Daniel Ellsberg

 Daniel Ellsberg

Ellsberg was a whistleblower who exposed the corruption that existed in the late 1960s concerning the Vietnam War. It was noted that the Vietnam War was started under dubious circumstances and Americans felt that the war was unjustified. Many Americans took to protests against the war thinking that it was an unnecessary war.

Ellsberg would describe how the Vietnam War was created and escalated with corrupt purposes. Ellsberg would publish the Pentagon Papers in the 1970s during the Nixon Presidency. Ellsberg would also include information concerning Watergate and how Nixon had sent FBI agents to break in to Democratic headquarters, steal information, and place wiretaps in the offices.

Ellsberg would be recognized as a hero by Americans for speaking truth despite opposition and envy from Nixon and the FBI. Ellsberg also described how the Vietnam War seemed to be instigated arbitrarily and with unilateralism. While Americans opposed the war, Johnson kept escalating the war. MLK and college students opposed the war and protested. 

It is quite possible that the war was provoked being that the US was not active in a specific war. (The Cold War was denoted for not involving actual warfare with guns, bombs, and battlefield battles, but by the threat of Nuclear Warfare between the US and Soviets.) In a conventional manner, the US was not engaged in a war on the ground with troops in a nation. In the late 1960s, the US was probably being sabotaged internally through the FBI and also abroad by creating wars that were not needed with the CIA. Kissinger probably was the architect of the Vietnam War and probably trained both sides of Vietnam (Had a big book by Kissinger about his involvement in the Vietnam War written by Kissinger but I did not read it and threw it away. It probably detailed his benevolence instead of speaking the truth.). How else was the guerrila warfare so effective at fighting American forces and also having powerful military equipment from land mines to massive repositories of weaponry similar to the US? It does not make sense unless the reason for the war was to lead to conflict with other nations instead of creating peace (neoconservatives love warfare as much as socialist leftists love abortions) and also tarnish Johnson's leadership although he was also probably intimidated to keep escalating the war by Hoover, Sullivan, and the FBI. Johnson even stated that Nixon had described that he would speak to Vietnam leadership to de-escalate the war while Johnson was president. This describes how both neoconservatives and socialists leftists hate peace and serenity. (Affluent marxist college students who some had military parents who supported marxism (i.e. Rudd) helped Nixon by telling SDS members to skip the elections in 1968 (Maybe McCarthy was not wrong?). This was with the intention to allow Nixon to win the election. Marxists and neoconservatives like Nixon were socialists.) Johnson took to escalate a war that was not approved by Americans and was also hated and disdained by the establishment for not being establishment. Ellsberg was able to speak truth and allow individuals to see the reality of corruption and iniquity. Nixon was not a Christian and definitely was a crook. Ellsberg exposed the true Nixon and FBI.

Ellsberg Was Persecuted By Nixon and the FBI

Ellsberg was a veteran who had served in the Marines and learned about politics and corruption. Ellsberg became aware of discrepencies in the Vietnam War narrative. Ellsberg collected information and published the information in newspapers in the 1970s. Among the information included the obvious questioning of how Vietnam could have been escalated unilaterally by Johnson. It is possible that Johnson's popularity was improving based on continuing JFK's reforms yet was not liked by the Establishment. While the Establishment envied JFK, they tolerated Johnson. The Establishment tolerated but did not actually like Johnson either. Nixon may have been involved in getting Johnson to escalate the Vietnam war through threats and intimidations from Hoover and Sullivan. This was noted when Johnson's popularity dropped due to the Vietnam war and Nixon took advantage to ridicule and appear as the obvious solution to unilateral war escalation. Nixon could not defeat JFK, win the Governorship of California, nor was well liked by Americans. In order to prevent the 1968 election from going to a Democrat, the Vietnam War may have been created as an excuse to lower Johnson's popularity and make individuals believe that America was imperialistic being that Nixon was a socialist. (Nixon would play the role of being a "supposed" Christian after getting caught in Watergate and socialists criticized how it was a Christian who was corrupt. The media focused their attacks on Christianity instead of Nixon's socialist tendencies. This was to also mislead individuals to think that Christianity was causing corruption being that Nixon was not a true Christian, moral, ethical, and was actually a corrupt socialist bureaucrat.)

"Indeed, actual federal expenditures for Vietnam in Year One of the war totaled only $6 billion [In the second year it was stated to cost $10 billion]."

