06 July 2019


The USA PATRIOT Act:  Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001

Why is it that people truly do not understand that we, the people, lost many freedoms when the PATRIOT Act became a law? The Act actually violates some of our constitutional rights by allowing for widespread corruption to legally permeate our system of government, although that was not its stated purpose.

Allow me to make it very clear, that while I support well-written laws which do not violate our rights as a way to strengthen our defense against terrorism, I, for one, do not condone the ways in which the PATRIOT Act violates our constitutional rights, because it can be, and has been used corruptly to abusively and prejudicially target people.

The original PATRIOT Act of 2001 allowed for citizens to be accused without their knowledge and without the knowledge of their lawyers.  Comment about that is missing in the ACLU article I highly recommend reading, as are any comments about changes (if any) that have been made each time the Act is reauthorized.  Additionally, the Act also resulted in numerous government departments being restructured and put under the umbrella of the newly established Department of Homeland Security.

Briefly, from the ACLU website, the PATRIOT Act was " an overnight revision of the nation's surveillance laws that vastly expanded the government's authority to spy on its own citizens, while simultaneously reducing checks and balances on those powers like judicial oversight, public accountability, and the ability to challenge government searches in court. . . . Most of the changes to surveillance law made by the Patriot Act were part of a longstanding law enforcement wish list that had been previously rejected by Congress, in some cases repeatedly."

Because the original PATRIOT Act  allowed for citizens to be accused without their knowledge and without the knowledge of their lawyers, that means it legalized abuse by conjecture based on flawed assumptions about guilt by association, without the accused having the legal right to be told of being accused - thus having no right to defense.  That is NOT the way in which our nation's government is to supposed to function on behalf of and for we, the people.  If that sentence is not understandable then read it again and translate it to family life.  Then, perhaps the actuality may be more familiar.  I was raised that way, many of my generation, and previous generations, were.  For that reason alone, at least the WWII generation and the first post-WWII generation should have known from harsh experience when the Act was being authorized, to do everything necessary to prevent violation of our nation's "innocent until proven guilty" constitutional right.

Although it is the same problem based on the same mind-set, unless the problems created as a child compromise one's opportunities as an adult, getting "the treatment" as a child is far different than false accusations as an adult which damage the ability of adults to move forward in life earning a good honest living.   False accusations and false imprisonment, especially when prejudicially intended, so easily compromise, limit, and obstruct one's opportunities and direction in life.  And they did so. legally, the Patriot Act making easy and increasingly more common after becoming law - even though the Patriot Act does so unconstitutionally (and even though it happened before the Act, but illegally).  How's that reality for creating cognitive dissonance regarding the security vs. rights issue - probably being intended to do so.  Unless one has experienced being on the unjustly punishing end of that seeming paradox, it may have little meaning, unfortunately.

I recommend reading the ACLU page.  It is one page long primarily about surveillance and covers a number of the abuses associated with how surveillance can be, has been, and is used to violate our constitutional rights.  From the ACLU website, Surveillance Under the USA/PATRIOT Act, one of the things the PATRIOT Act does - it “Puts CIA back in business of spying on Americans. The PATRIOT Act gives the Director of Central Intelligence the power to identify domestic intelligence requirements.  That opens the door to the same abuses that took place in the 1970s and before, when the CIA engaged in widespread spying on protest groups and other Americans.

I guarantee that folks who had Palestinian friends, acquaintances, and colleagues during the 70s (referenced as "other Americans") were under extremely punishing invasive surveillance.  Undoubtedly, so were "other Americans" for other supposed "reasons".  Even though surveillance was invasive and felt punishing - the fact is that the response of many was “I have nothing to hide”. Providing evidence and having it taken seriously was extremely difficult, anyway.  I had friends who found "bugs" (listening devices) in their apartment - actual evidence.  But there was no cooperation that lead to who was responsible for placing them.  However, having nothing to hide does not matter when corruption is at work and one's name is on a  list provided by a foreign government that is extremely and fatally prejudicially anti-Palestinian. 

There very clearly was corruption at work in the 70s.  The fact is that in 2001 the PATRIOT Act made that corruption legal, long after the fact, given that government had been getting away with some of the corruption since the 70s (and before according to the article).  Those who were already engaged in perpetrating the corruption viewed the act as legally enabling them, which it did, and further expanding corrupt use and abuse of the law, which it did.  Those not subject to those abuses would not have known they were occurring which means probably most of our legislative body was unaware.

Again, I strongly encourage reading what the ACLU says about the ways the PATRIOT Act violates our constitutional rights.  And I remind, also, that the Act was responsible for legalizing indefinite detention of non-citizens which is the last non-surveillance provision on which the ACLU article comments. 

Anyone still wondering why some in law enforcement so boldly take unwarranted, and too often deadly actions that are clearly prejudicial, without being prosecuted - for example high profile widely reported cases, like  most of the  “death by cop” incidents; Ferguson Missouri; the Pipeline; and at the border?  Then look to the PATRIOT Act.  Reporting about the incidents and the perpetrators not being prosecuted, is never connected to the PATRIOT Act.  However, with the PATRIOT Act being in effect, we know publicized incidents about which we are all aware, are abuses that are justified because of the Act - indicating that the corruption of “anything goes” is rampant in our nation.  Perhaps the PATRIOT Act is not even cited in court even though it is the “justification“ which results in a determination to not prosecute perpetrators.  After all reminding folks that the PATRIOT Act is responsible for not prosecuting institutionalized prejudicial crime might motivate we, the people, to raise hell about it next time it is up for a reauthorization vote in our legislative bodies. 

Once again, allow me to make it very clear.  While I support well-written laws that do not violate our rights as a way to strengthen our defense against terrorism, I, for one, do not condone the ways in which the PATRIOT Act violates our constitutional rights, because it can be, and has been used corruptly to abusively and prejudicially target people.

Some links and a few informative excerpts:
Patriot Act - Wikipedia
"The title of the Act is a contrived three letter initialism (USA) preceding a seven letter acronym (PATRIOT), which in combination stand for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001."
"The USA PATRIOT Act is an Act of the U.S. Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001." 

"The USA PATRIOT Act was passed by Congress as a response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The Act allows federal officials greater authority in tracking and intercepting communications, both for purposes of law enforcement and foreign intelligence gathering."

This may have been the stated purpose but the fact is that the real problems with any laws is the lack of rigorous debate which often shines a light on the weaknesses of a proposed law - more specifically in the case of the PATRIOT Act, debate could have made evident 1) the ways in which the proposed Act could be abused and used unjustly against people unless it was reworded 2) changes that should have been required, to be able to use the Act as it was said to be intended without abuse that is in violation of the constitution. The article makes clear how the Act was threateningly rushed through the Senate and the House with little or no opportunity for familiarization and debate.

From the start the law appeared to be meant as a smoke screen for the purpose of using it unjustly against citizens by legalizing prosecution based on assumption without people or their lawyers being informing of accusations.

Surveillance Under the USA/PATRIOT Act

“215 of the PATRIOT Act violates the Constitution in several ways. It: Violates the Fourth Amendment, which says the government cannot conduct a search without obtaining a warrant and showing probable cause to believe that the person has committed or will commit a crime.”

The Patriot Act Is a Vital Weapon in Fighting Terrorism
"America needs the PATRIOT Act because it helps prevent terrorism while posing little risk to civil liberties. The law simply lets counterterrorism agents use tools that police officers have used for decades. And it contains elaborate safeguards against abuse."

Whatever the supposed “safeguards” referred to, they did not prevent abuse - especially the abuse of  “guilt by association” assumptions that should never be allowed as justification to initiate punishment of anyone without their knowledge.   That is one of many "loopholes" without supposed safeguard which allows abuse of and by the PATRIOT Act. 

Frequently Asked Questions about the USA PATRIOT Act
This is primarily about library related provisions in the Act.  But it does have a section of links for more information about the Act at the end of the article, including links to reauthorization of the Act, which may include revisions, if any.

