with excessive minimalism.  The movie shines most during this moment.

Regarding Galt, Kristoffer Polaha played one of the most iconic literary creations wonderfully. There hasn’t been a better character of such swagger and confidence since many of the old Clint Eastwood movies.  Polaha was wonderful in the role and the movie could have excelled if it could have featured him more prominently—but there were a lot of characters and a limited time to get to the point of the movie.  So Polaha had to share a lot of screen time.   Of those other characters, they were as portrayed in Atlantis, the hidden world deep in the Colorado Mountains unlike any other characters in cinema.  Leading up to the movie the previews for upcoming releases featured two Reese Witherspoon films and a Bill Murray picture that were politically and ideologically 180 degrees in the opposite direction as Atlas.  In those films the characters in the Gulch would have been the villains.  In Atlas Shrugged those characters are the heroes.  It was clear that the target demographic for the typical Hollywood product had no idea who the viewer for Atlas Shrugged Part III would be because it was evident in the previews before the film.  Another television series was previewed at the Regal Cinemas called The Affair—as if the ideal of illicit romance was conducive to the message of Atlas Shrugged Part III—which of course it wasn’t.    One actress from The Affair declared during the preview—“We are all just trying to get by,” as opposed to the message of Atlas III by John Galt, “The world you desire can be won.  It exists…it is real…it is possible…it is yours.”  The philosophy of Atlas III is unlike anything being put out by Hollywood in any capacity—so for many people it is a very foreign concept.

My wife and I went to see Atlas III with our kids at the Regal in Mason, and didn’t expect much by way of a crowd.  We arrived about 25 minutes early to get a good seat.  I was a bit shocked to see that the only seats available for the 8:10 PM showing were high up in the stadium seating, which is not where I normally like to sit.  By the time the movie started, the theater was nearly full.  It was very close to a sellout, which was very encouraging.  Several times during the movie people cheered.  At the end of the film the audience clapped.  It had been a long time since I have seen that occur at the end of a movie.  So in spite of the parade of bad reviews and complaints about the technical aspects of the film, the audience I saw the picture with loved it—and were hungry for the message.  Most of the audience was above 40 years of age, and most were couples—(a man and a wife.)  However, dotted among the male and female heads of the audience were a few intelligent looking college students bright-eyed and excited—as if they were on the edge of a wave in thought.  There was rebellion in their eyes as if by coming to the movie, they were participating in a dirty little secret that the rest of society wish to conceal—and they’d be right.  Those same snickers came from young people who used to see The Rocky Horror Picture Show in 1975 and routinely since attend the midnight showings which promotes homosexual relationships and transgender exploits.  The Rocky Horror film is a terrible monstrosity of a movie that is now considered mainstream.  Any critic of the quality of the Atlas films needs to think long and hard about talking low quality cinematography, editing, and acting but praising The Rocky Horror Picture Show.  They can’t have it both ways.  Refreshingly, Atlas Shrugged Part III did have a sex scene that was very PG.  As written in the novel, it could have been rated NC17, but under John Aglialoro’s production value, it was greatly scaled back to nearly a G rating.  The filmmakers wisely knew that their audience was conservative and did not want the uncomfortable distraction of gross sexual imposition which comes in droves at the Rocky Horror Picture Show screenings.  For today’s young people, Atlas Shrugged is the new rebellion—and that delights me to no end.  It’s about time!

I will see Atlas III many more times and will treasure it for it’s worth.  I see the Atlas films as difficult to make and attribute most of their technical challenges to pushing the philosophy of Objectivism up an extremely steep hill.  My experience tells me that the panic of Mr. Thompson at the end of the movie is true and that the few people flying away in the helicopter at the end was 100% accurate.  There are always only a few people who do everything and that is a terrifying message to the masses who hope and pray that Mr. Thompson’s view of the world can be true.  Atlas Shrugged Part III tells them that it isn’t—and it is in that utterance that the anger toward the film is shouted loudest.  Atlas III is a work and offering of love by filmmakers who are coming into their own with the best tools available to them, like children trying to prove to the adults of the entertainment world that they have something important to say too.  The adults look at their offerings and see a scribble which they laugh off and make fun of.  But for me, I’d rather have the scribble of the Atlas Shrugged film makers than the polished diamond of Hollywood with messages that are false and completely ignorant.  It is for that reason that going to see Atlas Shrugged Part III: Who is John Galt was more like a gift than an entertainment experience.  And it is one that I will proudly hang from my refrigerator like many of the fine art pieces that my kids have provided over the years on their progression toward expertise, to enjoy as a daily reminder of something that has value where others only see a scribble.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

11 Ways You Know You Live in a Country Run by Idiots: The sad truth of our modern age

 

There has been a lot of talk in the news lately about abused wives who stay with husbands who beat them—primarily due to the latest round of NFL domestic violence cases. The level of amazement persists from millions who wonder why gold digging women would stay with men who beat them routinely. But for the answer, all anyone need to do is look at themselves and wonder why they allow the same type of abuse when their government is doing the same on a larger scale. That abuse tends to be more psychological as opposed to physical, but it is still abuse and representative of a dysfunctional household. Below are 11 ways that you know you live in a country run by idiots prone to abuse. To continue to allow these idiots to have such power over the population is allow an abusive relationship to continue. Here they are:

1. If you can get arrested for hunting or fishing without a license, but not for being in the country illegally, you live in a country run by idiots.

2. If you have to get your parents’ permission to go on a field trip or take an aspirin in school, but not to get an abortion, you live in a country run by idiots.

3. If you have to show identification to board an airplane, cash a check, buy liquor or check out a library book, but not to vote on who runs the government, you live in a country run by idiots.

4. If the government wants to ban stable, law-abiding citizens from owning gun magazines with more than ten rounds, but gives 20 F-16 fighter jets to the crazy leaders in Egypt, you live in a country run by idiots.

5. If, in the largest city, you can buy two 16-ounce sodas, but not a 24-ounce soda because 24-ounces of a sugary drink might make you fat, you live in a country run by idiots.

6. If an 80-year-old woman can be stripped searched by the TSA but a woman in a hijab is only subject to having her neck and head searched, you live in a country run by idiots.

7. If your government believes that the best way to eradicate trillions of dollars of debt is to spend trillions more, you live in a country run by idiots.

8. If a seven-year old boy can be thrown out of grade school for saying his teacher’s “cute,” but hosting a sexual exploration or diversity class in grade school is perfectly acceptable, you live in a country run by idiots.

9. If hard work and success are met with higher taxes and more government intrusion, while not working is rewarded with EBT cards, WIC checks, Medicaid, subsidized housing and free cell phones, you live in a country run by idiots.

10. If the government’s plan for getting people back to work is to incentivize NOT working, with 99 weeks of unemployment checks and no requirement to prove they applied but can’t find work, you live in a country run by idiots.

11. If being stripped of the ability to defend yourself makes you more “safe” according to the government, you live in a country run by idiots.

There is no dispute in these assertions. Yet they continue and prosper—and the reason comes from the same people who point to the NFL and call for Rodger Goodell’s head for allowing domestic violence to occur from his players. The government is engaging in far worse abuses—yet we keep coming back time and time again. The reason is the same as the abused NFL wife—because people become comfortable even within abusive relationships as they function from low self-esteem—which a predator like the government will always take advantage of.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/10/glenn-beck-reads-11-ways-you-know-you-live-in-a-country-run-by-idiots/

 

Rich Hoffman  

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

“Winds of Change”: Some of the best, most relevant television ever produced

As I spoke yesterday about the importance that Joseph Campbell played in my personal education, one of the people who most helped the JCF get off the ground and become that resolute organization was George Lucas.   Of course he is  known for the Star Wars films and was the creator of Indiana Jones—but I think George’s best  work as a filmmaker was a little known television project that was shown on ABC by Bob Igor, today’s CEO of Disney way back in 1992 to 1996.  That project was called The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles and was considered “edutainment.”  Just prior to the release of the last Indiana Jones feature film, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Lucasfilm released all of the Young Indy television shows on DVD, which of course I snagged up the moment they were released.  I literally pulled them off the delivery truck at Best Buy.  The DVD set was released in three gigantic collections and feature what I think is some of the best television ever done—not just because I enjoy the Indiana Jones character, but because the production quality, and content of each of the shows was impeccable.  Lucas used the character of Indiana Jones to essentially tell the history of the start of the 20th century and it was a remarkable undertaking.  For instance—one of my favorite episodes is the one shown below in several parts.  It is called “Winds of Change” and is about the Treaty of Versailles and covers nothing less than the modern troubles in the Middle East, the cause of the Vietnam War, and the reason for World War II all in a one hour episode.  It is really quite brilliant and if you want your child to know anything about history—or you want to fill the gaps of your own understanding, this is a great place to start.  Because of the modern pertinence to the trouble in the Middle East, watch the “Winds of Change” now through the clips below.  If you enjoy it, consider picking up the entire DVD set. They are tremendous treasures.

