March 21, 2018

Anatomy Of The State

“With the rise of democracy, the identification of the State with society has been redoubled, until it is common to hear sentiments expressed which violate virtually every tenet of reason and commonsense such as, “we are the government.” The useful collective term “we” has enabled an ideological camouflage to be thrown over the reality of political life. If “we are the government,” then anything a government does to an individual is not only just and untyrannical but also “voluntary” on the part of the individual concerned. If the government has incurred a huge public debt which must be paid by taxing one group for the benefit of another, this reality of burden is obscured by saying that “we owe it to ourselves”; if the government conscripts a man, or throws him into jail for dissident opinion, then he is “doing it to himself” and, therefore, nothing untoward has occurred. Under this reasoning, any Jews murdered by the Nazi government were not murdered; instead, they must have “committed suicide,” since they were the government (which was democratically chosen), and, therefore, anything the government did to them was voluntary on their part. One would not think it necessary to belabor this point, and yet the overwhelming bulk of the people hold this fallacy to a greater or lesser degree. We must, therefore, emphasize that “we” are not the government; the government is not “us.” The government does not in any accurate sense “represent” the majority of the people.[1] But, even if it did, even if 70 percent of the people decided to murder the remaining 30 percent, this would still be murder and would not be voluntary suicide on the part of the slaughtered minority.[2] No organicist metaphor, no irrelevant bromide that “we are all part of one another,” must be permitted to obscure this basic fact.
If, then, the State is not “us,” if it is not “the human family” getting together to decide mutual problems, if it is not a lodge meeting or country club, what is it? Briefly, the State is that organization in society which attempts to maintain a monopoly of the use of force and violence in a given territorial area; in particular, it is the only organization in society that obtains its revenue not by voluntary contribution or payment for services rendered but by coercion.”
~Murray N.Rothbard (`Anatomy of the State’ – 2009)

Murray Rothbard

“Our entry into World War II was the crucial act in foisting a permanent militarization upon the economy and society, in bringing to the country a permanent garrison state, an overweening military-industrial complex, a permanent system of conscription. It was the crucial act in creating a mixed economy run by Big Government, a system of state monopoly capitalism run by the central government in collaboration with Big Business and Big Unionism.”~Murray Rothbard

Murray Newton Rothbard (/?m?ri ?r???b??rd/; March 2, 1926 – January 7, 1995) was an American heterodox economist of the Austrian School,[1][2] a revisionist historian,[3][4] and a political theorist[5](pp11, 286, 380) whose writings and personal influence played a seminal role in the development of modern libertarianism.[6] Rothbard was the founder and leading theoretician of anarcho-capitalism, a staunch advocate of historical revisionism, and a central figure in the twentieth-century American libertarian movement. He wrote over twenty books on political theory, revisionist history, economics, and other subjects.[7] Rothbard asserted that all services provided by the “monopoly system of the corporate state” could be provided more efficiently by the private sector and wrote that the state is “the organization of robbery systematized and writ large.”[8][9][10][11][12][13] He called fractional-reserve banking a form of fraud and opposed central banking.[14] He categorically opposed all military, political, and economic interventionism in the affairs of other nations.[15](pp4-5, 129)[16] According to his protégé Hans-Hermann Hoppe, “There would be no anarcho-capitalist movement to speak of without Rothbard.”[17]

Rothbard was a heterodox political economist.[18][19] Economist Jeffrey Herbener, who calls Rothbard his friend and “intellectual mentor”, wrote that Rothbard received “only ostracism” from mainstream academia.[20] Rothbard rejected mainstream economic methodologies and instead embraced the praxeology of his most important intellectual precursor, Ludwig von Mises. To promote his economic and political ideas, Rothbard joined Llewellyn H. “Lew” Rockwell, Jr. and Burton Blumert in 1982 to establish the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Alabama.
. . . . . .
Lysander Spooner
Lysander Spooner(January 19, 1808 – May 14, 1887) was an American individualist anarchist, political philosopher, essayist, pamphlet writer, Unitarian Christian abolitionist, supporter of the labor movement, legal theorist, and entrepreneur of the nineteenth century. He is also known for competing with the U.S. Post Office with his American Letter Mail Company, which closed after legal problems with the federal government.
Spooner challenged the claim that the text of the Constitution permitted slavery.[14] Although he recognized that the Founders had probably not intended to outlaw slavery when writing the Constitution, he argued that only the meaning of the text, not the private intentions of its writers, was enforceable.



