When typing my site website directly you won’t see the hack.
It’s only when you click a link to my website through Google that you’ll be redirected to a porn site.
That’s my fault because I haven’t been updated my WordPress version or the plugins.
It’s still annoying, and I paid $215 to have SiteLock clean up my mess. Because I have multiple WordPress sites under the same shared hosting plan, one infection essentially spread to ALL directories.
What a cluster.
I’m in process of moving all my blog posts to Tumblr, so once that’s complete, I may continue the updates over there instead. I’m trying to figure out how to leave this site up as an archive since I have so many YouTube videos directed at specific landing pages.
What’s in those 28 pages that is so damaging that both Bush AND Obama don’t want it declassified?
Will Trump follow through on his promise to declassify if he is elected?
Will a direct link between the 15 out of 19 hijackers who were Saudi Arabians with the Saudi Government really matter to the US Public?
I doubt it.
At least if a Republican gets into office, it can bolster the anti-war movement, as much as it will become an anti-Trump movement. Anything to hinder productive Government action, I’ll support.
civilizations are created by individuals; they are destroyed by collectives
I’ve been back on my binge listening to Tim Ferris’ podcast. Typically, listening to freaky smart people provide info on how they do things feels futile since their tips are so unique to their own freaky abilities. But there are some that are humble enough to be explicit as such, or are so freaky smart and unique, you’re not really taking away tips to directly apply to your life, but to contemplate further implications. Walter O’Brien was one of the latter.
Bernie Sanders will correctly point out the wealth disparity in our country, but makes the mistake that ALL “richer” people obtained their wealth unjustly so that it provides the moral right for the Government to take it back and give it to the “poorer.” We can rightly criticize the wealth generated through Crony-Capitalism (ie. Government Bailouts, artificially low interest rates, etc.) on the basis of violating the Non-Aggression Principle, but what of the immense wealth generated by many of the individuals in the tech industry that obtained it by providing such advances to our standard of life that they got filthy rich?
I’m talking about the Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Uber Founders, Elon Musk, and Walter O’Brien’s of the world. Or let’s go back in time and pick out the Rockefellers, Fords, and Edisons.
If an individual provides such great improvements to other individual lives, and demonstrated that ability over-and-over amassing huge amounts of resources (AKA Money) without initiating aggression on others, then instead of siphoning away the resources these exceptional individuals obtained and giving it to the mediocre performance of Government bureaucrats and politicians, shouldn’t we let these exceptional individuals keep 100% so that they can reinvest their greater resources to advance humanity even more?
It seems backwards that the individuals for which have demonstrated exceptional abilities to advance humanity, should have a greater proportion of their resources expropriated to individuals who’ve repeatedly demonstrated mediocre performance.
The “greater good,” in terms of advancing civilization and technological advancement, should be to allow these exceptional minds to accumulate unhampered amounts of resources through voluntary interactions to promote innovation. “Taking from the rich” and subsidizing the below-average masses hampers the progress of humanity.
I’m not advocating that we start expropriating from the mediocre and poor performers. I’m saying that we should let those, who’ve demonstrated exceptional ability through “Clean” Capitalism, to keep 100% of their resources so that they can reinvest those gained resource toward advancing humanity even further.
There is a myth that the “trickle-down” effect is false and the super rich just “sit” on their big piles of cash like Scrooge McDuck. The truth, if you go meta including the technological improvements and increased standards of living since the proliferation of Capitalism, proves this myth false. Also, can you provide a specific individual who accumulated vast amounts of resources, to simply place their money in a vault and not attempt to generate additional value?
Bernie Sanders asks the wrong question. It’s not: “How much is more than enough money for rich people so that the Government can take away the rest?” It should be: “How much more good can the exceptional do with more resources?”
Allow the smartest and efficient in our world to wield the greatest amount of resources justly obtained, and watch as all boats rise the ocean of innovation.
● Let them go anytime they want. Just don’t ever let them back in. And make sure they are paid up in all back taxes.
● Give up your US citizenship for money? Good riddance! Don’t let the door hit you on the butt on your way out.
● And stay out. Most of those people aren’t contributing anything to America. Good riddance.
● It’s moochers that are renouncing; mostly tax cheats.
● I view these people as quitters!!
The fallacious premise for the above statements is the “Social Contract.” AKA a Blank Check Progressives love to invoke to justify unlimited Government tyranny and ease their intellectually challenged brains to justify their envy and theft. And no, I’m not creating a “straw man” here as many of these individuals happen to be Bernie Sanders supporters.
Don’t be fooled or deterred by their hypocritical attacks of you simply being “Greedy” and “Selfish.” These are the same tactics used by SJW to silence you when they scream out, “RACIST BIGOT! BLACK LIVES MATTER.”#AllLivesMatter ??? Nope. There’s a special place in hell for the “rich.”
Further questioning will reveal their premises violate the metaphysical laws of Reason:
These individuals tend to become unresponsive when I point out their fallacious thinking. It turns out people prefer to act immorally first, and then try and create a narrative, no matter how incoherent, to justify their actions and help them sleep at night.
Listening to Seth Godin resonated with me and compels me to change away from the path of destruction, for which I would exchange the chance for additional monetary wealth with silence.
Out of fear that my anti-Statist and controversial views may prevent me from being approved for tax incentives in Puerto Rico for a 4% tax rate, I placed all my Facebook posts to “private.” I also stopped posting to my blog.
