chAng's Blog

*source:
Wired - Brandon Keim
March 4, 2008

(Image: Doug Wilson)

When infant eyes absorb a world of virgin visions, colors are processed purely, in a pre-linguistic parts of the brain. As adults, colors are processed in the brain’s language centers, refracted by the concepts we have for them.

How does that switch take place? And does it affect our subjective experience of color? Such tantalizing questions, their answers still unknown, are raised by this developmental shift in color categorization, described today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

To test the phenomenon, a team of British and English researchers asked

adults and infants to focus on a briefly flashing target circle.

Sometimes the target appeared in the subjects’ right visual fields

– roughly speaking, the right half of a person’s field of vision,

which is transmitted from the eyes to the brain’s left hemisphere,

where language processing also takes place. Sometimes the targets

appeared in the left visual field, which connects to the pre-linguistic

right hemisphere.

When asked to pick out a target against a similarly-colored background

– a more mentally demanding task than distinguishing between different

colors — infants performed better when the target appeared in their

left visual fields. Adults, by contrast, had an easier time with

targets in their right visual fields.

Over the course of our lives, it appears that an unfiltered perception

of color gives way to one mediated by the constructs of language.

Does this mean that adults and infants see the same colors differently?

“We don’t know,” said study co-author Paul Kay.

But might adults see colors differently? That seems plausible.

“As an adult, color categorization is influenced by linguistic

categories. It differs as the language differs,” said Kay, who is

renowned for his studies on the ways that different cultures classify

colors. He cited recent research on the ability of Russian speakers to

detect shades of blue [pdf] that English speakers classify as a single color.

How does the switch to a language-bound perception of color take place?

“That’s the $64,000 question,” said Kay. “We have every reason to

believe that learning a language has a lot to do with it — but [as for] how

that works, it’s early.”

Categorical perception of color is lateralized to the right hemisphere in infants, but to the left hemisphere in adults [PNAS]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Terrence
McKenna on pre-linguistic perception:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Terrence McKenna on visual language:

(CBS) "What if we told you the Pentagon has a ray gun? And what if we told you it can stop a person in his tracks without killing or even injuring him? Well, it’s true. You can’t see it, you can't hear it, but as CBS News correspondent David Martin experienced first hand, you can feel it.

Pentagon officials call it a major breakthrough which could change the rules of war and save huge numbers of lives in Iraq. But it's still not there. That because in the middle of a war, the military just can't bring itself to trust a weapon that doesn't kill."

ih..







...In the United States the most common currency hasn't been backed by gold or silver for many decades. Inflation is the result. The Federal Reserve has been making counterfeit money legally with the un-Constitutional approval of authority by Congress. We gave that responsibility to Congress in its inception and they had no right to pass along that authority to a central bank that practices fractional reserve banking. (which is collecting interest on money they don't have to loan)

...The Liberty Dollar is backed by gold and silver, and you can get coins or paper receipts, for every receipt there is a coin in holding, so there is only a fixed amount of money and the more people use it, the more it will be worth. (as opposed to the opposite with worthless fed notes)


...Liberty Dollars are a negotiable currency, where if the value changes you can negotiate accordingly. The federal reserve notes are non-negotiable and it changes the prices of the products you buy.

...Please learn more about this legal parallel currency as it could save us from the hardship of depression and inflation.







The national debt has climbed to alarming levels since the Federal Reserve was created in 1913.
Source: U.S. Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt



As a result, the Federal Reserve Note (US dollar) has lost 96% of its purchasing power since 1913.
Source: U.S. Dept, of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI







For all the info on the Liberty Dollar, please visit: www.LibertyDollar.org

REAL Money Is Inflation Proof:
Your Liberty Dollar Solution

Andrew Williams, a spokesman for the Federal Reserve in Washington, D.C.:

"There is no law that says goods and services must be paid for with Federal Reserve notes. Parties entering into a transaction can establish any medium of exchange that is agreed upon."

Paul Harvey, well-known and respected news commentator, reported:

What's new? The Liberty Dollar! Fed Ex competes with the Post Office. So now there's the Liberty Dollar competing with the greenbacks printed by your government. The Liberty Dollar is backed by gold and silver. Yes, there's a competitive currency right here in the United States. In five years it has become the second most popular currency in America.

100,000 Liberty Dollar supporters:

REAL Money's got the look, the feel, and the real value. Because it is REAL Gold and Silver. I use it every day! And so can you!




eyb~





...I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth; banks are going bust; shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter; punks are running wild in the street, and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it.

