We Are Not The Land of the Free

We have all heard it all of our lives, we live in the "Land of the Free." But do we really? What does it really mean to be free, and do you really want freedom? Most people will immediately answer YES, without actually thinking about what it really means to be free.

Being free means competent adults are free to control their time, money and bodies any way they decide to, as long as it does not infringe on the equal rights of other competent adults to do the very same thing. It means other people may do things you do not approve of or participate in yourself, and it means you being able to accept that.

My good friend Attorney Marc Victor asked the question "Are You Really For Freedom?" in a short article he wrote on this subject. I would imagine after reading this article many of those who first thought they were for freedom might have to re-think their position...

 http://www.squidoo.com/we-are-not-the-land-of-the-free

Understanding How Women Think

When women speak, do not take them at their word. One of the first things you need to understand is that women never mean what they say and in fact in most cases they mean exactly the opposite of what they say. The second thing you need to understand is that you do not understand and you never will. Do not try to use logic to understand why, just know that this is so and be prepared for it...

 http://www.squidoo.com/understanding-how-women-think

Leaked DOJ Memo: Outlaw And Confiscate All Guns

(Kurt Nimmo)  The National Rifle Association has obtained a Department of Justice memo calling for national gun registration and confiscation. The nine page “cursory summary” on current gun control initiatives was not officially released by the Obama administration.
The DOJ memo (downloadable here as a PDF) states the administration “believes that a gun ban will not work without mandatory gun confiscation,” according to the NRA, and thinks universal background checks “won’t work without requiring national gun registration.” Obama has yet to publicly support national registration or firearms confiscation, although the memo reveals his administration is moving in that direction...

 http://govtslaves.info/leaked-doj-memo-outlaw-and-confiscate-all-guns

Marc Victor Already Planning to Run Against Kyrsten Sinema

Marc Victor Already Planning to Run Against Kyrsten Sinema, Expects Help From Ron Paul

Democratic Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema has been in Congress for a little more than six weeks now, but libertarian-minded attorney Marc Victor is already planning to defeat her in 2014.

We've heard from his campaign that Victor, who ran as the Libertarian option against Richard Carmona and then-Congressman Jeff Flake in the recent Senate election, will be running as a Republican.

http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2013/02/marc_victor_already_planning_t.php

Friends Don't Let Friends Vote!

You will never be able to vote yourself more freedom than your master is willing to allow you. Let's think about this logically for a moment. Would the government promote anything that actually would limit their power? Of course not, which is why they promote the farce of Democracy. Voting is a scam, If voting really worked the government would pass a law making it illegal. Democracy is nothing more than 9 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, don't vote it only encourages them!

We have all heard the mantra before: "If you don't vote, you can't complain." Well I disagree, I think it's just the opposite: "If you vote, you can't complain." By voting, you are legitimizing the system. You are giving your stamp of approval that you will accept the outcome because you agreed to it. If it does not turn out like you had hoped, you have no right to complain, because that would make you nothing more than a sore loser. Besides, it does not matter who you vote for anyway...government still gets elected; and government is not the answer, it's the problem.

Whenever I am in hot debate with the neurologically challenged, I have found this to be a good example: If I were having lunch with you, and in the middle of lunch I were to stand up and announce to everyone in the restaurant that you were buying everyone's lunch, I am sure you would take issue with that. What about if I agreed to put it up for a vote, would that make it fair? If you agree to accept the result, then you are therefore legitimizing it, and agreeing to the outcome.

On the other hand, if you were to say it is not up for a vote, I am not buying; I don't care what everyone else thinks, well then you would have every right to complain if I tried to coerce you into paying. By not agreeing to participate in the vote, you have not legitimized it, and therefore have every right to complain, and should. The sheep cannot seem to grasp this concept.

Democracy is nine wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. The State loves to promote the scam of Democracy so the sheep will think they have a say in who runs the State. In fact, most sheep believe they are the State. Butler Shaffer does a brilliant job of explaining this in "A Holiday For Fools" where he talks about an ancient society that would elect a King (Fool) for the day...


http://www.squidoo.com/friends-dont-let-friends-vote

Photo Radar Fraud

Once again, can we be honest here? As I said in my last two articles, 'My Day in Court and 'Click It or Ticket' speeding laws for the most part are nothing more than a way for the State to raise revenue and have very little to do with public safety. In particular photo radar is a complete fraud. Luckily there are ways to get out of being stolen from by the State when it comes to photo radar.

I am going to detail some ways you can keep the State from stealing your money in this article. I want to make it clear that I am not an attorney, nor is what I will write here to be construed as legal advice. It's simply ways that I am listing that may or may not keep you from being the next victim in the State run scam known as photo radar...or what I like to call Camera Fraud.