The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles is an American television series that aired on ABC from March 4, 1992, to July 24, 1993. Filming took place in various locations around Wilmington, North Carolina and on the campus of UNCW. The series was an Amblin Entertainment/Lucasfilm production in association with Paramount Network Television.

The series explores the childhood and youth of the fictional character Indiana Jones and primarily stars Sean Patrick Flanery and Corey Carrier as the title character, with George Hall playing an elderly version of Jones for the bookends of most episodes, though Harrison Ford bookended one episode. The show was created and executively produced by George Lucas, who also created, co-wrote and executively produced the Indiana Jones feature films.

Most episodes of the series depicted famous and not-so-famous historical figures, for example T.E. Lawrence, Leo Tolstoy, Winston Churchill, Ernest Hemingway, Al Capone, Pablo Picasso, Frederick Selous and Mata Hari.

Notable guest stars (playing either fictional or historical characters) include: Catherine Zeta-Jones, Daniel Craig, Christopher Lee, Peter Firth, Vanessa Redgrave,Beata Pozniak, Jennifer Ehle, Elizabeth Hurley, Timothy Spall, Anne Heche, Jeffrey Wright, Jeroen Krabbé, Jason Flemyng, Michael Kitchen, Kevin McNally, Francisco Quinn, Ian McDiarmid, Max von Sydow, Douglas Henshall, Sean Pertwee, Terry Jones, Keith David, Lukas Haas, Jay Underwood, Michael Gough, Maria Charles, and Haluk Bilginer.

Due to its enormous budget, the series was canceled in 1993. However, following the series’ cancellation, four made-for-television films were produced from 1994 to 1996 in an attempt to continue the series. In 1999, the series was re-edited into 22 television films under the title The Adventures of Young Indiana Jones.

Between 1992 and 1997, the series was nominated for 27 Emmy Awards and won 12.[25] In 1993, Corey Carrier was nominated for the Young Artist Award in the category of “Best Young Actor Starring in a Television Series”. In 1994, David Tattersall was nominated for the ASC Award in the category of “Outstanding Achievement in Cinematography in Regular Series”. At the 1994 Golden Globes, the series was nominated for “Best TV-Series — Drama”.[26]

In 2002, series producer Rick McCallum confirmed in an interview with Variety that DVDs of the series were in development, but would not be released for “about three or four years”.[8] At the October 2005 press conference for the Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith DVD, McCallum explained that he expected the release to consist of 22 DVDs, which would include around 100 documentaries which would explore the real-life historical aspects that are fictionalized in the show. For the DVDs, Lucasfilm upgraded the picture quality of the original 16 mm prints and remastered the soundtracks. This, along with efforts to get best quality masters and bonus materials on the sets, delayed the release.[9] It was ultimately decided that the release would tie into the release of the fourth Indiana Jones feature film.

Two variations of Volume 1 were released by CBS DVD, one simply as “Volume One”, and the other as “Volume One — The Early Years” in order to match the subtitle of Volume 2.

The History Channel acquired television rights to all 94 of the DVD historical documentaries.[10][11] The airing of the documentaries was meant to bring in ratings for the History Channel and serve as marketing for the DVD release and the theatrical release ofIndiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.[12] The History Channel and History International began airing the series every Saturday morning at 7AM/6C on The History Channel, and every Sunday morning at 8AM ET/PT on History International. A new division of History.com was created devoted to the show. As Paramount and Lucasfilm had already reserved IndianaJones.com solely for news and updates related to Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, StarWars.com temporarily served as the official site for the DVDs—providing regular updates, insider looks and promotions related to them.[13] However, Lucasfilm and Paramount soon set up an official website proper for the series—YoungIndy.com.[14] Paramount released a press kit for the media promoting the DVDs, which consists of a .pdf file[15] and several videos with interviews with Lucas and McCallum, and footage from the DVDs.[16] A trailer for the DVDs was also published on YoungIndy.com, with a shorter version being shown on The History Channel and History International.

Lucas and McCallum hoped that the DVDs would be helpful to schools, as they believed the series was a good way to aid in teaching history. Lucas explained that the series’ DVD release will be shopped as “films for a modern day high school history class.”[17] He believes the series is a good way to teach high school students 20th Century history.[18] The plan was always to tie the DVD release of the series to the theatrical release of the fourth Indiana Jones feature film, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, which was released on May 22, 2008.[8][19][20][21]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Young_Indiana_Jones_Chronicles

After watching the Lawrence of Arabia recently I had to go back and watch the Young Indy episode “Winds of Change.”   It was after all through Young Indy that I was introduced to T.E. Lawrence who was a personal friend to Indiana Jones on the show.  Jones met T.E. Lawrence in Cairo at the pyramids when he was a very young child being homeschooled by a private tutor.  The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles is an answer to the education void found today.  The work has been done by producers like Lucas and is available for a relatively cheap price.  The series is television at its absolute best—it was entertaining, fun, but best of all—educational.  After watching all those episodes so many years ago, then again with my family when the DVDs hit the market once again with their 90 one hour long documentaries produced exclusively by Lucasfilm what is found is a phenomenal effort not even surpassed by the National Geographic Society or the Smithsonian.

Often I would read more about the characters in the Young Indy episodes after seeing them for the first time during the broadcasts and would marvel at how accurate the writers for the show were at capturing their historical significance with precision.  In the cynical world that we see today in most entertainment formats, do yourself a favor that will help directly in understanding the modern world—watch the DVDs of the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles with your family and learn together about history.  Because I can’t think of a better way to tell about the events that have shaped our lives better than through the character of Indiana Jones as he become the kind of action hero so well known to motion pictures presently.  The character became the kind of person he was due to his vast education with the most significant figures of the past who shaped the world for good and bad—but none-the-less—shaped it all the same.

If you care about the education of your family, click the link below to start an unforgettable journey.

http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Young-Indiana-Jones-Volume/dp/B000VDDDVE

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

How Presidents help “Hammer the Sky”: 2014 WEBN Fireworks make an impact

I am certainly not one of those people who look back into the past and declare that those were the best days of my life.  I enjoy every day as much as possible and can typically dig fun out of a dry rock. However, I felt the enthusiasm clearly at this year’s WEBN 2014 fireworks when for the first time they produced a soundtrack to the show that was exclusively dedicated to the optimistic music of the 1980’s.  Every generation believes that their music was the best—but this is in belief only.  The explosion of fresh music that followed the dog days of communism, socialism—Watergate and Jimmy Carter were an unbelievable period of American optimism established by the former movie actor and GE spokesman for capitalism—Ronald Reagan.  Reagan told America that capitalism was alright, so the guilt of the past that hangs over the heads of typical Democrats was thrown off and this attitude was reflected in the art produced by American society during the period of the so-called 80s.  I should know, because I came to age during the 80’s and they were a unique period of unmitigated optimism and American success.  Those who have come to age since, or before have not had such an opportunity as those who saw America as young uncorrupted teenagers during the 1980’s.  I am very much a product of that time when WEBN put together their soundtrack featuring a range of music from E.T., Ghostbusters, and Rocky III to Motley Crue’s “Kickstart My Heart.”  The Ohio River between Newport, Kentucky and Cincinnati, Ohio was absolutely rocking by hammering the sky with fireworks to an incredible soundtrack.

Even young people who are teenagers now were dancing openly to the songs as the crowd roared with an unmitigated lack of constraint while fireworks filled the air closing out a summer that I won’t soon forget.   There didn’t appear to be a lax soul among the half million viewers as the music poured from virtually everywhere.  The riverside condos and boats filling the river contained people in my age group who had thrown off their constraints and let the music overtake them leaving the question to be answered—what happened to that kind of optimism in our art?

Even for a product of the 80’s which was pretty hard-core American—I was a radicalized example.  I didn’t drink or smoke anything and I was never what anybody would term a “partier” but the soundtrack from WEBN sounded like it came directly off my mix tape from that age stolen from an old car that still sits in my garage.  I was an unmitigated reckless individual and unapologetic capitalist during the 1980’s.  I remember like it was yesterday storming through the streets of Hamilton racing a rival from the West Side across the Great Miami River with a parade of cop cars behind us—my radio blaring Quiet Riot’s “Bang Your Head.”  I passed the courthouse at over 100 MPH and won the race by beating a train the old-fashioned way—barely scooting in front of it while the other guy just a bit behind me threw on the brakes.  Miles to the east all the cops finally caught up to me as every Butler County police officer in the area was radioed to my location.  Pulled over with my Confederate Flag license plates and tires still smelling like burnt rubber and guns trained on me as I tossed my drivers licenses across the hood of my car, I felt no fear.  The cops knowing me from other antics and tired of my court appearances were not sure what to do with me until I called in a favor from one of the police car’s primitive cell phone to a judge who supported me from Sharonville.  That judge talked the cops away from prosecution for maybe the fifth time in a two month period.

