Thursday, July 15, 2010

Lack of Updates, But not a Lack of Mild

Sorry about the lack of updates to my blog.

Several events have happened in my life which have caused this blog to become inactive over the last few months.

First of all I wanted a somewhat unbiased review of "Don't Tread on Me: Rise of the Republic" which I was unable to find a volunteer for and did not have much time to watch other films on a regular basis.

Secondly, spreading the word about the campaign and about the aforementioned film is causing me to be a very busy man. Please stay tuned to for information on how you can help support these efforts.

Lastly, many of you may be aware of some dramatic changes in my personal life. From fighting for visitation of my daughter whom I've lost contact with for 7 years, to a divorce and new inspirations, and lastly, my family band. My passions for truth have not died, but evolved and have taken a very individualist "jack of all trades, master of none" focus.

I want to keep up the infowar, especially this blog. Right now is a huge state of change in my life, however, and when things settle down, rest assured I will be back to online activism one thousand percent. Until then, keep in contact with me, as I will be spreading the word in the physical world and kicking Statist ass in this election as well as taking very proactive measures to advance my own responsibilities in launching the fourth decade of my life.

I will update occasionally as big things happen, such as this past Tuesday's candidate forum where I set the tone for many of the reactions from the other candidates.

All my peers in the online activism community, keep up the good work. It's almost time to reboot the revolution. Which is why my campaign slogan is "It's not 'Tea' It's not 'Change' It's about making a difference for Missouri"

Keep Rockin' and End the Fed.
-Kevin L. Kobe

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Documentary Movie Review: King Corn

Click Here to watch this film.

Click here for the guide to my review process and links to my other reviews.

It's in your hair. It's in almost every item on McDonald's Value Menu. It's on the wall of an Iowa museum. It's in fuel tanks of vehicles. It's in beer and liquor. It's in a hole in the side of a cow. It's in most products made by Coke, Pepsi and Seven Up. It's on the mind of politicians.

This film begins with the filmmakers having their hair analyzed. They find out their hair shows that their body has very high makeup of corn genetics. The idea that Corn could make up so much of a human's diet to be so clear genetically is intriguing. So the filmmakers set out to document 1 acre of a corn crop from preparation for planting seeds, to the point it enters your body to eventually become part of your hair.

Along the way however, the story becomes more about how Corn became so dominant in American society and the world. By the end of the film, you come to the conclusion that not only do two wrongs not make a right, but several wrongs repeatedly can be dangerous for our food supply.

This film continues to go back to farmers talking about how you cannot make money planting corn without participating in the government subsidies. Imagine how much money would be lost to the industry, and the level of the dominance of corn if “grow, baby, grow” wasn't the government push.

So modern corn is king, with not only subsidies, but a whole genetic property rights issue pushing up the issue of getting bigger and badder yield. The rest of the food industry soon followed suit.

An encounter at McDonald's sends the filmmakers hunting the cows. Cattle and Factory meat industries are examined as recipients of corn products as feed for farmed animals. The consensus is that the animals live in horrible conditions, and our food supply is tainted with pharmaceuticals for one reason. Corn is a cheap commodity, cheaper than the grasses and grains that the species that feed us are supposed to eat. So we feed animals a substance that they can't digest and pump them with medicine to quicken the process and allow them temporary relief.

The Beverage industry is the other shoe on the chopped off diabetes foot. High Fructose Corn Syrup is the sugar in almost anything you can eat or drink. America once again demands these products to be cheap, so Corn as a source of sugar is chosen. The problem? The empty calories often cause malfunctions in your metabolism, and ultimately Obesity and Diabetes is a result.

Soda pop and Hamburgers are the two biggest staples of American culture, so we literally have a nation poisoning itself through identity. How can this be? We find out through the Corn museum that corn is actually healthy in most varieties, however, the standard yellow corn that has taken over America lacks the nutrients that give most blue, red, and black corn their color. Instead, yellow corn is full of straight carbohydrates. So eat up America.

The journey ultimately leads to Dr. Earl Butz, former US head of Agriculture, who, in the 70's, whose policies “corrected” the US practice of subsidizing farmers to not grow food. The departure of limits on these subsidies opened the door to anyone willing to put some corn in the ground for a fast buck. It's my personal opinion that these policies led to the farming revolution of the major factory farming industries, and along with NAFTA and other free trade deals, has led to famine in other nations due to having to import corn from the US due to the subsidies causing price fixing putting their local farmers out of business.

When this film was over, I began to wonder what would happen if we instead chose to subsidize grass or hemp. While not guaranteed the massive yield of modern GMO, these crops can be grown easily and naturally and can inject some health into our food supply. I am not advocating the immediate switch from corn to alternatives, just merely stating that farmers should have some alternative available that will not harm society as much as the corn and soybean industry has.

Information: 3 stars – This film talks to those who are most affected by Corn and corn policies. Average people who have interest in the topic. Monsanto's monopoly over the seeds could have been examined more.

Source Documentation: 3 Stars – What you see is what you get. Great documentation on the filmmakers' families and on the subsidy policies of the US government, however, some stuff could use better explanation than just interviews.

Presentation Method: 4 Stars – We follow the filmmakers on a journey, one that would examine small Iowa farming community from their perspective,

Visuals/Sound: 4 Stars – Superb cinematography.

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: 4 Stars – Solution. These filmmakers follow the money in corn, and even make an “acre” of difference at the end.

Overall Wake-Up-Ability: 4 Stars – While other films certainly display the dangers of Factory Farming and the centralization of food, this one certainly tugs at the heart strings when you follow the emotions of the filmmakers.

Friday, April 30, 2010

Documentary Movie Review - Police State 4: The Rise of Fema

Click here to watch this film.

Click here for a guide to my review process.

The “Us against them” mentality will always be the adverse problems posed for true peaceful activism. Anyone who would use “Us vs. Them” for political gain should be alienated and ostracized immediately as a provocateur.

In the week of the release of this film, I had re-watched the original “police state” trilogy to review, as well as attending a local protest of the Federal Reserve and IRS. At this rally, one of the organizers began to bullhorn IRS employees that they should feel ashamed and quit their job. This is one example of the “Us vs. Them” mentality that we need to avoid. This is the problem that will undoubtedly increase the use of the police state.

What is the Police State? Alex really doesn't use his films to define the term, but rather show you what it could look like in your town. A “Police State” is one where virtually all activity in a geographical location is governed by an authoritarian force. In the United States, where freedoms and checks and balances prevent this, it is an extreme occurrence which an extreme emergency can be declared where those in charge of governing the area claim that chaos, or the potential for chaos, has grown too large to control while allowing for normal freedoms. This is commonly referred to as “Martial Law” or suspension of government.

This film begins outlining several executive orders by which the procedure for Martial Law is established. E.O.#s 10990, 10995, 10997, 10998, 10999, 11000, 11001, 11002, 11003, 11004, 11005, 11051, 11310,11049, 11921 are explained, however, you can research those. Needless to say, that combined, these executive orders provide for the government takeover of every resource and economic sector, including movement and housing. Alex also references Presidential Security Directive 51, which has remained largely a secret, event though representative Peter DeFazio tried to alert Americans to its existence and the secrecy of the executive. These powers include the “Continuity of Government” project of the US government, by which the United States would, during time of extreme emergency, not be governed by the Constitution or our elected representatives, but by an “Emergency” government with emergency powers. A new executive order establishing a federalized “Council of Governors” essentially pushing federalism at the state level, would also provide for a plan for emergency response. Alex also covers the Civilian Inmate Labor Program and DOD Directive1404.10. Please research the government documents listed in this paragraph if you need more information.