The first thing you need to remind yourself of is, "you are the victim, not the criminal."

The criminal in this is the State. You are not attempting to steal from them, they are attempting to steal from you. Why should you feel guilty about using every method possible to keep the thief from robbing you? Would you feel equally as guilty about protecting yourself from the novice criminal on the street?

In a lot of ways I fear the State thugs much more than I do the common thug on the street. The common thug is limited in what he can actually take from you. Usually these limits are confined to what you have on you at the time. I myself carry very little cash, and do not wear jewelry...even a watch so the common thief is limited to the few Federal Reserve Notes I may have and my cell phone at best. But contrast that with the theft powers of the government. They can literally take everything you own or will ever own, they are a much more dangerous predator.

I don't feel the least bit guilty using any and all means necessary to thwart a common thief from attempting to steal from me including physical force and I feel the same way about the thieves that collectively steal from me and call themselves the government...

http://www.squidoo.com/photo-radar-fraud

Religion is a Mental Disorder

When I was in the process of writing this I had a difficult time deciding exactly what category I should list it under. While I was perusing the choices "Religious Education" came up...I thought that's perfect, what an oxymoron that is...religion and education, which also reminds me of my other favorite oxymoron, "Christian Science"...as if there ever could be such a thing.

I'm sure to theologians 'Christian Science' is a way to try and add logic and reason to an area where none exists. By adding the term 'science' to the term 'Christian' they have convinced themselves that there really is some scientific process for their beliefs. Although this form of mental masturbation may serve them in some way, to the rest of the rational and intelligent world it is nothing more than a joke.

Here are a few of my other favorite oxymoron's: Government Intelligence; Government Organization; Fair Tax; Temporary Tax Increase; Political Science; Civil War; Congressional Ethics; Federal Reserve; Resident Alien; Genuine Imitation; Same Difference; Passive Aggression; Microsoft Works, and who could forget, Jews for Hitler.

I'm not sure if 'Oxymoron' is the correct term...I think just plain ole moron describes this better...

http://www.squidoo.com/religion-is-a-mental-disorder 

The Baseline Murder Case

CBS 5 Investigates the Baseline Killer: Year of Terror

http://www.kpho.com/category/254497/baseline-killer

http://attorneyforfreedom.net/2012/11/20/baseline-killer-lawsuit

 

Another side of attorney Marc Victor

Another side of attorney Marc Victor

Who is the man behind the Elizabeth Johnson case… and what’s he like outside the courtroom?

Who Really Needs an Assault Rifle?

I am an American. As such, none of my rights depend on a showing of need. I am a free man who has the right to define and pursue my happiness any peaceful way I see fit. The government does not grant me rights. I was born free. The legitimate role of government is to act as my agent to protect my rights; which exist independent of government. Americans do not beg the government for rights nor are they required to demonstrate a "need" for rights...

http://www.squidoo.com/who-really-needs-an-assault-rifle 

My Day In Court

Okay, let's stop pretending... speeding tickets have little if anything to do with 'public safety' and everything to do with raising revenue for the police state. I am not talking about reckless endangerment or someone traveling at a rate of speed that is well beyond the flow of traffic. I am talking about going a few miles over the posted speed limit and being pulled over and ticketed as if you were a danger for exceeding an arbitrary and ridiculous minimum speed limit set by the state in order to raise money to further their useless and heinous existence.

People for the most part drive with the flow of traffic and stay within a reasonable and safe speed based on road conditions, weather, time of day and other factors. This can be observed on any given day while driving around town. Except for the occasional lunatic, traffic moves at a fairly common and prudent speed. So with exception for the occasional reckless driver, speed limits are set by the drivers and most people will only drive at speeds that are within safe and prudent speeds. This however is in no way in relation to the ridiculous and low speeds set by the state in order to raise revenue.

If the posted speed is 45 this really should be an average safe speed that could carry an upward or downward departure depending upon time of day, weather and road conditions. This is already true as it relates to downward departures of the speed limit. If for example it is dark and raining and visibility is very low and you are in a posted 45 MPH speed zone, you could be ticketed for driving 45 MPH. This is what is known as 'driving too fast for conditions' and even though you were not driving faster than the posted speed, you were supposed to have used your own judgment in determining that 45 was too fast for the current conditions.

Since it is up to us to use common sense to determine when we should exercise a downward departure of the speed limit, shouldn't the same hold true for an upward departure when road conditions are such that driving 5 to 10 miles over the posted speed would still be considered safe and prudent based on those conditions?

This was to be one of the many arguments that my attorney would use in court.

So begins my adventure...

 http://www.squidoo.com/my-day-in-court

Federal Court Indicts President Obama – Will not see the end of his second term!