I have thought often of writing a series of stories from that period as I lived it gloriously.  The closest I’ve come was my novel Tail of the Dragon—but those weren’t the best days of my life.  They appeared to be for the American nation.  I knew at the time what I was doing and the rest of the nation appeared to be riding along joyously.  Back in the 80’s our military used to play some of those songs to terrify our enemies in Russia, El Salvador and Cuba.  Capitalism was on full display and Americans during that decade from 1980 to 1990 didn’t feel guilty about it. This gave filmmakers and music producers an open template for creation—which is what I think is behind the joy of hearing that music to this day.  It is why many young people love those old songs even though they were not born until two decades later.

George Bush senior started the downward trend which accelerated under Bill Clinton as president by letting America feel less than exceptional on the world stage.  Both men were globalists and the arts in America took shape around their national outlook—unfortunately.  The situation became much worse under George W. Bush and eventually the communist leaning Barack Obama.  American culture has declined proportionally since and young people are aware of it.  Much thought isn’t given to these kinds of things until the music is put on from that period in such a mass gathering like what happened at the 2014 fireworks display—and the restraints come off—intellectually.

Most people thought I would be dead before I hit my 17th birthday.  The grim reaper was often trailing me everywhere I went.  I remember another story from the time when I had to drop off a friend to his West Chester home and we were in downtown Cincinnati during the summer of 1985.  He had strict parents who demanded he be home before his curfew.  I dropped him off with 30 seconds to spare after leaving the St. Bernard area with just 10 minutes to spare.  It was one of the fastest times I had ever driven dodging in and out of traffic at such a pace that I was moving sometimes two times the speed of the highway traffic up I-75.  Some of the songs blaring from my car radio were some of the same ones played at the 2014 Fireworks.  But I survived and really haven’t tempered off.  Over time I was able to apply that recklessness to focused directions instead of just outwardly rebellious behavior—but it is still very much there.  Like the music and movies of the time, I didn’t feel I needed to apologize for anything in America.  Alan Greenspan—a member of Ayn Rand’s elite inner circle was running the Fed, money was being made in America and Ronald Reagan was using that unprecedented productivity to destroy communism throughout the world.  University professors and old hippies didn’t like Reagan or the music which made me want to turn it up even louder

America wants to feel that way about itself again and as the show closed I can see it coming.  I remember how the situation was set up before and it can happen again—the nation is primed for it.  In so many ways America is worse now by far than it was transferring from 1979 to 1980.  Our current president is far worse than Jimmy Carter was and the repressed emotions so voluminous during the 60’s and 70’s are today exacerbated.  I knew what I was rebelling against in the 80’s.  I was a Reagan Republican and very proud of it.   I had no sympathy then as I don’t currently for radical old hippies from the past—from the folk songs of the Charlie Manson sex communes filled with marijuana smoke and communist rhetoric.  For the parents of the kids I called friends who used to be those loser hippies and the school teachers and college professors who thought Ronald Reagan was the devil himself for his unmitigated support of capitalism—I sought to rub it in their faces at every chance and the reason the 80’s were so much fun was that the rest of society was on board with that.  In the 90’s and the period from 2000 to 2010 America went back to feeling guilty for its Excepetionalism and people are sick of it.  They want to feel good about themselves once again which is evident in the superhero movies that are dominating the box-office at the moment.  Guardians of the Galaxy is not only the box office champ of the summer; it is also the top-selling soundtrack directly having an impact on the music industry.  2015 will be a mother load of positive films that may very well look like 1977 all over again when a string of movies starting with Jaws in 1975 to Close Encounters, Smokey and the Bandit, Saturday Night Fever and Star Wars knocked the rust off American consciousness and created the optimism of the 80’s nearly singlehandedly.  Coming up in 2015 is Jurassic World, Mad Max 4, The Avengers 2 and of course Star Wars—among many other titles that will be surprises the way Guardians of the Galaxy is this summer.  People are poised to admit that Obama was a joke, they are tired of not having money, and they are sick of the rest of the world thumbing their noses at America.  They are ready to reflect these emotions in their art and we may be seeing a period like the 80’s coming soon.  Very soon.

Send this video to ISIS, forget the air raids. 

That is fine with me, I still drive fast and am every bit as rebellious as I was then and am ready to do my part.  I expected to be melancholy as I normally am at the WEBN fireworks because I love summer, and typically Labor Day weekend is the close of that glorious time culturally in America.  But not this year—the music and people’s reaction to it was a light of hope where there wasn’t any before for me.  It’s not the reflection down memory lane so much as it’s the hunger for rebellion that was even present on Tricia Macke’s Channel 19 broadcast.  It’s more than buying cloths at the Merry-Go-Round at Kenwood Mall, or Michael Jackson songs—the 1980’s were a decade of not feeling guilty for America’s love of capitalism—and our culture prospered.  It can again if only it had a president who no longer allowed America to feel that guilt letting the arts of the period reflect that sentiment.  By the reaction of the audience at this year’s fireworks—society is primed and ready.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Understanding “Who Is John Galt”: ‘Atlas Shrugged Part III’ hits theaters September 12th

I first met Harmon Kaslow, one of the producers of the Atlas Shrugged films, in 2012 at the Duke Energy Center in Cincinnati, Ohio while we were both promoting the release of the second film, CLICK TO REVIEW.  At the time he was under tremendous pressure—he had just completed the second film with John Aglialoro and was working hard to promote it against a tidal wave of dissent.  Harmon is a Hollywood producer and his work on the Atlas films went against the general message of the entire entertainment industry—so it was a courageous move on his part to bring an independent film version of the novel Atlas Shrugged to the big screen when conventional career climbing wisdom said not to. The book came out in 1957 and was in development hell for over 40 years due to a number of influences.  Ayn Rand’s biggest mistake to support her Objectivist philosophy which was the message behind the popular novel was in not allowing Albert S. Ruddy to make a film adaptions of Atlas Shrugged his way after the success of the Godfather films in 1972.  Ruddy wanted to produce a version of the Atlas  films with Clint Eastwood and Robert Redford playing the lead roles—but Rand wanted to maintain complete creative control the way she had on the movie version of her other novel, The Fountainhead many years earlier.   The deal unfortunately fell through.  Hollywood would have been a much different place if Rand and Ruddy had made Atlas Shrugged in the 1970s.  Instead, it took another 40 years to get a movie version made after many attempts and it was Harmon Kaslow working with John Aglialoro who was able to pull off what nobody previously could.  As recently as 1999 Aglialoro and Ruddy negotiated a deal with Turner Network Television for a four-hour miniseries, but that deal also fell through during an AOL merger with Time Warner.  There were other attempts, but all failed until Kaslow and Aglialoro using the tools of the modern age to bypass the studio system were able actually get the job done.  The third and final film is finally ready to be released to the public on September 12th 2014.

I am grateful for the films.  For as long as I’ve been alive church leaders have sat me down and tried to tell me to assimilate more with the human world—to make more friends.  School guidance councilors have done the same—spent many hours talking to me trying to convince me to drop my resistance to other people and make more friends.  To this very day I can attend a crowded football game with 60,000 screaming fans—I can sit in a luxury box with 25 to 30 friends and power brokers—but I am always alone in the midst of the swarm.   The advice given to me for all the years prior—which I have never listened to—was that I needed to compromise my values to maintain friendships with people who did not hold the same—because making friends and assimilating with the population at large was more important than personal integrity.  But it’s not.  That is some of the worst advice that anybody can receive and it is the primary reason that Atlas Shrugged had difficulty being made into a movie.  How do you make a movie that is critical of how the masses of the population behave—intellectually?

To measure the typical Hollywood industry reaction to Ayn Rand and how threatened they are by her message the Futurama episode called, “I Second that Emotion” contains a library of books flushed down the drain into the sewers to be read by deformed mutants.  Among those books one of the main characters sees Atlas Shrugged and dismisses the book saying “There is nothing but crumpled porn and Ayn Rand.”  The popular video game Bioshock attacked the Objectivist premise of Atlas Shrugged for many of the same reasons showing how such a society could become dangerously suppressive.  Always behind their revulsion of Atlas Shrugged is the fear that the message of Ayn Rand might seep into society and expose them for being second-handers who live exclusively off the efforts of others.  So they attack Atlas Shrugged to protect their scheme against not only society at large—but themselves.  The rock band Rush has had a fascination with Ayn Rand for years and was the back bone of their 2112 album when lyrist Neal Peart wrote the breakthrough song—“Anthem” dedicated to Ayn Rand which brought them unprecedented ridicule from British journalists.  George Lucas essentially being in the know over the intentions of Albert S. Ruddy to make an Atlas Shrugged film molded his character of Han Solo in Star Wars as an answer to the individualism versus collectivism argument so prevalent in the 1970s.  Back then Lucas wrote in his early screenplay draft, “May the force of others, be with you.”  Han Solo was supposed to learn by the end of the film to think of others before he thought of himself.  However by the time Harrison Ford applied his magic to the character, Han Solo became one of the most popular characters in the series and he stayed very Randian in subsequent movies.  Case in point, Han Solo is about to be frozen and shipped off by the bounty hunter Boba Fett when Princess Leia says, “I love you.”  Han Solo using a very profound pronoun replies simply, “I know.”  Solo doesn’t care to reassure Leia that he too loves her, only that he knew all along.  The premise of his declaration is that his knowledge is more important than her acknowledgment.  They later get married have a daughter named Jaina who is the star of the new upcoming films.  By the time Star Wars hit popular culture Lucas changed a bit in his perspective shortening the popular line to just, “May the force be with you.”  These philosophic arguments are quite loud and many don’t even realize they are happening—but the battles rage on to this day and the stakes are quite high.