Homeland Security Act, Patriot Act, Freedom of Information Act, and HIM - Retired

Chapter 13: Crimes against the Government - 13.2 Crimes Involving Terrorism

Examples of how the Act has been applied in crimes involving terrorism.

Does The Patriot Act Violate Free Speech?
"Does The PATRIOT Act Violate Free Speech? The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments Tuesday in a case that pits an individual's right of free speech and association against a federal law aimed at combating terrorism. ... "My speech is particularly nonviolent," says Ralph Fertig, president of the organization. Feb 23, 2010"

It violates free speech if for no other reason than legalizing prosecution based on false assumptions and false accusations against which one has no defense because of making it illegal to tell the accused and/or a lawyer of the accused. 

From the ACLU page again


"A person or organization forced to turn over records is prohibited from disclosing the search to anyone.  As a result of this gag order, the subjects of surveillance never even find out that their personal records have been examined by the government.  That undercuts an important check and balance on this power: the ability of individuals to challenge illegitimate searches. "

A person can be prosecuted without being informed or their attorney being informed, so there is no opportunity for defense.  That is total abuse which allows total corruption.  Unless we make needed changes to the PATRIOT Act it is only a matter of time until complete and total corruption is common place.  Yet many folks still have no idea it is occurring and the extent to which it has become a reality in our nation.
Once more I ask for we, the people, to choose to become more informed.  Everyone may not be up for researching the Act - so please, at least, read the information at the ACLU website https://www.aclu.org/other/surveillance-under-usapatriot-act about how the Act can and is used to violate our rights.   And if you can spare another moment, than at least take a quick look at this online PDF which is the entirety of the act as passed in 2001 (without updates or revisions), if only for a brief glance at the table of contents which shows how extensive the law actually is:  PUBLIC LAW 107–56—OCT. 26, 2001 which is the act as passed in 2001. 

21 May 2019

The Military Industrial Complex and Iran

"Trump says the military industrial complex is pressuring him into a war with Iran."  This was a headline on an article a friend shared, today.  My comment, with a few edits here for clarity, was:
I can buy that, actually. In fact that is the good and bad of President Trump's fickle opinions and what he supports and does not support. He seems to listen to input, which is good, then bases opinions on who gets the most access time and puts the most pressure on him.

That results in a whole lot more bad than good - too much turning around of past legislation and too much conflict of interest in people he appoints, then boots out of those positions, apparently  so he can reappoint others to government positions. It looks like the appointments are intended to reward his cronies rather than to benefit we, the people.

And if Trump wants to be honest he needs to state that the political zionist machine is also pressuring him to attack another of Israel's neighbors, indirectly, through our military industrial complex, and the illegal Israel lobbies representing the wishes of a foreign nation, and more directly when possible - his son-in-law comes to mind.
But there is more than that brief comment which also  needs to be said.

Our President also needs to know and acknowledge that Israel is exacerbating the problem of Iran, primarily for Israel's benefit, simply because Iran is a powerful nearby Muslim nation as a neighbor of Israel. It is also apparent that Israel is taking opportunistic advantage of the fact that Iran, as a Shiite nation, wants to take Saudi Arabia's place in controlling Mecca (at least controlling Haj and Mecca during Haj); and opportunistic advantage of Iran's desire to be recognized as head of the real Caliphate which is the position of the Saudi king.  Iran's past attacks on Mecca have clearly demonstrated its intent.  As clearly, that Saudi Arabia considers the stakes to be too high for Iran to be a nuclear nation, is understandable, particularly when considering Israel is a nuclear nation, and also nearby. 

A regional Saudi/Israel "friendship" benefits SA's regional interests far more than it benefits U.S.A.'s  Thus Saudi Arabia gets what it wants when Israel manipulates U.S.A. policies.   Israel could do worse than having Saudi Arabia for a "protector", in some ways, especially  when some of Israel's and SAs political interests are the same.  Too bad U.S.A. can not be objective enough to truly understand the lay of the land - which seems to primarily be "speak softly and carry a big stick".  U.S.A. is the "big stick" because it is foolish enough to dedicate funds to "policing the world", based on the prolific false flattery of being "the most powerful free nation" in the world since the end of WWII.  Saudi Arabia speaks softly to the U.S.A., and Israel rattles U.S.A.s cage. 

To some extent during economic recovery after WWII when it was recognized U.S.S.R was intending to be a threat, at the start of the Cold War, the flattery regarding  power of the U.S.A.  at the time may not have been as much of a total exaggeration.  But after the U.S. declared the Cold War to be over and done because of the Berlin wall coming down and Russia feeling confident enough about the U.S.S.R satellite nations being allies to disband the U.S.S.R., then  the false flattery continued greasing the wheels that  encouraged the resulting vacuous attitude and "policing" behavior of U.S.A.  It has become become a serious problem for we, the people, which results in U.S.A. dedicating over half of the annual budget to active conflict elsewhere in the world at the bidding of those who ask - in the guise of "policing the world".  No doubt there are perks of some type offered when being asked.  But the false flattery, alone, is likely still a powerful motivator, unfortunately.

Saudi Arabia is well aware the U.S. is far more apt to consider Israel's problems to be an issue it is willing to fight for, than it is apt to be concerned about Saudi Arabia's issues which U.S. relegates to Islamic religious issues - given news reports that Saudi Arabia is considered to be terrorist inclined.  However,  the Saudi King is concerned about and responsible for the Ummah, especially during Haj, and in the case of Iran concerned for the security of his nation, as well.  And Saudi Arabia is not foolish enough to ignore the opportunity of U.S.A.s  willingness to do Israel's bidding.

Understanding that should solve what is a mystery to some about the "friendship" between Israel and Saudi Arabia.  And it must be noted that it is at cost to continuing death of and violence targeting Palestinians in oPT, and destruction of their livelihoods and homes.  Though many would like to consider Palestine and Palestinians irrelevant to these issues, the fact is the negotiations about the partition of Palestine which the political zionists tried to put an end to when declaring Israel a nation, is very much at the center of almost all of the political issues in the Middle East since that time.  Palestinians will continue to be targeted for death and destruction by the political zionist government of Israel as long as no other nations are preventing the government of Israel's long, slow, drawn-out over 70 year genocide of Palestinians who live on the land Israel wants without them on it.  Nothing could be simpler to understand, yet nothing has consistently created more political turmoil during my life, up to the point of here and now.

That "mystery" is only part of Israel's motivation because its intent has been to harass all the nearby Muslim nations, which grew into attacking Islam and Muslims in general.  That effort increased by taking opportunistic advantage of 9/11 to put pressure on U.S.A. when it was ready and  eager to comply, because of understandably  being in retributive mode.  However  our government should be more self-disciplined about not taking action when in retributive mode, instead of being driven by emotions in the same way that any "crime of passion" is driven, especially when being encouraged to take ill-advised action in the heat of the moment.

It was not understandable that the U.S.A. did not have the foresight to refrain from depending on faulty "intelligence" (originating from Israel) which was used as justification to start engaging in active conflict against Iraq after the announced "War on Terror".  The only reason Israel has been able to push the anti-Muslim anti-Islam  agenda so far for so long is because U.S.A. enables Israel's agenda, including unconditionally enabling Israel's agendas long before 9/11.  And the anti-Muslim agenda feeds into the government of Israel's deadly determination to claim all of Palestine for Israel.  The political zionist machine never actually wanted to be a state in the nation of Palestine, even partitioned into a Jewish only state.  The intent always was to claim all of Palestine as Israel.

Am I blaming everything on Israel and its political ideology of zionism? Of course not.  But is is a much larger part of all the Middle East conflicts than most are willing to realize, or as the case may be, to admit because it serves their purposes not to. With Israel is where a lot of the ignored actual blame, safely (unfortunately), resides.  However I am blaming many  of our most damaging (domestic and foreign) U.S.A. policies, especially middle east policies and active conflict, on the foreign manipulation of our government which is not only Israel's doing.  Because that is the truth of the matters. However, understand Israel strategies and tactics and it becomes clear the origin of it's first and strongest supporter at the end of WWII, even as far back as the pogroms, actually.  That a huge number of people know this, and have advised our elected and appointed officials about it, is a euphemistic "mystery". 