"In fact, in the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1966, budgetary expenditures would be not $112.8 but in excess of $126 billion, with Vietnam costing not $10 billion but almost $20 billion." (page 160)

Ellsberg described how the Vietnam war was escalated without approval from Congress and other governing bodies and instead kept on leading to mass casualties. After describing the obvious corruption of the Vietnam war escalation, Nixon, and the FBI's involvement in Watergate, Ellsberg was wiretapped illegaly and most likely surveilled. Nixon wanted to go after Ellsberg because Nixon's obvious corruption was exposed. Ellsberg was charged with treason and espionage for publishing truth in the newspaper being that he was a whistleblower exposing the corruption of Nixon and the FBI who were actually treasonous snakes (obvious projection). Ellsberg was able to persist and not be charged on fake charges from corrupt politicians and the corrupt FBI. Ellsberg triumphed and showed that it is possible to speak truth and stand up for integrity. While he was persecuted for speaking and writing truth, Ellsberg did not quit and kept fighting against corruption. Nixon decided to resign from the presidency since he was going to be the first ever president to be impeached in the history of the United States. Nixon resigned but he was probably enganged in fomenting envy and corruption in his time after the presidency. Ellsberg would outlive Nixon and be considered an amazing individual. 

The Cost of the Vietnam War in 1965 and Domestic Terrorism by the FBI

The monetary cost of the war started at $6 billion in the first year yet escalated to $20 billion in the second year in 1966 despite advisors noting that the cost was estimated at $10 billion. (The real cost of the war was not described and kept being increased while saying that the monetary cost was less.) The war was said to only last until 1967 based on the Vietnam war cost yet kept ballooning in cost. The war went on for more than two years and the cost of the third year in 1967 was $26.5 billion. Johnson described that if he needed to decrease spending on social programs like education and healthcare for the Vietnam war (that was unpopular to many Americans), he was going to keep spending on the Vietnam war. There was skepticism of how the Vietnam war was not being won despite warring for more than two years. It may have been that the Vietnam war was to decrease Johnson's popularity to Americans in order to benefit Nixon in 1968's election. The Vietnam war raised so many questions concerning how can a war have been escalated unilaterally? 

The Vietnam war had caused massive inflation in the second year of the war. Inflation was causing economic difficulties and there was the question of whether Johnson would favor social programs to the Vietnam war. Johnson had been popular in 1964 winning the election by a landslide against the Republican nominee keeping JFK's Civil Rights stance. The Establishment probably did not want his popularity to persist into the 1968 Presidential election since Nixon was going to be a Republican nominee. Johnson was probably intimidated by the FBI and Hoover to escalate the war and make questionable choices deciding to escalate an unpopular war, fund the war, defund social programs, and pay community action organizations to essentially foment racism in the United States. Community organizations were paid to teach socialism and racism to the big cities. Individuals with modest resources were given the opportunity to participate in politics at the local level. Community programs were actually originated from JFK in Peace Corps and Service Corps yet like the socialist bureaucrats like to do, they denied the Service Corps in the United States in 1963 and created their counterfeit version in 1965 (under the deception of fomenting unity and empowering the poor) by marxist socialists. (James Farmer was denied a grant to teach literacy to African Americans with modest resources while Saul Alinsky (an idolator) and several other marxists taught class warfare and probably gangstalking to the poor. Thugs and idolators were paid to make negative and racist street plays and when bureaucrats saw that the idolators were still not happy and demanded more money, the bureaucrats in different cities wanted to scrap the program but did not (they also paid a protection agency to protect them from the marxist thugs costing $15,000 a week in Harlem. Talk about misuse of tax payer resources.) It seems that bureaucrats Sanford Kravitz and Richard Boone were organizing communities to learn socialism and foment conflict. (The FBI were probably intimidating Johnson to not support Farmer and advocating for community programs that taught marxism instead. Instead of the poor working with local politicians to gain political participation, the dynamic was class warfare and racism which was intentional by the marxists who taught the poor. Some local politicians also prevented the poor from participating on boards and led to hostilities, most likely on purpose.) The bureaucracies either were directly or indirectly trying to foment class and race warfare instead of unity and harmony while getting tax payer funded money to pay for the marxist hostilities (The bureaucrats did not suspend the programs from 1965 until 1974 after Congress decided to scrap the programs. Nixon kept the programs under other agencies prior to Congress removing it in 1974.) This was when the Black Panthers were popular and Carmichael was instructing racism and socialism to oppose the Civil Rights Movement. Mark Rudd was a socialist who instructed breaking and stealing from stores. H. Rap Brown instructed the same against Caucasians owned stores and was even given time on the news to foment conflict. How could the Watts race riots have happened? All the while racist socialists were intimidating and attacking pacifist Civil Rights Activists in the mid 1960s. MLK rebuked racism, socialism, criticized the Vietnam war, and kept fighting for equality and justice despite the FBI's persecution in 1965.) It is no coincidence the racist socialists were beats and hippies. Lust and idol worship leads to aggression, envy, and coveting. The Unraveling of America describes how the idolatrous beats, hippies, and socialists were and are the source of problems in the world. Pacifist Christians actually are who have made the world a better place despite persecution and envy seen in JFK, MLK, and Christian Civil Rights Activists. (The Unraveling of America is a book that describes that the turmoil of the 1960s was due to socialism. Yet is a bit generous to Nixon. Nixon never changed despite having P.R. firms that attempted to make him seem genuine and good. Nixon was evil and covetous and never benevolent. Ellsberg did describe the real Nixon and was persecuted, but persevered.