I have known this about people all of my life—well before I ever read Atlas Shrugged.  The reason I’ve always been alone—even in crowds is due to my avoidance of letting second-handers too close to me.  Most people live their lives as second-handers so Atlas Shrugged for them is dangerous—and insulting.  They will not enjoy the movie Atlas Shrugged and this is why the movie was in development hell for such a long period of time.  Movie producers and studio distributers by the nature of their jobs are second-handers themselves—the film business demands it of them—so they have problems with Atlas Shrugged.  Politicians are also second-handers, most of them hate the book and the movie produced by Aglialoro and Kaslow.  Movie critics are some of the biggest second-handers in existence—they are often film school drop-outs who couldn’t make their own movies so to be close to the industry, they write film reviews for newspapers and television shows.  Atlas Shrugged challenges them in a way that frightens their values—and second-hander nature.  When the third film hits theaters on September 12th 2014, they will pan the film not because the movie is bad—but because the story attacks their tendency to be second-handers and it makes them feel guilty.

The reason I have always been alone in crowds is that I do not allow myself to be looted from them socially, and literally.  Government does steal my money as a second-hander entity through taxes—but as an individual I have a policy against second-handers and do not allow it.  The new movie Atlas Shrugged III: Who is John Galt is a film made for people like me.  There is a scene in the upcoming film where John Galt is offered the top job of Wesley Mouch which holds unlimited government power.  John Galt laughs at the offer as his girlfriend Dagney Taggart is listening and instructs all those present that no such job should exist.  Dagney is allowed to listen because the president Mr. Thompson thinks that she will learn a lesson when he breaks John Galt through temptation.  Most people watching the movie and criticizing it after will not understand why John Galt laughs at the offer.  Most people would take such a deal in less than a second.  I do understand with great clarity.  I have lived my whole life laughing at the same type of offers without always understanding clearly.  I didn’t read any of Ayn Rand’s books until her books began to explode in popularity after the election of President Obama—in 2008.  My enjoyment of those books was not because they changed my life.  It was because reading those books and getting to know a bit about the people who made the recent movies—it was refreshing to see that there were others out there who thought the same way as I did—they resisted the waves of second-handers trying to impose a scheme against the productive hoping to remain concealed.   Now three films later over the last five years, Kaslow and Aglialoro have done what seemed impossible—they made Atlas Shrugged into movies with the last coming out just ahead of the November elections.

So the answer to “Who Is John Galt” will be answered quite well in the new film.  John Galt is a person who refuses to be consumed by second-handers, and when it is asked who talks and thinks like him by critics after they have seen the film and seek to hide their fear of the philosophy behind a bad review—I do.  I have in many ways lived John Galt’s life with a remarkable parallel that made me think when I first read Atlas Shrugged that I was reading something written just for me.  I have made similar decisions as John Galt for similar reasons at nearly the same time as that fictional character and in just the same kind of theatrical conditions.

My employers have always utilized my talents as an inventor of new ideas.  I went so far to even begin processing some of those ideas as patents in my early 20s.  When I learned that the industry was filled with second-handers and that virtually every connection to my endeavors was teeming with similar types, I withdrew.  My wife and I live in our home like our own personal Galt’s Gulch.  I took on several medial jobs—much the way that John Galt does in the new film for much the same reason but withdrew my talents from the second-handers so not to make them better at my expense.  There have been a few times along the way such as the time of the present where I am paid on the front end to solve complicated problems.  It takes more than money to conceive me of the worth—and if those values align, I agree to help, but generally, my wife and I live in a gulch of our own making—which is remarkably similar to the lifestyle shown in the new movie.

Due to a busy schedule I will not be able to attend the premier by invite which is occurring in Las Vegas just prior to the September 12th release date.  But I am excessively happy to see that the film was made and is the best of the three films.  For those who have seen the previous two either in theaters or on DVD later, then that should paint a picture of how good this new film should be for them.  When it comes to the filmmakers and others I have gotten to know a bit from the literal Gulch that we all reside in, I don’t feel those same emotions where a crowd can be present, but that I am standing by myself—around them.  The best part of the new movie is that it was made for people who are already like John Galt.  It’s not a movie for everyone.  Many will be curious enough to watch the film even if they don’t understand it.  But for those who already know who John Galt is by looking in the mirror—they will have a rare treat that deserves thanks toward the producers for making such a wonderful film intended for those who are standing alone in the world on an island of creativity surrounded by the desperate needs of second-handers.  It is rare that anything is ever made for people like that—because they always do the making.  But thanks to John Aglialoro and Harmon Kaslow, Atlas Shrugged Part III: Who Is John Galt was made for them—and that is a real treat.

To find out where the movie is playing near you, click the link below, and learn where you can see the film on September 12th.

http://www.atlasshruggedmovie.com/theaters

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Help Burger King–Buy a Whopper Today: The vote of tax inversions against progressive politics

To a large extent progressive politicians who wish to redistribute the wealth of America to smaller—less productive countries created this monster—but now those same politicians are feeling the wrath of their failure surrounding the tax inversion tactics created by the federal government. Tax inversions are where United States corporations move their headquarters to other countries to avoid paying corporate taxes. While those same progressive activists in government wanted this to happen to some extent—they did not bother to do the math on the potential impact to loss in the United States treasury. When Burger King recently announced that they were about to move to Canada to avoid the high corporate taxes in the United States, it forced politicians like Obama and Ohio’s Sharrod Brown to confront the issue as “unpatriotic.”

To the progressive politician patriotism means supporting their system of government schools, their high monopolistic wages for road maintenance, their social infrastructure created by government for government through an intrusive tax system. Obama’s response to the Burger King exodus was that their failure to pay future taxes would lead to tax increases for individual citizens who would be forced to cover the federal bill for services rendered. However, it never occurred to Obama, or Brown that their progressive policies which cost a lot of money—their wealth redistribution schemes, their ridiculously inefficient education system, their welfare policies were unsolicited by a large portion of the thinkers in the United States. Just because the producers, thinkers, and general entrepreneurs are in the minority in America does not mean that the masses through democracy can vote themselves the legal ability to loot and pillage enterprise. Corporate taxes in America are among the highest in the world because of intrusive progressive politicians representing the degenerate masses. They did not consider what would happen if those corporations picked up and left because the looting of their profit would be deemed too costly.

President Obama intensified his criticism of U.S. firms that shift their headquarters overseas Thursday, arguing the tax-saving tactic is unfairly “gaming the system.”

“This is basically taking advantage of tax provisions that are technically legal,” Obama said in an exclusive CNBC interview, referring to a surge of U.S. corporations transferring their official addresses to Ireland, Bermuda or other lower-tax jurisdictions.

“But I think most people would say: If you’re doing business here, if you’re basically still an American country, but you’re simply changing your mailing address to avoid paying taxes, then you’re really not doing right by the country and by the American people,” said Obama.

He acknowledged that corporate executives and board members are paid to maximize company profits and expand business operations. “But people are also paid to be good corporate citizens, they’re also paid to make sure that they’re thinking about, in addition to shareholder value, how do you grow a company over the long-term,” said Obama.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/07/24/obama-tax-inversions-criticism/13120369/

NEW YORK (CBS Cleveland/AP) — Burger King says it struck a deal to buy Tim Hortons Inc. for about $11 billion, a move that creates the world’s third-largest fast-food company and could accelerate the international expansion of the Canadian coffee and doughnut chain.

The corporate headquarters of the new company will be in Canada. The two brands will continue to be run as stand-alone chains, with Burger King still operating out of Miami.

Some analysts have suggested that Canada’s lower tax rates stand to benefit Burger King over time. But Burger King said that’s the not main motivation for the deal.

During a conference call with analysts and investors, Burger King Executive Chairman Alex Behring stressed that international growth possibilities are driving the deal. He noted that 3G Capital, the investment firm that owns a majority stake in Burger King, has turned the hamburger company into one of the fastest-growing chains since buying it in 2010. He said that experience will be applied to Tim Hortons.

Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, is calling for a boycott of Burger King.

