Shhhhhhhhh, do you hear that dear reader? SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. It’s a few nights before Christmas and not a creature is stirring…………..not even a mouse. Instead, they are all huddled together in the cracks of society planning what to do next. If you listen carefully you can hear them making their plans at damage control. Did you wonder why Obama suddenly showed courage and support for Hollywood in the face of North Korean aggression when he had blamed an anti-Muslim video for the whole Bengahzi incident? And could the timing of the Cuban deal have come months before, or several months later—instead of right now. And how about the executive orders in favor of amnesty? SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, listen carefully.
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee released a report Tuesday that found the Obama White House turned the IRS into a political organization that has spent years attacking conservative groups. Yet with all the noise surrounding Christmas, the 18 trillion-dollar debt, the Korean crises, the Cuban crises, the Chinese crises, the declining Russian economy, the parade of scandals following the Obama White House like tin cans chained to a beat up car hosting newlyweds after a shotgun wedding, the race wars in America, the plummeting gas prices, there just isn’t any room in people’s minds for the most important news item of them all—how the government from the very top used the IRS as a personal weapon to attack political rivals so that their regime could stay in power during the 2012 election. Here’s some of what the report said:
“The Internal Revenue Service has compromised its traditional position as an independent tax administrator,” the report found. “The IRS’s inability to keep politics out of objective decisions about interpretation of the tax code damaged its primary function: an apolitical tax collector that Americans can trust to treat them fairly.”
The report indicated that improper IRS activities began with a 2010 comment from President Barack Obama, who said some of the Tea Party groups were being funded with corporate money, and “we don’t know where this money is coming from.” That criticism was prompted by Democratic reactions to the Citizens United case in the Supreme Court, which many Democrats blamed for allowing the wealthy to pour more money into campaigns.
Five days after Obama spoke in 2010, former IRS official Lois Lerner spoke at Duke University and said many wanted the IRS to “fix the problem.”
“The pressure to ‘fix the problem,’ as articulated by Lois Lerner, originated with President Obama and senior party leadership,” the report found. “For twenty-several months, from February 2010 until May 2012, the Internal Revenue Service systematically targeted conservative tax-exempt applicants for additional scrutiny and delay.”
“As prominent Democratic politicians and the media condemned conservative non-profit groups, the IRS sought ways to rein in the groups’ political speech,” the report found. “Lois Lerner initiated a ‘c4 project’ — careful to ensure that it was not ‘per se political’ — and called applications filed by Tea Party groups “very dangerous” because she believed that they could undo existing IRS limits on non-profit political speech.”
That led to additional scrutiny of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status. The report said that while a few groups were targeted with the words “progress” or “progressive” in their title, almost all were conservative-leaning organizations.
The decision to target conservative groups was followed by later decisions to cover it up, and blame lower level workers for the initiative.
The report also blamed Obamacare, which gave the IRS a key role in implementing Obama’s health program, for turning the IRS into an arm of the White House, when it should have remained independent.
“Evidence shows an IRS responsive to the partisan policy objectives of the White House and an IRS leadership that coordinates with political appointees of the Obama administration,” it found.
It said efforts to cover up the scandal were ultimately led by Obama himself. Obama initially said the IRS’s actions were inexcusable, but later said there was not a “smidgen of corruption” at the IRS.
Yet there’s a good bet that the report will be largely ignored. Most of the premier newscasters are on vacation using replacements to fill the airtime while everyone has their eyes on the Christmas Holiday and time with families. The story will likely die on the vine as everyone is thinking about everything but the IRS. Even those who do watch the news over the holiday season do not give it much weight as their minds are heavily encumbered with social obligations—and that is all by design. Obama and his White House simply overloaded the news cycle with news bits with such density that most people’s heads would simply explode if they tried to take it all in.
So punishment for the IRS crime and the “smidgen” of evidence pouring in from the White House will go unpunished. When the senate released their report about the waterboarding torture conducted by the CIA under the Bush administration—the entire news cycle covered the story even as Paul Gruber was testifying on the Hill about the deceptions that helped Obamacare get passed as a new tax because Americans were too stupid to notice—his words. But regarding the White House aggression in using the IRS as a personal political weapon next to nothing will be said, even on Fox News because all the heavy hitters are on vacation and by the time they come back in January, there will be new things to talk about and the IRS story will be old hat—and uninteresting.
But the proof that the White House was involved from the very start of the scandal is there. You just have to listen very closely to hear it. SHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Do you hear it now? Good, so can I.. Now, what do you want to do about it?
I had a nice talk with Doc Thompson the other day about some really cool things that are on the horizon—which ironically corresponded to some of the really good work that Glenn Beck has been doing. Beck on December 18th 2014 did a very dystopian video playing himself as a man 40 years older thinking back on this time and the events of our day. His message corresponded perfectly with the contents of the discussion Doc and I had just hours earlier. In a lot of ways the reason I write this blog every day, and produce the other creative content that I do is that I know we are entering a new age where collectivism will be the new open mantra and it is my responsibility as an individual to speak out against it. The revisionists are already hard at work steering the world in the direction Beck alluded to in his video just as they did with the Christopher Columbus voyage—declaring that Europe had discovered America—even though that was very far from the truth.
I have watched and learned over the years how diabolical the church aligned with politics can be in destroying history. In order to maintain the theory that the North American Indian was “native” to the New World and that Columbus discovered them the government has virtually destroyed those nomadic people so to remove the evidence of their very lives, and destroyed numerous archaeological sites that proved human beings had advanced cultures in America thousands of years before Christopher Columbus ever thought of sailing across the Atlantic. In America there were of course Vikings who moved as deep into the country as Oklahoma and Minnesota. There were also Chinese who apparently mated with a giant species of man possibly from the lost tribes of Israel. There were Aztecs and Mayans who traveled up the Mississippi to exchange goods with Cahokia and other large population centers with advanced knowledge of astronomy and mythology. And likely there were advanced cultures in America before any of those groups came to be—well before Europe was even a land of kingdoms. But to maintain the illusion that Europe had discovered America—much evidence had been destroyed on purpose.
So Beck’s video drama is not far off the mark. Revisionist history is hard at work in the present trying to erase events only decades old—let alone centuries so that an order centered around collectivism can rise to power. And if that assault is not met with aggression, Beck’s apocalypse will come true. So I write my postings, my books, and do whatever I can to preserve the history that I have witnessed personally through a colorful life full of experience. I have first hand witnessed the world before the revisionists put their hands on fate—so I’m dedicated to that preservation.
The history erasing is mostly happening by the public school system followed closely by the media. The most current evidence of historic revision is the Cuban issue of Obama reopening ties with the southern communist country. In my lifetime I watched the Cold War struggles between America and Cuba and have watched how during the Obama presidency that slowly the anger toward communism has abated with full support of the media culture to watch the revision of a former enemy to a friendly southern neighbor occur virtually overnight. Within a few years the dark days of the Cold War will be wiped away.
Ironically the best way to study revisionist techniques comes from the attempted passage of local school levy issues where public relations professionals spin reality often and hide crimes to gain tax increases by public vote. They will cheat any way possible to acquire their funds. The same basic Alinsky methods have been used by the Obama White House to cover their many scandals. Once that game is understood it is easy to see how history is being erased right before our eyes as fast as it is created.
Beck’s apocalyptic vision is quite realistic if taken at the value of true observation. Those who might call it conspiratorial or paranoid are the type of people erasing history presently. And this cannot be allowed to occur. So in a lot of ways I have dedicated my life to the preservation, and resurrection of the proper history before it is gone forever—wiped clean by the revisionists trying to hide their tracks. And that was the content of the talk Doc and I had. 2015 should be a very interesting year.