We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat. And we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be!

We all know things are bad -- worse than bad -- they're crazy.

It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we're living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, "Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials, and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone."

Well, I'm not going to leave you alone.

I want you to get mad!

I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your Congressman, because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street.

All I know is that first, you've got to get mad.

You've gotta say, "I'm a human being, g*ddammit! My life has value!"

So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm going to vote for Ron Paul!!"

-Howard Beale, Network (1976)

..."War Made Easy reaches into the Orwellian memory hole to expose a 50-year pattern of government deception and media spin that has dragged the United States into one war after another from Vietnam to Iraq. Narrated by actor and activist Sean Penn, the film exhumes remarkable archival footage of official distortion and exaggeration from LBJ to George W. Bush, revealing in stunning detail how the American news media have uncritically disseminated the pro-war messages of successive presidential administrations."

(source)


Is The US Really Bringing Stability to Baghdad?
To judge from the talk in Washington, the ’surge’ that put 30,000 more US troops on the ground in Iraq has succeeded in bringing stability to a nation still riven by ethnic, religious and tribal conflict. Life, the Pentagon boasts, is returning to normal. But the truth is a very different story.
by Patrick Cockburn

People in Baghdad are not passive victims of violence, but seek desperately to avoid their fate. In April 2004, I was almost killed by Shia militiamen of the Mehdi Army at a checkpoint at Kufa in southern Iraq. They said I was an American spy and were about to execute me and my driver, Bassim Abdul Rahman, when they decided at the last moment to check with their commander. “I believe,” Bassim said afterwards, “that if Patrick had an American or an English passport [instead of an Irish one] they would have killed us all immediately.”

In the following years, I saw Bassim less and less. He is a Sunni, aged about 40, from west Baghdad. After the battle for Baghdad between Shia and Sunni in 2006, he could hardly work as a driver as three-quarters of the capital was controlled by the Shia. There were few places where a Sunni could drive in safety outside a handful of enclaves.

What happened to Bassim was also to happen to millions of Iraqis who saw their lives ruined by successive calamities. As their world collapsed around them they were forced to take desperate measures to survive, obtain a job and make enough money to feed and educate their families.

In the US and Europe, the main measure of whether the war in Iraq is “going well” or “going badly” is the casualty figures. The number of American soldiers and Iraqi civilians being killed went down to 39 US soldiers and 599 Iraqi civilians in January. The White House is promoting the idea that the United States is finally on the road to success, if not victory, in Iraq.

On the back of this renewed optimism about the war, Senator John McCain, the premier hawk among the Republican candidates for the presidency, has been able to revive his foundering campaign and is set to be his party’s nominee. Despite the scepticism of many US journalists permanently stationed in Iraq, television and newspaper newsrooms in New York and Washington (in London they are more sceptical) have largely bought into the idea that “the surge” - the wider deployment of 30,000 extra US troops since February 2006 - has succeeded.

But any true assessment of the happiness or misery of Iraqis must use a less crude index than the number of dead and injured. It must ask if people have been driven from their houses, and if they can return. It must say whether they have a job and, if they do not, whether they stand a chance of getting one. It has to explain why so few of the 3.2 million people who are refugees in Syria and Jordan, or inside Iraq, are coming back.

At the time we had our encounter with the Mehdi Army in Kufa, Bassim was living in a house in the mixed Sunni-Shia area of Jihad in south-west Baghdad. He loved the house, which had a sitting room and two bedrooms, because he had built it himself in 2001. “I didn’t complete it because I didn’t have enough money,” he said. “But we were so happy to have our own home.”

He was living there in the summer of 2006 with his wife Maha, 38, and his children Sarah, 13, Noor, eight, and Sama, three, when Shia militiamen took over Jihad. The struggle for the capital had begun on 22 February when Sunni insurgents blew up a revered Shia shrine in Samarra. Bassim fled to Syria with his family and, when he returned to Jihad three months later, he found pictures of Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shia nationalist cleric who heads the Mehdi Army, pasted to the gate of his house.