I then started to realize that if I were to be accepted into the tax incentive, move to Puerto Rico, and then discover that in order for me to maintain the special tax incentive would mean that I would have to keep my Free Market views secret, I realized that I could not live my life that way.
At least for a weirdo like me, who can see through the BS that is our society, the moral indignation alone would make me a miserable person.
How can I sit idly by and not at least bring to people’s attention the Truth for which I see. I’ve been imbued with a BIG MOUTH, and to silence that would silence my very being and self-expression.
Pointing out intellectual contradictions is an art form for me. For me to point out and mock the obvious seems to be my calling. Or at least, a hobby for which takes up significant time.
I’m a thinker. I’m a questioner. I’m a deviant.
And if that causes Puerto Rico to reject me, then it’s better now, than after I relocate my family.
Another thing that Seth Godin inspired me to do is to write more often on my blog. I already do so on my Facebook posts, but now I’m thinking I’ll primarily write on the blog first and then copy and paste into Facebook.
At least for now, I seem to be getting a lot more “reads” from my personal Facebook page.
I’ve also contemplated doing a morning Podcast with daily musings on current events and articles I read on LewRockwell.com. At least for now, the time sink it requires and my inspiration seems to vary morning to morning. Sometimes, I don’t really have anything worthwhile to say for 30 minutes.
I haven’t been following Mark Driscoll for a while, but I did once donate about $30,000 to the church being a member since the Orange County campus plant. This was an accumulation of “tithe” money over numerous years. I did this out of my understanding that around 2006, that Mark had preached that he was one of many elders that could be voted out.
At the time I donated the money and had joined the newly planted Orange County church, I was not aware that the government structure of the church had changed to provide consolidation of power to Mark Driscoll so that he could no longer be “voted out.” Had I done my research into the governance structure transition, I would not had monetarily participated.
Personally, Mark Driscoll never did anything to me that I could hold him morally responsible for. It is within his full, moral right to change the governance structure for which he founded.
It wasn’t until I started noticing the inherently structural weaknesses of the unhealthy pace of growth of the church, causing very brittle relationships and conflicts to occur, that was brought to my attention by the outgoing, “founding” Orange County campus pastors (ie. Kyle Firstenberg and Dave Kraft), that I dropped out.
One thing I regret is that I turned off my intellect and failed to ask questions from the beginning. Had I applied as much scrutiny to the church as I do to the State today, I would had not been so surprised. Never again will I be part of an organization without a full understanding of its governance structure and areas of weakness. Never again will I cease to be vigilant. There is no institution or organization which is invulnerable to corruption and folly.
Yes, this may seem like “duh” to all of you, but to me as an “obedient” and “non-divisive” church “member,” I will admit that I turned off my brain in that one.
No one ever held a gun to my head to hand over the cash. I did it of my own free will and idiocy.
There are some people I’ve engaged that essentially act as though “everyone’s opinions are just as valid as anyone else’s.” Usually, this is in context of the individual holding self-contradictory beliefs and lacking the skills to think internally using Reason and Logic.
I could blame this on the shortage of proper teaching in Public Schools on how to properly use Reason and Logic. The Establishment doesn’t want individuals thinking critically and questioning everything.
For the unReasoned, they are not even aware that they fail to adhere to the Metaphysical Laws of Reason (as popularly described by Aristotle):
Do the unReasoned choose to be so of “free will?” or is it simply because they haven’t been exposed to this information? Or are there psychological reasons outside of their control that compels them to remain ignorant and rebellious toward the Metaphysical Laws of Reason?
The “Free Will” vs. “Determinism” debate has implications on morality. Even within the Christian tradition, the debate between Arminianism and Pre-Destination Calvinists has been an ongoing debate.
Individualism, separate consciousness, and concepts of the “ego” are additional implications of this debate. Life, Liberty, and Personal Property seem to be predicated on “Free Will.”
As I’ve come to understand the influence childhood trauma and mental illness has on the actions and thought patterns of my own self and my loved ones, in addition to dealing with the psychological, fallacious thinking of others in terms of objective reality screaming in their face, I’ve become less and less willing to attempt to “change” people’s minds. What’s the point if the individual really doesn’t have much “free will” to actually change their thought patterns?
If a psychopath is not morally responsible for a mass murder due to a physical brain tumor rendering him incapable of restraining his impulses, then to what degree can an individual be held responsible for the indoctrination they received through Public School?
To what degree can a Bernie Sander’s supporter be blamed for dehumanizing “Capitalists” in order to internally, and morally justify their envy and theft? Their minds already are set to steal from and punish those who have more than them, and then they develop a mental construct in their mind to morally justify such actions. This concept of “dehumanization” can also be applied to Neo-Cons advocating for the murder of innocents in the Middle East and shrugging it off as, “Collateral Damage” or “those people.” But the root of dehumanizing attempts is to apply morality to entire groups of people, rather than toward individuals.
Within Christianity I see parallels within the concept of “hard hearts.” God has already chosen the “select” for which would become receptive toward the Gospel, or would turn away from it. If the infinite riches of God’s love is not enough to turn hearts (assuming if this is true), who am I to somehow believe that those who support initiating violence on other individuals can be swayed with the mere use of reason?
How does a victim appeal to the victimizer from initiating violence to take what they want? If Reason was not the original motivator, then why would I think Reason would have any effect?
But once again, the concepts of the “Non-Aggression principle” seem to be predicated on this notion of “free will?” Or is it?
I’ll have to consider this further.