Most normal Americans probably don’t know that there is a World Socialist Web Site, but there is. In fact, there are a lot of web sites throughout the world dedicated to socialism and they are primarily aimed at the young, the stupid, and the uneducated masses that lack natural aptitude. Socialism is attractive to the infinitely, and incurably lazy because it allows them to gain resources at the expense of somebody else’s work. It is far from fair because those who have natural ambition and drive are constantly plucked throughout their lives and punished for their drive by the collective masses who call themselves socialists. There are a lot more socialists than most people realize—and they are a lot more open about their activity outside of the United States. There is still a stigma in America toward socialism because of the foundations of capitalism that formed the prosperous country. So socialists and would-be communists keep their identification concealed behind “alternative” terminology to perpetrate their ruse against society.
I have identified to readers here what Interstellar was all about in my review, which can be seen by clicking here. The film has made within just three weeks over $500 million dollars, most of it overseas—particularly communist China and somewhat capitalist South Korea. The film underperformed in the United States largely due to the intellectual weight of the subject matter. Thinking is not fashionable in America currently, so given the nature of Interstellar, an almost 3 hour film that does not involve any sex or even romance—is a lot to ask out of American film audiences to sit though. They for the most part are scared of a physics experiment that does not involve someone flashing boobies somewhere within it. Those who love Interstellar in America are those who like to think. In societies already suppressed by communism and collectivism however—they do enjoy thinking because it’s the only freedom that they have—and they LOVE Interstellar. Forget the stereotypes that Asians are good at math, the movie market in the East loves thinking movies—which Interstellar is.
But socialists don’t like thinking movies because they require non-thinking mentality to execute their ridiculous political and economic policies. Communists in China have seen first-hand what a debacle their policies have been and the are moving toward capitalism instead of away from it like Americans have been for so long—and they see the message behind Interstellar as hope for their dire situations. Elsewhere, particularly around Europe, socialists see the message of Interstellar as a threat to their climate change religion of earth worship so they attack the premise of the plot with the same voracity that Bible thumpers profess that evolution is not a scientific factor in plant and animal life development.
For proof of this discriminatory condition against capitalist endeavors such as a non-climate change movie, below are some hilarious excerpts from the World Socialist Web Site as they reviewed Interstellar. The World Socialist Web Site is essentially The Huffington Post only without the filter of progressivism to mask the hard left slant. The WSWS is written by The International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) which is the name of two Trotskyistinternationals; one with sections named Socialist Equality Party which publishes the World Socialist Web Site, and another linked to the Workers Revolutionary Party in Britain. The International Committee originated as a public faction of the Fourth International. It was formed in 1953 by a number of national sections of the FI that disagreed with the course of the International Secretariat of the Fourth International led at that time by Michel Pablo (Raptis) and Ernest Mandel (Germain). The Committee was co-ordinated by the American section, the Socialist Workers Party, and included the British section led by Gerry Healy and Pierre Lambert’s Parti Communiste Internationaliste (PCI) in France. Trotskyist groups in various other countries, notably in Austria, China, India, Japan, New Zealand and Nahuel Moreno‘s group in Argentina, also joined.
Needless to say, they didn’t like the movie, here’s what they said:
Interstellar is part of a trend in contemporary science fiction movies, and cinema in general, that subscribes to the notion that everything in this planet is already lost. Brand’s brilliant scheme is simple: if we cannot save the Earth, let’s leave it. The idea of abandoning the planet for a fresh start in another part of the universe is alarming, irritating. Responsible scientists, artists and others need to address the present social and political challenges, instead of ignoring them or projecting them far away.
Toward the end, when Cooper awakes on board a NASA space station orbiting Saturn, it seems that people are living in harmony. As was the case at the beginning of the film, there is no reference to the social context. Is this a world with a different economic structure, with social justice, free from capitalist exploitation? Does Nolanthink the discovery of another planet will automatically make human beings’ relationships better? Or is humankind a species destined to wander through the universe without hope for all eternity?
Nevertheless, the overall plot resolution is ridiculous. Nolan prefers providing easy, indulgent answers to the audience rather than working through thought-provoking questions.
At one point, Amelia says: “Love is the one thing we are capable of perceiving that transcends time and space.” But beyond the vindication of the family institution, the classic setting of the petty bourgeois, the film does not dare to go anywhere. Ultimately, what is so striking about Interstellar is the contradiction between the science and technology (including film technology) and the poverty of the ideas. It is easier for many filmmakers to imagine a fifth dimension and coming out the other end of a black hole than it is for them to study our social organization and construct a critical picture of it.
Incoherent and boring for long stretches, Interstellar is a galactic mess: a sci-fi extravaganza, in which Nolan becomes the prisoner of his own gravity. His work says little about the human condition, our world and its relation with the universe around us. Made for $165 million, it has already grossed more than $130 million in the US, and $225 million in the rest of the planet since its release. If Nolan’s film reveals anything, it would be the mediocre state of American studio filmmaking and the undemocratic global system of distribution and exhibition.
Notice how the key words of socialism were placed in the article from their philosophic vantage point, “capitalist exploitation,” “social justice,” and the illustrious “bourgeois.” Their biggest gripe with the film is that the Nolan brothers decided to take the plot line of earth worship completely out of the factors of consideration and just left earth behind for destinations yet unknown. By doing so all the tenants of progressive and socialist belief are instantly diffused. Socialism and communism only work when there are no other options for a society—and capitalism is destroyed. This is why they tend to mostly be greenie weenie types and old hippie tree huggers with tie die t-shirts hanging in their closets and an occasional aroma of marijuana smoke emitting from their urban dwellings. They have made a religion out of earth worship and attached it directly to political activism—which ultimately attacks capitalist enterprises like coal consumption, carbon emissions, and creates EPA activism through regulation.
Socialists require no options to sell their ideals to society, and Interstellar takes movie goers completely out of the earth worship culture of progressives and gives them something else to think about besides social justice. Given that option, socialists throughout the world are watching as years of mind-numbing programming are erased with a simple three-hour Christopher Nolan movie. This is precisely why my own children have been to see Interstellar three times over the last three weeks. When my oldest daughter had any option she wanted for her 25th birthday, she chose to see Interstellar for the third time—and I am proud of her for supporting such a wonderful picture. I want to see it again just because I know it galls socialists to no end to see such philosophic competition arguing against their policies.
Kip Thorne is hardly a bastion of conservatism along with his openly left-leaning Interstellar producer Lynda Obst. Thorne is an academic whom I admire immensely, so I forgive him for his old hippie ways. It’s alright so long as he stays on campus and keeps his fingers out of the business world where capitalism rules. Lynda was producing Interstellar with Steven Spielberg and if things had stayed the way they were lining up Interstellar would have been a good film like A.I. or something to that effect, but it would not have made nearly as much money. Science geeks would go to the film, but conservatives would stay away because of all the hippie messages that Obst and Spielberg would have sprinkled in—and the $200 million dollar project might have broken even in the world-wide market. But Obst had a problem, after a writer’s guild strike pulled Jonathan Nolan away then Spielberg had to bail, she had no other option but to take the next best thing, Christopher Nolan fresh off his Dark Knight films. The Nolans working together once again rewrote the script, cut out all the hippie sludge, and put together a film that truly took viewers off this planet and all the problems associated with it. The result is an international box office smash that will redefine the film industry—especially in the Asian market.
So the socialists of the world are watching the success of Interstellar with a serious case of the goo. They are miserable to see such a rejection of their social philosophies, and Interstellar is very much a rejection of their assumptions—that’s partly what makes it so wonderful. So if you really want to piss off a socialist—go see Interstellar a few more times and support it with the kind of revolution that the communists in America are calling for in Ferguson. The best way to solve many of the social problems that afflict the world is to put more money in people’s pockets and upgrade their standard of living. Space shows promise in that direction—but more importantly, capitalism offers those solutions. Socialism leads mankind to earth worship and more EPA regulations. Capitalism leads to space, and the many opportunities for the world found there. It is that realization that has the World Socialist Web Site feeling so dejected. And that makes me very, very happy.