 The Vietnam War and Military-Industrial Complex

The Pentagon Papers described that there were interests from unethical individuals in fomenting warfare. While Johnson had escalated the war, Nixon was touting de-escalation. The FBI probably was intimidating Johnson who decided to escalate the war. All the while, the Establishment wanted to remove Johnson for being non-Establishment. While Johnson was not completely ethical and was noted to eskew the moral standards in order to gain wealth, he was still hated and envied by the Establishment. (Johnson made money by having broadcasting companies that had ties with the government. Obviously, there was favoritism and decreased competition. Definetely not ethical and did not compete with other broadcasting companies fairly.) Despite being unethical, Johnson was not from the Establishment and was hated by the FBI. (The corrupt have tiers and disdain outsiders.) Johnson was favored over JFK because JFK was impressive, ethical, and had a standard of morality preaching genuine empathy. The Establishment wanted to remove JFK from completing another four years since he was able to accomplish so much in three years. When the Establishment knew that JFK was going to win the 1964 election against any Republican contender, JFK was shot. Johnson was president and was tolerated by the Establishment but never a part of. The Establishment disdained Johnson for not being born with money, and Johnson disdained the Establishment being rugged. He did not go to Ivy League schools and also did not favor the pretentiousness of the bureaucracy. Johnson was unethical and not good, yet he was not a bureaucrat. (There are bad people and then there are socialists.)

Nixon was a bureaucrat and a scoundrel. Nixon was even worse than Johnson despite Johnson being not good. Nixon may have been of the Establishment, was a crook, and may have been a part of privately escalating the Vietnam War while also appearing to de-escalate the war publicly. Nixon ridiculed Johnson's de-escalation strategy while intimidating Johnson through the FBI. Nixon was a socialist and took to create an image of sincerity that was repudiated by many people for its fakeness. Nixon also was a part of the military-industrial complex being a part of unnecessary warfare in other countries including Vietnam while saying he was a pacifist and protestant christian. Vietnam was touted as a war to fight against socialism yet the military complex was probably providing weaponry to both sides. The socialists in the military complex including Kissinger were training and proving weaponry to both sides while touting the need to fight the Vietnam war under patriotism. The Pentagon Papers described the discrepancies of how the Vietnam War was not terminated within a specific amount of time and still the obvious incongruencies of military strategy including adding more soldiers when citizens did not approve of the war. Most citizens were against the Vietnam war including MLK and college students. Ellsberg was brave for publishing the exposè that told truth to the lies of Johnson, Nixon, Kissinger, the media, and the FBI. Johnson would not seek re-election in 1968 probably being intimidated by the FBI and seeing the truth of how the Establishment operated. Without JFK and Johnson, RFK decided to fight for the working class and went to be a presidential nominee of the Democrat party. RFK was winning the primaries leading the Democrat party when he was shot. Humphrey came close to beating Nixon by a slim margin in 1968 and Nixon was not able to finish his presidency due to Watergate and may have been the first impeached president had he not resigned. While Johnson was not good, Nixon was worse.

Nixon May Have Sabotaged Peace Talks Between Johnson and Vietnam

"As for future talks, North Vietnam dropped its objections to negotiating with Saigon, and the U.S. dropped its objection to negotiating with the National Liberation Front. But on the verge of public announcement, the North raised new demands that the U.S. could not accept. On October 16, 1968, amid international rumors of a breakthrough, President Johnson dejectedly phoned the candidates and told them that it was not so."

Prior to the elections of 1968, Johnson was able to restart peace talks with Vietnam. While North Vietnam seemed to be involved in peace talks with South Vietnam and the United States, it decided to negate peace talks. The North Vietnam representatives decided to not be in favor of peace talks. 