Most Published SCIENCE Research Findings Are False

Do enjoy the read;

“Why Most Published Research Findings Are False John P. A. Ioannidis Abstract Summary There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research. Published research findings are sometimes refuted by subsequent evidence, with ensuing confusion and disappointment. Refutation and controversy is seen across the range of research designs, from clinical trials and traditional epidemiological studies to the most modern molecular research. There is increasing concern that in modern research, false findings may be the majority or even the vast majority of published research claims. However, this should not be surprising. It can be proven that most claimed research findings are false. Here I will examine the key factors that influence this problem and some corollaries thereof. Go to: Modeling the Framework for False Positive Findings Several methodologists have pointed out that the high rate of nonreplication (lack of confirmation) of research discoveries is a consequence of the convenient, yet ill-founded strategy of claiming conclusive research findings solely on the basis of a single study assessed by formal statistical significance, typically for a p-value less than 0.05. Research is not most appropriately represented and summarized by p-values, but, unfortunately, there is a widespread notion that medical research articles should be interpreted based only on p-values. Research findings are defined here as any relationship reaching formal statistical significance, e.g., effective interventions, informative predictors, risk factors, or associations. *Negative* research is also very useful. *Negative* is actually a misnomer, and the misinterpretation is widespread. However, here we will target relationships that investigators claim exist, rather than null findings. It can be proven that most claimed research findings are false.” 
Also see: 

Scientists do lie a lot…

When Politics and Money come through the door the TRUTH goes out the window..


Stephen Hawking Hoax Ends

Apparently the ACTOR that played Hawking was tired of playing this character Hawking.. Maybe the Holy Pontifical Hoax himself decided the Hawking show should end.. Who knows.. No more Stevey Hoaxing Hawking.. Finally.. Scientism kept him alive.. GRIN…

Stephen Hawking

a lifetime member of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences,

Pontifical Academy of Sciences

Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts

Lucasian Professor of Mathematics


Millions likely fooled by the Stephen Hawking Hoax…


Poisoning Of Mankind AND Earth

The poisoners are playing God. They rebel against God and everything that is God and truth. They hate God and they hate His Christ. They are of the lines we’ve been warned against time and time again, they are of the lines that were disinherited 2000 years ago. They do not worship the One and Only True God, our Father in Heaven. They worship that which is evil — demons, idols, and earthly material things. They are anti-Christ, they are many. They are not of the line that authored the books of the Bible. If they were of this line they would adhere to and live by the laws and writings of His servants and the prophets, and would be Christian Jews today. But these Jews are not Christian Jews because they had no hand in writing the Word. (Though, they have tampered with some of the books in order to fulfill their agenda.) In defiance of God they authored their own self fulfilling laws and rituals as found in their books of Talmud and Kabala, those books that go back to an ancient place and time to Babylon. Today they are “elite”, secret sects and secret societies, andChristians”; the list is long. These secret groups derive their workings, rituals, symbolism, and traditions from the Talmud and Kabala. They work in secrecy, for the people will be repulsed and angry at what they do. They are liars, murderers, thieves, deceivers, and they destroy the earth and mankind.


They Proclaim To Be God: Remember what you have been told in generations past, for the time has come and the lawless ones have now been revealed. They exalt themselves over everything that is called God or is worshiped, and they set themselves up in God’s temple proclaiming to be God, by claiming to be direct descendents of God through the blood — the blood of Jesus Christ. The blood type found on the Shroud of Turin, the suspected burial cloth of Jesus, is blood type AB, which “matches” the poisoners blood type, and thus, their DNA. Everyone else with blood types of A, B, and O have damaged DNA/proteins . (We were ALL created with blood type AB negative with normal healthy protein/DNA properties; their poisons have mutated us into the other “blood types”.) This is how they proclaim to be God, the “Chosen Ones” and the 144,000, by their blood type/DNA matching that found on the Shroud of Turin. They try to change the set times in their favor. Through their secret groups, they perpetuate the blasphemous story of the bloodline of Christ. Their claim is that Jesus fathered a child/children and their ancestors became royalty in Europe and the bloodline now has many descendants. They also claim that everyone else who does not have blood type AB evolved from man-apes (“prehistoric man”), and were not created by God, since the man-apes only have the other major blood types of A, B, and O. This is to glorify themselves and exalt themselves above God and all of creation.

An Eye Opening Tour


Bird Of Prey

They’re the treaty breakers.. Always used clever terms always make up what their terms mean so those terms always benefit them.. Contracting with them for their privileges is a fools game..


Stormy Daniels And Donna J. Trump Did What?