“Burger King’s decision to abandon the United States means consumers should turn to Wendy’s Old Fashioned Hamburgers or White Castle sliders. Burger King has always said ‘Have it Your Way’; well my way is to support two Ohio companies that haven’t abandoned their country or customers,” Brown said in a statement. “To help business grow in America, taxpayers have funded public infrastructure, workforce training, and incentives to encourage R&D and capital investment. Runaway corporations benefited from those policies but want U.S. companies to pay their share of the tab.”

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2014/08/26/dem-senator-calls-for-boycott-of-burger-king-tells-consumers-to-eat-at-wendys-white-castle/

Tax inversions, newly popularized by the law firm Skadden Arps Meagher & Flom four years ago, have taken on a new popularity this year as many corporations struggle to appease shareholders looking askance at growing corporate cash piles. While corporate cash piles act as a bulwark during recessionary times, the recovering economy has made the multibillion-dollar cash hoards look like bad financial management.

Many US corporations have complained loudly about US tax rates, even though it’s rare that they pay the full burden of 35% to 39%. Out of the Fortune 500 of prominent US companies, 288 paid an effective US federal tax rate of just 19.4% between 2008 and 2012, according to advocacy group Citizens for Tax Justice.

The conflict really centers around the profits that US companies generate overseas. These foreign profits have flooded the coffers of US companies, making up the bulk of an estimated $1.5 trillion in excess cash. Some, like Apple, have burned down some of the money by returning it to shareholders in the form of dividends, or have bought back their own stock in an attempt to drive their share prices higher on the open market. Still, the trillions remain out of reach until the companies make peace with the taxes they will have to pay, and Apple CEO Tim Cook has testified to federal officials in favor of a tax holiday.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/aug/26/burger-king-calls-obamas-bluff-tax

What is ignored by politicians like Obama, and Brown—progressives who falsely believed they could build an empire of dependents in America and that corporations and the productive entrepreneurs of industry would gladly pay for services, schools, roads, and government infrastructure that they don’t support—for the greater good as defined by those same progressives, is that people might not want to pay for their view of the world.   Brown’s statements specifically about Burger King was that the business of the fast food chain was built by those same infrastructure items and that the restaurant chain does not want to pay their fair share. But consider that roads to nowhere have no value unless there is a Burger King to drive to, or an Apple product to purchase at a shopping mall. Education has no value unless it is to prepare young people to live in the world created by entrepreneurs—people who will eventually eat at Burger King or drive a car to make an Apple Store purchase. In a capitalist society entrepreneurship comes first, dedication to social causes that win Democratic elections second. The “egg” comes first in that kind of society and it is under a capitalist society that Burger King was created. Socialist countries don’t create such places.

It is patriotic to leave America when progressives have infiltrated capitalism so ridiculously that it has weakened the capitalist system which built all these marvelous businesses. It is patriotic to say no to higher taxes because most taxes only serve politicians who benefit from the demographic receiving wealth redistribution. Most politicians, especially those like Obama and Brown have no ideal how two quarters are made into .50 cents and how the value was created to begin with. All they see is that somebody has money and that they feel it is their duty to social justice to take that money and give it to somebody who doesn’t have it. Most of their public education systems teach the same behavior and their road construction crews are artificially high in cost because of their monopoly on that particular construction industry. The system really only benefits progressives and their politicians—it does not benefit the job creator. Without a job creator there is no place for a road to go, or even the need for an education—because the destination is created by the few for the many. Not the other way around.

I don’t normally eat at Burger King, but this week I will to support the restaurant chain in their desire to use a tax inversion to save some corporate tax. Not paying a tax is the only way to vote against the big spending wealth redistribution policies of typical progressives who attack everything about the system of job creation that they can without restraint. Progressives should not wonder why Burger King and many other companies want to avoid the tax—if they understood the nature of profit and how important it is to any economy—especially a capitalist one like the United States. But Obama and Brown are career politicians—they get paid to steal the wealth of companies like Burger King, and to give it to those too lazy to be enterprising. So their befuddled nature in this case is amusing. What is insulting is when they insist that others will have to pay the taxes Burger King is avoiding because in their minds they have already spent the money. It is in that condition that they prove themselves to be so detrimental to the human race and intelligence of any kind. So help Burger King by purchasing a Whopper today. I am!

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

Racism falsehoods: The myth of “white privilege”

Bill O’Reilly and Megan Kelly from Fox News had an interesting debate about the perceived disparity of the black population and the so-called white privilege that is so much talked about regarding minorities.  Kelly rattled off a series of statistics which showed that blacks are clearly falling behind in virtually every category of social measurement and she leaned in favor of the argument supporting “white privilege.”  O’Reilly proposed a number of opposition arguments which provided clarity refuting the designation favoring whites.  That discussion can be seen below and is worth noting.

I have had more personal friends who were black than white over the years and understand the issue very well.  Megan is only talking about the result of statistics, but not the cause—whereas Bill O’Reilly began to touch on the real issues.  There is no white privilege in America.  The suppression of the whites against the blacks is a thing of the past and is only still considered by the very ignorant.  The cause of the disparity between the statistical facts rattled off by Megan Kelly is that blacks tend to support by default the position of collectivism versus the personal responsibility of individualism.  Collectivists associate all the things that happen to them as a group allowing many in that group to hide their bad behavior behind the mask of consensus.  In poor populations where fathers are infrequent, government sustains personal incomes, and the general philosophy is a collectivist oriented belief system statistics like the ones Megan Kelly discussed will take place regardless of the color of anybody’s skin.

If personal responsibility is not present in a culture, it will fail and resemble the kind of conditions seen in Ferguson.  The cries for equality by blacks and accusations of white privilege only come from those who decry personal responsibility and seek more collective mandates to hide their crimes.  The crimes of the typical perpetrator of the Ferguson riots would be loose moral attributes, poor family structure, terrible work ethics and deplorable personal conduct—all traits that center on collectivism.   Those who are successful in society tend to be those who conduct themselves with a code of some valor, personal responsibility, and awareness of their impact on the world around them not as a collective mass—but exclusively as an individual.

Being an avid motorcyclist I can name countless times that I have watched a person in another car throw a smoked cigarette out of a window. A lot of the time the same cars displaying environmental concerns are the worst perpetrators.  Think how hypocritical it is for a lover a nature to liter the streets of earth with cigarettes freshly consumed and still smoking.  But whenever a car is seen with bumper stickers displaying rainbows of support for mother earth, and cigarette smoke dances from a cracked window, 9 times out of 10 that same person will throw their empty cigarettes into the road while sitting at a stop light.  Many times they throw them out the window while driving not even caring that I’m on a motorcycle behind them.

I have studied this behavior for many years and this is the conclusion resulting from those observations.  People who throw their cigarettes out of windows tend to be collectivist oriented people who do not hold personal responsibility in high regard.  They assume that they are hidden behind a mask of anonymity provided by collectivist identification.  Because personal responsibility is not what they are functioning from they can’t imagine why or how their small cigarette thrown from a window could harm the earth.  What they fail to see is that if 30 to 40% of all people in a 300 million person population did the same, the roadways would be littered with pollution caused by the cigarettes.  But if the same person believes that a corporation—which is a collective group is harming the earth with pollution, then they will march with signs of activism and proclaim with fervor—“down with the rich CEO” the individuals at the top of large companies.  Their lack of personal responsibility has a double edge to it, first they hate individuals who control groups of people—so they attack CEOs, second they only understand things in terms of collective reference.  Anything outside of those parameters are invisible to them—like the thought that a simple cigarette might cause pollution in the world.

The same can be said of the welfare recipient, or the louse who blows off a free public education because their fatherless households failed to instruct them of the value, or the drug addict who shrugs away the value of their life in favor of getting high—the removal of personal responsibility during times intoxication.  The collectivist cannot associate responsibility with personal behavior because their lives are constructed around avoiding that diagnosis.  Thus you have race baiters like Al Sharpton declaring to a mass of angry blacks that “police have the money for guns, but not for education,” as if spending money on public education would solve the problem in poor black neighborhoods.  Billions of dollars in additional funding could be thrown into public education in a black neighborhood and nothing would improve—just as nothing has improved in public education in spite of additional spending for decades now—because personal responsibility for education is not being taught as an entry-level criteria.  Until that happens nothing will improve.

No matter what the topic when collectivism is involved, the result is always the same.  Decaying circumstances follow no matter what the skin color or sex involved entails.  If personal responsibility is vacant, corruption follows in every case.  There are no exceptions.

It is a lack of personal responsibility that is killing black America.  It is a lack of individual assessment and family structure that causes most of the trouble in communities like Ferguson.  During the last election, I supported Herman Cain and in the future I hope that Ben Carson runs for president, just as I have supported Alan Keys in the past.  They are all black politicians who I adore, so nobody can call me a racist.  I have more affiliations with more minorities than most people have in their entire lives, so I can speak fluently when I say that personal responsibly is the key to success in life.  The lack of personal responsibly is the cause of failure almost every time—even considering the misfortune of hard luck.