(An Iraqi soldier mans a checkpoint in Baghdad © AFP/Getty Images)

Neighbours told Bassim to get out as fast as he could before the Mehdi Army militiamen came back and killed him. He drove with his family to his father-in-law’s house in the tough Sunni district of al-Khadra, where he and his wife and three children were to live in future in a single small room. He did not dare go back to his old home, but he heard about it in the summer of 2007 from a friendly Shia neighbour who said it had been taken over by militiamen. “They accused me,” says Bassim, “of being a high-rank officer in the former intelligence service and because of that they got a permit [from al-Sadr’s office] to take it over.”

Two Shia families moved in for a couple of months and, when they left, they took all his remaining belongings. They left the house unlocked, and soon the wooden doors and other fittings were gone. The permanent loss of his home, his only possession of any value apart from his car, was a terrible blow to Bassim and his wife. “I have nothing else to lose aside from my house,” he wrote to me in a sad letter in the autumn of 2007, “and because of what happened I had a heart attack. I worked as a taxi driver for a few days, but I couldn’t do it any longer because of the dangerous situation and I had no other way of earning a living. Finally, I sold my car and my wife’s few gold things and I will try to go to Sweden even if I have to go illegally.”

I thought his plan to travel to Sweden was a terrible one, as Bassim spoke only Arabic and had not travelled outside Iraq, apart from a few trips to Syria and Jordan. But there was nothing I could do to dissuade him. I did not see or hear from him for six months, though I heard from his friends that his bid to reach Sweden had failed and that he was stuck in Kuala Lumpur.

Then, on 1 February, he appeared at the door of my hotel room in Baghdad, looking shrunken and miserable, and told me of his strange and disastrous odyssey.

I had originally hoped that his plan to travel illegally to Sweden was a fantasy he would never try to realise, but everything he had said in his letter turned out to be true. He had sold his car, his wife’s gold jewellery and some furniture for $6,500 (about £3,300) and borrowed $1,500 from his sister and the same amount from friends. Of this, $6,900 was paid to Abu Mohammed, an Iraqi in Sweden, who provided Bassim and a friend called Ibrahim with Lithuanian passports (these turned out to be genuine, but one of Bassim’s many fears over the next three months was that his passport was a fake and he would be thrown in jail). The two men went first to Damascus and then, instructed over the phone by Abu Mohammed in Sweden, they flew to Malaysia.

This would seem to be the wrong direction, but Malaysia has the great advantage of being one of the few countries to give Iraqis entry visas at the airport. Bassim and Ibrahim took rooms at the cheapest hotel they could find in Kuala Lumpur.

They were then told by Abu Mohammed to get a plane to Cambodia and take a bus to Vietnam. Though their money was fast dwindling, they did so. Somehow, still speaking only Arabic, they made their way from Phnom Penh to @#!$ Chi Minh City. The plan was to get a ticket to Sweden by way of France (Bassim now thinks that this was a mistake and it would have been better to travel first to Lithuania, posing as citizens returning home, but this would have left the two Iraqis with the problem of explaining to officials there why they did not speak Lithuanian).

In the check-in queue at the airport in Vietnam on 5 January this year, Bassim was desperately worried he would be detected. He had staked all his remaining money and his family’s future on getting to Sweden. In fact, he and Ibrahim had little chance of being allowed on to the plane. Too many Iraqis, claiming to be citizens of small East European states, had tried this route before. Suspicious Vietnamese immigration officials took them to an investigation room where Bassim felt ill and asked for a glass of water, which was refused. He and Ibrahim continued to protest that they were Lithuanian citizens and demanded to be taken to the Lithuanian embassy, knowing full well that Lithuania is unrepresented in Vietnam.

It was all in vain. The officials guessed that they were Iraqis. They sent Bassim and Ibrahim back to Cambodia. Half-starved because he did not like the local food - “I was used to Iraqi bread,” he recalled later - and with his money almost gone, Bassim made his way back to Kuala Lumpur by the end of January. He last saw his friend Ibrahim heading for Indonesia in a small boat.

Abu Mohammed in Sweden became elusive and, when finally contacted by phone after six days, admitted that “for Iraqis, all the ways from Asia to Sweden are shut”. He did not offer to return Bassim’s $6,900. Demoralised, and hearing that many Iraqi refugees trying to get to Europe through Indonesia simply disappeared, Bassim used his last few dollars to fly to Damascus and took a shared taxi across the desert to Baghdad. “The journey took three months but it felt like 10 years,” he said. “I have lost everything.”