“But beyond the vindication of the family institution, the classic setting of the petty bourgeois, the film does not dare to go anywhere.” Now, you know what’s wrong with American public schools—what a terrible, diabolical attitude toward family structure. It should be clear what socialists are out to destroy.
To those who have read Edward Leeskalnin’s book Magnetic Current they have the fortune of knowing that it is as revolutionary as Einstein’s E=MC2. In the book Leeskalnin explains how to remove magnetic currents from objects and to manipulate them in a way that is useful. Yet the information is technically impossible by modern methods of science as there is some missing knowledge in getting from here to Leeskalnin’s assumptions. The impact of Leeskalnin’s understanding to magnetism will eventually be much more revolutionary than Tesla’s experiments with AC current as opposed to Edison’s DC. Tesla was attacked and buried by his former boss in Edison so to preserve the power grid model we see today that is unionized as a public utility—and controlled by government backed monopolies. Yet Leeskalnin and Tesla were using electrical current and magnetism in ways that tapped into the cosmic supply of that energy—which never runs out making the levitation of giant objects and perpetual use of power completely free as an obtainable possibility. The difference is essentially the Internet we have today which costs a fee to have access but once there, the world is at your feet in as much abundance as you can handle—as opposed to Obama’s attempts through the FCC to control and regulate the Internet as a public utility.
In A Book in Every Home Leeskalnin had some very interesting thoughts about the quality of an education system and how to determine if it was any good. He stated:
Now, a few words about eduation. You know we receive an education in the schools from books. All those books that people became educated from twenty-five years ago, are wrong now, and those that are good now will be wrong again twenty-five years from now. So if they are wrong then, they are also wrong now, and the one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is mislead. All books that are written are wrong, the one who is not educated cannot write a book and the one who is can be proved, to possess appreciation and self control.
Now, if you lack willingness to learn, you will remain as a brute and if you do things that are not good and right, you will be a low person, and if you believe in things that cannot be proved, any feeble minded person can lead you, and if you lack appreciation, it takes away the incentive for good doing and if you lack self control you will never know the limit.
So all those lacking these characteristics in their makeup are not eduated.
Essentially what Ed was saying in a manner that reminds me of the way Sun Tzu wrote in The Art of War—which is still used today by military minds—is that most books are written by people not properly educated and of no mind to teach others. The government’s motivation in this debacle is revealed by their desire to go through the motions, yet still delivering people to an ignorant state so that they are easy to control by creating a society of the feeble minded. The government only wants to educate people in the methods of instruction that will lead to a career which serves the state—and not in the wisdom of perpetually obtaining knowledge.
To confirm the results of this vile approach just look at any slack jawed loser who has been trained by their public schools into incurable ignorance. Their minds were destroyed in public education and they now can do very little with their lives but show up at a job they trained for and vote for one of the two members of a political party. The rest of their lives are virtually wasted.
If society had listened to Tesla every home in the world could have free electrical power. There would never be grid failures but each power generation supply would operate like an air conditioning unit does now—they would run and supply free power for as long as the perpetual generator lasted instead of the J.P. Morgan backed debacle we ended up with through Edison. The government wanted unionized employees servicing a power grid, and that’s what we ended up with vulnerable to every downed tree, heavy wind, or car accident that hits a power line. Edward Leedskalnin and his anti-gravity techniques could eliminate huge power equipment for construction and manufacturing methods—but most of those suppliers of equipment are also unionized, and they don’t want average people to gain the ability to lift 20 to30 ton objects the way a child picks up a penny off the sidewalk. The technology is there, but it cannot be unlocked because government schools have taught mass swarms of individuals to think of the collective good before individual selfishness—and in that way nobody dares to provoke the systems put in place by government intrusion—to question their merits.
Yet if you step off the path the governments of the world have led you down dear reader—you will see easily that a better life is easily obtainable. Tesla discovered many of those secretes and so did Edward Leedskalnin. They tried to help people see those secrets by overcoming the public faith in a government backed education system and Leedskalnin’s books were obvious efforts toward that objective. Sadly, especially in Leedskalnin’s case he remained a hermit most of his life because it is just too tormenting for highly intelligent people like him to watch others behave so ignorantly following the same outdated education methods even in a time where the world envied the American system as the best in the world. Leedskalnin understood the deficiency and he tried to warn people of it—but they did not have a mind to listen.
Because of the poor educating methods applied to mass society, there are no minds able to unlock the secrets of Leedskalnin’s book Magnetic Current. There are only knuckle dragging assumptions that always look toward mother government for encouragement and breast milk. And the same slavery of ignorance which has persisted for millennia continues to ruin minds, destroy societies, and eradicate family structure. The only thing government schools are good for is creating compliant minds who will drink too much, shorten their lives considerably with unhealthy choices, and pay their taxes for the employment of slugs who eye every conceivable holiday with a yearning for the intoxication that comes from the hit of a bottle and too many groceries in the refrigerator—keeping them fat, dumb, and happy.
I really like Edward Leedskalnin. He was my kind of guy and is one of those obscure geniuses who never had a fair shake during his lifetime, but likely held the secrets that many in the human race most decidedly crave. It is likely that he had the intelligence of Einstein without the fame or platform—and being a natural recluse whose hobby was “thinking,” the outside world just never considered the importance of his work or gave him the respect he deserved. But Leedskalnin likely preferred it that way.
Edward Leedskalnin was born January 12, 1887, according to World War I draft registration records, in Stāmeriena parish, Latvia. Little is known of his childhood, aside from the fact that he was not wealthy and achieved only a fourth-grade education. However Edward was a sickly boy, and often spent his time inside reading books — eventually leading him to discontinue his schooling as it “bored him”. For Ed, his development of a yearning to obtain knowledge became a passionate and potent driving force in many endeavors throughout his later life.[2] At the age of 26, he was engaged to marry Agnes Scuffs, a girl ten years younger.[3] However, the girl that Leedskalnin referred to as his “Sweet Sixteen” broke the engagement the night before their wedding, so he emigrated to North America[4] where he found work in various lumber camps in Canada, California, and Texas.
Then, after contracting a case of tuberculosis, Leedskalnin moved to the warmer climate of Florida around 1919, where he purchased a small piece of land in Florida City. Over the next 20 years, Leedskalnin putatively constructed and lived within a massive coral monument he called “Rock Gate Park”, dedicated to the girl who had left him years before. Working alone at night, Leedskalnin eventually quarried and sculpted over 1,100 short tons (997,903 kg) of coral into a monument that would later be known as the Coral Castle. He used various basic tools, several made from timber and parts of an old Ford; first he built a house out of coral and timber, then he gradually built the monuments for which he is famous.[4] In spite of his private nature, he eventually opened his monument to the public, offering tours for 10 cents. He was a surprisingly accommodating host, even cooking hot dogs for visiting children in a pressure cooker of his own invention.
When people asked Leedskalnin how he had moved all of the stone by himself, he refused to give over his method and would only reply to whoever was asking with the same statement: “I understand the laws of weight and leverage and I know the secrets of the people who built the pyramids (being those at the site at Giza in Egypt).”
He was also a writer and published a few books, one on education and politics, and another on the mysteries of magnetism. Leedskalnin’s first and longest booklet, a treatise on moral education, was printed on only the left-hand pages, and begins with the following preface:
Reader, if for any reason you do not like the things I say in the little book, I left just as much space as I used, so you can write your own opinion opposite it and see if you can do better.
The Author
In the first section, Leedskalnin vents his anger at his “Sweet Sixteen”, arguing that girls should be kept pure, and that boys are primarily a soiling influence upon them. On page 4 of A Book in Every Home, Leedskalnin writes:
“Everything we do should be for some good purpose but as everybody knows there is nothing good that can come to a girl from a fresh boy. When a girl is sixteen or seventeen years old, she is as good as she ever will be, but when a boy is sixteen years old, he is then fresher than in all his stages of development. He is then not big enough to work but he is too big to be kept in a nursery and then to allow such a fresh thing to soil a girl — it could not work on my girl. Now I will tell you about soiling. Anything that is done, if it is done with the right party it is all right, but when it is done with the wrong party, it is soiling, and concerning those fresh boys with the girls, it is wrong every time.”