White privilege only comes to those who are taught to conduct their lives responsibly.  White people who adhere to collectivism as their guiding philosophy are just as wrecked as blacks who do the same.  Color has nothing to do with it—personal responsibility is everything.  I have known many blacks who are quite successful. I know whites who are very successful.  And I have known many other types men and women who are very successful—and what they all have in common is a belief in themselves as individuals.  All the failures in life that I have ever known all share in common a belief in collectivism—in the hope that they can live forever concealed from responsibility.  They of course cannot, but the fault of their circumstances are their own.  They can read these words and become angry, but they can offer no argument in favor of collectivism that cannot be refuted easily.  Notice the lack of comments on this article—which is free to the world—yet the lack of a defense of collectivism.  That is because they can’t defend it.  Collectivism is the reason that black communities, white communities and groups of all kinds fail.  It is no mystery, only a carefully concealed secret driven by a desire for waking intoxication of personal irresponsibility.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

The Epidemic of Bastards: Matt Clark and Rich Hoffman’s answer to the Middle East, Ferguson, and the border crises

Matt Clark did the world a tremendous favor during his weekend broadcast on WAAM radio in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He brought me on and between the two of us we explained during a two segment broadcast the entire problem centering on ISIS and the violence of the Middle East along with a direct tie-in to the violence revolving around the Ferguson riots outside of St. Louis. We also discussed the immigration border crises in America and the general ineptitude of the Obama administration through it all. We offered an accurate diagnosis of all those problems in just the two segments, and if people listened, they would find that the problems would evaporate. What was unique was that the broadcast was a history lesson, a psychological analysis, and a comparative overview of some very large and all-encompassing troubles. Most similar broadcasts only deal with one such topic. But these problems are all connected, and Matt Clark might be the only radio host in America who was able to put all those topics on the table with such brevity. For those who want to understand the essence of these many problems, enjoy the recordings of the broadcasts below as they were heard during Saturday on the air.

The compelling evidence involving all those critical issues, the ISIS terrorism, Ferguson, and immigration is the prevalence that they all are direct results of group oriented identification behavior. Even the gangs of thugs involved in the sex trade industry who cover their bodies with tattoos indicating their belonging to a particular gang share this old tribal desire to be recognized within a group. This desire is stronger than ever because in most cases families have been destroyed and young men have a strong desire to find a sense of family within the brotherhood of gang violence. As crazy as that might sound consider that of the young men involved in the street violence in Ferguson most are from fatherless homes, most of the thugs in ISIS are from homes destroyed by years of violence and their new families are the fellow terrorist groups who associate with them. Most of the gangs involved in trafficking children from Central America, across Mexico and into the United States are from homes vacant of fathers or fathers who were previously involved in illegal and illicit activity. There is a sense of family in such groups that makes them feel that it is they against the world validating their afflictions.

Politicians like President Obama, Jessie Jackson and many others have been caught fanning the flames to these revolts due to their own lack of parental structure in their lives. They seek in group behavior a rectification of their own lack of family structure from their childhoods. Obama gets caught in not calling the ISIS terrorism as outright evil, because he identifies more with them than he does a Tea Party supporter from the Midwest who knows who his mother and father are and can call them at any time and speak without shells exploding outside their windows. Obama instead comes across in his condemnation of ISIS sounding like a big brother talking to a bunch of little brothers who are conducting themselves in a way that might get them into trouble. When it comes to Ferguson, Obama sent Eric Holder to tell the residents there that he understood their issues—he too was once pulled over by a cop profiling him because he was black. When it comes to the border crises Obama as an open border supporter by practice created the policies that allowed the gangs of thugs to destroy lives, rape children and sell copious amounts of drugs to an unmanaged population. Obama’s administration through Fast and Furious actually helped put guns in the hands of border gangs which created a scandal only escaped through executive action.

Yet during our broadcast I reiterated to Matt that I felt sorry for Obama. Yes he proposed the burning of America (metaphorically speaking) and advocated many of the same kinds of things that the terrorist groups against America have, but the ramifications of his actions appear to hurt him—as if he didn’t know that he would bring so much pain to so many people through his treacherous behavior. But Matt was quick to point out that Obama was recently partying the night away in Martha’s Vineyard dancing to every song—which is detestable. Obama has the performance of a person who just can’t face the terrible conditions which he has delivered to the world and is behaving like an alcoholic knowing full well he is destroying his family through his actions. So he parties to hide the pain. But he never intended not to create pain. But the ramifications still hurt. Watching America burn even for a person who hates it—is painful. The responsibility is on his shoulders.

This is similar to the actions of those in ISIS or the looters in Ferguson, they without question feel bad about their acts of terror—any human would. But for them it is their family which comes before anybody else and for fatherless bastards (taken literally) they are instinctively drawn to the brotherhood of group involvement—gangs of thugs who become their new family in the absence of healthy relationships emitting from around a dinner table where a properly structured head of household manages his family with value and love.

We live in the day of the thug from every sector of society, where they greet one another with strange tribal handshakes and identify each other with tattoos and other markings to show their commitment to the collective cause of their created family—their brothers in crime and terror. Their brotherhood of destruction where crimes are hidden from their eyes through collective endorsement and justification are their identity and this is what makes them dangerously unmanageable. This is what Obama and others like him are guilty of—they support through their silence the actions of ISIS, Ferguson, and the gangs of Mexico. They endorse the behavior through a brotherhood intellectually accepted, not physically, but through a brotherhood of fatherless households.

I didn’t use the term bastard on Matt’s FCC controlled radio station, but it is in essence the cause of all these problems. We are living on a bastardnized planet advocated by political despots’ hell bent on social destruction leaving in their wake gangs of fatherless thugs as the only family identification left to them. No amount of money can solve these problems and no law can be written that will stop the continued degradation. Only love of a family—a real honest to goodness biological family can do the trick. A family of natural means must be created to override collective relationships driven by artificial factions.

It is not ironic that many of these problems are the creation of tampering governments who have sought to replace the parent as the supreme guide of individuals in society. England and France created the problem in the Middle East, Open Border advocates created the situation in Mexico, and civil rights leaders have taught for years that minority groups have been oppressed as they sought for personal power reasons to become the leader of a tribe and supreme father to large groups of people by turning masses of people into victims in need of a big brother like Al Sharpton. They want a daddy figure of an entire population to lead their made-up gang family. Most of these problems have risen during the progressive era and are a direct result of their big government tampering which has cheapened the role of fathers in families only to be replaced by government—poorly managed government to be exact.

Answers to these complicated problems have been provided by Matt Clark and me during the epic Clarkcast broadcast. There is no excuse not to know how to fix those problems; they are as evident as a bright sun in the desert on a cloudless day. The only thing that is up for contention is what to do about it. Humans need a sense of family—of knowing where they come from. If that family is a gang of thugs—then the quality of life in that family brotherhood will be destructive. If the family is healthy and good, then there is a good chance that terrorism will be far from their minds. That terrorism whether it is the reforming of America by Obama to represent an anti colonialism viewpoint given to him as a school child in Jakarta, or the Muslim radicals of ISIS—the heart of their problem is the lack of love of a father and a family to give them what their hearts deeply seek—a sense of belonging and knowing that they have a place in the hearts of people they admire. What all these modern terrorists have in common is that they are the direct result of a society of bastards—and that is the direct fault of progressive politics. Nobody else can share that blame with them—because they have pushed everyone else aside leaving them holding the responsibly exclusively.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

The Rebellions of Day Time Dreamers: Understanding the ‘Seven Pillars of Wisdom’

“All men dream, but not equally.  Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds, wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act on their dreams with open eyes, to make them possible.”

T.E. Lawrence

The Lawrence of Arabia is one of my favorite historical characters.  I understand him.  If you have not seen the 1962 film by David Lean, you should do yourself the favor of seeing it now, because it is directly applicable to the current crises in the Middle East.  The classic film is not 100% biographical, but it is like Lawrence’s classic piece of literature titled The Seven Pillars of Wisdom which is studied heavily by today’s American troops in the Iraq region and others who take part in the violence so prevalent in the Holy Land to this current day.  But to understand the Lawrence of Arabia it takes a different kind of mind, one who dreams by the day—and most people just aren’t like that.  Lawrence was a bit of living folklore and he used that to his strategic advantage.  It was he who gave the Arabs and the British troops the testicular fortitude to push back the Turks and start the defeat of the Ottoman Empire during World War I.  If not for T.E. Lawrence the Ottoman Empire may have never been defeated, and their support may have assisted Germany into winning World War I.  If there was a figure who most impacted the first Great War it was the Lawrence of Arabia.  Yet, after the Treaty of Versailles and the English betrayal of Lawrence and Price Feisal, Lawrence changed his name, took a low-level job with the air force and dropped out of the radar even though he was one of the most popular men in the world at the time.  The answer as to why he did what he did can only be understood by dreamers of the day.  Most in his position would have milked out the riches and popularity for all he could, but not Lawrence.  He withdrew to the countryside in disgust of the politics and refused to participate for the rest of his days.