There you go. Not a Conspiracy Theory, the plans for martial law and imprisonment exist. The only debates are:
A. Do you agree with “Emergency” (increased) powers in times of perceived chaos?
B. What types of events are “emergencies” that could initiate the declaration? and
C. What would martial law look like and would it negatively affect the people?

That's where the rest of this film comes in. Bankers telling our congress that if they voted against the bailout that Martial Law would be necessary is financial terrorism. The financial crisis has brought outrage from several interested people. The protests exist, as I mentioned my attendance above. However, what happened in Pittsburgh in 2009 did not make most news outlets. More on that in a sec.

If Martial Law was a duck, most people would say that the evidence of a controlling mad government is just a quacking, waddling, and feather covered teddy bear, not a duck.

Alex goes into some of the Military working in the homeland in violation of posse comatatus, as well as the Northcom force, reported to be targeted at 40,000 US troops trained to operate in the homeland, including quelling insurrection.

The Infowars crew were filming these efforts in Pittsburgh during the 2009 G-20 Protests. Jason Bermas' inability to get these members of Military to define posse comatatis shows how dire things can be.

“Order out of Chaos” is a commonly known phrase of people aware of authoritarian tactics of globalist leaders. Government will always claim that their control tactics are to restore order to a chaotic situation. The problem people have with this, is the seemingly unequal target of these tactics toward people who would be in opposition to federal government, globalist, or elitist goals.

The first time I'd seen the L.R.A.D. lesser-lethal crowd control device was in the Jon Ronson documentary “Crazy Rulers of the World” where he was outlining how governments use unusual torture tactics that start out with seemingly no military application. The L.R.A.D. is a device that blasts brain piercing noises in a targeted direction. A Lock-down of the streets of Pittsburgh Pennsylvania using Military, rows of Police, and the L.R.A.D. was clearly a display of Martial Law.

So what was their justification? Perceived chaos? We see “Anarchists” throwing things, breaking things, wearing masks. Again, instead of targeting the bad apples, lets declare an Emergency and lock the place down of all constitutional activities. Alex's previous films as well as a clip of a few anarchists here, provide interesting evidence that some of these “Agents Provocateur” could perhaps be government employees.

The L.R.A.D. also blasts an interesting announcement. “This is an unlawful assembly”

Amendment I - U.S. Constitution: “Congress shall make no law.. ..abridging.. ..the freedom.. ..of the people, peaceably to assemble..”

Clearly this was a Constitution-free zone.

The announcement tells people to “Leave the area immediately”, however, as Alex shows us, the police just corral the people into one area blocking from all sides. A free state Philadelphia was not.

Alex also covers the interesting case of Hardin, Montana. A private, foreign-run, “security” firm known as “American Police Force” takes over a local prison facility, and begins driving around town in vehicles labeled “Hardin Police.”

The most interesting thing about this film is how it clearly outlines the issue of the Christmas 09' Underwear “Bombing” attempt, as well as the concurrent push for body-scanning machines at airports. Alex, in interviews with Webster Tarpley does the job that the media told us our government failed to do, and that is “Connect the Dots” surrounding this attack. Alex also shows the differences between the incontrovertible eyewitness testimony vs. the several different official government stories of this event including the State Department telling Detroit News that even the Federal Government was involved in allowing it to happen.

The Body-Scanners are also exposed as Michael Chertoff's health-destroying, submission ritual, money making machine.

Alex also covers the important propaganda issues of the MIAC report and Glenn Beck's lies as well as the Pentagon writing news stories and the FCC's ability to take over media networks.

This film takes the styles and focuses of the original “Police State” trilogy and pumps them into a 2009-2010 alert. This film also resolves some of the contextual problems that the first three films suffered.

Information: 5 stars – This film covers the push for a controlled society, covering all of the available news and information from recent years. It's jam packed full of footage, eyewitness accounts, news reports, and government documents.

Source Documentation: 4 Stars – While this film has cured most of the contextual issues of the previous films, there are a few issues where skeptics might feel that some information is not related to the overall message.

Presentation Method: 2 Stars – This was basically clips from the Alex Jones Show, inter-cut with clips of what he is talking about. He would have been served well to take the time to re-explain some of these issues specifically for the film, at times some contextual stuff from that day's show is mentioned, which does this film injustice.

Visuals/Sound: 2 Stars – Unfortunate that the special graphics used must have been created for big screen HDTVs because it seems that it is very hard to read important stuff on the screen at key times. Also included is a segment where two computer voices alternate layered over loud music, which makes it nearly impossible to understand what they say. The only bonus this film does get, is the fact that while watching it on my surround sound, the L.R.A.D. came on and my wife started throwing things at me because it was hurting her ears. Congratulations on bringing the experience home for me, I respect that if others have that experience, they might understand how negative the L.R.A.D. is.

Political & Social Spectrum: 4 Stars – He would get 5 stars if he did not choose to label some issues as “conservative.”

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: 1 Star – Consti-pollution While the information is good, again, there is little to no direction on how we the people can change this stuff. He didn't even do as good of a job of calling for people to spread this information. We also need to spread the word of the importance of citizen journalism when events like those in this movie happen.

Overall Wake-Up-Ability: 4 Stars – Not quite as good as “Washington You're Fired” at emphasizing the issues of government power grabs, but quite honestly, this might be one of the few “Movies” that actually shows clashes between police and protesters in recent years, which gives it a unique quality. As such, I honestly would rather to have seen some coverage of DNC/RNC 08' footage or RNC 04' footage (while revisiting the Seattle WTO issue) than some of the focus on terminology that people might not understand. I think establishing the history of detainment facilities for protesters would have been a perfect topic for the film.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Documentary Movie Review: Flashback Special – The Alex Jones "Police State" Trilogy.

With this week's release of Alex Jones' latest film "Police State 4: The Rise of Fema" I felt it fitting to review all 4 films this week. I am combining the first three films, known collectively as the "Police State" trilogy into one review, since I recommend them to be watched together.

"Police State: 2000" was Alex Jones' breakout in investigative journalism on the closing grid of police and military operations in our lands. Alex goes around showing how many of these enforcers are unaware of the checks and balances that our constitution and federal law would have in place to prevent the types of tyranny in place. Interviews with officials like San Antonio Police Chief Al Phillipus on Federal "police" intrusion into localities were things nearly unheard of at the time of the film's release. The "On the Scene" footage of military, in American streets and training to round up American citizens is undeniable. We see the various excuses from seat belts, to catching drunks, that "enforcers" will use to assert authority. But ultimately, the issue is shown clearly, about 20 minutes into the film. The failed "Nazi Excuse" of "Just following Orders" is way too frequently the excuse for this behavior from those who would falsely use the slogan "Protect and Serve." At the time of the film, many of these operations were labeled as "Training" but the subsequent films show that the incrimentalism of posse comatatus violations have only served to warm the people to the idea of Military, Federal, and even Foreign Agents on the streets. Disturbing is the footage of Local police working with US and foreign military doing urban warfare and emergency response drills, by kicking in doors and shooting first, interacting with actors and local volunteers who scream “I'm an American,” “We need to get paid,” “We Want Food,” “I need to speak with your commanding officer,” and “I have rights.” along with loudspeakers telling the people to “remain calm so that we may process you into the camps faster.”