The second section continues along the theme of moral education, with several aphorisms aimed at parents regarding the proper way to raise children. The last, “Political” section reveals that the reclusive Leedskalnin had strong political views. He advocates voting for property owners only (and in proportion to their holdings), and argues that “Anyone who is too weak to make his own living is not strong enough to vote.”
Some writers have suggested that Leedskalnin’s booklet contains further information on his electromagnetic research and philosophies encoded in its pages, and the blank pages are provided for the reader to fill in their decrypted solutions. It has also been suggested that Leedskalnin’s frequent referral to his “Sweet Sixteen” may in fact refer to the numerological and/or scientific relevance of the number sixteen to his research and theories.[6]
Leedskalnin’s ideas may appear unusual. He wrote that a mother’s most important task is to ensure that her daughter remains “chaste and faithful”:[4]
“In case a girl’s mamma thinks that there is a boy somewhere who needs experience then she, herself, could pose as an experimental station for that fresh boy to practice on and so save the girl. Nothing can hurt her any more. She has already gone through all the experience that can be gone through and so in her case it would be all right”
I find myself agreeing emphatically with Leedskalnin on most of his social and political positions and believe that he was tapped into the elusive power of magnetism as they have a direct effect on concepts of anti-gravity manipulation. His science as obscure as it was indicated by his writing was firmly rooted in a value system driven obviously by the lost love of a potential wife whom it appears he never got over. He applied his massive intellect toward building a magnificent castle garden for her, but she never came. Even at the turn of the century, he was already observing the corrosive effect that males have on females when he references how they “soil them.” And he’s right, just imagine what his thoughts of girls today would be—they are “soiled” at age 11 and 12 now through the same public education system that he found so boring.
Leedskalnin chose to be a recluse it appears for similar reasons that I limit my social contacts—because people are disappointing—they often fail to live up to their potential and are often relegated to poor personal standards. Leedskalnin saw one of those social failures occurring at the young age of women becoming soiled by males—which then lowers the ambition of the males ones they get what they wanted—the benefits of the young woman’s loins. I often have similar thoughts, older women look too often like used up husks and males no longer want to hunt in their loins since the endeavor becomes easy. So the males turn toward younger women not yet ruined by life and its disappointments. Currently we have an education system which seeks to exacerbate this crisis instead of rectifying it with value and that is certainly not good for civilization. Knowing these kinds of things makes dealing with people difficult—deeply laborious in fact—because people can only take from you and have little to give back leaving the thinking person always feeling emptied by such human presences.
So are people like Leedskalnin wrong? Of course not, nobody else in America or the world currently has been levitating three-ton rocks around with anti-gravity devices—no university has discovered his secrets through his decoded writings. He left hints, but a non-thinking world just doesn’t have what it takes to perform the task. And to him the origin of the problem was with women—a woman that left him at the altar likely for a more exciting man. He blames the girl’s mother for not establishing the proper virtue in causing her heart to behold a man who could lift massive stones with just simple garden tools and an ancient secret as opposed to the football star, the Wall Street financier, or the fancy pants scum bag who could purchase a large diamond for her finger to show off to her friends. A failure to have a society of quality women has led to a degeneration of men who simply no longer wish to work for anything any more—especially sex. The young men of our day are a grotesque species pampered from birth to have everything given to them so as adults they only want to soil up women to deposit themselves in so that they can return back to their video games. It is that loss of intellect that has prevented others from discovering the secrets of Leedskalnin even though he posed the challenge gently hoping for takers to solve his riddles. Sadly, most of a century later—he has not had any real takers because of the soiled women and lazy men rotten from their public educations. I like Leedskalnin so much because for once I feel like I’m not the only one saying these kinds of things. For society, they have to weigh out the value of collective foolishness over individual genius—such as what Edward Leedskalnin had. For me, I’ll pick the advice of a guy who can levitate giant rocks over the average Joe who only wants to soil women, any day of the week. The values of the two are not even relative to one another. And it is in the former that the keys to civilization’s future reside. The trouble is that we do not teach our young to recognize this value—which is a tragic loss to human potential now and so long as it continues.
Regarding space travel versus these Taoist monk progressives who are so obsessed with their mind/body dichotomy that they stay all their lives so treacherously grounded to the earth–space to the extent that you can see the curvature of the earth easily is only 22 miles straight up. A bicycle rider could cover that distance in a couple of hours, a car could knock out that travel time in less than 15 minutes. There really isn’t much above us considering the massive amount of space that is beyond those 22 miles of atmosphere. The International Space Station orbits on average above the earth between 173 miles to 266. That is the usual distance between most major cities in the Midwest and can be covered within a few short hours of car travel time. It’s not that far—at all. Yet people like Arthur Rosenfeld think that the human mind should remain tethered to the ground so that we can align ourselves to our mind and body through Tai Chi exercises.
In college I met tons of these idiots. On the U.C. campus I used to eat breakfast every morning in Coryville at a little place right across from the Kroger store. Inside with me were many of the college professors who had the same habit before reporting to class. I would often do my morning reading which often composed of material well beyond their grasp—some of it Kip Thorne’s work. They would gather over coffee and omelets and wear their Taoist jewelry under their sport coats and argue with me over the same type of things that Arthur Rosenfeld did after seeing Interstellar, most of it playful banter until they realized they couldn’t change my mind. What I learned from my college experience was that those people in that little breakfast shop were destroying the minds of every American youth who attended their classes. They were not equipped to teach anybody anything regarding spirituality, science, or even politics when their frame of reference was rooted to progressive philosophy in such a way that the answers to life’s difficulties were not explored just 22 miles above our heads—but instead around the other side of the world and down the road in the latest government created slum.
Arthur Rosenfeld is a typical progressive—he is a mind firmly anchored to the ground much like a jealous small-minded parent who fears for their five-year old to ride a bicycle down the driveway without a helmet. He is part of that “safety first” culture when it crushes the natural spirit of adventure. Instead he offers to quiet the mind so that you can hear the voices of the earth and all its animals relegating oneself to its grim limitations like a jealous mother who cannot let go of a treasured son or daughter. After seeing Interstellar Rosenfeld wrote a remarkably small-minded review in the Huffington Post, linked below. But of that article, there were a few paragraphs that stood out as exceptionally ridiculous reminding me so intensely of those nutty U.C. college professors who used to share breakfast over arguments in Coryville and convinced me that progressives could not be helped—that they were not content to just live and let live—but desired with a military-like fervor to put shackles on the mind of mankind so to keep them within their own intellectual comfort zones. Progressives were detrimental to every mind they attempted to teach. Read those excerpts below with my comments following:
Posted: 11/14/2014 8:29 am EST Updated: 11/14/2014 9:59 am EST
Despite the marvelous special effects and the great lengths gone to by the filmmakers to imaginatively render singularities, Interstellar misses the chance to be either an inspiring or cautionary tale. Instead, the film lionizes precisely those social elements that are most reprehensible and scary, and lauds precisely those psychological traits that we must excoriate if we are truly to save our planet and survive along with it. More, instead of juxtaposing technology and consciousness, science and morality as James Cameron did in Avatar, director Christopher Nolan panders to our primitive urge to resort to fantasy rather than reality when facing the very problems that have put humanity in its current pickle.