I happen to have been paying attention for a long time, so I speak up because I know more about these Israel/Palestine issues and their history than many other issues because of it being a focus of my research from college and university days which started with a question that arose about controlled news (by government)  at the start of the 1967 Six Days War.  The media response was so incredulous, as if there was no knowledge any problem existed which could have precipitate the war, that it was impossible to not consider the hypothesis of news being controlled.  And that has something to do with the fact that I had been informed the war was pending and soon to start by a Palestinian woman I never did meet whose family had escaped as refugees to Jordan in 1948.  As a 19 year old college freshman and journalism student at the time, the incongruity of me knowing this - and the media being unaware - simply did not compute correctly.

The point is that it is a huge mistake for Congress, and we, the people, to not recognize any other foreign nation's agenda, particularly Israel's middle east agenda regarding neighboring Muslim nations, which overly influences Congress; especially the nature of that "influence" through heavily funded "Israel first" lobbies which have been actively interfering with U.S. elections and political policies, increasingly so since 1948, along with extortion and skillful hasbara/propaganda designed for public consumption very actively since 1967.  Lobbies representing foreign nations are illegal.  And, yes, court cases have been won that focus on lobbies and lobbyists who represent foreign nations but did not register, as required, as foreign agents or lobbyists who were acting on behalf of a foreign principal.  Even so,  the violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) continues to occur.  Anyone interested in consulting with and advising elected and appointed government officials about the problem might want to refresh their knowledge of FARA.  The Foreign Lobby Watch about FARA at the Center for Responsive Politics is a good place to start.

Americans who are informed and know the deal are tired of wondering and asking if appointed and elected American government officials are as totally ignorant and lacking in knowledge as it seems, or, if they truly are, collectively, so ill-intended and corrupt that they allow their opinions to be swayed by foreign agents lining their pockets with perks and/or threats to prevent their reelection.  I do not want to think it is wide spread corruption as much as it is conveniently wearing blinders when it comes to anything that Israel demands of the U.S.A., directly and through it's lobbies.  But there comes a point when ignoring issues that can not be ignored, because of the extensive damage they do, becomes a matter of being corrupt. And that was reached, decades ago. 

Sometimes something obviously connected to the political zionist influence issue arises which might lead to questions that get too close to the comfort zone of elected and appointed government officials.  Then, strangely enough, there are efforts to redirect the attention of we, the people, to what are sometimes unnecessary bizarre manufactured problems.  We can be assured that the intent is to draw our attention away from more pressing issues which often are associated with what our nation is pressured to do.  This question of incompetence or ill-intent becomes more pertinent when there is an ambitious effort to redirect and refocus our attention.

Case in point, currently, the abortion issue which never should have been an issue - ever.  And of course it is an attack on Roe v. Wade, and of course it never should have been an issue which even required Roe v. Wade way back when.  The actual issue, originally, was about federal funds being used for abortions.  And look at what it morphed into.  We should all realize by this time that abortion is always a hot button issue that is dragged out to be used to redirect the attention of we, the people, at opportunistic times, particularly women - oft the kinder, gentler demographic of we, the people, who like to put the skids on war-mongering.

We can be confident that each time abortion comes up, especially in bizarre extreme ways, it is primarily intended to redirect the attention of we, the people, away from more pressing issues; as if trying to make it illegal for women to make their own decisions - especially about their own bodies - is not pressing enough.  How can the well orchestrated domestic extremism, this time around,  not appear to be redirecting us from the real issue which is about U.S. being pressured to engage in armed conflict with Iran  by the military industrial complex.   More precisely the U.S.A's  military industrial complex is being used as a weapon by the unregistered foreign agents of numerous nations.  Are the Joint Chiefs really too naive to not know, or do they truly relish the needless death and destruction that is taking our nation to hell in a hand basket.

16 May 2019

Still and Again - Because It Is Ramadan

People are still and again attacking Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar for being Muslim.  Of course it was predictable the attacks would increase during Ramadan, one of the Holy months of Islam when truces are traditionally initiated and agreed upon for the duration of the month.  So of course only self-declared enemies would increase their verbal attacks during Ramadan.

Are you asking who benefits from continuing and increased harassment of Muslims - including verbal attacks and violence like the mosque arson fire in Connecticut - during Ramadan?  If not why not.

At her own Facebook page people want to attack Congresswoman Tlaib because of links they provide that are comments made on  CNN by Aaron David Miller and John King who were both trying to peddle nonsense associating Palestine with Nazi Germany which is a twisted half-truth and not related to what they are trying to dump on Tlaib as undeserved criticism.  (And the facts are a matter of the pot calling the kettle black when one researches the claims.) At least John King was correct in commenting about there being a plan under way to create Israel  prior to the holocaust.  But he neglected to specifically state more about the ambitious and illegal plan of the political zionists.  Sunlen Serfity also wanted to attack Congresswoman Ilhan Omar.  The only clear intent was that everyone was trying to reduce them both to being uninformed  little girls while at the same time being ill-intended anti-semitic Congresswomen.  The only thing the efforts actually resembled were an effort to create the confusion of cognitive dissonance in listeners which is exactly the intent of hasbara/propaganda.  And of course they also could not resist trying to blame and criticize our Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi,  for all the vicious ill-intended hasbara they wanted to assign to these two Congresswomen because they are Muslim and speak factually about the Israel/Palestine issues.

The CNN nonsense  Rashida Tlaib "Revises History," Says Palestinians Helped Create Haven For Jews After Holocaust

The people at FOX wanted to accuse Tlaib of hate.  There wasn't any, except theirs as they hatefully slandered her.  The man being interviewed, name of Ben Shapiro, came across like an overly-excitable child trying to peddle a load of total hasbara.   The interviewer was not as bad.  Then it was almost humorous to see the segment about Tlaib's Yahoo Skullduggery podcast be juxtapositioned in the second half to Alyssa Milano's response to medieval abortion laws.  The intent was to relegate the opinions and comments of both to the same trash heap, expecting the folks who strongly support right-to-birth which they refer to as right-to-life, and think Milano's comments are screwy, would also consider Tlaib's comments as screwy - just in case the FOX slander had not succeeded.  However, it must be noted that in medieval times, and earlier, abortion, pregnancy, childbirth, and preventing pregnancy were women's issues.  Men were not consulted, their permission was not asked nor required, nor were they informed about abortions and birth control.  (Do not blame me for the meander!  FOX did the meandering and had a reason for it.)

The FOX News nonsense  Rep. Rashida Tlaib faces backlash over remarks on Holocaust, Israel

The only clarity from watching both of these analyses, was that the media was engaging in personal attacks on two Muslim Congresswomen during Ramadan by trying to create a controversy which does not exist about what Tlaib said on a Yahoo Skullduggery podcast.

What they claimed set them all off, was that they understood from what Tlaib said that Palestinians created a haven for refugees from the holocaust.  How that kindness could possible hit a bigot's nerve I don't know, unless they wanted to deny it, which was apparently the intent.  Palestinians actually did create an appreciated haven for refugee Jews starting long before the end of WWII by taking in huge numbers of Jewish refugees escaping from the Russian pogroms; and they also created a thankless haven after WWII.  Palestinian people are notoriously warm welcoming gracious  people and were kind to the later refugees as they had been to the several waves of earlier refugees.  Congresswoman Tlaib is correct, absolutely correct about Palestine creating a haven for refugees from the holocaust, even after the political betrayal of the WWI allies.  She is not revising history, nor is she trying to revise history.  Revising their joint history has primarily been the work the political zionists heavily engage in doing, very skillfully, with a lot of dependence on twisted half-truth.  No one wants to, nor could they successfully challenge that skill in peddling hasbara which is very believable to the uninformed and apathetic - and unfortunately to the unethical who benefit from supporting the hasbara.   

However, there is more to the history of Palestinians providing a safe haven for Jews.  A lot more.  And I am sure Congresswoman Tlaib well knows that anyone who thinks it is necessary to hate Palestine and Palestinians because they love Israel, has little or no interest in the actual history, let alone having the necessary  attention span which would allow exposure to even a brief run-down of some of that history.   However, just in case anyone wonders and does not know, briefly . . .