Life in the Iraq to which Bassim has returned is said by foreigners and Iraqis alike to be getting better. Perky pieces in the foreign media breathlessly describe how Sunni children are once again playing football in al-Zahra park near the Green Zone, where they would have been murdered a year ago. “The problem,” complained one American correspondent in Baghdad, “is that newsrooms back home have two mindsets - ‘War Rages’ and ‘Peace Dawns’ - and not a lot in between.”

Previous claims of an improvement in security by the US or the Iraqi government had been wholly false. I remembered Paul Bremer, the US viceroy during the first year of the occupation, claiming that the Sunni insurgents were a doomed remnant battling against “the new Iraq”. When Bremer left in 2004, he was shown on television clambering into one helicopter and then, when the cameras departed, scuttling on to a second aircraft in case those same insurgents might shoot him down.

In contrast to the spurious turning-points of the past, the most recent political changes in Iraq, which had led to the fall in American and Iraqi casualties, are quite real. But they differ significantly from the way in which they are portrayed in the outside world, and have less to do with al-Qa’ida and the US than the continuing struggle for power between Sunni and Shia in Iraq.

From the fall of Saddam Hussein in 2003 to the summer of 2006, the five million-strong Sunni community had battled the US and the Shia-Kurdish Iraqi government. Then, quite suddenly, last year many of the Sunni rebel groups switched sides and allied themselves with the Americans, formed the “al-Sahwa” or “Awakening” movement and declared war on al-Qa’ida.

Dramatic changes of side when enemies embrace each other are not unknown in Iraqi politics and may stem from its traditions of tribal warfare. I was in Iraqi Kurdistan in 1996 when the Kurdish leader Massoud Barzani, many of whose family and tribe had been murdered by Saddam Hussein, called in Saddam’s tanks to capture the city of Arbil and to repulse an offensive by the rival Kurdish leader Jalal Talabani, now president of Iraq.

The US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, and the US ambassador, Ryan Crocker, are cautious about claiming too much success. But the White House and the Republicans have been quick to suggest that a turning point had been reached in the war. As in 2003, after the American overthrow of Saddam, both the Democrats and much of the American media could be easily intimidated by the fear that they were being unpatriotic or defeatist when military victory was in sight.

“The problem in Iraq is that the agenda is driven not by what is really happening, but by the perception in America of what is happening,” Ahmad Chalabi, veteran of the opposition to Saddam and one of the most astute observers of the Iraqi scene, told me. A problem is that US politicians and commentators assume far greater American control of events in Iraq than is the case. The US is the most powerful player there, but it is by no means the only one.

The dramatic change of sides of Sunni guerrilla organisations such as the “1920 Revolution Brigades” and the “Islamic Army” came about for many reasons. In Anbar province west of Baghdad (perhaps one-third of Iraq by area), the Sunni tribes had become enraged by al-Qa’ida’s attempt to establish total dominance, and to replace or murder traditional leaders and set up a Taliban-type state. But the Sunni community could also see that, although its guerrilla war was effective against the US, it was being defeated by the Shia who controlled the Iraqi government and armed forces after the elections of 2005.

The only source of money in Iraq is oil revenues, and the only jobs - four million, if those on a pension are included - are with the government. The Shia, in alliance with the Kurds, controlled both. “The Sunni people found that the only way to be protected from the Shia was to be allied to the Americans,” said Kassim Ahmed Salman, a well-educated Sunni from west Baghdad. “Otherwise we were in a hopeless situation. For the last two years it has been possible for Sunni to be killed legally [by death squads covertly supported by the government] in Baghdad.”

The “surge” - the 30,000 extra US troops implementing a new security plan in Baghdad - has helped to make Baghdad safer. In effect, they have frozen into place the Shia victory of 2006. The city is broken up into enclaves sealed off by concrete walls with only one entrance and exit.

Areas that were once mixed are not being reoccupied by whichever community was driven out. Bassim can no more reclaim, or even visit, his house in the Jihad district of Baghdad than he could a year ago. He can still work as a taxi driver only in Sunni areas. The US military and the Iraqi government are wary of even trying to reverse sectarian cleansing because this might break the present fragile truce.

“People say things are better than they were,” says Zanab Jafar, a well-educated Shia woman living in al-Hamraa, west Baghdad, “but what they mean is that they are better than [during] the bloodbath of 2006. The situation is still terrible.”

Baghdad still feels and looks like a city at war. There are checkpoints everywhere. “You seldom see young girls walking in the streets, or in restaurants,” adds Zanab Jafar, “because their families are terrified they will be kidnapped, so they send private cars to pick them up directly from school.” New shops open, but they are always in the heart of districts controlled by a single community because nobody wants to venture far from their home to shop.