Jim Cameron’s film, Avatar was a progressive journey against capitalist endeavor. The corporation in the film was the villain and the heroes were a bunch of natives who were plugged into the consciousness of their planet. With each failed marriage in Cameron’s personal life he moved more and more away from the logic of the truck driver he used to be—which was obvious in his early films, like Terminator, and even the Abyss and started forming his political beliefs around the pick-up lines he used on subsequent love interests. Females, because of their unique ability to have children are sympathetic to the resonance of Mother Earth and the metaphor of their children growing up and leaving them is not lost to the concept the plight of mankind leaving the earth to journey into space. When a human male wants to gain the sexual favor of a female he will often appeal to this “motherhood” aspect of females to lure them into his bed. If he likes them, he might try to marry them, and in James Cameron’s case—he went through this process many times looking for love that never really lived up to his cinematic brilliance. So he has moved toward female view points after many marriages as opposed to finding females that leaned toward him. Avatar was the result of a pick-up line that became a movie. This is why many women vote for Democrats because progressive liberals appeal to this motherhood neurosis.
Mankind is at its adolescence and space is essentially like moving out into one’s own first apartment. It doesn’t mean that we abandoned our parents on earth, but that we have to form a healthy relationship where our destiny is shaped by our own thoughts instead of the home planet. Rosenfeld is proposing that Interstellar had an obligation to accentuate how irresponsible mankind is—like the film Koyaanisqatsi—which Interstellar resembles often. Instead, Interstellar boldly declares that man’s mind is the answer to everything in the universe and this is what Rosenfeld finds so reprehensible.
To sort through the razzle-dazzle and get to what really makes this movie so reprehensible requires some straight talk about who we humans really are and are not, both in the physical and spiritual sense. Physically, we are one species among millions, living an impermanent existence against an ever-changing bio-geological backdrop. If we are unique, it is not because we are the most intelligent species on the planet (that honor likely goes to whales), nor because we are the most enduring (look to cycads and roaches instead) but because, in addition to being stunningly resourceful, creative, potentially loving and deeply spiritual, we are also the most hubristic, self-absorbed, and destructive.
Animals are collectivists; I have not seen a whale build a rocket to the moon, or a new car to speed their transit across the earth. Whales especially are a matriarchal society which is a progressive metaphor for their religion of earth worship, so it is not to be ignored that Rosenfeld uses whales as an example of the type of earthly animal species that deserves inclusion as the earth’s most intelligent species. Give me a break. Whales are wonderful; they are magnificent to look at. I respect their right to live in the ocean and not to have their mating habits infringed upon—but when a whale gains the ability to run a company and produce more than an ocean full of shit—then I might be willing to entertain the notion that whales need to be considered intelligent. But again, Rosenfeld proposes that humans are just one species and that it is our task to slow our minds down to the tiniest insect and to listen to what they have to say as an equal species.
Just yesterday I was conversing with a person and was aware of a Chinese stink bug that was crawling along the side of a table. I was careful not to lean against that table as I was trying not to bring harm to it. Well, the person I was speaking with without any ill intent leaned against the table killing the poor little insect by crushing three of its legs. It fell to the ground for a slow death completely unintentional and I felt bad for it. I tried to save it, but the insect was in a place it didn’t belong and it was crushed by man’s progress just like the millions of bugs that are smashed on the front of our cars and under our feet. To people like Rosenfeld we are supposed to limit this behavior almost to the point of non action, but in the scheme of the universe—of the potential life that is “out there” even the largest whale is of the importance of a bug. Entire species can be killed easily with a simple meteor impact into the ocean or a few degrees of temperature change induced by radiation from the sun. Only human beings have emerged with a mind to so dramatically change their fate as to be simple bugs crawling on the side of a table with life and death timed out so perfectly between revolutions of the earth around the sun. Humans have come to know themselves by how many times the earth circles the sun. To the young women who cries at her waning youth complaining about how many candles are on her birthday cake representing age 40, her crises is that the first forty times she traveled on the earth around the sun provided her with youthful growth, and the next forty will be a gradual decline into death where her body is placed into the earth to be forgotten forever—so she is sad.
There is nothing brilliant about animals when they yield to those in a pecking order who are stronger and faster than they are—or older and more experienced. When humans follow the same patterns they end up worshiping people like Rosenfeld who hope to think of themselves at the top of an intellectual pyramid in a collective based society where he can be the one to teach others to tap into that common fountain of knowledge that we share through the tiniest insect during his Tai Chi exercises. Interstellar is about leaving this corrupting behavior behind and overcoming their restrictions. In the future, it is people like Rosenfeld who have destroyed invention, destroyed education, and destroyed politics leaving mankind to scribble in the dirt waiting to die. Interstellar offers an alternative and that is why Rosenfeld disliked the movie.
Let’s stop making movies like this, or, at least, let’s stop watching them. They freeze our hearts, turn our brains to mush, and delude our children into believing in Scientism, the latest and most dangerous of man’s religions. If we are going to explore, let’s explore our spiritual landscapes in a quest for an antidote to all such fantastical belief systems. Let’s find a mindful, balanced, and harmonious alternative to hating and killing everyone and everything in the name of what we say we believe. Let’s create cinematic masterworks that exhort us to cherish the planet we have, and all the wonders upon it, rather than jettison it in favor of new turf to kill.
Here is likely the most ridiculous statement I have heard in a long time—Rosenfeld actually proposes that movies like Interstellar shouldn’t be made in a free society full of competing ideas. As much as I like Star Wars, I’m not a huge fan of the “Force,” as it reminds me too much of people like Rosenfeld who don’t quite “get it.” I can watch those movies and enjoy them taking what I like and leaving behind what I don’t. But Rosenfeld actually proposes either a boycott of Interstellar, or cutting off the ability to produce such works of art because he doesn’t like the message.
There was no proposal in Interstellar to kill another species while they were in space looking for another earth-like planet to settle on. Rosenfeld suggests that there be a kind of social cinema board who sits around and actually decides the type of content which should be made into a film. In some ways—there already is within the studio system where progressive money often does just this very thing. It is amazing that Christopher Nolan has managed to make his kind of movie in that studio environment—but if you look at a chart of how many counties in America are politically red, it is no wonder that Nolan does so well at the box office—because he makes movies for the type of people who often get ignored by progressives like Rosenfeld. The farmer/hunter from the Midwest doesn’t give a rat’s ass about some urban progressive like Rosenfeld who wants to “feel the earth” while in line at Starbucks. The farmer is in the dirt every day and the content of Interstellar is very appealing to them—“they” get it.
Rosenfeld actually attacks the premise of science which is a ghastly mistake proposing that our “spiritual landscapes” are far more important than the vast blackness just a few miles above our heads. To maintain the type of political order where progressives like Rosenfeld get to be the “leader of the pack” on earth teaching people to honor the defeated Indian tribes and all their superstitions or think that whales are the most intelligent species on earth they cannot have competition to those beliefs, so they attack anything that might disrupt their scam against the human intellect.
I keep waiting for whales to build a cool shopping mall on the bottom of the ocean, and I eagerly await the next whale feature film about their life and habitat—their latest drama about how upset their matriarchs get when they seek to change mating locations 20 miles north of their birth place instead of the traditional nesting grounds. And I can’t wait until whales send their own into space on a rocket built of sea shells using compressed water as a propulsion system. Maybe if they are really smart, which Rosenfeld believes they are, they’ll use a couple of dolphins to run smaller scout ships into orbit around Mars so they can begin to seek a new ocean planet where natives of the intellect of Rosenfeld fall in nicely to whale worship and are happy to sacrifice goats, cows and other human beings to the Gods of the ocean to keep the whales living prosperously lumbering around in peace for all eternity.