Palestine: A Haven During the Pogroms in Russia

There were little or no problems with peaceful coexistence in Palestine as a result of the influx of Russian refugees from the pogroms in Russia, before and after the turn of the century (end or 1800s start of 1900s).  Why would there have been?  No problems . . . until those who espoused the ideology of political zionism started agitating in Palestine between WWI and WWII to create problems which history demonstrates were all blamed on Palestinians - unless one reads factual primary sources and/or the works of credible researchers who cite them which makes the unjust blame evident.  I started slowly doing both, myself, in the late 60s, then more intensely throughout the 70s, because of incongruity and contradictions of those who I learned had "hidden" political agendas which they believed justified prevaricating and being misleading. 

After WWI the Mandate was established by the League of Nation, which included Palestine and Jordan.  Britain was tasked with administering the Mandate. However, the WWI allies reneged on delaying the creating of a nation of Palestine due to a secret agreement with the political zionist leadership.  It had been the promise of the WWI allies to the Palestinian leadership that if Palestine would ally with them against the Ottoman Empire, of which Palestine was a part at that time, the allies would insure that Palestine would be recognized as an independent nation after the war was won. along with the other nations that had also been part of the Ottoman Empire.  So Palestine supported the allied effort. 

Some may recall that the film "Lawrence of Arabia" was about the WWI activity in the Middle East.  This four page Smithsonian article might interest some:  "The True Story of Lawrence of Arabia - His daring raids in World War I made him a legend. But in the Middle East today, the desert warrior’s legacy is written in sand"

And an interesting book from 1930 (which I have not yet read yet) likely to provide a good amount of interesting and pertinent history:
A JEWISH POLITICAL STATE IN PALESTINE. Crabites, Pierre. Current History (New York); New York Vol. 31, Iss. 4,  (Jan 1, 1930): 749. 

"It is this struggle that raises the Lawrence saga to the level of Shakespearean tragedy, as it ultimately ended badly for all concerned: for Lawrence, for the Arabs, for Britain, in the slow uncoiling of history, for the Western world at large. Loosely cloaked about the figure of T.E. Lawrence there lingers the wistful specter of what might have been if only he had been listened to."

The reneging was a matter of the WWI allies wanting to give half of the land of Palestine to the political zioninsts who wanted to create a modern day nation of Israel there, where the ancient Kingdoms of Israel and Judea had been for only  a relatively short period of time, comparatively.  The secret agreement specified a portion of Palestine would be allocated to the political zionists for their Jewish only population.  It did not specify  what the political zionists intended which was to create a modern day nation of Israel, rather than an apartheid state of Israel within the nation of Palestine.  In fact the condition for partitioning Palestine stated there was to be no prejudice toward the inhabitants, that the indigenous inhabitants were not be negatively impacted by the proposed partition. 

That reneging was the betrayal of Palestine by the allies of WWI.   Palestine understandably, and rightfully did not agree to the the plan to partition Palestine created  by that  betrayal which deprived Palestinians of half their land simply because the political zionists insisted on their portion being a home to ONLY Jewish people.  Accommodating a lot more immigrants might have been doable had it not been a betrayal.  Being expected to vacate half of of Palestine was not doable.  Even so the political zionists intended to force the Palestinians to leave, who did not leave voluntarily from the ongoing constant harassment including fatal violence, by the Liberation Army i.e. the collective underground political zionist paramilitary groups.   

From the start the political zionists violated the secret agreement associated with the Mandate and always intended to violate it.  In doing so the political zionists made it clear from the start they wanted to appropriate all of Palestine and simply change the name to Israel and not allow anyone except Jewish folks to live there.  From that injustice was born the euphemistic "problem of Palestine"  i.e. how the political zionists intended to succeed at peopling Palestine with Jews only.  It has long since been labeled more realistically as the problem of Israel - the political zionist government of Israel yelling, shouting, and screaming anti-semitism through out the transition to the problem being recognized as the ideology of political zionism of the Israeli government.  Israel's illegal policies, of course, made the actual problem of Israel clear.  Of course it is absurd to label recognition of the problem of Israel's political ideology as anti-semitism.  No one is blaming an entire ethnicity of people worldwide for Israel's crimes, and they certainly are not blaming the the religion of Judaism.   What they are doing in not accommodating the proponents of the political ideology of zionism who are blaming Judaism and Jews for the ideology's irreligious claims and policies of abuse, and violence of Palestinians which violates international and humanitarian laws and bears no resemblance to the values of Judaism.

The Political Zionist Leadership's Liberation Army

The leadership of the ideology of political zionism  had convinced the allies to betray the Palestinians.  It had been done and dusted, without the knowledge of Palestine.  The irreversible problems increasingly occurred when the political zionist leadership arrived in Palestine between, WWI and WWII, after the Jewish population of Palestine had reached the targeted number of males the political zionists  deemed necessary to be able to create their  Liberation Army (LA), the plan of the leadership being their Liberation Army  would then start to agitate against and harass Palestinians.  To that end the  depended on the cooperation of Jews who had been refugees from Russia two and three generations earlier, whose home  had been Palestine for as long without ethnic problems surfacing since Jews, Christians, and Mulims had coexisted peacefully with one another in the region for centuries - respecting one another's beliefs and sharing the celebration of their  holidays with one another.  Long story short to gain the cooperation of those who had been refugees from the Russian pogroms, because they did not have a need to be "liberated",  the political zionists threatened them and their families if they did not cooperate and agree to be actively particpate in the LA the political zionists were creating.  At that time agitating by numerous "underground" paramilitary political zionist groups, collectively considered to be the Liberation Army, started becoming very active in Palestine.

From that point forward the LA relentlessly engaged in terrorism targeting Palestinians. And yes, sometimes the Palestinians responded in kind. But they sure as hell did not start the problem; nor did they create the political situation that empowered and nurtured it.

WWII, as horrific as it was, was an after thought as far as being the cause of problems in Palestine - and it became a horrific far-reaching afterthought which built on the problems already established, by adding huge numbers of refugees to the mix.  Because, those WWII refugees were willing to fight as part of the LA, from the start, because the Mandate already existed even though there was not an agreement about the areas of the division.  Thus the partitioning, intended to create two states in the nation of Palestine, was not yet partitioned into half for Palestine with the other half being allocated to the political zionist leadership for all the Jewish folks who had been living in Palestine for millennia, those who had immigrated during the pogroms; also those who arrived after WWI throughout WWII and after too, who had been brought to Palestine by the political zionist organization. The area to be allocated for a Jewish only state within Palestine, was  not yet resolved.  And the LA was there to conscript every new arrival in Palestine before, during, and after WWII, to participate in it's "liberation" effort i.e. the ongoing harassment of Palestinian Arabs.

The WWI allies through the League of Nations had made Britain the administrator of the Mandate on their behalf.  I suppose, but have not researched that specifically to know for sure, that the duty was assigned to Britain because the betraying agreement had been between the British and the political zionist leadership.  Fast forward to after WWII and there is increased terrorism, snipers, bombings, fires, consistent harassment of Palestinians, and the self-declaration of Israel as a nation by the political zionist leadership in May 1948. After the U.N. approved the partiton in late 1947, and the Palestinians were not ready to agree on the specified division, the political zionist terror groups committed the lawlessness of the assassination of the Mandates negotiator, Count Bernadette. At that point even though the British were responsible for administering the mandate they stepped back from doing any administrating. 

The Mandatory government had not succeed in maintaining the letter and spirit of the Mandate which was that the Palestinian inhabitants would not be prejudiced in any way up until and when the partition was agreed upon and went into effect.  The fact is that by assassinating the the mandate's negotiator, then declaring Israel a nation within several months after the U.N. approved the partitioning, it did not change the fact that the partitioning of the territory still needed to be agreed upon.  Who could blame Palestine for knowing it was getting cheated because the political zionists intended the Jewish partition of Palestine to be a place where only Jews could live which meant the political zionists intended to rid their area of Palestinians by any means possible.