For all the talk of Baghdad being safer, it remains an extraordinarily dangerous place. One Western security company is still asking $3,000 to pick a man up at the airport and drive him six miles to his hotel in central Baghdad. The number of dead bodies being picked up by the police every morning in the capital is down to three or four when once it was 50 or 60.

“People are being killed in the back streets and alleyways but not in the main roads as they were 12 months ago,” says one Shia leader with a network of contacts throughout Baghdad. “About twice as many people are being killed as the government admits.” This figure is still well below what it was 18 months ago, and is unlikely to return to its previous level as long as al-Qa’ida does not resume its suicide bombing campaign, using trucks loaded with a ton of explosives detonated in the middle of Shia markets or religious processions, killing and wounding hundreds. If the attacks on the two bird markets in Shia areas on 1 February, killing 99 people, are repeated, then Shia death squads will start a fresh cycle of @#!$-for-tat killings of Sunni.

The new element in Iraq is the development of the Awakening Council, or al-Sahwa, movement. Suddenly there is a Sunni militia, paid by the US, that has 80,000 men under arms. This re-empowers the Sunni community far more than any legislation passed by the Iraqi parliament. But it also deepens the divisions in Iraq because the leaders of the Awakening do not bother to hide their hatred and contempt for the Iraqi government.

At the end of January, I visited Abu Marouf, one of the leaders of the Awakening, in his headquarters near Khan Dari, halfway between Abu Ghraib and Fallujah. Asked about his attitude to the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Abu Marouf, until recently a commander of the 1920 Revolution Brigades, said: “Maliki has got 13 divisions [in the army] most of whom are Shia, and half are from militias controlled by Iran.”

In his State of the Union address, President Bush spoke of the 80,000 Awakening Council members - also labelled “concerned local citizens”, as if they were respectable householders who have taken up arms against “terrorists”.

The picture Bush evoked is similar to that often seen in Hollywood Westerns when outraged townsfolk and farmers, driven beyond endurance by the crimes of a corrupt sheriff or saloon owner and their bandit followers, rise in revolt. In reality, in Iraq the exact opposite has happened. The Awakening Council members of today are the “terrorists” of yesterday.

Even the police chief of Fallujah, Colonel Feisal, the brother of Abu Marouf, cheerfully explained that until he was promoted to his present post in December 2006 he was “fighting the Americans”. Abu Marouf is threatening to go back to war or let al-Qa’ida return unless his 13,000 men receive long-term jobs in the Iraqi security services. The Iraqi government has no intention of allowing this because to do so would be to allow the Sunni and partisans of Saddam Hussein’s regime to once again hold real power in the state.

Bizarrely, the US is still holding hundreds of men suspected of contacts with al-Qa’ida in Afghanistan and elsewhere, while in Iraq many of the Awakening members are past and, in many cases, probably current members of al-Qa’ida being paid by the US Army.

“I knew a young man, aged 17 or 18,” says Kassim Ahmed Salman, “who was a friend of my brother and used to carry a PKC [a Russian light machine-gun] and fight for al-Qa’ida. I was astonished to see him a few days ago in al-Khadra where he is a lieutenant in al-Sahwa, standing together with Iraqi army officers.”

The present state of Iraq is highly unstable, but nobody quite wants to go to war again. It reminds me of lulls in the Lebanese civil war during the 1970s and 1980s, when everybody in Beirut rightly predicted that nothing was solved and the fighting would start again. In Iraq the fighting has never stopped, but the present equilibrium might go on for some time.

All the Iraqi players are waiting to see at what rate the US will draw down its troop levels. The Mehdi Army is discussing ending its six-month ceasefire, but does not want to fight its Shia rivals if they are supported by American military power. Al-Qa’ida is wounded but by no means out of business. Four days after I had seen Abu Marouf, who was surrounded by bodyguards and maintains extreme secrecy about his movements, al-Qa’ida was able to detonate a bomb in a car close to his house and injure four of his guards.

Protestations of amity between Shia security men and Awakening members should be treated with scepticism. My friend, the intrepid French television reporter Lucas Menget, filmed a Shia policeman showering praise on the Awakening movement. He introduced two of its members, declaring enthusiastically to the camera: “You see, together we will defeat al-Qa’ida.” Back in his police car, the policeman, lighting up a Davidoff cigarette and shaking his head wearily, explained: “I don’t have a choice. I was asked to work with these killers.”