To Rosenfeld progress—the products of man’s mind is the real villain. To his religious fanaticism any attempt to supplant nature as the superior guiding force is reprehensible. If one does not yield to nature, they are harming it—so every shopping mall, every Starbucks, every movie that does not pander to this earthly belief should be attacked and ridiculed. That is the limited mind of the progressive and why I just can’t stand them. I learned to hate them while I was in college and I never yielded to their rhetoric even in small ways—and for that I am infinitely grateful. Over time, those professors found some place else to eat and left me alone—which suited me just fine. The owner of the restaurant was in distress about the many arguments we often had—and when only I was left, it brought him much pain—much like the aforementioned stink bug—a casualty of intellectual competition. The professors took their four tables of left-leaning progressive hippies and started meeting across the street at Perkins and I spent my breakfast periods alone with my books and my omelet each morning happy for the solitude. Within four months, over the summer break, the owner had to close down due to a lack of business. So I moved across the street into Perkins and those same college professors left for someplace else–again. They did not want to sit near me because I would not give them the illusion that they were right about their limited world view. So they did what they always do, they picked up their act and went somewhere among their own kind so that they could live in the illusion of their falsehood. And what happens when people spend their whole lives in that condition—they become people like Arthur Rosenfeld. The appeal for me of Interstellar would be that I could leave the earth to get away from people like that—or—that they might get on a ship and leave for some hippie planet far away—just as the college professors did at our breakfast restaurant—leaving me to enjoy my life in peace—away from their corrupt minds and small perspective.
For education reformers in Ohio disappointment was revealed after the smoke cleared once the Election of 2014 results came in. In Southern Ohio where resistance to Common Core and the influence of teacher unions against children is strongest two socialist leaning Democrats won the state board of education seats for both District 3 and 4. One was an incumbent the other a former teacher union president which guarantees inaction and more progressive policies imposed on government schools providing a further erosion of the minds of young people. This is how The Pulse Journal reported the aftermath:
A.J. Wagner appeared to be winning election Tuesday night to the state board of education’s District 3 seat, which represents Butler, Preble, Montgomery, Miami and southern Darke counties.Wagner, a former judge and Montgomery County auditor, was appointed to the seat in August after Jeff Mims resigned. Both are Democrats who want to keep the Common Core standards and place a priority on urban public schools.
Former teachers union president and art teacher Pat Bruns won the school board seat for District 4 that represents Warren and Hamilton counties, earning 56 percent of the vote, to 44 percent for Zac Haines Bruns, a Democrat, supports Common Core school standards and wants to crack down on charter schools. Haines, a young Republican business owner, opposes Common Core and strongly supports school choice, including charters.
Putting a teacher union president on the state school board is like putting a snake into a glass cage filled with mice. There is no place for the mice to go, and all will be consumed eventually by the asp. So long as these types of people are setting the state standards in Ohio or anywhere else, government schools will be ineffective and culpable of instructing students all the wrong liberal policies.
For short-sighted gains, area Republicans did not focus any energy into the seats of these board positions which end up being breeding grounds for liberalism. When signs for Mary Pritchard who won (28 percent) nearly on her own without much party support, were displayed at an area Kasich rally, Todd Hall threw out the advocate. Todd runs the Republican Party in Southern Ohio now and is primarily concerned with bending the party around the finger of developer’s business interests instead of solid philosophical policy. Knowing him the way I do, he probably has a hard time saying that word let alone putting it to practice. The result is more bleeding heart Democrats setting the pace for more union control of government schools who continue to ask for money to support their scam ridden baby-sitting service called “public education.” That means area Republicans who are developers—like Todd is–will end up having to pay more money in taxes to those institutions of mismanagement because of their short-sighted strategy on a race that was locked from the start. There was no challenge to Kasich, or Boehner so Republicans could have helped Pritchard gain just 10 more percent of the vote. But because they chose to play it safe—it will cost down the road quite a bit.
Common Core is one of the vilest attempts at youthful minds in recent history. It is revisionist education steering minds toward collective intentions instead of individual achievement. This does not make Republicans for the future—it makes Democrats. In the dim-witted desire to show solidarity behind party favorites like the liberal union rep Sheriff Jones of Butler County and talk show progressive Bill Cunningham who only pretends to be a Rush Limbaugh type on WLW radio—Republicans have taken a weak approach to the philosophical tenets of conservativism and are patting themselves on the back as if they achieved a victory.
Todd Hall and his area Republicans are proud that they know weak-kneed conservatives who golf with President Obama with tough talk to the media, but gently fondle his genitals under the White House dining table and think nobody sees it. They are proud that Kasich dipped his feat in the water with a fight against public sector workers but decided that it was too much for him—and quickly retreated straight into the arms of Obamacare—to win some women voters and minority compliments—all the while giving up on conservative belief in favor of big government support. They are stupid enough to think they won—meanwhile real conservatives like Mary Pritchard are out of the arena and relegated to a category of “crazy Tea Party types.”
So true the country moved a bit toward conservativism, but only in name—just like most area Republicans in Southern Ohio—the races that could have been won that really mattered still have vile Democrats in them and can still do massive amounts of damage to young minds through Common Core—which is a creation of a current front-runner of the Republican national ticket for president—Jeb Bush. So before thinking that the dark days of liberalism are behind anybody in Ohio—the evidence indicates that the storm is just brewing and these soft-backed Republicans do not have the philosophical wherewithal to withstand the pressure such radical Democrats from the state board of education will try to impose. The real fight of the 2014 was lost in Ohio and Republicans failed to recognize it—in spite of the warnings. They were too busy looking like an inclusive party than focusing on the actual management of Ohio from top to bottom—and that will cost down the road…..a former teacher union president on the state board of education—what a travesty.
It appears that Joe Biden representing White House viewpoints was smoking the same type of crack that his son did when he was recently kicked out of the Navy for drug abuse. The Biden family obviously has a permissive attitude toward drug abuse as is evident by their politics, but it has migrated from just casual use to out-right believing that the hallucinations are a reality only they can see. For a politician with all the resources that come from the Obama White House—and being a so-called political heavy weight—Biden ridiculously predicted that Democrats would keep control of the senate. The evidence was extremely heavy against such a fantasy prior to the Election of 2014, yet he still went on the networks and gave speeches driven by hallucinations of hope knowing full well that his words would come back to haunt him—yet he did it anyway—as chronicled by Reuters:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Vice President Joe Biden predicted Democrats would retain control of the U.S. Senate in Tuesday’s congressional elections but said that whatever happens, Republicans would have to work harder to make sure things get done in Washington.
In an interview with CNN, Biden said he did not agree with forecasters who say Republicans are poised to capture the six seats they need to take over the Senate. They are also expected to expand their majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“I don’t agree with the odds-makers,” Biden said in the interview broadcast on Monday. “I predict we’re going to keep the Senate.”
Just weeks prior to the election Biden’s youngest son Hunter was kicked out of the Navy for testing positive for cocaine use—yet the story by the media was nearly completely overlooked, which was a very significant report involving such a prominent politician. Cocaine is an illegal substance—yet for the progressive Democrats, they wish very much to decriminalize drug abuse obviously carrying over into destructive habits taught from parent to child. Here is one of the view media outlets who carried the story—Ben Swann—the reporter formally from Channel 19 in Cincinnati.
On Thursday, it was revealed that Vice President Joe Biden’s youngest son, 44-year-old Hunter Biden, was released from the Navy in February, after he tested positive for cocaine use.
In a statement from Hunter Biden’s lawyer, he said:
“It was the honor of my life to serve in the U.S. Navy and I deeply regret and am embarrassed that my actions led to my administrative discharge. I respect the navy’s decision. With the love and support of my family I’m moving forward.”
Hunter Biden graduated from Yale with a law degree, and he currently works in Washington as the private equity executive and board director of an international energy firm, in addition to practicing law in Connecticut.
Yahoo News reported that Biden, “faces no automatic review of his law license in Connecticut following his discharge from the U.S. Navy Reserve after testing positive for cocaine use.”
According to Connecticut’s Statewide Bar Counselor, Michael P. Bowler, lawyers in Connecticut face automatic review of their bar admission only when they have been convicted of a crime.