The U.S. president at that time, Harry Truman, was pressured by the political zionist machine to recognize the self-declared  nation of Israel, against his own better judgment.  And he did.  Wrong choice.   And our nation has been paying a heavy price for that decision since that time - because of what Israel has done to the Palestinians.  As an occupier (because the mandate was never settled) Israel has violated all the international and humanitarian laws incumbent on an occupier to provide for the safety and welfare of the occupied - all laws that Israel is signatory to, without abiding by the terms.

The Need to Make Things Right

Israel needs to take responsibility for its crimes and make things right.  There are numbers of well researched and well documented publications by Palestinians and Israelis, including first hand experience also, where it can be learned what "making things right" entails.  There are also numerous publications by historians who are not Palestinian, Israeli, Jewish, or Muslim which often are as illuminating and well document, and at least provide material which is designed to point out incongruencies and contradictions about what people think they know.  The hope is always that people will look for the answers themselves. And that is one reason I do not provide sources, here.  First because this is simply a quickly written conversational piece so there is no citing of resources.  And secondly because I want folks who do have a problem with whatever is said that contradicts what they think they know, to try to prove me wrong through whatever sources they imagine substantiate their belief.  When it is possible, I welcome adjusting my perspective so that it becomes more precisely factual.  

The hard part about acknowledging contradictions and incongruencies regarding anything  is that most want to be in denial about the possibility of what they know and believe, being wrong.  It is much easier to believe the "other" is wrong, particularly when the media works hard to point the finger of blame.  And the truth of all matters is that the only way any one changes or revises an opinion once it is established, however realistic or unrealistic it may be, is to wonder about the contradictions and incongruities that lead to differing conclusions from the opinions they hold, IF there is enough interest to want to know the facts. 

As for me, world peace, and insisting that my own nation's policies and legislation reflect our values, principles, and ideals, provide more than enough reason to have an interest in most issues, including this one.  That I know and care about the Palestinian people is irrelevant to most of the historic and political facts of what I know and how I know it, having done my own research.  And of course after the majority of my research I have been plugging in information primarily from the personal experiences Palestinian folks share, many of whom have seen and filled the need for texts by writing them.

Again, I can only conclude that Israel needs to take responsibility for its crimes and make things right.  If the U.S.A. would wake-up and put an end to military aid to Israel, given that our aid encourages and enables Israel's crimes against Palestinians, it would be a step forward towards that end.  It is the only honest, peaceful, and just solution.  A few of our Congresspeople are on the same sheet of music about the need to have the courage to sound a wake-up call - finally - and are doing so.  At times we actually have a duo, a trio, an ensemble.  And there has been an orchestra on rare occasion, as there should be.

21 April 2019

You Are Loved

I feel compelled to say this, today, to those who most need to be acknowledged.  I know your experience with evil in your past lead to the strength you developed which lead to doing battle with evil and overcoming it;  and being able to continue to do so whenever it tries to retake control. 

Because you chose love, not revenge and retribution, your spiritual evolution is a blessing to you.  Getting to that point can be a difficult choice each time it is necessary to do so, especially the first time -  but you succeeded.  And through the work you do in life your choice is a blessing to everyone in your life as it enables others to more easily spiritually evolve. 

Your spiritual evolution is an empowering inspiration to all with whom you come in contact, especially family and friends, but also including those who have found themselves on a similar path in life even though the environments in which this occurred has been different for each.  The work is easier and more fulfilling when done together;  because there will be more battles and the value of not doing battle alone will increase as our appreciation increases for those we encounter along the way who are also successfully fighting similar battles against the same evil.

Those who have repeatedly won spiritual battles alone, highly value those in their lives whose natural inclination is to battle similar evil in similar ways, no matter what disguise the evil wears - and it will always try to fool with a disguise.  We are all stronger and more adept when doing  battle, together.  The differences so many like to make a problem of are only superficial, even though these differences occur because of the environments in which we live due to  the attachments we have in life which are not superficial.  With levity, because levity is actually a dimension of spiritual evolution, I have to say:  may the force be with you - live long and prosper.

Inspiration and Empowerment

I have  known the difference between the blessing of a walk-in and an intended possession by evil since before age 2 1/2.  I will not go into how and why here.  But I have known the difference nearly my entire life.  That means I have understood for nearly my entire life that we all need empowerment and inspiration from one another to be able to rise about the limits and obstructions of those to whom we are attached in life; those who we allow to create obstructions and limits in our lives when it is not possible for us to simply walk away.  Some of us did need to walk away, eventually, to be able to survive and be who we are.  It is never easy, particularly when it is familial evil in the form of damaging bad habits considered "traditional" family traits which we must walk away from when they are still accommodated by some in the immediate and extended family who are determined to superimpose generations of unacceptable damaging "family ways" onto our lives also. 

How can those who host evil actually spiritually evolve as long as they are willing to host the evil?  That is the question.  They tolerate the evil but want to blame its presence on those who were designated within extended family as “scapegoats” to be made responsible for hosting the negativity the evil creates, to which those who do the scapegoating are addicted.  Such people do not always know the damage they are doing.  But that is evil’s way and those who choose to host evil project the harm it does onto others in an effort to blame them, instead, for its presence.  That is not spiritual evolution.  And it requires walking away, even when it is from those close to us because the evil they refuse to deny leads them to who want to limit and obstruct our spiritual evolution, imagining it improves their own lives to do so as they punishingly cling to damaging family "tradition". 

Why?  Those intentionally difficult people in our lives seem to imagine that if they recognize we are spiritually evolving it will result in value they too want to claim.  In the less spiritually evolved it will take the form of them wanting to be competitive and possessive and controlling of us, viciously so in some cases. They seem to want to feel left behind as they observe that we are making progress.  But that ongoing reaction eventually results in the need to leave them behind because they  become thoughtlessly demanding and  controlling of our availability which interferes with our work and with us being available to them as we are able to be. 

Thing is we all work within the environments in which we place ourselves, so how we earn our ways forward in life  will differ.  As such, observing progress of others, especially those closest like family, unfortunately, invites from the less evolved, envy, jealousy, greed, narcissistic control issues - even when they are able to observe that we are working hard to achieve progress despite the many obstacles they have worked hard to create for us because they see us succeeding.  Thus, for some of us it truly is also better for those folks for us to walk away from their presence, influence, and efforts to control our lives.  Because, as long as that is what is evoked in them by our presence in their lives, they will not evolve.  And they will also want to continue to hold back those who they allow to evoke that in their lives, feeling justified because that is how the family has always functioned.  

Why? They can not stop blaming the evil they experience on the previously  designated family scapegoats, never having questioned or known that those who made those designations in earlier generations were possessed of the familial evil when they did so.  We have already said no to that evil and will not stop doing so. By walking away we refuse to accommodate those who willingly accept that evil, and their efforts to superimpose it on us including indirectly when they do not actually know that is what they do by accommodating familial evil as "tradition".

Acknowledged and Started the Battle Does Not End

We must all do battle against evil together.  However those who do not recognize it as such, instead accommodate and host it and want to require us to do so, also.  That requires those of us who do not accommodate it to take our leaves of those who do if we are not to limit their spiritual evolution by being available to them in their lives; which, if we do not leave is also a choice to allow them to continue to limit our evolution too - becoming a vicious downward spiral  of blame which accommodates the familial evil, both directly and indirectly.

Leaving does not mean we will refuse to welcome those we have had to walk away from in our lives when/if they are ready to evolve beyond hosting the evil we refuse to accommodate as the “cost” of the connection family and some friends want to demand of us if we are to be part of their lives.  Those connections simply can not actively exist without harm resulting as long as some want to accommodate the evil some of us refuse to accommodate.

To those who are not ready to rise above the evil - you are loved.  To those who have risen above it and continue to refuse to accommodate it you are loved, trusted, and respected.  To those who are knowingly working at rising above it, you are loved and respected.  Be inspired as you encounter and are motivated by those you recognize as having gone before you - and welcome to the reality of mutual battle against evil.  Once you survive doing it entirely alone the first time except for your divine connection, future efforts will not feel as isolating. 