Someone just sent me this. I have had no time to verify if any of this is true or not yet, so take it with a grain of salt, it may be bullshit...but it would be great if it were true.

On January 25th, 2013 , Mr. Lyndon Larouche, a well respected journalist and political activist recieved word from his sources within the United States government that President Barack Hussein Obama has been indicted by a Federal Court. Details of the indictment has been ommited by Larouche but he characterized them as probably the greatest indictment he has ever seen placed upon a standing president throughout history.  Watch the first 5 minutes of the video to hear this explosive news. WOW!

Is God Just Pretend?

I have never been one who cared much for political correctness, and the subjects of religion and politics are two subjects I most often like to talk about. I am sure one of the main reasons is because I am a non-conformist; I don't act in a particular manner because society says that I should. If society decides something is taboo, chances are that is the exact thing I will talk and write about. I also have several articles that are of a political nature, so if speaking about the unspeakable is something that is damaging to your delicate senses, then you should pass on anything I may write because those are going to be the subjects.

I will be writing this as an atheist for atheists who may find themselves debating people of faith and may not be as versed on all the talking points, but also for people of faith who are not afraid to look at other views without feeling threatened or offended. You should never be unwilling to look at other points of view, no matter how much you believe you already know the 'truth.' Many people of faith have never taken the time to really even investigate their beliefs, they just accepted them...after all that's why it's called faith.

My main purpose in writing this is not to cause offense, but that is almost certain to happen. I can understand why this would be; no one likes to have their beliefs called into question because it may make them appear to be foolish or stupid. This would be the main reason for people getting upset and not even wanting to discuss the matter, because deep down inside they also know it does not sound believable. By not talking about it they do not have to try and defend the indefensible. But is it better to hold onto beliefs that you may have not examined in full, or examine them and determine if they are really worth holding onto at all? This is written from an atheist's point of view, and will be critical of many things sacred to religious people. There is no way to discuss these topics without offending someone.

As a Libertarian I believe people should have the right to believe in anything they want to believe in...no matter how silly or implausible others may believe those things to be. With that being said, I would like to point out that having a right to your belief, does not void someone Else's equal right to have an opinion opposite yours and be vocal about it. You do not have a right to not have your beliefs challenged or to not be offended.

I have tried to write this in what I feel is as least offensive tone as I could, because it was important to me for atheists and theists alike to be able to read this. But please understand that I am an atheist, and as such it is hard for me to be as non-bias as some of the people reading this would like, just as it would be hard for a theist to write about atheism I am sure. But with that said, I am sure most will agree that for the most part it is non-offensive as is possible.

Atheists that will use this, or any other book, must be aware that it's not very likely they will succeed in 'convincing' a person of faith to change his or her opinion of their faith... if that is your goal. You may feel frustrated and annoyed because the person you are talking to cannot easily see what you see so clearly. Most likely this person will be as equally frustrated that you cannot fathom the greatness of their God...

Continue reading below-


http://www.squidoo.com/god-is-just-pretend

Ban Everything

 

 

Moon Bat Logic

In the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings the anti-gun moon bats have started once again chanting their ban guns mantra. This incident was tragic and I am in no way trying to down play this tragic event, but just like in so many other tragic events involving guns, this knee-jerk reaction that the answer to this problem is banning guns is just feeble minded and not the answer.

The thought process involved in thinking that banning guns will somehow magically make gun violence disappear is akin to thinking that banning fatty foods will solve the obesity problem or that banning automobiles will solve the automobile accident problem. While it's true that automobiles are used in 100% of all accidents involving automobiles, this does not mean that the solution to stopping automobile accidents is to ban automobiles, but this is the exact logic that anti-gun activists use to make their case for gun bans...

 http://www.squidoo.com/ban-everything

Why Do People Believe Bullshit?

Why are people so prone to believe in bullshit? I am not just talking about religion (although religion is complete bullshit) but all things bullshit. Fortune tellers, astrology, talking to the dead, alien abductions, end of the world, ESP, Ouija Boards, near death experiences, Faked Moon Landing, war on drugs, Criminal Justice, gun control, government, taxes, "Evil Wal-Mart", recycling, Global Warming, the Bible, Creationism....Elvis is still alive.

There is almost nothing that people will not believe. No matter how absurd and completely ridiculous something may sound, chances are there are people that truly believe it. The fact that people believe all this bullshit just makes me want to look at them and ask "what the fuck?"

What is wrong with these people? Were they dropped on their heads as babies? Did they eat too much lead based paint as a child? Or is this really nothing more than a neurological disorder these people suffer from?

We may never really know for sure, but one thing is certain...this is all 100% bullshit!

http://www.squidoo.com/why-do-people-believe-bullshit