Archive for March, 2009

what is Bilderberg?

Sunday, March 8th, 2009

hmm – that’s a good question. my suggestion: Google it!

so, did you Google it yet? if you did, you might have noticed that Google’s new “dropdown magic” (the suggested results that drop down whenever you start typing) didn’t seem to work correctly for the phrase Bilderberg. now, maybe there’s a reason for this – maybe there just aren’t any articles out these about Bilderberg! after all, that is how the dropdown magic is calculated – the more results a keyword has, the more important it will be in the dropdown.

so, did you notice how many results are returned for the term Bilderberg? 1,530,000. seems like that should be enough to get some face time, right?

now, try this. start typing the word, until you have typed “Bilde”. notice something weird? they neglected to censor the misspellings! “bildeburgers” and ”bildenbergs” are shown in the dropdown magic – and did you notice their results? 1,180 and 10,400 respectively. seems like the term with about 1,000 x the results should show up here, right?

now that I’ve hopefully got you intrigued, it is your duty to look into what the Bilderberg Group actually is, and why it’s being censored. at first you won’t believe it, or maybe you won’t care. maybe you’ll think I’m a crazy conspiracy theorist – if you’re reading this, hopefully you know me better than that. but maybe, just maybe, you’ll educate yourself on the most important issue impacting our current state of affairs - the Federal Reserve System (“The Fed”). and then maybe you’ll investigate Infowars and Alex Jones, and look into New World Order, and Illuminati. and if you look into this enough, you might come to find that the world you think you’ve lived in is drastically different from the world you actually live in.

“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National auto determination practiced in past centuries.”
- David Rockefeller

on the right to keep and bear arms

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

I’ve gotten into some debates over the meaning of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The classic debate: does it apply to military only, or to all citizens of the U.S.? Here is the Second Amendment, as it was written, with original punctuation, etc:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The first thing you should notice is that “People” is capitalized, but “militia” is not. Think about that. Now, instead of arguing semantics, I beg you to use some common sense. Think about the spirit of the times. The Founding Fathers were revolting against a tyrannical government. Who did George Washington battle? The British military. How could George Washington lead a revolution against an oppressive government, if the only group in possession of firearms was the army representing that oppressive government? He would have had to be a whole lot more creative, that’s for sure.

Amendments can change other amendments, but the Bill of Rights cannot be changed. That is because the Bill of Rights lists Rights that are not granted to us – these are inherent Rights from the minute we are born into this world. If our Rights could be restricted, it would be called the Bill of Privileges, but it is not. In other words, our right to guns is not up for debate.

I know some will laugh about this. “That’s ridiculous, nobody is going to take your guns, it’s conservative paranoia and propaganda.” Okay, let’s take a look at the assault weapon ban which will probably be reinstituted soon. Well, people say, “What kind of crazy people need assault weapons?”. Hmm, good point, I don’t have an assault weapon. I don’t necessarily think I need one. But can’t you see what precedent is being set? Can’t you see that when the assault weapons are banned, it’s much easier to ban rifles? Semi-automatic handguns? Can you see how vulnerable we are? How easily we give in and allow ourselves to be told what to do?

The time is here, they are passing laws left and right to limit our gun rights. Gun bans, extreme ammo taxes, mandatory permits – these things are happening right now. Eventually, they will come to our doorsteps demanding our guns. And when it does, we will each have a choice whether to fight or to acquiesce. And if you acquiesce, you have learned nothing from history, when the Jews slowly gave up their rights in order to avert a crisis. And the blame will not be on Obama, or Pelosi, or Roberts, or any of the other instruments of control. The blame will be on you.

“People say ‘well you know, the interpretation of the Supreme Court is the only one that counts when we’re talking about the Second Amendment’. Oh really? Well then you come and stand in front of my front door when the government comes to collect my guns – you’re going to find out that my interpretation of the Second Amendment is the only one you need to be worried about. Make sure you’ve got your insurance paid up and kiss your kids goodbye.” – Michael Badnarik

Audio Showcase

Monday, March 2nd, 2009

so I realize I probably should have posted about this earlier, but February completed the first full month of AudShow. I created AudShow “to bring obscure bands into the light”, and it’s been keeping me so busy, I haven’t had a chance to even post about it over here. so go check it out, enjoy, suggest, comment, etc. viva music!


Switch to our mobile site