There will always be battles against the evil you have chosen to deny.  However, the plateaus we reach, increasingly together with other souls we recognize as similarly evolving, will be less potentially damaging along the way because of actually knowing numerous others are on a similar journey toward the same destinations, as we each continue to find ourselves in additional dimensions further along the way on our journeys of spiritual evolution.

14 April 2019

Are Men Afraid of the #metoo Movement?

Talk about an assumed attitude of privilege which also embraces ageism!  On a news program, today, a young woman was saying one of the negative side-effects of the #metoo movement was that men no longer feel comfortable around young women.  Really?  Really!  I mean Really?!  All I could think was are you sure you don’t want to rethink and reword that comment?

I agree that the
#metoo movement has an effect of  making some men uncomfortable because of fearing they could be falsely accused.  Men, in general, do not deserve to have to be fearful because of those in their ranks who are violators, especially those who are serial offenders.  But woman, in general, also do not deserve to be in fear of being attacked by men, because when they do report violations they are not believed so those who violate get away with violating instead of being apprehended. 

The problem is with dishonesty, and an unwillingness and inability to discern what is and is not factual - to the point of denial which results in a lack of thorough investigation.  The only people who do not invite investigation are the violators and those who enable them.  That is a truism.

It is the men violating who are at the foundation of the fear some men have of being dishonestly accused, not the  woman who  have chosen to report violations and expect to be believed to the point of an investigation being mandatory because of reporting the violation.   If there was not so much refusal to believe woman and investigate the violations they report, then there would not be so much fear in men who are not violators. 

And what about men who may not be sure about whether or not they have been considered violators? Well, wondering, alone, makes a statement.  If a man makes an effort to contact someone he may need to find clarity from, then it is a statement which is an indicator of decency, as long as the intention for contact is not intended to be obnoxious and threatening.

Clearly, the refusal to believe woman is associated with the high numbers of violators, and repeat offenders in particular, who  have the power of influencing others to the point that others choose the corruption of enabling the violators and their offenses.  So it is understandable there has been an increase in some  men fearing they could be unjustly accused.  I think that fear is likely to be directly proportional to the amount of women who are unjustly accused simply because they are not believed and their claims are not properly investigated when they do report violations.

The way to minimize fear is for thorough, objective, investigations which are never subject to the corruption of threats and/or  pay-off by violators who claim their careers and lives will be ruined when they are held accountable.  They, and apparently, the mores of our society have been buying into not ruining the lives of violators, and instead condoning the ruining of the lives of those who were violated. 

And of course it must be stated that some boys and men have been violated, and that some people have been violated by same sex violators. I
t also must be stated that #metoo is not only about sexual assault, rape, unwelcome touching and sexual innuendo in the workplace, but that it is also about harassment of all types in the workplace and everywhere else. 

However,  the issue is about reporting violations which are not believed and not investigated which  becomes a situation that precipitates the fear of  being unjustly accused because of not being believed, and adequate investigation being withheld.  It is the conundrum  of a stereotypical "vicious circle".  In reality logic tells us that the problem is disbelief, and that the only way to alleviate that is to investigate claims until all the facts make evident exactly what happened.  It really is that simple.

What I do not agree with, and what stinks of privilege and ageism in a young woman "of a certain age" who is clearly old enough to know better, is that she said men do not feel comfortable around “young women” - as if older women invited violation, or acquiesced to and wanted to be violated in their younger years - as if they are not still considered potential targets of violation along with anyone else violators want to violate and believe they can get away with violating. 

If it would not come across as sexism and ageism I might say that perhaps part of the problem of fear is actually the attitude of righteous privilege which some young and not so young woman want to assume - those who have not learned the wisdom of extending forgiveness to individuals who give them the opportunity to do so.  When in doubt, extending that opportunity is always the correct choice and the only one which will alleviate fear.

10 April 2019

Prosecute the Scoundrels to the Full Extent of the Law

What is wrong with this damned state of New Mexico, and this damned city of Albuquerque, which together refuse to stop children from being brutally killed by those who are supposed to care!!!!  There has to be an end to it.  I can not believe there are people in the lives of the children and the adults responsible for being their parents or guardians, who  have not realized there are dangers for the children and reported the huge red flags indicative of those dangers!!! 

In fact, if news reports are accurate, I know the dangers have been reported, even several times in some cases, and that either law enforcement, or the social agencies which are supposed to handle such problems, often both, have failed to respond appropriately to the warnings of wrong-doing!  There must to be an end to accommodating the evil of ill-intended bottomless hate and incompetency, together, that is the cause. An end!!  Anyone who makes a decision to allow children to stay in dangerous homes or puts them in the care of those who should not be trusted with their care, is wrong to criminal extent. 

It is past time those responsible for not responding appropriately are removed from their jobs, and apprehended for their crimes of willful neglect which encouraged and enabled the continuing perpetration of the crimes.  They are accomplices who enable the continuing intolerable abuse resulting - predictably resulting - in the deaths of children.  Fact is the same happens to adults in danger - but this is primarily about how and why young children end up in environments which result in them being killed.



There is an underlying issue which can be preventative, and that is birth control.  However some people are so obsessed with preventing abortion they can not see past the noses on their faces to recognize that birth control is the answer to preventing later crimes, even  if that form of birth control must sometimes be abortion in the early stages of pregnancy.  Instead those people want to create policy that forces child-bearing, which then results in young children  being killed by those who are supposed to care, but never did. 

Yes, birth control to include the extreme of abortion, is an  impossibly difficult choice for people who want to accommodate superimposed religious control in their lives instead of their own common sense when it comes to choices they have the foresight to know will do the least possible harm all the way around.  But people are able to come to terms with the choices they make.  The problem is the hypocritical politicians who want to try to create  cognitive dissonance in individuals, and at a societal level.  They are the worst perpetrators when they try to redirect political attention to personal issues which can not and should not be legislated based on superimposed religious beliefs of specified religions.  That effort is  unconstitutional,
actually i.e. the superimposing of beliefs associated with specified religions. 

Family Planning Is a Personal Matter Not a Legislative Matter

For example, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I know of no Bible verses which say birth control is not permissible.  As I recall, be fruitful and multiply  is advised.  I did say advised not dictated because my personal view of religion is that it is advisement not dictatorial governing which tries to deny and discredit one's own divine connection and ability to discern guidance from it.  Most reasonable people have a similar perspective which is why the conditions associated with being fruitful and multiplying are a personal choice for true believers.

llow me to point out that be fruitful and multiply prolifically like rabbits do, is not what is advised in the Bible. I take that to mean that reasonable and responsible people can be trusted to plan the amount of fruitfulness they can accommodate and when they are prepared to start being responsibly fruitful.  This is an example of religion concerning itself with birth control as a tacked-on people-made dictate of religion which really is not a tenet of religion, is it.  As such, neither birth control nor abortion are included in sacred religious texts.  It is not as if either was unknown and unpracticed in time and place.  They simply are not addressed in religious texts.

It is not my job to tell people what to believe.  But it is the job of all of us to prevent the superimposition of the tenets of any specified religions in the form of efforts to legislate policies dictated by people-made tacked on interpretation to specified religions which some buy into, personally.  Family planning needs to remain at the personal level - not be superimposed as unconstitutional national policy.  When all is said and done birth control is about family planning. 
And family planning is a personal choice and responsibility in which policies demanding forced births have no place.

Irresponsible Family Planning and Killing of Young Children Are Connected

Morality and kindness can not be legislated.  They are personal choices.  We all know this.  It is not new information.  The extent to which individuals choose religion(s) to inform morality and kindness is also a personal choice - not a choice for politicians to try to make for we, the people, then try to superimpose with unconstitutional policy-making.  Of course this can be said about all issues which is why it is the job of we, the people, to remain vigilant about policies our elected and appointed government officials want to legislate - so that we can do our jobs of advising those who represent us, of our wishes.