For Theodore Roosevelt Was A Jolly Good Fellow That Nobody Can Deny

Uh Oh… We gonna make some fanatics mad with this one… GRIN…

“Freemason Theodore “Rex” Roosevelt, 1858 – 1919 #245 26th President of the United States of America 9th Commander-in-Chief of the Pope’s “Holy Roman” Fourteenth Amendment Corporate-Fascist American Empire, 1901 – 1909 A member of the Jesuits’ Roosevelt-Delano-Rockefeller Dynasty, “Teddy” Roosevelt was the Black Pope’s first real Emperor and Commander-in-Chief of the Papal Caesar’s “Holy Roman” Fourteenth Amendment American Empire, intended to restore the Temporal Power of the Pope worldwide and to enforce the absolutist policies of the Holy Alliance. A personal friend of New York Knight of Malta William R. Grace (after whose Order he named his Maltese Cross Cabin in North Dakota), Jesuit Thomas Sherman, James Cardinal Gibbons (Archbishop of Baltimore), and Cardinal Satolli (the Vatican’s secret diplomatic agent in the White House), the Jesuits used their Shriner Freemason to begin building their corporate-fascist-masonic Empire throughout the western hemisphere. Under this wicked apostate Protestant, having erected the statue of President Andrew Johnson’s occult

Masonic master and White House advisor, Albert Pike, in Washington, D.C., Rome’s huge corporate monopolies, managed by J. P. Morgan, another Shriner Freemason, and Nicholas F. Brady, a Knight of Malta, began to be built and to work in unison preparing the Order’s massive Military Industrial Complex for the Jesuit General’s Second Thirty Years’ War. The approaching First World War was the major purpose for the construction of the Panama Canal, now in the hands of the Order’s Communist Red Chinese. Meanwhile, Jesuit-controlled Protestant America would be deceived into abandoning President George Washington’s wise policy of isolation, and begin to enforce the enslaving, political Temporal Power of Satan’s Papacy upon every nation on earth pursuant to the Black Pope’s wicked and evil Council of Trent. Theodore Roosevelt, Our Twenty-Sixth President, Ann Graham Gaines, (Chanhassen, Minnesota: The Child’s World, 2002) p. 36.”—Eric Phelps.. A thorough, illustrated biography discussing the president’s childhood, his career, his family, and his term as President of the United States. Includes a time line and glossary.

Well then… A jolly good feller for sure… And now we know who placed Pike’s statue in D.C.s Judicious Judicial Square…

And last but not least;

Interesting because I’ve learned to anger everyone is the result of telling them the truth.

Free government, well it’s certainly been free to do whatever it wants while destroying the freedom of being its citizens…


2018 03 02 Delegate Nick Freitas Speech on Floor of House of Delegates

I don’t buy into man made government anymore, nor their damnable rights turned upside down into privileges that continues to be a political debate about removing those privileges based upon shooting drills allegedly going live.. Yet this guy calls the left out and nails em to their own BS…The leftists cannot face themselves in the mirror.. As far as I’m concerned the discussion is over.. They cannot be trusted with anything..


America At War With Itself: The Sandstorm

America At War With Itself: The Sandstorm
By Henry Giroux

“And the shadow of fear again has darkly lengthened across the world.”~President Dwight David Eisenhower

“In white America’s collective psyche, and in its traditional narratives of historical memory, authoritarianism is always viewed as existing elsewhere. Seen as an alien and demagogic political system, it is primarily understood as a mode of governance associated with the dictatorships in Latin America in the 1970s and, of course, in its most vile extremes, with Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany and Benito Mussolini’s fascist Italy in the 1930s and 1940s. Both societies glorified war, soldiers, nationalism, militarism, fallen warriors, racial cleansing, and a dogmatic allegiance to the homeland. These were states in which society became armed, security became the raison d’être of both the citizen and state, and fear became a pretext for giving up one’s liberty. Education and the media were the indoctrination tools of authoritarianism, merging fascist and religious symbols with the language of God, family, and country. These cultural systems were used as weapons to achieve servility and conformity among the populace, something many are seeing re-emerge in our current political moment.

In its earlier forms, the language of authoritarianism relied upon the discourse of command and courted mass hysteria, one that produced totalizing world views, punished dissent, disseminated hate-filled propaganda steeped in the vocabulary of ultra-nationalism and racial purity, and emptied language of any substance, reducing it to a ritualized performance. This script is well known to the American public; it has been fully commercialized and marketed in the form of countless products: from films, television series, video games, and works of fiction, to museums and other cultural apparatuses. As a result, the public has been conditioned to perceive totalitarian modes of governance as dead relics from a bygone era rather than as part of a historical narrative with living legacies at play in the present.