“Police State 2: The Takeover” is a fitting sequel, however, Instead of military training and the federalization of police, instead this film takes its heavy focus towards Agents Provocateur and how they enable martial law style tactics to be enacted. Alex shows you news reports out of Seattle's WTO protests, where Agents Provocateur were allowed to continue to reign in destruction even with a heavy police presence, and then the area was placed on lock down as a reactionary tactic. A suspension of the first amendment, thanks to a city council vote to declare a state of emergency. Meanwhile those responsible for the real violence and destruction got free rent from the city's low income housing. Those rounded up for “improper assembly” were taken to a federal “prisoner processing camp” at Sand Point. Which leads Alex into how federally funded public schools could be used for these purposes, and into the issue of federalism of the school systems through special crime watch programs. Alex then continues the expose from the first film, showing new footage of urban warfare drills and police/military collaborative checkpoints.

"Police State 3: Total Enslavement" is almost an odd film out. It may have been decent when it was released, however, there seems to be a complete lack of visual integrity and focus on topic. Which can be a good or bad thing, depending on how you look at it. On the one hand, Alex throws a ton of Information in, it is more random than topical. All in all this movie plays out like one of Alex's daily shows in modern times. Alex throws almost every topic that has to do with control grids in this film, through news reports on video or on paper. This movie comes off as more alarmist, partly because there isn't really anything special that this covers. This goes into federalism, globalism, microchips, FCC takeovers of radio & TV, cameras on the streets, and other “smart” technology. This film is more about the “1984” side of these issues, which, to some is harder to source and prove in a believable manner. Ultimately, I think that Alex could have waited a few more years to do the 3rd film, then he could have included some further use of the martial law type strategies that towns and their police used in the first two. It would have been great to have seen some of the RNC 04' stuff in this.

Information: 5 stars - These films have some repetitiveness in the information, however, those educated on the constitution and posse comitatus should be definately concerned about the details of our overall society reported in these films.

Source Documentation: 4 stars - While all of the information is sourced, some of the context in which evidence is alluding to can be questioned by skeptics.

Presentation Method: 3 Stars - "Low budget 60-minutes-style special report" These films are of Alex sitting at a desk going through the evidence cutting to the videos and documentation

Visuals/Sound: 3 Stars - What could be expected from the turn of the century independent media. It got dated fast.

Political & Social Spectrum: 5 Stars - No Left or Right. Only Right and Wrong.

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: 3 Stars - Part Pollution Part Solution. A whole lot of "this is something to be afraid of" with a "get the word out" solution. I think that advice to create a movement asking the viewer to watch and video things in their own town, or to research their town's federal ties could have helped propel a more direct 3rd film and may have sped up the release of #4. If these films are to be viewed as showing us a dangerous threat to our Liberty, there should definitely be a movement toward further documentation.

Overall Wake-up-ability: 3 Stars - I hate to give these films such a low score here, but Alex does come across as an alarmist to new viewers in some of these areas due to connecting dots. I'm not saying he's wrong, but there is a difference between a town giving an abandoned building to the military for temporary use as a base for trainings operations and "The Federal Government" "taking over" a building. Both could be dangerous, but only one would imply improper use of the government. I think that the WTO Seattle compilation in the second film is the thing that makes any of this a "must see" for the modern activist.

Friday, April 16, 2010

Documentary Movie Review – Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined

New: Recently created, arranged, or changed

World: 1. a Planet; 2. Planetary

Order: 1. A request; 2. A state of control

New + World + Order: A change in the planetary state of control.

Many questions arise when one begins to ask the question, "What is the new world order." When you ask questions, the most common are the good old who, what, when, where, why, and how.

This film goes into answering those questions. The reason these topics are thought of as a "Conspiracy Theory" is the inability for the common individual to connect the who with the why and the how. This film attempts to connect those lines for the viewer. For one to fully understand the term, you need to fully appreciate the context in which the term "Order" is used. Jason and his clips from mainstream media show the installers of this agenda in their own words. Often people confuse the word "Order" as an answer to the question of "Who." They might know wnough about the use of the term "new world order" to understand that there are secret societies involved and some might even falsely believe that "new world order" is an assigned name for groups that either have no name or have names that people are not aware of.

On the contrary, this film names these organizations and shows the viewer that the level of influence that the famous members of these groups have is undeniable. One would simply brush them off as "special interests," however, many would find it an insult to "democracy" to know about the private meetings between the Politicians, who all claim to be fighting for the people's freedom from big business, the Bankers, who claim to be trying to regulate a disordered economy to enable the people to be independent, Industry, who claim to want to provide goods and services that nations and their peoples might need, and Media, who claim to independently provide oversight of the actions of government. I often personally refer to the unified stance of these four societal structures, as the four pillars of the new world order.

As this film will show, the outcome of these sectors of society operating in a unified fashion is not only a conflict of interest, but the ultimate in elite social connections allowing to consolidate Power, Wealth, Information, and Direction of the planet. It does not take a genius to observe what might happen when a Politician, a Banker, an Industrialist, and an owner of mainstream media channels are all working toward the same goal. You wind up with, respectively, a funding mechanism, the legal ability, the industrial ability, and the public perception to carry out any agenda that you might wish to agree upon. Not only that, but these agendas can include expanding, renewing, or preserving the powers of its own membership.

The easiest way to describe this is using the term "Globalism." The term basically means standardization of all societies, communities, and laws globally. The easiest way to think of the people pushing this agenda is to think "Globalist Special Interests."

I'd say the only thing left to debate after one would see this film is whether a person believes that Jason Bermas is right in his assessment that this concept of a new world being perpetrated by the elites of the world is one of negativity and evil.

A concept which would take the elements that make up the concepts of Humanity and Sovereignty and attempt to alienate societies' preservation thereof.

A concept which would reject the concept of individuality or reject the idea that different regions of the world/different communities might look, act, or think different than the rest, requiring different types of laws, businesses, and societal structures.

Jason provides evidence of Drug smuggling, Paganism, homosexual prostitution, false flag acts of war and violence, deception through propaganda, and a policy based on depopulation, theft, and death. All under the cover that they are mostly honest, christian, civic leaders.

For me, the information in this film,(as well as others) showing the deeds of these people and their groups, paired with the celebrity knowledge of the lives of the persons involved, confirm, to an honest person, that these persons are not interested in ordering the world in a fashion that would truly be new and peaceful.

Instead, what I see is the classic throne-sitter mentality of persons who want to rule the world supposedly for its own good. Only a tyrant would believe that they are above the people in the capacity to handle doing what is right by civilization. It is comforting to know that filmmakers with an artistic capability and focus such as that of Jason Bermas would agree with my view of the motives of these people.