Iraq remains a great sump of human degradation and poverty, unaffected by the “surge”. It was not a government critic but the civilian spokesman for the Baghdad security plan, Tahseen Sheikhly, who pointed out this week that the city is drowning in sewage because of blocked and broken pipes and drains. In one part of the city, the sewage has formed a lake so large that it can be seen “as a big black spot on Google Earth”.

In the coming weeks, we will see the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq by American and British forces on 19 March, and the fall of Saddam Hussein on 9 April. There will be much rancorous debate in the Western media about the success or failure of the “surge” and the US war effort here.

But for millions of Iraqis like Bassim, the war has robbed them of their homes, their jobs and often their lives. It has brought them nothing but misery and ended their hopes of happiness. It has destroyed Iraq.

ih`


...The following is some info that was brought into question in another blog, and I felt it warranted posting it here rather than having several replies in that other blog, considering the length of the content.

...Well here it is, I found it rather interesting considering I have been already learning about state vs. national citizenship and the like.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 21:00:19 -0800
From: "Paul Andrew Mitchell" ..
To: pc
Subject:
More Re: [ronpaul-48] so does this mean mccain has the right to be
president?

What a large number of Americans still do not know
is that we have two (2) classes of citizens in America,
not one (1):

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/twoclass.htm

The case of Pannill v. Roanoke is particularly pertinent,
and dispositive, because it held that federal citizens
were not even contemplated when Article III was first
being drafted:

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/twoclass.htm#pannill>

The implications of the Pannill case are very far-reaching,
chiefly because that key holding is historically correct.

Because Arizona's voter registration application requires
that all applicants verify, under penalty of perjury, that they
are federal citizens, McCain's application can be used
as admissible evidence proving that he is a federal citizen,
NOT a State Citizen aka Citizen of ONE OF the United States of America:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/sanmarco/complain.htm#one
-of

Moreover, State Citizens are prohibited by Arizona State law
from registering to vote. If they are not also federal citizens,
they commit an act of perjury by executing that application
"under penalty of perjury". I was a Citizen of Arizona
during the 1996 Presidential Election, and I was barred
from voting in that Election:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/azvmitch/voting/

Also, the term "United States" means "States united"
in all the Qualifications Clauses: People v. De La Guerra.

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/quals.htma>

Federal citizenship was first created by the 1866 Civil Rights Act:

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/1866cra/

Because the Qualifications Clauses have never been amended,
the Qualification Clause for President requires that all candidates
be Citizens of ONE OF the United States of America,
i.e. Citizen of ONE OF the States united = State Citizen
born in one of the several States of the Union.

All of this means that federal citizens are who are not also
State Citizens are not eligible to occupy the Office of President.

One last thing: there is no constitutional authority for the
proposition that federal citizens are also Citizens of the
any State in which they may "reside".

The latter statement may be the most difficult for many
to accept, particularly anyone who thinks we are "insulting
their intelligence" -- when we definitely are not consciously
trying to do so.

Nevertheless, 27 has always been less than 28, and
the so-called 14th amendment was never properly ratified.
See Dyett v. Turner:

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/14amrec/

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/knudson/judnot09.htm#dyet
t

Maybe they are the ones trying to insult my intelligence instead,
e.g. by asking me to believe that 27 equals 28!!

If John McCain is a federal citizen, as evidenced by his voter
registration affidavit, that is another reason why he is not eligible to occupy the office of President, quite apart from his birth outside the jurisdiction of the United States (federal government).

Having been born in Panama, he is not a "natural born Citizen"
i.e. State Citizen born in ONE OF the 50 States of the Union,
as that term occurs at Article II, Section 1, Clause 5
in the Constitution for the United States of America:

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#2:
1:5

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the
United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,
shall be eligible to the Office of President ....

I do think it is fair to say that my office has done
more research, and litigation, on these subjects
than any other lawyer anywhere in the USA, be they
government attorneys or private Bar-licensed attorneys.

For proof of this last sentence, please see "The Federal Zone"
here:

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/

and the extensive litigation which has utilized
the fundamental findings documented in that book.