The Vice President’s son was discharged from the military which is run by President Obama while both of them currently reside in the White House for consuming an illegal substance yet nothing was said about it. And just weeks later Joe Biden was confident enough to tell the media that the senate would be retained by Democrats even when all the evidence pointed to other results—which eventually came true even more robustly than predicted. The only conclusion that can be surmised from these events is that Joe Biden is either ridiculously stupid and naive, or is on crack himself and should be drug tested—because he would likely fail.
Biden was arrogant enough to defy logic in favor of political ideology which is a symptom that most drug users are guilty of. They often abuse drugs so that they can escape the effects of reality upon their conscious minds—which is why drug induced users are dangerous to themselves and others. There is a reason that drugs are illegal—it is largely because it is proven that some of them—like cocaine have a detrimental effect on human beings that not only makes them dangerous and stupid but has a carry over effect into society at large imposing their destructive habit into the lives of the innocent. Alcohol is certainly a dangerous intoxicate also, but it takes much longer and a lot more consumption to arrive at the point of danger than a few lines of cocaine. People who want to cheat the evasion process of shrugging reality propose the decriminalizing of drugs—as Biden has because in his family he obviously endorses it. However, cocaine is still illegal and the Biden boy should go to jail—not just lose his standing in the Navy. Only a victim of a drug induced stupor would fail to see such a thing—just as the same condition would have been needed not to see that the Republicans were going to take the senate. For those who favor drug use and its effects—if you want to know the dangers of habitual use—just look at Vice President Biden and listen to him talk. Then you’ll know why cocaine is an illegal substance.
On Saturday, November 1, 2014, Bill Schmidt wrote:
Rich,
After you again posted another of my e-mails to you on your blog, I told some people that I had been sending e-mails to this anti-school’s guy named Hoffman and that you had been posting and then commenting on them in your blog. They read some of the entries and then said that you seemed pretty kooky and creepy. They asked me why I kept sending you e-mails and I told them about your appearances on the radio, etc. They asked if I thought I could change your narrow mind at all and I said “definitely not”. So they questioned what was being accomplished by continuing the discourse.
I thought back to Nov of 2011 to when I sent you my first e-mail. Lakota had just voted down another school levy and it was clear more cuts needed to be made. I had been made very uncomfortable about how Doc Thompson had made you a spokesman about school finance and how he coddled you by agreeing with everything you would say and how he wasn’t being much of a journalist. So I wrote you an e-mail which you posted on your blog. Since then, various things have happened. You no longer are requested on the radio. You were kicked out of No Lakota Levy. A school levy passed in your district. And, judging that my e-mails are the only ones you seem to put out there, it appears your readership must consist of only a handful of kooks and creeps.
I had to admit that sending you e-mails seems to have no purpose anymore. We are just rehashing the same old stuff. I feel you dragging me into the abyss. I need to let you continue to sink on your own. Since I only read your school blog diatribes anyway, because the other stuff you write is such nonsense (as illustrated by your recent Virgin Galactic tout), I really doubt if I will be calling up your blog very much anymore.
Don’t hurt yourself out there trying to find Communists hiding behind the monkey bars but maybe you should take one of your Brown Shirts along with you as you search. I’d say mattjutras might be available. And I’ll be careful trying to find a Kroger survey to participate in.
William
Years down the road the strategy I am currently conducting will be quite evident. I have worked with others but consistent with my experience, there are severe weaknesses in doing so—so a strategy unique to the times is mandated to implement the needed objectives. I have been building that network now for several years and in doing so certain patterns emerge.
Schmidt’s current position is not that unlike the Laura Sanders episodes, or school board member Julie Schafer—when faced with facts that defy their worldly views, they chose mental evasion to logical observation. They always come around to saying that “you’re not worth the time or investment so I’m leaving.” What they really mean is that “I cannot make you accept my reality so I’m discouraged and will not look in your direction with the same candid flare a child hides under their covers hoping that monsters will not get them.” They often rationalize this position by calling me names like kooky or creepy and think they are smart with connections to debunked communist conspiracies or otherwise scandalous activity leading to public rebuke as if that public had a mind toward intelligence where their collective sum outweighed an individual thought.
Once these people reach the end of their tolerance—of their attempts to reform elements of society into their harmony they retreat to the warm arms of their like-minded despots—such as what William did in a moment of crises. Arrogantly his advisors spoke as if they were Christian missionaries on location in some primitive wilderness and their advice to William the failed missionary was to cut ties with the failed attempt and focus their efforts somewhere that brings success. In this way the government education culture has taken on a type of religious zeal not unlike the Crusades or the current Jihad movement of Islam—that anybody not brainwashed to the religion of their viewpoint should be cast aside as disreputable, or destroyed so that their challenging viewpoints do not threaten the sanctity of their religion—in this case the religion of public education.
There is a long list of such characters that have tried and failed to do what William has. Of them I will say that Schmidt often refrained from going too far which is why I will miss him a bit. He did provide a window into their thinking that I have been using extensively in studies for the referred to upcoming strategies. But as for demeaning my efforts here in attempting to portray them as ineffective and isolated from the mainstream—I can see who reads each day and how many of them there are. I see the many links to Lakota school computers, to the movers and shakers of politics, to the government offices of Columbus, Ohio and Washington D.C. I wouldn’t spend my time if it was wasted—which its not.
But I’m doing things, and planning things that are highly unconventional and certainly not a part of any current political playbook. And it’s all carefully considered and calculated. But as to Schmidt’s wishes of reputation smashing quandary—the meter on the sidebar tells the story better than words. Most newspapers would love to have those numbers, and I don’t sell any advertising aside from links to my own extended works which is about to get a major update. It’s all in the name of authenticity and in these types of political fights; there just aren’t enough characters in the arena who have a heart for that fight—or a proper strategy. And the ones who do are treated as a threat because they are upsetting the apple cart that people like Schmidt depends on. Like a last-minute football play in the closing seconds where a spectator might look away not able to take the drama of the moment—Schmidt’s type always retreats to this effort because the moment is just too much for them. The impact on the world at large is too great and they worry about the changes to their lives if it continues—which I can assure all—it will.
But you can’t do the same old thing over and over. I had a friend at 700 WLW, actually two friends, Darryl Parks and Doc Thompson. They were both fired largely due to people like William Schmidt who complained to the station and its advertisers hoping to quell the message against their social scam. 700 WLW is much friendlier now toward the William Schmidt types—the pro-pot, gay-marriage supporting advocates. They are a sports talk station that does not currently get involved in messy politics. They probably will return to that at some point in the future, but as for now, they are playing it safe. That was their decision. They have invited me on their programs which I have declined. Their criteria wished me to take on the role of the villain instead of the role I formally had—and that wasn’t going to happen. So we have moved on to other things separately. But those other things will likely have more power than the former things and that is the concern that Schmidt and his advisors see on the horizon.
So as things continue on, I will miss Schmidt and his window into oblivion—where his kind considers anything with a three syllable word—“kooky,” or “scary.” There is value in studying the problem, but as often is the case the problem when it knows that eyes are on their tail retreats into a hiding place trying to buy additional moments for its sustenance. But the time is running out—and they know it—even if they turn their eyes away hoping to maintain an illusion for just a moment longer.
A recent comment about my site here, Overmanwarrior’s Wisdom contemplated my use of bullwhips and attempted to associate it with slavery in the typical progressive fashion. Of course I’ve heard all this before and each time I hear it only inspires me more to expose progressivism for the destructive force that it is more intensely. One of the reasons that bullwhip work is degraded as sadomasochism and instruments of slavery is due to this progressive marketing campaign that wants to divide up everything into just a few categories, fairness for women, fairness for people of color, fairness for the poor, and fairness for other countries. Of course that fairness is always defined by a political class of elites hungry for power and inspired by the communist movement of the 20th century. But that is always ignored. Instead this is the kind of intelligence we are to contend with:
‘Justice comes with the crack of the whip,” is the tag line. And he wields bullwhips as a hobby. Naw, he’s no overseer. What connotations could I even imply?