Lawrence returned to the United Kingdom a full Colonel.[33] Immediately after the war, Lawrence worked for the Foreign Office, attending the Paris Peace Conference between January and May as a member of Faisal’s delegation. He served for much of 1921 as an advisor to Winston Churchill at the Colonial Office.

On 17 May 1919 the Handley Page Type O carrying Lawrence on a flight to Egypt crashed at the airport of Roma-Centocelle. The pilot and co-pilot were killed; Lawrence survived with a broken shoulder blade and two broken ribs.[34] During his brief hospitalization, he was visited by King Victor Emmanuel III.[35]

In August 1919 Lowell Thomas launched a colorful photo show in London entitled With Allenby in Palestine which included a lecture, dancing, and music.[36] Initially, Lawrence played only a supporting role in the show, but when Thomas realized that it was the photos of Lawrence dressed as a Bedouin that had captured the public’s imagination, he photographed him again, in London, in Arab dress.[36] With the new photos, Thomas re-launched his show as With Allenby in Palestine and Lawrence in Arabia in early 1920; it was extremely popular.[36] Thomas’ shows made the previously-obscure Lawrence into a household name.[36]

In August 1922, Lawrence enlisted in the Royal Air Force as an aircraftman under the name John Hume Ross. At the RAF recruiting centre in Covent Garden, London, he was interviewed by a recruiting officer – Flying Officer W. E. Johns, later to be well-known as the author of the Biggles series of novels.[37] Johns rejected Lawrence’s application as he correctly believed “Ross” was a false name. Lawence admitted this was so and the documents he provided were false and left. But he returned some time later with an RAF Messenger, carrying a written order for Johns to accept Lawrence.[38]

However, Lawrence was forced out of the RAF in February 1923 after being exposed. He changed his name to T. E. Shaw and joined the Royal Tank Corps in 1923. He was unhappy there and repeatedly petitioned to rejoin the RAF, which finally readmitted him in August 1925.[39] A fresh burst of publicity after the publication of Revolt in the Desert(see below) resulted in his assignment to a remote base in British India in late 1926, where he remained until the end of 1928. At that time he was forced to return to Britain after rumours began to circulate that he was involved in espionage activities.

He purchased several small plots of land in Chingford, built a hut and swimming pool there, and visited frequently. This was removed in 1930 when the Chingford Urban District Council acquired the land and passed it to the City of London Corporation, but re-erected the hut in the grounds of The Warren, Loughton, where it remains, neglected, today. Lawrence’s tenure of the Chingford land has now been commemorated by a plaque fixed on the sighting obelisk on Pole Hill.

He continued serving in the RAF based at Bridlington, East Riding of Yorkshire, specializing in high-speed boats and professing happiness, and it was with considerable regret that he left the service at the end of his enlistment in March 1935.

Lawrence was a keen motorcyclist, and, at different times, had owned eight Brough Superior motorcycles.[40][41] His eighth motorcycle is on display at the Imperial War Museum. Among the books Lawrence is known to have carried with him on his military campaigns is Thomas Malory‘s Morte D’Arthur. Accounts of the 1934 discovery of the Winchester Manuscript of theMorte include a report that Lawrence followed Eugene Vinaver—a Malory scholar—by motorcycle from Manchester to Winchester upon reading of the discovery in The Times.[42]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T._E._Lawrence

Lawrence could have had the world but he insisted on an authentic life away from the dreamers of the night, those encumbered souls lost to the globe of politics.  For all his ability to unite the entire Arab civilization against the Turks and retake the Holy Land for England, nobody at the time or since has possessed the ability to duplicate his abilities.  Of all the things T. E. Lawrence did which no military mind reading his Seven Pillars of Wisdom can ever understand is that Lawrence achieved his first military conquest by breaching completely the orders of his superiors.

In 1917, Lawrence arranged a joint action with the Arab irregulars and forces including Auda Abu Tayi (until then in the employ of the Ottomans) against the strategically located but lightly defended[24][25][26] town of Aqaba. On 6 July, after a surprise overland attack, Aqaba fell to Lawrence and the Arab forces. After Aqaba, Lawrence was promoted to major, and the new commander-in-chief of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force, General Sir Edmund Allenby, agreed to his strategy for the revolt, stating after the war:

“I gave him a free hand. His cooperation was marked by the utmost loyalty, and I never had anything but praise for his work, which, indeed, was invaluable throughout the campaign. He was the mainspring of the Arab movement and knew their language, their manners and their mentality.”[27]

Lawrence now held a powerful position, as an adviser to Faisal and a person who had Allenby’s confidence.  But the Lawrence of Arabia conducted the whole operation without any input from his British superiors stationed in Cairo.  He performed the entire task on his own as a day time dreamer who wanted to bring freedom to the Arab people from not only the Turks, but also the powers of Europe.  So he organized the invasion and only after it was successful was General Allenby so permissive.

But the dream died once politics entered the picture and Lawrence was forced to deal with those corrupt dreamers of the night.  He was able to achieve the greatest of military victories in one of the most hostile regions of the world—nearly on his own with sheer charisma.  But he could not deal with politicians as their minds were encumbered by needless restriction—so he changed his name and left the world of chaos to them so that he would be free to read, write, and play with his motorcycles.

He was one of the greatest military minds every to be born and he was great because he did not follow orders, and acted as a day time dreamer that was dangerous to the men who were night-time dreamers.  Because those night-time dreamers did not regard the area of Arabia to be so pivotal in world affairs at the time, they put up with Lawrence’s insurgency and lack of ability to follow orders by a superior.  But as fate would have had it that was exactly the attitude required to unite the Arabs for the first and only time in world history.  And it is the missing ingredient in that region to this day.  Military minds can read Lawrence’s Seven Pillars of Wisdom, but unless they learn to be day time dreamers—they will never understand how Lawrence did what he did.  The best and brightest in our world from the past and future will always be day time dreamers.  But their antagonists are always those restricted night-time dreamers—those slugs of mental acuity.  They fail at everything they do because their dreams and actions are not aligned.  Whereas Lawrence was always living a dream as quick as he thought them.  The difference between him and everyone else was that he acted on those dreams with great—unprecedented success.

Rich Hoffman

www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com

 

The Sykes-Picot Agreement: How the Krak des Chevalier caused the modern violence in the Middle East

When you visit a hospital dear reader you likely didn’t know that you were visiting a concept started by the Knights of the First Crusade—particularly in the Middle East to care for the poor and unfortunate during their conquest by Christianity against Muslim forces.  The term is derived from the Hospitallers who built one of the largest castles in the world located in present day Syria exclusively for the purpose of allowing the Crusaders to have a stronghold in the Middle East and force tribute from the surrounding area.  I have explained previously the hostilities in the Middle East which have their origin in establishing a Biblical prophecy around Jerusalem.  To review that previous article about the Middle East and the undercurrent of the present situation CLICK HERE to read it again and watch the videos.  But to understand the crux of the current trouble in that war-torn Biblical area and how Europe and the Middle East would arrive at their current hatred of each other the history I am about to convey must be understood.

Perched on a giant hilltop above an impoverished community of the extreme poor in present day Syria is the Crusader castle Krak des Chevaliers which displays the extreme amount of energy that the Crusaders where willing to expel in defeating Islam with their Christian backed philosophy.  The First Crusade (1096–1099) started as a widespread pilgrimage (France and Germany) and ended as a military expedition by Roman Catholic Europe to regain the Holy Lands taken in the Muslim conquests of the Levant (632–661), ultimately resulting in the recapture of Jerusalem in 1099. It was launched on 27 November 1095 by Pope Urban II with the primary goal of responding to an appeal from Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos, who requested that western volunteers come to his aid and help to repel the invading Seljuq Turks from Anatolia. An additional goal soon became the principal objective—the Christian re-conquest of the sacred city of Jerusalem and the Holy Land and the freeing of the Eastern Christians from Muslim rule.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Crusade

The castle itself was a massive enterprise that would take thousands of laborers more than half a century to build and when concluded it was an impenetrable fortress only vulnerable to political deceit.  The castle was perched to hold off the entire Muslim aggression for centuries in their own homeland so it was built to represent Europe in the Middle East as an unmovable force that would not be eradicated.  Krak des Chevaliers kʁak de ʃəvaˈlje]) (Arabic: قلعة الحصن‎), also Crac des Chevaliers, is a Crusader castle in Syria and one of the most important preserved medieval castles in the world. The site was first inhabited in the 11th century by a settlement of Kurds; as a result it was known as Hisn al Akrad, meaning the “Castle of the Kurds”. In 1142 it was given by Raymond II, Count of Tripoli, to the Knights Hospitaller. It remained in their possession until it fell in 1271. It became known as Crac de l’Ospital; the name Krak des Chevaliers was coined in the 19th century.