Information: I have never before seen a film with so much important information on the relation of Negative Globalism to Historical and 21st Century geo-politics - 5 Stars

Source Documentation: Jason backs up the arguments and information with mainstream media reports, books, videos etc. There is one little quote in the film, however, which might be considered heresay about Bill Clinton's brother supposedly talking about him having a "nose like a vacuum", referring to cocaine running through Arkansas relating to Clinton having a drug habit. I am only pointing out the lack of a trusted first-hand witness of this quote, as opposed to the existing third-hand heresay. I am not making claims about the validity of the quote, partially because this is the first time I've heard it. These very small, very rare errors in sourcing can sometimes invite debunkers such as the "screw loose change" community (which Jason knows all too well) to make widespread claims diverting attention of the factual. - 3 Stars

Presentation Method: Jason starts off relating to you on a personal level, then goes into news clips, images, and documentation - 4 Stars

Visuals / Sound: The 3D rendering of images through layering movement is very attractive. Sound effects are superb. Some of his expert testimony could be a little louder in comparison to the music and sound effects of other clips – 4 Stars

Political & Social Spectrum: If you love the won't after this. The mainstream brainwashed partisans might not like this as it attacks the motives of mainstream Democrats and Republicans evenly. - 4 Stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Constitution. With the exception of his closing argument asking people to "take action" and Alex Jones popping in ¼ of the way through the film with an ad, no specific steps to action. - 4 Stars

Overall Wake-Up-Ability: Anyone that pays close attention to the details of this film and understands the sources, while still denying, is obviously in denial out of fear. - 5 Stars

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Documentary Movie Review – Secret of OZ (with Special commentary on the currency debate)

Documentary Movie Review – Secret of OZ (with Special commentary on the currency debate)

Click Here for the Guide to navigating my reviews

Anyone who has seen the expose “The Money Masters” is familiar with the educated knowledge filmmaker Bill Still has in regards to our monetary system. In this follow-up we learn of the possibility that Frank L. Baum's “Wonderful Wizard of Oz” may have been a warning to future generations about the political struggle of monetary policy.

This film disappointed me greatly. While a potentially decent tool to get someone new interested in the concerns of monetary reform, it is really less about the ties to “The Wizard of Oz” and more about the history of politics and money in the United States.

I'm all for a history lesson, especially in our culture where people frequently forget the important things in a very short time span, with the exception of the things our controlled media would rather direct our focus on. This movie provides a great history lesson as to the debates and balance of power between banking interests and government.

I usually have a few issues with films I review, and I'm not sure how to take away how I feel about the message of this film. Mr. Still absolutely demonizes the idea of a gold backed currency in favor of a government fiat currency. However, I would hope that he understands that his narration of support for fiat currency is not the message the film would actually send out. At the end of all of the evidence he puts forth, and the warnings of “The Wizard of Oz” you come away (and even Bill himself summarizes this) thinking that the answer to monetary woes in this nation is a Silver standard.

The monetary argument is that of a currency based on one of the following principals: Fiat (fictionally inflatable value relation) vs. Creatable (physically inflatable consumable resource) vs. Scarce (limited consumable resource) vs. Precious (rare limited in-consumable resource) vs. Finite (abundant,but limited in-consumable resource). I will mention a sixth below that is rarely discussed in these types of debates.

The difference between a fiat currency and the rest is an issue of quantity. Mr. Still argues that the problems with our monetary supply are A. Who controls scarcity?, and B. Who controls quantity?.

The only difference is that Bill, and several other economists believe that the two are one in the same. However, the difference between Silver (in the Finite category above) and Gold (precious) are their ability to be controlled through scarcity. I'm not going to disagree here, because I believe that as the population of the world expands, a system based on Silver could perhaps push even a more abundant resource like Silver into the precious category. As we see with the Diamond trade, (and even in our own fiat currencies) that perception of use and value can increase perceived demand, or perceived supply decrease, which creates real demand in an effort to get a piece of a rising investment.

I will now discuss the sixth principal of value that economies are based upon. I like to group it with Fiat into a bigger category known as “ethereal” and the other valued resources are “physical.” The Sixth one is Labor. You see just as a Federal Reserve Note is not limited in quantity if you are the Federal Reserve, Labor to a large degree is not limited in “quantity” only ability and capability, which are the whole basis for the use of Labor as a resource. Just as a Fiat currency is only a service of having an inflatable means of exchange that is limited only in ability and capability. Availability do not determine value in these two methods, unless a skill of labor is in such demand that it is treated like a precious resource, but even then it is a product of ability, since most are able to be educated to perform most tasks. These are ethereal because their physical properties do not determine value. One can decide that a piece of paper with ink or an hour of labor is worth $1 or $1000 by simply assigning what it needs to be worth using supply side thinking.

Physical resources on the other hand are demand side thinking. Their physical properties and quantity determine their value. An ounce of Silver will always be worth an ounce of Silver, only the demand for silver can change that price.

The other part of Bill's rejection of the Gold Standard for Fiat is that Government is supposed to be an institution of the people, and that a government controlled fiat system that eliminates banker influence allows the people through government to control the value of their currency.

He acknowledges that politicians do have the incentive to improperly hyperinflate or deflate the currency under that system, but pledges that it would be better than a gold system where deflation is controlled by monied interests who are already in control of resources. And that only the way in which banking money is created affects the system.

I feel that if they are already in control of resources, then their influence is still there even if they do not have the official powers. I think that is an argument that this film even supports. If we've went through this debate several times in this nation already, then why has it not went away? Because banks still have influence over the market and over the scarcity and the value of goods. With that power, you have leverage politically against any politician's effort to protect a system of freedom. I argue that the politicians in Washington are too “modernized” into being a tool of the corporatocracy, and lack the political fortitude to put their political advancement in jeopardy for the sake of values. My answer? State currencies. This is why all of these “Democrats” are afraid to make a real decision about the war on terror, because they are afraid the political implications that doing the right thing will make them appear politically “soft” against the “evil people.” This is why “Tea Partiers” are afraid to purposefully alienate “Republicans” and “neo-cons” because they falsely believe that their independent movement is being accepted by a mainstream system, when a real examination can see the mechanisms at work.

My argument is that you need competing, decentralized currencies, ethereal and physical, supply side and demand side, for in order for a tyrannical institution to control both supply and demand side of a sector of the economy, it also needs a mechanism for driving demand, such as the Diamond or Oil cartels. For example, Texas can have a Gold or Silver backed currency, Alaska an Oil backed currency, Missouri a food backed dollar, Kansas a Fiat currency, all to be legal tender of the United States Union trade-able to banks across state lines, but the control will be in different sectors of the economy. This, however would be unconstitutional due to the Gold/Silver States' clause of the Constitution. (that is also not followed under the FRN system) However, we can still advocate for decentralization and competition between currencies which are the important factors here.

You see to control an economy, you must control both supply and demand. The reason bankers have such great power is that they have controlled demand of the Federal Reserve Note through Legal Tender laws. If a business owner is able to mandate that his store will only accept gold coins, then the power of a Fiat currency supplier is taken away. Much of the Demand side is perception. This is why economies are becoming global. The labor movement of the 20th century had power because they controlled the demand for their skill, and therefore had leverage to negotiate the value of that labor. Much of demand-side economics is disappearing in our global economy because of our ability and willingness to do business with unregulated markets. To the average American, it begins to matter less and less the standards by which goods are made in comparison to their ability to acquire it. Chinese goods are made with practically slave labor, in very poor quality, but we refuse to pay twice the price for morally and quality made goods. This is a 100% perception issue.