The implication there of course is that as an “overman” I want to be a slave owner ruling over a flock of black slaves. The bullwhip is part of the slave master tradition to the thinking of these political marionettes. But they would be wrong, in fact, they are part of a massive cover-up which seeks to highlight the effects of slavery in America—inherited from Europe—and the type of slavery that Thomas Jefferson himself attacked when he could—which was the start of the United States Marines. That slavery started it all in the modern world and involved Muslims in North Africa. The information and statistics are staggering of how many white people were enslaved by Muslims of color and were articulated in the 2004 book Christian Slaves, Muslim Masters: White Slavery in the Mediterranean. Read about the study conducted in that book below:
COLUMBUS, Ohio – A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before.
Robert Davis, professor of history at Ohio State University, developed a unique methodology to calculate the number of white Christians who were enslaved along Africa’s Barbary Coast, arriving at much higher slave population estimates than any previous studies had found.
Most other accounts of slavery along the Barbary Coast didn’t try to estimate the number of slaves, or only looked at the number of slaves in particular cities, Davis said. Most previously estimated slave countshave thus tended to be in the thousands, or at most in the tens of thousands. Davis, by contrast, has calculated that between 1 million and 1.25 million European Christians were captured and forced to work in North Africa from the 16th to 18th centuries.
“Much of what has been written gives the impression that there were not many slaves and minimizes the impact that slavery had on Europe,” Davis said. “Most accounts only look at slavery in one place, or only for a short period of time. But when you take a broader, longer view, the massive scope of this slavery and its powerful impact become clear.”
Davis said it is useful to compare this Mediterranean slavery to the Atlantic slave trade that brought black Africans to the Americas. Over the course of four centuries, the Atlantic slave trade was much larger – about 10 to 12 million black Africans were brought to the Americas. But from 1500 to 1650, when trans-Atlantic slaving was still in its infancy, more white Christian slaves were probably taken to Barbary than black African slaves to the Americas, according to Davis.
“One of the things that both the public and many scholars have tended to take as given is that slavery was always racial in nature – that only blacks have been slaves. But that is not true,” Davis said. “We cannot think of slavery as something that only white people did to black people.”
During the time period Davis studied, it was religion and ethnicity, as much as race, that determined who became slaves.
“Enslavement was a very real possibility for anyone who traveled in the Mediterranean, or who lived along the shores in places like Italy, France, Spain and Portugal, and even as far north as England and Iceland,” he said.
Pirates (called corsairs) from cities along the Barbary Coast in north Africa – cities such as Tunis and Algiers – would raid ships in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, as well as seaside villages to capture men, women and children. The impact of these attacks were devastating – France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants. At its peak, the destruction and depopulation of some areas probably exceeded what European slavers would later inflict on the African interior.
Although hundreds of thousands of Christian slaves were taken from Mediterranean countries, Davis noted, the effects of Muslim slave raids was felt much further away: it appears, for example, that through most of the 17th century the English lost at least 400 sailors a year to the slavers.
Even Americans were not immune. For example, one American slave reported that 130 other American seamen had been enslaved by the Algerians in the Mediterranean and Atlantic just between 1785 and 1793.
Davis said the vast scope of slavery in North Africa has been ignored and minimized, in large part because it is on no one’s agenda to discuss what happened.
The enslavement of Europeans doesn’t fit the general theme of European world conquest and colonialism that is central to scholarship on the early modern era, he said. Many of the countries that were victims of slavery, such as France and Spain, would later conquer and colonize the areas of North Africa where their citizens were once held as slaves. Maybe because of this history, Western scholars have thought of the Europeans primarily as “evil colonialists” and not as the victims they sometimes were, Davis said.
Davis said another reason that Mediterranean slavery has been ignored or minimized has been that there have not been good estimates of the total number of people enslaved. People of the time – both Europeans and the Barbary Coast slave owners – did not keep detailed, trustworthy records of the number of slaves. In contrast, there are extensive records that document the number of Africans brought to the Americas as slaves.
So Davis developed a new methodology to come up with reasonable estimates of the number of slaves along the Barbary Coast. Davis found the best records available indicating how many slaves were at a particular location at a single time. He then estimated how many new slaves it would take to replace slaves as they died, escaped or were ransomed.
“The only way I could come up with hard numbers is to turn the whole problem upside down – figure out how many slaves they would have to capture to maintain a certain level,” he said. “It is not the best way to make population estimates, but it is the only way with the limited records available.”
Putting together such sources of attrition as deaths, escapes, ransoming, and conversions, Davis calculated that about one-fourth of slaves had to be replaced each year to keep the slave population stable, as it apparently was between 1580 and 1680. That meant about 8,500 new slaves had to be captured each year. Overall, this suggests nearly a million slaves would have been taken captive during this period. Using the same methodology, Davis has estimated as many as 475,000 additional slaves were taken in the previous and following centuries.
The result is that between 1530 AD and 1780 AD there were almost certainly 1 million and quite possibly as many as 1.25 million white, European Christians enslaved by the Muslims of the Barbary Coast.
Of course nobody ever hears about this because under the re-education so fashionable under progressive interpretation, the slavery of whites doesn’t fit the communist motivated, anti-American imperialism that is the real target of the attack by those who want to destroy America and the capitalism that drives its economic power. So the slavery argument has been captured to only discuss the practice in America. What is ignored is that once America had freed itself during the Revolution it immediately went to work to free all men which started the Civil War. After the Civil War was a period of westward expansion which highlights the era typically rendered by the cinematic western. It is from this time that the bullwhip came into play not as a plantation guardian, but of individuals facing down the vast open spaces of the American West.
The tag line I use at this site is a quote from my own 2004 novel The Symposium ofJustice where the main character Cliffhanger fights off modern slavery by destroying a mind control device designed to interfere with the thinking of a town’s citizens and guide them in the proper political direction. The use of bullwhips in the story has nothing to do with slavery or standing over other people—it is about freeing people so that they can think. The use of the bullwhip is to use force to punish bad guys for attempting to enslave civilization. My use of the bullwhip in that story context is to free people, not to enslave them.
Those who chose to revise history are far more dangerous than the perceived slave master who uses a bullwhip to control the black slaves at their southern plantation. The minds of these critics shown at the beginning of this article are made by modern progressives who make movies like Dajango Unchained and the ignorant masses believe wholeheartedly that the filmmaker Tarentino is a scholar who knows much about the slavery argument. But he doesn’t. For those who do know, slavery wasn’t a black or white condition, it was a product of the times, and white people were just as vulnerable to enslavement as blacks were—yet this is never discussed even though the evidence is quite extensive.
For my own lessons in history it is my proposal that it takes an “overman” to see past the limitations imposed on mankind through thousands of years motivated exclusively by ignorance. It takes such a position to understand why a 2004 book written about white slavery in North Africa by a professor of history at Ohio State was ignored—because it didn’t fit the progressive definitions meant to attack American imperialism. It is also meant to ignore the role that Muslims played in that slavery—as Islam is a religion that progressives are advocating as a volatile assailant against the bourgeoisie of world power, the North American continent. Those progressive definitions come straight out of the books of Karl Marx and have no other grounding in reality. To see such contradictions not only takes a student of history, but someone willing to step outside of the current human limitations of personal sensitivity and political concern to see the truth. And the truth is, America freed their slaves, but the rest of the world didn’t. Of those other places in the world that promoted slavery so intensely, it was the Muslims who then as they do now, seek to rule over mankind with an iron fist. For me, the bullwhip is a symbol of the American West and the only time in world history that a nation freed itself from a tyrannical past. That symbol needs to be propped up for the world to see so that they too can rise up against their slave masters with a projection of strength that can metaphorically come only from a bullwhip.
The Overmanwarrior 