The Hospitallers began rebuilding the castle in the 1140s and were finished by 1170 when an earthquake damaged the castle. The order controlled a number of castles along the border of the County of Tripoli, a state founded after the First Crusade. Krak des Chevaliers was amongst the most important and acted as a centre of administration as well as a military base. After a second phase of building was undertaken in the 13th century, Krak des Chevaliers became a concentric castle. This phase created the outer wall and gave the castle its current appearance. The first half of the century has been described as Krak des Chevaliers’ “golden age”. At its peak, Krak des Chevaliers housed a garrison of around 2,000. Such a large garrison allowed the Hospitallers to extract tribute from a wide area. From the 1250s the fortunes of the Knights Hospitaller took a turn for the worse and in 1271 Mamluk Sultan Baibars captured Krak des Chevaliers after a siege lasting 36 days, supposedly by way of a forged letter purportedly from the Hospitallers’ Grand Master that caused the Knights to surrender.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krak_des_Chevaliers

Well, of course the last remnants of the Roman Emperor operating in Europe were not going to stand for being driven from their former territory.  For the next half of a millennia they plotted amongst themselves for a resurrection of their power in the Middle East and during World War I they would have it.  Once Lawrence of Arabia had united the various tribes of Arabia to the common cause of destroying the Turks of the Ottoman Empire—promising freedom for their assistance—England and France were thinking of revenge for their previous Crusader attempts in the region—to recapture Jerusalem and gain control of Damascus the large capital near Krak des Chavalier.  It was T.E. Lawrence from England who developed the guerrilla tactics of terrorism against the Turks which were so effective in destroying train supply lines.  The psychological impact of the terrorism had defeated the long handed occupation of the Turks backed by Germany allowing the Arabs to drive them from the Middle East.  Riding on the coattails of T.E. Lawrence’s guerilla warfare tactics were the English who during that war reclaimed Jerusalem with great fanfare.

But secretly there was an agreement among the forces of diplomacy which would hearken back to the type of mentality shaped by the Roman Catholic Church centuries before during the time of the Crusades  unknown to T.E. Lawrence until the very end which pained him greatly.  The Sykes–Picot Agreement, officially known as the Asia Minor Agreement, was a secret agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and France,[1] with the assent of Russia, defining their proposed spheres of influence and control in the Middle East should the Triple Entente succeed in defeating the Ottoman Empire during World War I. The negotiation of the treaty occurred between November 1915 and March 1916.[2] The agreement was concluded on 16 May 1916.[3]

The agreement effectively divided the Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire outside the Arabian Peninsula into areas of future British and French control or influence.[4] The terms were negotiated by the French diplomat François Georges-Picot and British Sir Mark Sykes. The Russian Tsarist government was a minor party to the Sykes–Picot agreement, and when, following the Russian Revolution of October 1917, the Bolsheviks exposed the agreement, “the British were embarrassed, the Arabs dismayed and the Turks delighted.”[5]

Britain was allocated control of areas roughly comprising the coastal strip between the sea and River Jordan, Jordan, southern Iraq, and a small area including the ports of Haifa and Acre, to allow access to the Mediterranean.[6] France was allocated control of south-eastern Turkey, northern Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Russia was to get Istanbul, the Turkish Straits and the Ottoman Armenian vilayets.[6] The controlling powers were left free to decide on state boundaries within these areas.[6] Further negotiation was expected to determine international administration pending consultations with Russia and other powers, including the Sharif of Mecca.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%80%93Picot_Agreement

The Bolsheviks of course were the communists who intended to conquer the world with their Karl Marx philosophy of soulless collectivism.  The Arabs betrayed turned toward the philosophy of the Bolsheviks because of their exposure of the Sykes-Picot Agreement and to this day in the Middle East behind many of the Muslim radicals are a combination of tactics shown to them by T.E. Lawrence and the communist Bolsheviks.  They intend to reclaim the Middle East from the impact of the Treaty of Versailles conducted after the conclusion of World War I which allowed for the Sykes Picot Agreement to manifest into reality.  Now Germany who suffered greatly after the Treaty of Versailles used communism born of their philosopher Karl Marx to eradicate the rule of the Russian  Tsarist government given control of Turkey—their former partner during World War I and destroy them as a world power.  It is why to this day many hope to resurrect the Ottoman Empire with a Muslim caliphate.

To further exacerbate the Muslim world–after World War II–after Hitler had attempted to eradicate the Jews from the Holy Land now residing in Poland the long-planned Zionist possession of Jerusalem was made possible by the creation of Israel in 1947.  This was only possible because of the Sykes Picot Agreement which still held the Middle East as European occupation forces in a foreign land.  Hitler as a soldier during World War I knew what the Sykes-Picot Agreement did in the Holy Land and wanted his own revenge on behalf of Germany.  The Muslims furious of the Israel creation refused to give possession of the Temple back to the Jews.  It was well-known that the Jews sought to rebuild the Temple of Solomon for a third time.  The Muslims still hold the spot of the temple to this day essentially to prevent rebuilding the temple.  Muslims claim the Dome of the Rock as the sacred site of Abraham’s sacrifice temptation of his son and where the Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven accompanied by the Angel Gabriel.  (I’m not a fan of Gabriel.  CLICK HERE to read why)    

So what’s missing from this history?

In no part of it is the United States even remotely involved—not in the Sykes-Picot Agreement, not in the Crusades or the building of the Krak des Chavalier.  Yet due to the failures of the English and French to maintain their military strength due to their adoption of socialism originally advocated by the old Bolsheviks they have called on their friends in American government to support them militarily—whether it is out of obligation through some Masonic order derived from European history, or Illuminati participation—again a secret society from Europe created during all this mess—America has been coaxed with the same manipulation from Europe that created the Sykes-Picot Agreement.  Now after Iraq and countless other follies in the Middle East conducted by America—pushed by Europe like a little brother being shoved into a fight by a weaker older brother so to defend the family name—America finds itself trying to restore the Middle East on behalf of Europe not for oil, occupation, or religion, but to maintain the intentions of the First Crusade and has failed.  The deceit at Krak des Chevalier that caused them to lose their stronghold—and the tributes gained through the Knights of Hospitallers.

Now the enemy in the Middle East are Islamic radicals driven by a communist philosophy and they are very dangerous.  Even the communists are a creation of Europe who trained Lenin to overtake Russia to soften them up for conquest by a vengeful Germany.  Lenin launched his campaign of communism from Munich and London heading to St Petersburg with the knowledge that Germany was at his back.  Communism was created by European tampering with passive aggressive rule from distant lands and the Middle East was created by the same intentions.  A quick look at the link below will show how deeply rooted communism now is in the Middle East hidden carefully behind the face of Islamic religion.   All these failures are due to Europe, that big brother and its Roman Catholic tampering through religious justification and secret society handshakes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Communist_parties_in_the_Middle_East

The global media knows that behind the Muslim radicals using the terrorist tactics of L.E. Lawrence that Islam represents the hope that through a caliphate economic communism will spread to the entire world.  So the media conducts soft reporting on the terrorist behavior.  The loyalty between communists and Islamic faith points back to the Sykes-Picot Agreement, they were fused together in 1917 forever in the wake of betrayal following the Treaty of Versailles.

The United States and its capitalism are being used as pawns by Europe to fulfill the Last Crusade against the Holy Land and allow for the construction of a third temple in Jerusalem.  The Seven Pillers of Wisdom by T.E. Lawrence which is read by United States officers stationed in the Middle East will not help because Muslim radicals there are reading the same book and were actually taught by the English how to drive out foreign invaders for good—just as the Turks were years before.  The unseen force at work is communism sponsored by Germany behind the mask of Islam and it is for that reason that it goes unnamed because the intentions for those provocateurs is not to regain the Holy Land, but to spread communism to every corner of the globe depleting the United States of resources in defense of its big brothers in European partnership.  This will leave no resistance to the kind of radicalism that the Bolsheviks long hoped for.  The game being played is not the game being shown—like he Sykes-Picot Agreement in betraying T.E. Lawrence and his Arabian army driving the Turks out of the Holy Land to fulfill long-held Crusader objectives.  The real game is to spread communism adopted out of Arab loyalty to their defenders—the Bolsheviks who replaced Lawrence as their new master by revealing the truth which is so important to the Arab world.  The aims of global communism benefit.

Think about all of that the next time you visit a hospital dear reader.  At that point look at the duel serpents of the medial logo and think of Krak des Chevalier and the Knights of the First Crusade and realize that we are just as primitive now as we were then and just as naive.  (As usual, the videos above are there to provide supporting evidence.  Watch them, even though it will take much of a whole day, and you will learn a great deal which supports the text provided.)  Communism is the modern letter sent behind the walls of America to encourage surrender in the Middle East–metaphorically of course.  Behind ISIS, and the Muslim Brotherhood are the old revolutionary communists of Europe, and eventually Stalin driven by the same Crusader forces from the First Crusade broadcast from the castle of Krak des Chevalier.

Rich Hoffman www.OVERMANWARRIOR.com