Thank you.

p.s. There is much additional (and free) reading
at the links below my name here ...

http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964(a)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney
.general.htm
Criminal Investigator and Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13

ih`












...Please visit http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html for more information.

ih`






...This is supposed to be a parody, but it's funny because it's so true. With 24 hour news coverage, the mainstream media has forsaken the real issues for mindless crap and trivial BS, laminating the minds of viewers to the point that noone cares anymore, and everyone just wants this damn election to be over so they can get back to watching American Idol re-runs in peace.


...People are so self-occupied with their own trivial pursuits that hardly anyone notices when widespread voting fraud is blatant, or when a candidate promises to turn a part of the world into a "glass crater" or impose a theocracy in the place of our Republic, if elected.

...People know more about the Simpsons then they do about how the government works, they are quick to tell you who was banished from the island last week on Survivor, but give a puzzled look when asked to name the three branches of government. We deserve what we get in the long run, but it's a hard fact to face up to for those of us who are attentive on the issues.

ih`


...The District of Columbia Act of 1871 , signed in that year by Congress, effectively turned the ten mile plot of land we know as Washington DC into a corporation, making it one of the three sovereign "city states" of the world. The other two city states include Vatican city, and the worlds largest financial district of downtown London.

...Each of these city states have flags bearing three stars, and each have Egyptian needle-like towers called Obelisks, which, in ancient Egyptian culture it was believed that within the sacred structure dwells the sun god "Amen-Ra."


...When the Act of 1871 was passed, America was going through a rough time financially, the civil war had almost bankrupt the country, and the Act was basically a bailout by foreign bankers. With it passing into law, the citizenry lost it's sovereignty and it's Constitution.

...The title of the Constitution before that was changed from,"The Constitution for the united states of America" to "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA."



...The capitalization, and the changing the word "for" to "of" is very significant. To fully understand how our rights of sovereignty were ended, you must know the full meaning of sovereign:

"Chief or highest, supreme power, superior in position to all others; independent of and unlimited by others; possessing or entitled to; original and independent authority or jurisdiction." (Webster).

"Our corporate form of governance is based on Roman Civil Law and Admiralty, or Maritime, Law, which is also known as the 'Divine Right of Kings' and the 'Law of the Seas' -- another fact of American history not taught in our schools.

...Washington DC's Constitution is called Lex Fori.

...Actually, Roman Civil Law was fully established in the colonies before our nation began, and then became managed by private international law. In other words, the government -- the government created for the District of Columbia via the Act of 1871 – operates solely under Private International Law, not Common Law, which was the foundation of our Constitutional Republic. "This fact has impacted all Americans in concrete ways.