When it is about the connection between preventing birth control and the killing of young children, if a specified religion really was that important to those individuals who want to use religion to make political issues out of choices individuals must make about responsible family planning because of personal necessity, then there would not be pregnancies in the first place would there - unless pregnancy was a result of rape, or failed birth control.  For someone else, especially politicians, to try to pick and choose what is and is not acceptable about the dictates of any specified religion, then to try to superimpose that as policy, is the height of intolerable hypocrisy - as well as unconstitutionality. 

That is the environment in which abortion as an extreme form of family planning is being politicized when family planning should not even be a political issue - unless it is to limit the number of children a couple is allowed to have, like China successfully did, as a way to handle the problems of overpopulation.  Genocidally neglecting vulnerable populations is not an appropriate way to handle overpopulation.  Neither is a national budget that dedicates more than half of the available resources to defense.  Yes, that pertains, because redirecting funds away from domestic needs highly contributes to the problems we experience that exacerbate over-population because of the reduction of needed available resources.

Religion as a Legislative Motivator

When intentional confusion is created about any religion based on a variety of different people-made interpretations tacked onto the sacred texts of religions through the years, then people either buy into the religious belief or they do not.  True believers do not decide to do and not do some things because of the slavish codification of later interpretation by people into what become dictates to, and in some cases corruptors  of a religion.  They do not misconstrue actual teachings about attitude and behavior, i.e.  morality issues, associated with the shared wisdom within sacred texts of the ways in which people can successfully peacefully coexist with one another.  

Let us not be coy.  Every reasonable adult who is literate is capable of understanding religious texts and interpreting them for oneself, and does so, no matter who does and does not approve.  Why else would there be so many folks who identify as a specific religion, but do not appear to actively practice the religion,  or to frequently  participate in the religious community except to socialize or unless they have children and need religious community to reinforce the values they are teaching their children? For some, religious beliefs are at the foundation of  spiritual evolution rather than primarily a competition associated with piety that is intended to be demonstrated to the religious community.  I mean really.  Those in the clergy
with whom I am acquainted, associated with several religions and subdivisions within religions, are much more authentic people than a good number of the followers of the religion.  They simply do not have cause for concern about how pious they are perceived to be by others.

Given reality, legislators have no business trying to superimpose as policy what any specific religion dictates - what is and is not a violation according to a specified religion's tenets.  And they also have no business trying to selectively make some tenets of a specified religion into  political issues but not other tenets, particularly when the ones they want to legislate are based on religious morality which is dependent on the ones they do not want to legislate.  It is simply not done to attempt to superimpose the interpretation of sacred texts of any specified religion
onto everyone through legislation - IF one is  a decent person who supports and defends our constitution.  It really is that simple.

Since the initial existence of all religions, they have been subject to having been politicized based on a variety of tacked on people- made interpretations associated with oral tradition and/or recognized sacred texts and beliefs.  And that type of confusion resulting in convoluted
cognitive dissonance associated with religious beliefs, is a major reason why our founders decided on it not being allowable for government to specify a national religion.  By extension that decision is intended to protect government from religion, and religion from government, and we, the people, from superimposed politicized religious beliefs that are not our own. 

Birth Control/Abortion Issues Target the Rights of Single Woman

Consider, for example, if the religion whose tenets you want legislators to superimpose as legislation specifies marriage as a prerequisite to creating children, then you can not ignore the prerequisite of marriage and try to legislate family planning as being disassociated from that prerequisite, without creating a hypocritical double standard because of politically choosing what is and is not enforceable as a religious tenet.  Fact is it should be a moot point because superimposing religious tenets is unconstitutional.  But that has not stopped legislators from trying to superimpose a tenet of a specified religion associated with the part of family planning that is about scheduling children i.e. birth control, including the extreme of abortion when necessary.  So this is not a foolish comment I make about legislators wanting to superimpose selective religious tenets they buy into while ignoring prerequisite tenets.

Fact is that any legislation associated with birth control, including the extreme of abortion is intended to interfere with the unmarried single woman's right to family planning.  It puts all responsibility on the single women who become pregnant, by trying to religiously guilt trip them and  force them to give birth without being married, even when their family plan does not include being a single parent.  In other words it takes male responsibility out of the equation even though both a male and a female are required to create a life.  If this does not make sense yet, then stay with me because it will.  But first do not try to make this into an
LGBTQ gender issue or a technology issue, because it is neither.  It is about making pregnancy solely an individual woman's responsibility and/or punishment when in fact it is a couples issue and choice even if half of the couple is irresponsible and not part of making decisions about family  planning. 

Why do I say single women are targeted by birth control and abortion legislation?  Because legislation of birth control is a moot point when it comes to married couples and simply not subject to legislation, marriage being considered sacrosanct, which means among other things that family planning within a marriage is not subject to the judgment of others.  So the fact is that birth control/abortion legislation is intended to prevent a  single woman from the right to schedule family planning, thus is a violation primarily of the rights of a single women.   A woman has a right to choose to bear children within a marriage rather than to be forced to bear children outside of a marriage.

Anyone who has ever been around children knows they deserve two parents who love one another, and who actually have planned for and want to give birth to and/or raise children together.  A woman has a right to plan family around a prerequisite of marriage.  And she also has a right to prioritize marriage so that she is not forced into marriage before she has prepared herself for marriage.  That often means education and career are priorities for young single women because following one's heart brings all that is good and right into one's life whatever that may be.  That is a concept associated with Spiritual Evolution 101.  However the troubles some folks cause because they do not even make it that far with their spiritual evolution by recognizing that is part of everyone else's spiritual evolution, also, are mind-boggling.  When it is meant to be, marriages happen when
purposely harassing obstacles are not used to redirect and demand the attention and resources of individuals who are seeking and reaching the goals which enable them to serve their purposes in life.  That is true synchronicity which manipulated coincidences can not successfully masquerade as, no matter how clever and far-reaching the manipulation is.

At issue is, that if legislators want to concern themselves with family planning then they need to stop being concerned about connecting religious morality to
birth control and abortion, just like they stopped associating religious morality with the LGBTQ issues - which actually should have been a harder sell than abortion given what is and is not stated in religious texts.  As such that is an indicator of how politicized family planning has become which focuses primarily on abortion and the foundation it rests on of specified religious belief that does not condone  birth control.  If legislators continue to want to be intent on regulating family planning, then they need to legislate mandatory preliminary conditions associated with child birth which are best for a couple and the children.  That would be marriage, economic stability which affords necessities and the cost of raising  children, plus agreement on when to start fitting into their lives, together, the creation of their own family, and how many children  can realistically be provide with the quality of life they deserve. 

In other words birth control and abortion are total non-issues when legislators focus on the requirements necessary for family planning and stop trying to make hot-button political issues out to birth control and abortion for single women who do not choose to raise children outside of marriage, or to have their priorities co opted by an unwanted marriage and/or an unplanned pregnancy.  Society has moved on from the 50's/60's forced-marriage-after-pregnancy-occurs problem so it is high time for legislators to move beyond it also and stop trying to victimize single women as if they alone are responsible for unplanned pregnancies and need to be prevented from making the best decisions for themselves and their future families.

The Environment in Which Young Children Are Killed

Let me be very clear.  It is not acceptable to apply the tenets of any religion in an effort to  legislate personal choice - in this case birth control, including early term abortion, because so many unwanted children end up dead when both birth control and abortion are legislated against.  Yes, that is directly related to the killing of young children.  And anyone who does not understand how targeting single women as intended victims of marriage with someone they do not want to marry, and targeting them as victims of unplanned childbirth, can and does highly contribute to the killing of young children, is neither paying attention nor thinking clearly. 

The social welfare system can not and does not provide all that is required to safely and successfully raise children as a single parent.  Sure some single parents can do it because of their already formulated good character, determination, drive, self discipline, even though they do not have training which allows them to do the work they would like to do.  And some single parents have an education and are working in a field that is fulfilling and includes a livable income which does not require them to depend entirely on social services to meet the needs of their families.  But what about those single and married women who were totally unprepared to become parents, then  become dysfunctional, perhaps
were surrounded by people not good for them, and/or resorted to drugs, prostitution, theft, cheating the welfare system, and anything they could do to escape from that dimension of desperation, pain, and revulsion their lives had become?  That is the environment into which children are born who too frequently are abused and exploited until they end up dead.  It must stop. The first line of defense which can prevent the deaths of young children is effective birth control, including the extreme method of abortion when necessary.