Just as over-regulation on smoking became popular, while many complained of the price increases, the prices have actually stayed quite sane in comparison to the regulations. Why is this? Because of decreased demand due to the majority of the public turning their back on smoking as a desirable habit. The reason I mention this, is the fact that the bankers have the power and wealth, so they have the influence. You can take the ability to create money, but they've never had the power to create wealth, only to steal it through fiat. Well, as even this movie admits several times, that once you take the power from the bankers, if they still maintain their assets, then they maintain their influence on the Military Industrial Complex, the media, the politicians, and it's only a matter of time before they are in control again. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly expecting a different result. Lets break the cycle of Government and Banks trading bureaucracies over fiat and cartel-controlled currency systems, and repeal these damn Legal Tender laws.

Information: A Jam packed history lesson on all of the currency fights of our lands dating back to the colonist era. Great history of Monetary policy without using “big words”. - 3 Stars

Source Documentation: Experts in finance discussing these issues, although most seem bias against a gold standard - 2 Stars

Presentation Method: History Lesson - 3 Stars

Visuals / Sound: Nothing Flashy, Just the facts, Ma'am - 3 Stars

Political & Social Spectrum: Only slant is the continuous use of the phrase “The gold bugs believe...”- 4 Stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Constitution. While I may not agree with his ideas, it's a start and a step in the right direction. Only thing missing is steps to take to affect change.- 4 Stars

Overall Wake-Up-Ability: People might be upset that this is more about History than about the hidden symbolism within a pop culture icon that this is advertised to expose. Very unfortunate that Legal Tender laws are not exposed. - 2 Stars

Friday, April 9, 2010

Response to Planned Parenthood Candidate Survey

Dear Planned Parenthood, ADVOCATES, and to whom it may concern.

I Recently have received the Planned Parenthood/ADVOCATES State candidates' survey. I have been very much looking forward to completing surveys of this type. However, due to the extreme bias nature of the questions, I have found it nearly improbable that anyone could take this survey honestly and in a serious fashion.

The reason I am being so harsh is that I have found much of the language within your survey very contradictory to itself. The wording of this survey at times is very exact or very broad. Sometimes both broad and exact in the same clause.

(For example: “Oppose a ban on abortion procedures that does not include an exception for the woman's life and health?” at first glance the narrow word “life” would appear to be advocating abortion in severe medical conditions. However, the simple inclusion of the broad word “health” creates the potential implication of a very broad definition of health that could include mental health, stomach cramps, vomiting, etc. which are all natural side effects of pregnancy.)

It is clear that this is perhaps an attempt to confuse a candidate into believing that they are voicing their support for a moderate issue, when the same answers can be interpreted to mean very extreme beliefs in regards to the rights of females and when the killing of a fetus should be tolerated by a society.

First, let me start off by saying that you question a candidate's support of a woman's “Access to information,” “Access to Medical Care,” and the like. However, the section that includes question 17 and 18 “Government Intrusion In Medical Decisions” makes it clear that instead of having complete information about the decision a family is about to make, your organization would rather have a woman be educated by Planned Parenthood and the FDA approved pharmaceutical advertising materials.

I support a woman's access to information regarding pregnancy options. But I think that information would also include what any side effects of any drug or procedure could mean to her, information about gestation, phone numbers to adoption agencies, and any other information or education that would support a live birth option.

While I do support a woman being able to make medical decisions, I have personally met many families whose lives have been altered by the side effects of certain types of FDA approved birth control and vaccines, including my own wife, and find it very dangerous that an organization such as Planned Parenthood would have so many questions regarding taxpayer support of its services, yet find so intrusive the regulations that taxpayers would require for oversight of how that money is being spent on dramatic family decisions. It would do your organization well to remember that when you use the term “Government” that it also means “Taxpayer.” I find it clear from the several law firm advertisements on daytime television, that our pharmaceutical industry and FDA is in no way perfect when it comes to the safety of our medications, and for Planned Parenthood to use the FDA as a guide is not progressive thinking. And it is also clear that any organization requesting government funding for their services should not be opposed to following guidelines to ensure that the mental condition of their patient is one of a sound, educated, individual.

While on the subject of the “Government Intrusion” section of your survey, let me address the first phrase: “Planned Parenthood believes that the decision to have an abortion is best left to the woman in consultation with her loved ones and her physician....”

If this were a true statement, then if that person was a child, her loved ones would be her parents. Your question number 7, asking for a candidate's support of underage contraceptive services without parental consent, would show that Planned Parenthood would rather the child believe that Planned Parenthood were her loved ones, and not her parents. As long as an adult is responsible for the actions of their underage child, it becomes ever important that the parent be allowed access to all of the information available regarding the education and medical care of that child, and be given the opportunity to influence their own child's decisions regarding the several types of medication and contraceptives on the market, for the child's own safety.

Onto the subject of the Morning After Pill and Abortion. I do not believe that the two are medically one in the same, but morally they are very close. While men and women are very different, our nation's Constitution has made equal protection under the law, the law of the land. When a man's reproductive decisions are brought up in a court of law, he finds that the rule of thumb is that he is responsible for when, where, and who he chooses to mate with, and must face any consequences of this decision that may arise from the time of the decision to mate to the time of his death. Many would advocate the use of these two forms of birth control for merely socioeconomic reasons. Such “socioeconomic” “escapes” from the aforementioned responsibility toward the decisions to mate, are not only bias against males, but is also a very unfortunate precedent in regards to responsibility in our society, that should instead be discouraged, educated against, and only used in extreme measures. Education and preparation is the responsible choice, the widespread application and availability of the “oops” option as socioeconomic birth control is the irresponsible, sad choice for the modern intelligent woman.

Which brings me to the Rape/Health issue. While I do consider myself pro-life, I do believe in the right to defend one's own life from the life of another, including one's own growing child. However, these complications should be high risk, and a decision not made lightly. In regards to Rape, I do support the limited use of the morning after pill. I think Abortion in the case of Rape should be the final option after the woman has declined or received mental health services to aid her in coping with the trauma, and declined the possibility to adopt. Rushing to a decision to abort after such a life-traumatizing event is very dangerous for the long-term mental health care of an individual.

Again, with the inclusion of your “Government Intrusion” section, another contradiction would be found in your “Refusal Clauses” section. I don't believe government should intrude in the decision of a business owner to do business as they would choose within reasonable context of regulatory law. If a physician would like to prescribe a medication that is socially controversial, it would allow for those in support of that medication to compile a short list of pharmacies that do sell, and allow for the free market to let those pharmacies to gain advertisement for their willingness to do more business. I would hope that Planned Parenthood would rather support someone willing to ensure access to a woman's care than to force that business upon a business owner in opposition to Planned Parenthood's beliefs.

Ultimately, other than for my knowledge of some of the information I've heard about Eugenics, I am not completely against the idea of Planned Parenthood nor against some of the beliefs that the organization stands for. In fact, I'd like to think of myself as moderate-conservative on most social issues. However, your survey has made it impossible to be a moderate in the eyes of your organization and I will gladly feel comfortable with any endorsements you may give to my opponents in the 2010 51st District Missouri State Representative election.

Thank you for your time,
Kevin L. Kobe
Libertarian Candidate
Missouri State Representative District 51

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Press Release: Activist files as Libertarian Candidate for 51st District

Press Release: Activist files as Libertarian Candidate for 51st District
-for immediate release

The 51st Missouri House of Representatives race has expanded with the recent filing of Kevin L. Kobe for the Libertarian party ballot. This district covers the Independence Square and surrounding areas as well as Sugar Creek and a small portion of Kansas City east of I-435.