...For instance, although Private International Law is technically only applicable within the District of Columbia, and NOT in the other states of the Union, the arms of the Corporation of the UNITED STATES are called 'departments' -- i.e., the Justice Department, the Treasury Department. And those departments affect everyone, no matter where (in what state) they live. Guess what? Each department belongs to the corporation -- to the UNITED STATES.


~~~~~~~~~~~

...Fast forward to the 5 minute mark on this one to learn more about the "3 city states."





...and this one talks about the Obelisks at the beginning.

ih'


...This is just crazy, I don't know the validity of it, but it's quite shocking to say the least. The guy in the video says on the youtube page that more info can be found at www.therightperspective.com although I didn't see it referenced there myself, quickly looking over the site.

...Even though it probably is BS, it's good for a laugh at least.

ih`


...This is a series of BBC films about the shift in the mindset of politicians that went from promising us our dreams, to promoting the idea that they can protect us from our worst nightmares.

...It follows the rise of two groups, the American neo-conservatives, and the Islamic extremists, and displays the ideologies driving each group and the course of events leading up to the present.

...It's important to see how they both play off each other and use publicity and public opinion in their strategies to attain and preserve their power.

...A must see for those interested in understanding the driving forces behind the main characters in the war on terrorism.



Part 1: Baby It's Cold Outside


Part 2: The Phantom Victory


Part 3: The Shadows in the Cave

ih`



source *

Grover Cleveland Elementary School Shootings: On 29 January 1979, 16-year-old Brenda Ann Spencer opened fire on children arriving at Cleveland Elementary School in San Diego from her house across the street, killing two men and wounding eight students and a police officer. Principal Burton Wragg was attempting to rescue children in the line of fire when he was shot and killed, and custodian Mike Suchar was slain attempting to aid Wragg.Spencer used a rifle her father had given her as a gift. As to what impelled her into this form of murderous madness, she told a reporter, ”I don’t like Mondays. This livens up the day.”

The “Mondays” comment was not the only eyebrow-raising declaration to issue from Spencer that day. According to a report written by the police negotiators who spoke with her during the six-hour standoff, she made such comments to them as ”There was no reason for it, and it was just a lot of fun”; ”It was just like shooting ducks in a pond”; and ”[the children ] looked like a herd of cows standing around, it was really easy pickings.”

That Spencer failed to kill any of the children she shot at was attributable to luck rather than any reluctance on her part to take their lives. The bullet that struck 9-year-old Charles “Cam” Miller missed his heart by about an inch.

Spencer pled guilty to two counts of murder and assault with a deadly weapon and was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison.

She has been up for parole four times and has been turned down each time, the last in 2005. At her first parole hearing she expressed doubt that any of the victims were hit by bullets from her rifle and contended they might have been shot by police.

She also claimed to have been under the influence of alcohol and hallucinogenic drugs at the time of the shootings and asserted prosecutors and her attorney had conspired to fabricate test evidence showing there had been no drugs in her system.

By her third parole hearing she was admitting guilt and expressing remorse but was still contending she had been drunk and high on marijuana laced with PCP the day of her deadly rampage. She also claimed something new, that she had been beaten and sexually abused by her father, an avowal conspicuously absent from previous records.

She is eligible to again apply for parole in 2009 (which will also be the 30 year anniversary of the crime). Those who continue to be troubled by the callousness of Brenda Spencer’s crime and concerned by her continued attempts to shift blame for her actions onto anyone or anything else can draw comfort from the knowledge that murderers are rarely granted parole in California.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

...This is the story that prompted the 80's song “I Don’t Like Monday’s” by the Boomtown Rats

...Also re-made by Tori Amos,

*lyrics:

The silicon chip inside her head
gets switched to overload
and nobody’s gonna go to school today
she’s gonna make them stay at home
And Daddy doesn’t understand it
He always said she was good as gold
And he can see no reason
Cos there are no reasons
What reasons do you need to be shown

Chorus:
Tell me why
I don’t like Mondays
I want to shoot
The whole day down

...The very first lyric, mentioning a silicone chip, is referencing the connection about how brain-microchip experiments were known to be happening at that time, and there's speculation the girl might have been a product of that, or some sort of mind control experiment.

ih`


... Presidential candidate Mitt Romney was caught cheating last night at the MSNBC Republican debate. At around 1:17:00 of the debate Tim Russert asks Romney a question involving Ronald Reagan. A whisper can clearly be heard "he raised taxes" and seemed to be coming from the candidate's right hand side from behind the curtain just off stage. It can't be a coincidence because Romney follows the instructions of the "whisperer" and replies "I'm not going to raise taxes."






...This is obviously highly unethical and most would say he was cheating. I have called the Romney campaign about this and they have not yet commented. A blogger from MSNBC heard the "whisper" as well and wrote about it on the MSNBC website. That blog has been taken down and the comment deleted. Here's the link:

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/error.htm?aspxerrorpath
=/blogs/post.aspx

...The version of this part of the debate posted on Romney's website mysteriously edits the "whisper out."

It's about one third the way down with the tag "working together on social security"

http://www.mittromney.com/News/Debates/Florida_Boca_Rat
on

...People on youtube are saying the "voice" came from the moderators like someone whispering in Russert's ear. I say it doesn't matter where the "voice" came from because it's obvious that Romney uses the information provided by the "voice" in his answer to the question.

ih`




..."Nanotechnology refers broadly to a field of applied science and technology whose unifying theme is the control of matter on the atomic and molecular scale."

...We don't hear much about it really, but the applications are mind bending. Somewhat along the same lines as genetic engineering, in the sense that it could create tiny synthetic organisms to act like machines repairing our bodies from within.

...The applications for daily life are limitless, but so are the dangers and potential for abuse.


...This is a fun, yet informative, 7 minute documentary short created for Global Media course at Brown University 2007.





Nanotechnology - Age of Convergence (4 min)

ih`


...Across the pond they're doing some half human, half animal, Dr. Moreau mutant crazy creature stuff with genetics. My question is, if it is worth the trade for scientific development in such research, and potentially opening an unknown Pandora's box of who knows what, and especially since such moral and ethical concepts are being raised? Do the benefits out weigh the potential abuses?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACsdYZ__RR0


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yriYP02INow


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1JA0TeBH5Q