Hannah Arendt and Sheldon Wolin, the great theorists of totalitarianism, believed that the fluctuating elements of fascism are still with us and that they would crystalize in different forms. Far from being a thing of the past, they both believed, totalitarianism “heralds . . . a possible model for the future.” Wolin, in particular, was keenly aware that the corporatization of the state and civil society, the destruction of public goods and commons, the commercial control of the media, and the rise of an economic survival-of-the-fittest ethos posed a serious threat to American democracy. According to Arendt, the culture of traditionalism, the dismantling of civil and political rights, the ongoing militarization of society, the “religionization of politics,”6 the attack on labor, the obsession with national security, the perpetration of human rights abuses, the emergence of a police state, entrenched racism, and the attempts by demagogues to undermine education as a foundation for producing critical citizenry were all at work in American society. For Arendt, these anti-democratic elements in U.S. society constituted what she called the “sand storm”–a metaphor for totalitarianism.
Historical conjunctures produce different forms of authoritarianism, though they all share an intolerance for democracy, dissent, diversity, and human rights. It is too easy to believe in a simplistic binary logic that strictly categorizes a country as either authoritarian or democratic and leaves no room for entertaining the possibility of a competing mixture of both forces. American politics today suggests different forms of authoritarianism. The possibility of white America becoming a fascist nation has a long legacy in American fiction that includes Sinclair Lewis’s It Can’t Happen Here and Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America. For Native Americans who were exterminated, descendants of Africans who were dehumanized, trafficked, and enslaved by whites, Japanese Americans subjected to concentration camps, and people of color who have been degraded by violence, coercion, and various forms of apartheid for generations, questions of freedom and fascism are quite different from those historically faced by whites, who never feared racist cops, lynch mobs, or burning crosses.

Nevertheless, following World War II, the shadow of fascism was never far from U.S. shores. It is worth remembering Huey Long’s response to the question of whether America could ever become fascist: “Yes, but we will call it anti-fascist.” Long’s reply indicates that fascism is not an ideological apparatus frozen in a particular historical period, but, as Arendt and Wolin have suggested, a complex and often shifting theoretical and political register for understanding how democracy can be subverted, if not destroyed, from within.

The notion of soft fascism was articulated in 1985 in Bertram Gross’s book Friendly Fascism, in which he argued that if fascism came to the United States it would not embody the same characteristics associated with fascist forms of the past. There would be no Nuremberg rallies, overt doctrines of racial superiority, government-sanctioned book burnings, death camps, genocidal purges, or abrogation of the U.S. Constitution. In short, fascism would not resemble the way it has been packaged, marketed, and sold to us as commercial entertainment, nor would it take the form of a previous ideological grid simply downloaded into our political moment. Gross believed that fascism was an ongoing danger and had the ability to become relevant under new conditions, taking on familiar forms of thought that resonate with nativist traditions, experiences, and political relations. Similarly, in his Anatomy of Fascism, Robert O. Paxton argued that the texture of North American fascism would not mimic traditional European forms but would be rooted in the language, symbols, and culture of everyday life in America. According to Paxton:

No swastikas in an American fascism, but Stars and Stripes (or Stars and Bars) and Christian crosses. No fascist salute, but mass recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance. These symbols contain no whiff of fascism in themselves, of course, but an American fascism would transform them into obligatory litmus tests for detecting the internal enemy.
It is worth noting that Umberto Eco’s discussion of “eternal fascism” also argues that any updated version of fascism would not openly assume the mantle of historical fascism; rather, new forms of authoritarianism would appropriate some of its elements, making it virtually unrecognizable from preceding forms. Eco contended that fascism will, if it manifests in America, have a different guise, although it will be no less destructive to democracy. Instead of an all-powerful supreme leader, the government is now controlled by the anonymous and largely remote hands of corporate power and finance capital. More recently, in the face of what Paxton has called an “alarming willingness” on the part of some Republican Party candidates to “use fascist themes and styles,” he has updated his own view of fascism as “a mass nationalist movement intended to restore a country that’s been damaged or is in decline, by expansion, by violent attacks on enemies, internal as well as external enemies, and measures of authority, the replacement of democracy by an authoritarian dictatorship.”12 Rather than cancel each other out, all of these theorists offer up elements that bear traces of old and new forms of authoritarianism. However, the 2016 candidacy of Donald Trump–embraced by white supremacist groups as their “Glorious Leader”–illustrates how the two forms of authoritarianism may now be advanced in one political package.”