Kevin had most recently gained press as the former organizer for area tea party-style group “Liberty Restoration Project,” known locally for its opposition to Red Light Cameras, The Real ID Act, and the political influence of banks.

In addition to Real ID, Kevin has personally testified about last year's controversial MIAC Reports released by the State Highway Patrol agency which profiled several types of government opposition activism as potentially dangerous.

Kevin's political beliefs are based upon “Original Intent” constitutional philosophy, small localized government and small localized competitive capitalism. He became an activist after the failed 2008 Ron Paul presidential campaign.

Kevin Lives in northeast Kansas City with his wife. He is a father of two and comes from a family with several generations from the Independence area. His current occupation is in the Security field with other career backgrounds in Cooking and Shipping. In his spare time he studies politics, philosophy, and history.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

Documentary Movie Review: How Weed Won The West

Documentary Movie Review: How Weed Won The West

Click Here for a guide to navigating my reviews

Kevin Booth's American Drug War was a good film about a bad policy. This sequel focuses on recent events in California's “Emerald Triangle” and the booming medical marijuana industry and the mentality of the government's “War On Drugs” viewpoints in an area where the people have spoken, and how the battle for de-criminalization is never really over.

We meet growers, distributors, and users to get the first hand accounts of how modern day “reefer madness”has affected them. The often touted opinion of “Stoners” as unintelligent couldn't possibly be 100% true, when there are more headshops in southern California “than there are Starbucks”

We find out that marijuana is very scientific. Breeding different strains together to get desired medicinal effects to help the customer, or by realizing northern California's “Emerald Triangle” being the prime area for growers, as it is the inverse meridian of Afghanistan's poppy regions. The Californian Marijuana industry is researched and optimized for maximum results.

The message of this film is straight forward, check out some of these people, and why they do what they do, and then show how government interferes. This film was pretty hard to watch for me, because while all of the information was good, it reminded me of MTV's documentaries. You still get the feeling that this is a cultural battle being disguised as a battle of fundamentals, when you can tell that Kevin makes poor attempts to show it the other way around.

Radio host Alex Jones features prominently in this film, being the naysayer against authoritarianism and control, however the only example in the film is one Medical Marijuana shop where the local government kept pushing the State anti-drug agencies and the DEA to raid the place. A business owner and his employees pushed around and security cameras broken, guns in their faces. Of all the tragic aspects of this raid, Kevin Booth focuses on the owners' Pit Bull injured by two bullets fired by agents during the raid.

What could have been a very sympathetic moment for the movement, became too personal to be taken seriously. The owner starts spouting off Common Law, and it's never explained, so the owner winds up looking like a kook and the only collateral damage that you wind up being sympathetic for is the dog.

The usual arguments about comparisons to Alcohol Prohibition and the mainstream pharmaceutical industry. We meet Sherry, a pro wrestler and actress who, after back injury, increased the dosage of painkillers to the point where I felt sorry for her liver. This beauty queen tells her story and her frustration with pills while sitting sensual in her bikini, and I swear there was a shot of her walking with crutches with her breasts hanging out the bottom of her tank top. Once again, a seeming compassionate victim comes across in the film as a wierdo.

This is the unfortunate truth about this film. We meet several persons affected by the drug war, however, when it comes to credibility, there isn't a whole lot of first hand interviews that the average person would want to relate to. But what Kevin lacks in the company he keeps, he makes up for in philosophy and science. When you feature scenes of former gang leaders making a purchase from a convicted Rastafarian, you had better find a way to make it look better than it sounds and Kevin Booth barely passes the smell test.

Information: The facts and philosophy are great research. The first hand interviews are based on life experience, which isn't as important. The information level is high, but you get the impression that Kevin intends the viewer to be as well. - 4 Stars

Source Documentation: Cameras are inside the industry. - 4 Stars

Presentation Method: If you've ever seen any of the MTV specials like "16 and Pregnant" or "True Life" it's that style where you follow the stories of a few people affected a scene at a time. This film would have been better served not inter-cut, but should have told each story individually, with the facts and figures told separately to show a difference between the valid information and the stoners. - 3 Stars

Visuals/Sound: While Kevin Booth doesn't add a bunch of flashy stuff, the camera work is amazing with the exception of one or two scenes. You can almost smell the Pineapple Kush through the screen. - 4 Stars

Political & Social Spectrum: American Drug War had drug opponents, this doesn't. This plays out more like a propaganda film for NORML than a semi-objective documentary, but that's the point. - 3 Stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Solution! Even though this film is all about the issues with California's law, it's clear by the end of the film that it is a freedom issue, and one that will be settled one state at a time through state legislatures and petitioning for ballot initiatives, and the power to decriminalize is within reach if you take action. - 5 Stars

Overall Wake-up-ability: Marijuana skeptics unfortunately will not be swayed very much by this film, so it will be preaching to the choir of the majority of the public who already agrees with decriminalization. The hope is that everyone can come away with a little more compassion and education when it comes to the medicinal use of this plant. - 3 Stars

Friday, March 12, 2010

Documentary Movie Review: Kymatica

Documentary Movie Review: Kymatica

Click Here To Watch This Movie

Click Here for a guide to navigating these reviews and links to past reviews

The liberty movement is a wide term that includes several archetypes of people who are taking different approaches to become sovereign in their own way. I like to talk often about the real left-right paradigm being a natural response to the false left-right paradigm and my watching of this film is the perfect example on how different types of people can agree with fundamentals, facets, and metaphors, but completely disagree on all the details that support an argument, so you wind up agreeing for different reasons.

I had to shake my head no quite frequently, however, this film makes you examine and debate your motives for action or feelings toward things that make you uncomfortable with your own paradigm, so I really had to re-examine and re-affirm my disagreement. After thinking it over, I'll still disagree with the message of the film, stating that 99% of good information based on 1% of something that I would call an unproven personal political belief is not a good thing.

It's not a flat out disagreement, but perhaps my interpretation, or how I can see others will interpret the information in this film. Watching this film reminded me of hearing a debate between Infowars' Alex Jones and Zeitgeist's Peter Joseph. I respected Peter Joseph quite well until I heard him say that Evil is not natural and that “Sin” is learned behavior.

The end of Kymatica suggests that we can overcome this through natural evolution, as long as we're conscious of our behavior. I believe that sin is part of life, part of humanity, and therefore is not something that can be overcome merely by some passive consciousness evolution as this film suggests. That does not mean that I think this is not the solution to our problems. With consciousness comes education and wisdom, and I truly believe that this makes the passive solution here an active one.

I also hope that those who watch this film do not attempt to use this as an excuse to avoid speaking out when evil does happen. Just because you're focusing on your own individualism and mental evolution does not excuse our duty to family friends and community to provide example and mentorship to those who would need influence, as long as you're not just forcing your way onto an unwilling subject.

The film would have you reject admiralty law and societal law in favor of individual rights and living within your own mind, body, and spirit. I caution those who are new to these concepts not to confuse being against the tyranny of society with being against community. Also keep in mind before you take any action to exercise your natural law rights above admiralty law, that while filmmakers and people within both the Globalist and Freedom movements are aware of the concept of admiralty law as a form of control, much of the Law Enforcement and Judicial community still hold these powers as valid over human beings. The idea is to be free from fear, and be educated, but don't do something stupid and force yourself into unnecessary harm.