Women have the right to avoid co-opting their life plans instead of being forced by circumstances they did not create to unexpectedly become single mothers who are dependent on welfare.  They have the right to not be  forced into marriage with someone they do not want to marry. 

The young children who are killed are a symptom of all that I have addressed and more.  But they also are a direct result of the negligence of those who could have prevented the deaths, but instead enabled them and are not being held accountable and prosecuted for what can only be understood as a combination of collective willful negligence and incompetency. 

God help us all if those same people in law enforcement and social services have been lead to believe they are protected  because of abiding by superimposed unwritten s.o.p. they must accommodate as a condition of keeping their jobs.

05 April 2019

A.I. Nightmares

I read an article today citing Sputnik International about Swedish scientists,  who want to build robot replicas of dead relatives:  "Would YOU turn your loved one into a robot clone? Swedish scientists are using AI to build androids that are 'fully conscious copies' of dead relatives, report claims".  Yes, Sputnik International, and we all know whose news that is.  No matter.  All media has been on the A.I bandwagon, as of late.  And it is probably going to be THE industry for the young adult generation of today, like IT was for the previous generation.  What else can they do with so many jobs becoming computerized.  Best to get in on the ground floor and create the machines that will do the work people would otherwise have done.  Right?  But this is about far more than that.

AIMy first thought was Wow!  What next! What do the Swedish people think about that!? I really do not want to be someone who "used to like Swedish people".  But common sense quickly came to the rescue. 

It gets worse,
because it is obviously not only "Swedish Scientists" engaged in wanting to merge A.I. with people and to upload minds of the deceased to machines.  The article also says there is a Terrasem Movement Foundation in Vermont working on technology to transfer consciousness of people to computers.  And the article claims Elon Musk's Neuralink company is dedicated to the same.  Anyone not thinking this is headed toward the Borg way of life?

Unregulated Unethical Research

Tell me these are not government funded programs!  Please!  We can only guess how long funds have been funneled into such research through "the black ops budget" which essentially means no oversight and no regulation.

Thing is these unregulated unethical research efforts ordinarily do not make the news until they are actually happening.   Worse is when they are government funded and with no oversight.  And in the past month or so A.I. articles started saturating the news - with nearly fully grown technology except for the absent foresight which includes ethics, regulation, and oversight.  That means there has been a lot of work prior to all the A.I. hype in the press and on the news.  It is no secret Japan and China both have been obsessed with and working on A.I. for much longer.

Recorded and Impersonated

It is clearly all the more reason to e-mail (or text) instead of talk on the phone - particularly when "trapped" with long futile "recorded for training purposes" customer service (CS) calls, isn't it . . .

It has long been known the intent of some scam phone calls is to record one's voice so it can be used by crooks to impersonate.  The only difference with folks who use the "recording for training purposes" disclaimer is that unless you object their recording is legal.  Be that as it may, it does not mean unethical use of the recordings is legal.

And what happens when someone does not agree to the call being recorded and asks to talk to someone who does not need to be recorded "for training purposes"?  My guess is a refusal of service.  I do not know anyone who has ever tried to challenge that unreasonable "request".  Because the request is made in the form of a statement which requires refuting if one objects, a caller would need to make a point of refusing to permit the recording.

One Person's A.I. Heaven Is Another Person's A.I. Hell

When one's life has become a terribly resistant unreasonable facsimile in a false reality (usually known way before the threatening extreme, actually) it is very clear those ass-covering phone call disclaimers about being recorded actually mean those unscrupulous people are selling one's voice to unscrupulous folks who are using it in the way the article reveals - their cloning efforts, biological and/or A.I.  It adds a whole other dimension to "reality check", doesn't it.

The effort the article speaks of is the same as trying to imprison a person's soul in a dimension they have transcended i.e. where they do not belong and should not be. It would be analogous to the way religions describe purgatory and/or hell.

Don't believe it? Apply the scientific method and prove me wrong. I guarantee we need another law to protect individuals (living and dead!) by regulating how recorded phone calls (all recordings actually), photos, and animated videos can NOT be used - guarantee.

31 March 2019

So Many People Love You. Don't Focus on the People Who Don't.

"So many people love you.  Don't focus on the people who don't."   It's great advice - home being where the heart is which is where we need to dwell in life, as much as possible!   And it certainly is not up to others to try to define "home" for anyone else.  As we all evolve spiritually, home - as in parents/siblings/extended family - is not necessarily "home", although some ancestors of these folks, our ancestors also, often are part of what we recognize as home for ourselves - as the path to where the most love we experience and project, leads.  Home becomes a spiritual environment (frequency as we can also say) not necessarily a temporal place.  Although, being in a loved place enhances the spiritual environment, so does bringing love to any environment also enhance it, resulting in it being a loved place.

In addition to great advice, the above comment is also an encouraging "feel good" comment.

Hate Requires Defense

I do not want to be a reality wet-blanket, but I need to point out that as much as we would like to be in that place spiritually, emotionally, and physically (intellectually too) - all the time, or at least as much as possible - personal experience informs us that we can not always focus on only love, simply because of those who hate, because hate does require defense. 

I also need to add a comment in defense of ego which is associated with intellectual processes as a necessary bridge among our spiritual, emotional, and physical aspects.  Ego is not always a narcissistic, psychopathic, evil monster as it is often portrayed.  Discernment and all forms of communication and creativity use ego as a bridge between the necessary well-developed ego as part of love, and the other aspects of oneself. 

EGO and ego

EGO and ego are two entirely different aspects of being.  EGO is damaging to self and others.  At the lowest common denominator environment we find ourselves functioning within at any given time, accessing and using ego is required.  Humanity, collectively, moves forward from the lowest common denominator which is about EGO, and it requires us to properly employ ego (which is never damaging) for the purpose of raising the standard of the lowest common denominator where EGO does cause damage.  Is there a gray area between EGO and ego?  Well, when we focus on love, no.  Being vigilant and identifying what is not love, does not mean we are not focusing on love.  It is a balance guardians/gatekeepers/scouts/way-showers/shamans/healers must master (i.e. skillful control within self) because of work which needs to be accomplished.

People who do not love us are not the problem.  And defense actually is necessary at least from time to time - unless, of course, one is  fortunate enough to always be defended by others, like the sacred guardianship those who love extend to children - and all others, actually.

Be Wary of Ill-intent

The problem is people who are actively exercising ill-intent towards us, you, others. They are within a subgroup of people who do not like us and want to control us, who are within a subgroup of people who do not love us.  So be aware to fend off ill-intent because "ill" actually does means ill.  It is what people with violent hateful attitudes project who want to create environments that kill, instead of outright directly killing and risking being apprehended.  Thus their need to create chaos as a smoke-screen by involving many others in their efforts, others who willingly participate, not necessary knowing the intent.

Perhaps the problem actually is: those who do not love us do not know us! 😅 (This comment is EGO, EGO, EGO humor, actually, in case there is any doubt!)

Humor, notwithstanding, it is advisable to be wary of ill-intent which is always a part of the palpable chaotic hate some project which is very strong no matter how much effort there is to hide it.  When some you know seem to be projecting hate, sometimes they do so unknowingly because of being victims of it.  And unless you know such a person, well, it is not always possible to know the origin of hateful ill-intent plaguing them, which plagues others through them.  We only know they are  desperately in need of help either to fend it off, or as its origin.

Caution!  Hate Becomes Viral

When we know hateful ill-intent is being projected at us, directly or indirectly, we owe it to others as well as to ourselves to trace the hate to origin - always challenging work.  Unfortunately, hate often functions like a rampant communicable disease.   It is rarely personal and often targets those who are innocent of the "reason" hate is being projected, at them and through them to other people.  Neither is defense personal, and in fact it needs to be extensive in the process of zeroing in on the causes of hate.