In the end the whole dang movie is almost awesome, telling you to examine your motives, telling you to learn your language, telling you to be aware of the microcosms of reality that can be changed by tiny individual actions and thoughts. However, it's presented as black and white, as if there would never be a valid reason to have something to fear, or a valid reason to allow outside influence into your psyche.

While I agree with the concepts, the cut and dry, black and white nature of the argument invokes feelings of strict untrusting Anarchists crossed with the “post-new-world-order-100-years-of-peace” crowd that tout global tyranny in order to usher in what comes after the tyranny.

Information: From Admiralty Law, to subliminals, to Influencing Paradigms, to Planetary Organic Biology, this movie is packed. - 5 stars

Source Documentation: Not a whole lot of experts or track-able information - 3 stars

Presentation Method: New Age Lecture 2 stars

Visuals/Sound: New age symbolism intertwining graphically to eerie music and monotone narrator - 2 stars

Political & Social Spectrum: Non-Partisan “Shamanistic” - 4 stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Constitution. Have some values, focus on them, but don't act upon them, because you can't trust yourself, or anybody else. - 3 stars

Overall Wake-up-ability: The Mainstream is not quite ready to examine a film this deep, half will turn it off because it sounds too hokey to them, the other half won't take much from it other than “be a better person on the inside if you want a brighter universe” – 2 stars

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

Documentary Movie Review: In The Shadows (Core of Corruption Part 1)

Movie Review: Core of Corruption: In The Shadows

Click Here to watch this film

Guide to my movie reviews

Core of Corruption is a series by Jonathan Elinoff, and "In The Shadows" is the first of the series. It takes a look at the persons, places, and events behind the 9/11 tragedy.

One of the most common complaints about the "9/11 Truth Movement" is its focus on "Controlled Demolition." This film touches on it, but focuses more on the background of the individuals directly related to the incident. I'm disappointed when these films focus so heavily on intelligence and government failures and still feel the need to get into a physics argument. Occam's Razor is the concept that you provide only the information that you need, the information that is relevant to your argument. I don't see how these films benefit from the Controlled Demolition theory. It becomes an argument on what is possible and what is probable, and not necessarily documented, proven events that are easily agreed upon to have happened. Much evidence supports the Controlled Demolition theory, however, the "how" is not as important as the "why" or the "who." Controlled Demolition would have been better covered in the sequel being released soon, or another film.

A heavy focus in this film is on what Porter Goss and Bob Graham Knew before the attack, and what power they had to pass on the information so something could have been done about it if they had. The film shows how these two men were privy to warnings beforehand and were involved in the failure of investigation.

Able Danger, The Dr. Graham 9/11 Report, John O'Neill, Randy Glass' letters to Bob Graham, and several other warnings were filtered through our government and almost every warning went unheard and this film wants you to ask why. And those are the warnings that we KNOW our government had, when you see the Fox News report on Comverse Infosys and Amdocs you begin to really understand how the attacks could not have been pulled off without foreknowledge.

The secondary question is why we don't hear more about the Israeli spy ring found in our nation? This film takes the Fox News report's exposure of the problem of Israeli espionage, and asks about the odd secondary events on 9/11, and what the FBI could know about ties between some of these 9/11 events and this spy ring.

If you don't believe that the United States could have stopped the attack of September 11, you will understand that this becomes more than a mere one-day-one-event failure when you scrape the surface.

This film is almost comparable to Jason Bermas' "Fabled Enemies," only this film gives you more information and more ties to Graham and Goss. This film gathers more mainstream news reports and more clips of first-hand witness accounts.

Information: Very informative. If you don't know the information behind 9/11 you will after seeing this film. - 5 Stars

Source Documentation: News reports and first hand interviews. - 5 stars

Presentation Method: News Clips inter-cut with First Hand interviews. – 4 stars

Visuals/Sound: Great music score, great graphical elements. - 4 stars

Political & Social Spectrum: 9/11 transcends political party to the point where it is shunned by mainstream politics. There is no political angle here. - 4 stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Constitution. 9/11 becomes important to a person, but in the end, that won't protect our liberties. This film is a great research project, and perhaps a good movie to hand out, but other than that, 9/11 truth is a cause that becomes ever harder to act upon. - 2 Stars

Overall Wake-up-ability: Truth is made fun of in the mainstream and claimed to be discredited several times over, however, with more films making the inside connections between persons, places, and things, we may just have justice one day. If you can get someone to watch this, they will understand why 9/11 is still important to much of America. – 4 stars

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Documentary Movie Review: American Drug War - The Last White Hope

Movie Review: American Drug War

click here to watch this film on Google

click here for a guide to my rating system

With the release of Kevin Booth's new film I thought I'd take a look back this week at his last film, American Drug War. I'll have a review up soon of “How Weed Won The West.”

American Drug War points the finger at the effectiveness of the “war on drugs” and its progress in the self-destructive culture saturated with legal mind-and-body-altering substances. Kevin Booth offers his own family's plight with drugs, both legal and illegal, and alcohol addiction as inspiration for his journey.

Along the way we meet several persons touched by the drug war in their own way. We hear from Freeway Ricky Ross via prison telephone, who was known at one time as the “wal-mart of crack” because of his wide distribution in southern California. His story of regret for selling his community out, inter-cut with former DEA agent Celerino Castillo's discussion of the South American drug running of the CIA becomes the most damning story of our Federal Government's hypocrisy.

Kevin also gets Tommy Chong to tell how he was set up by a government sting operation to get his son's pipe company to send a pipe to a county that banned paraphernalia.

This isn't a one sided argument though, we hear from Sheriff Arpaio of Maricopa County, often thought of as the toughest law enforcement official in the country when it comes to enforcement and incarceration. His opinion on combating drugs and listening to him brag about treating the K9 units better than the prisoners makes one re-think the sanity of law enforcement.

We also hear from Clinton's Drug Czar. (Go Czars!) Kevin ambushed him disguising himself as a conservative lecture-attendee to get him to speak about the importance of the drug war, and it becomes clear that the Federal Government and its heads really have no idea what is going on in the streets of big-city-USA.

One of the most shocking things about the drug war is the ability to use inmates as slave labor. When you hear the true motives for why some drugs will never be de-criminalized, you might just start speaking out about the issue yourself.

Most films about drugs are often criticized by mainstream America as biased, not stating the dangers of the drugs, or for advocating their use. Kevin, on the other hand, shows you the harm drugs create in our society, and then shows you why the Federal Government's solution is no better.

Information: The camera takes you to the streets, in the jails, in Kevin's family, and in the face of government officials. The only thing missing is a Doctor's perspective - 4 Stars

Source Documentation: First hand interviews, along with scenes from C-Span of congressional hearings - 5 stars

Presentation Method: Rugged HBO-style documentary. (fitting since it aired on Showtime) – 4 stars

Visuals/Sound: Nothing fancy. But for this film it doesn't need to be. - 4 stars

Political & Social Spectrum: Completely Neutral in my opinion, however some of the more family-oriented conservatives might not like the angle. But in my opinion that's their bias, not Kevin's - 4 stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Pollution. While this film is great information, with the best interviews, it leads nowhere. At the end, you're left feeling that it's someone else's problem and that you, as an individual, or community, cannot change this giant scheme between government and security contractors. - 2 Stars

Overall Wake-up-ability: This film will give a slap in the face to anyone in the country who still thinks that the CIA or privatization of government entities are good things. Almost anyone in society can take a new point of view from this film, the only problem is lack of a solution. This film doesn't even give firm examples as to where our values can be improved. Sure, it's a Must-See movie, but it should be accompanied by a talk about what we can do to at least fix the mindset, if not start fixing the problem, but maybe that's the point of the film, to fix the mindset...but if that were the case, it would be free-distribution, which it isn't. – 4 stars

Friday, February 12, 2010

Documentary Movie Review: Camp Fema

Movie Review: Camp Fema
Click Here for the guide to my reviews and rating system
Watch this film on Youtube
It was World War II and our nation faced an enemy that was percieved to be walking among us.

The response by the United States Government was to utilize the results from the Census to identify potential threats to our nation and create internment camps to house thousands of Japanese-Americans, including American citizens.

Fast forward 80 years. Our media and government point out how the war on terror includes the domestic front, including American citizens.

The latest film by filmmaker William Lewis and producer Gary Franchi looks at the lessons of history and examines current government programs and bills to simply ask about the possibility of the War on Terror could be used in such a way that would target political enemies of those in power in our nation and marginalize, criminalize and detain people who may disagree with the party line. Primary source documentation and testimony from several experts who have researched the modern political culture make a compelling argument that could frighten even the most avid skeptic.

Every so often we hear about the threat of Martial Law, however this film takes and in-depth look at recent political developments and asks the viewer to determine if there could very well be a dangerous path in store for this country if more people do not make civics education and accountability a priority in their lives.

From provisions of the Patriot Act (Which William outlined in his film, Washinton You're Fired), to government misuse of watch lists and threat reports, to quotes from our President about indefinite detention and a well funded "civilian" national security force, things begin to rhyme with history's worst actions in the name of "Nationalism."

While one hopes that we never have to worry about such a control grid, nor fear-mongering thereof, it becomes ever important when examining the current direction of the country and the way our government assesses what an enemy is, that we are able to continue to exercise our rights.

Information: When you first pop this DVD in, you think "Conspiracy Theory" but the relentless onslaught of informative content leaves you wanting more - 5 stars

Source Documentation: Clips from mainstream media, several constitutional researchers, and in your face screen captures of websites and government documents. - 5 stars

Presentation Method: One of the best parts of this film is a skit detailing a martial law force raiding someone's home. It is very entertaining, however, with a topic already struggling with legitimacy issues, it probably would have worked better as a dvd extra. Otherwise, the interviews and narration were flawless. - 4 stars

Visuals/Sound: Beautiful Graphics, seamless transitions, decent sound. - 5 stars

Political & Social Spectrum: This film confirms the fears of the conservative/patriot movement. Some of these things may have non-constitutionalists asking why they should care. Obama supporters will hate this film. - 3 stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Part Solution/Part Pollution. So you're afraid of Fema Camps, what next? There are several options at hand, and preparation is key, but so is Activism. While there is a great call to represent your values, it is a little fear based, and your left feeling that your fate relies solely upon your communication with your state legislature, although, some filmmakers would not give you that much. - 3 stars

Overall Wake-up-ability: This film suffers from the opposite of the "title misleading" problem most films have. No, the title is straight forward, unfortunately it's on a topic that avg. Joe dismisses as fear mongering. If you can get people to watch it, this film will change their outlook on the "good of Government" - 4 stars

Documentary Movie Review: Architects of Control - Program One

Movie Review: Architects of Control – Program One

Michael Tsarion has given several presentations on the origins of the elite and the mystery religion and its ties to modern society. This film is a diet, more presentable version of the information he talks about.

As with all of Michael Tsarion's information, you really have to go into this film understanding that he's not going to tell you anything you expect to believe. He gives you thoughts on how you can inform yourself with knowledge to decipher the symbolism, codes, and propaganda that are out in the open in every day society.

“Talismans” are around us everywhere. Seemingly innocuous logos and icons are actually part of language going back centuries. Using clips from major motion pictures and examples in mainstream media right into real-life prophetic events and persons, This film makes you question whether reality is truly “stranger than fiction” or if reality is something that is straight out of what is written in fiction, guided by those who want to make those sci-fi books and films a reality.

As with most of Michael Tsarion's stuff, it's meant to make you question, not give you answers, so there is little proof involved other than whether you can believe what you're hearing. But that's the point.

Perception is everything, and when it comes down to downright facts, nothing is proven until you physically sense it in-person, and even then you must trust that what you've perceived is exactly what happened. So, when you're questioning a “reality” what you're questioning is the reality we've been told and sold through external sources.

Some in the movement, and really much of the skeptical society would attack Michael Tsarion and other alternative theological researchers for being too “out there” or for putting out information that they cannot “100% prove” however, the important thing to remember, is that SOMEONE believes it. Someone with POWER. Someone who wishes to control you. If you can prove at least that much, then the information is sound enough that the people should know about it.

It's good to finally get Tsarion and other experts in a format that isn't behind a podium with a slide show. The Graphics are amazing and the presentation is wonderful. The message of the film is to be an individual which, while positive, is a double edge sword.

You almost get the feeling after watching this, that being involved in government and activism is pointless as long as you have love in your heart and are freedom within your mind. Almost as if slavery is okay as long as we have spiritual freedom. But that's just one possible misinterpretation of the end part of the film that someone could possibly take away from this film, so if you get this feeling too, don't blame the person on the other end of the phone for your hearing aid malfunction.

This film goes into Mind Control at every level, from MK Ultra to subliminal advertising. Understanding what is possible is just as understanding what is known, and that is the point of this film. Getting to know deeper different important events in society in a light where you can see beyond the known into the potential that these events are also methods of rounding up the hive into a single mindset that is willing to submit to the proposed agendas of the elites.

Information: Informative to those who want to know about talismans and the depth of what the mind is capable of, with great comparisons to sci-fi media. - 3 stars

Source Documentation: Michael Tsarion is recognized as an expert in his own right when it comes to esoteric information, however there is no “proof” in philosophy and religion, and that's what this film is. - 2 stars

Presentation Method: Mixing Science Fiction with real study of reality is often used by the mainstream media to misinform or make fun of important issues, Michael shows us how the same tactics can be used to inform the people of these same issues when you point out how blatant and in your face these stories can be. - 4 stars

Visuals/Sound: The music is a bit annoyingly creepy on purpose, but the camera work and graphics are great. It's good to see Michael Tsarion somewhere other than a dark room behind a podium. It really gives pop to the information he's presenting. - 3 stars

Political & Social Spectrum: Neutral/Alternative Philosophical. Not biased, but a little too “alternative” for most social groups. - 3 stars

Solution, Constitution, or Pollution: Part Solution/Part Pollution. The information is good for anyone learning about individualism, but this is also pretty much brain candy that could potentially be a diversion for the active. - 3 stars

Overall Wake-up-ability: I hate to give this such a low score, but even the “Alternative” movements are not open minded enough for this information, and those who are, might not care about the spiritual/philosophical enough to believe in the individuality message. If you are open minded and like to wax philosophically then this movie is a must, and if you think you know people who may be open to questioning their reality, this movie is for them, but this movie is pretty far out there and the majority of even awakened people will shut down their eyes and ears to this message pretty quick. - 2 stars