"But negotiations in Paris continued, finally bearing fruit two weeks later, when Hanoi agreed to accept the terms to the original bargain. Now it was Saigon's turn to balk. Johnson had hoped to announce the bombing halt in a communiqué jointly issued by the governments of the United States and South Vietnam. On October 29, under pressure from hawks in his own government, South Vietnamese president Nguyen Van Thieu tried to sabotage the agreement by making unacceptable demands of his own... Thieu told his National Assembly that he would not participate in the Paris talks if the NLF participated also."-(page 434-435)

A few weeks later, the North Vietnam leadership decided to reconsider and described the need to talk about peace concerning the Vietnam war. This time the South Vietnam leadership refused to consider peace talks. It seemed strange that the peace talks were offered prior to the 1968 election. The Vietnam war had lasted three years (costed 52 billion dollars) and was heavily criticized by Americans. The peace talks did not occur until a few weeks prior to the election. Both sides of Vietnam refused peace talks. The intention may have been to make Johnson look opportunistic when in fact it was Nixon and Kissinger who were probably exploiting the timing of the peace talks for the 1968 election. Johnson was disliked for the Vietnam war, and Nixon probably appeared to be a "peacemaker" in 1968. It is possible that the peace talks occurred to make Johnson and the Democrat nominee appear to be pro-war (the war had lasted three years) and also opportunistic for waiting until elections to end the war. Nixon probably criticized Johnson and the Democrats for waiting until the 1968 elections to have peace talks and also was preventing peace talks in private while probably suggesting the peace talks prior to the elections (Racist corrupt bureaucrats were causing foreign wars, Vietnam, riots and looting in the United States, and preventing true democracy in the 1968 election. Nixon was one of the worst presidents along with Hoover.)

"When on October 27 the South Vietnamese Embassy in Washington sent home an intercepted message recommending obstruction of the peace process until after the election, Johnson thought he knew why. On his orders the FBI placed Madame Chennault under surveillance and initiated phone taps at the South Vietnamese Embassy. One day after Thieu's refusal to go to Paris-November 2, 1968-Madame Chennault called the embassy urging Thieu to stand firm on grounds that the South would get a better deal from Nixon. Did Nixon know of this call? The South Vietnamese official asked. 'No, but our friend in New Mexico does,' she replied. Johnson, infuriated, concluded that the friend of whom she spoke was Spiro Agnew, campaigning that day in Albuquerque. It in no way diminished Johnson's suspicions that the FBI check he ordered on Agnew's outgoing phone calls from Albuquerque uncovered none to Chennault. As a high ranking FBI official testified before Congress in 1973, the White House 'felt the Republicans... were attempting to slow down the South Vietnamese from going to the Paris peace talks and... wanted to know who either Mr. Nixon or Mr. Agnew had been in touch with.' Humphrey too harbored suspicions of Nixon. On learning of Chennault's diplomatic meddling, the candidate was tempted to discredit the Republican's in the campaign's last days exposing it. Lacking evidence of Nixon's direct complicity, he reluctantly refrained."-(page 436)

Johnson tried to de-escalate the Vietnam war on multiple occassions towards the last years of his presidency only to have the northern and southern Vietnam leaders deny the peace talks. When Johnson attempted to end war through peace resolutions, Vietnam renounced peace agreements. Vietnam declined to peace talks on multiple occassions. When Johnson attempted to resolve through peace talks, the media also criticized him saying that he was not able to secure peace negotiations despite Nixon probably sabotaging the peace talks and also telling the media to criticize Johnson's inability to end the war. (Nixon was both escalating the war and telling the media to criticize Johnson in his inability to end the war (while intimidating Johnson to escalate the war through Hoover.) This was to decrease Johnson's popularity due to Johnson being popular due to having helped the Civil Rights Movement in 1964. 

Johnson noted that it was probably Nixon who was sabotaging the peace talk with Vietnam. Johnson spoke to the CIA to know why the peace talks were not going well. The CIA told him lies and not complete truth (Maybe McCarthy was not wrong?) The CIA told him lies that it was the Chinese widow of a Republican general that was speaking to Vietnam in favor of Nixon. The CIA said that the Chinese widow was telling the southern Vietnam leader to not participate in peace talks until Nixon was president to obtain better terms. Johnson told the FBI to wiretap and overheard that Agnew was alluded to as knowing why the peace talks were not working out. (This was a lie since it was Nixon who was preventing the peace talks since Nixon also allowed Watergate.) Agnew was alluded to to protect Nixon. The CIA probably told Johnson lies saying that the peace talks were not working out because of the Chinese widow, Johnson wiretapped her, the FBI told the widow that she was being wiretapped, and the widow alluded to Agnew knowing why the peace talks were not going well when it was Nixon who was sabotaging. This was to prevent Johnson from knowing the truth and make Johnson think Agnew was the sabotager when it may have been Hoover, Nixon, and Sullivan. The truth being that Johnson was being scapegoated by the establishment to decrease the Democrats popularity, make Nixon and marxists seem "cool" and "pacifists", and blame moderates for riots and warfare. Johnson then began to doubt Nixon and Agnew. (It was most probably Nixon. Agnew was not a part of Watergate and was prevented from being Vice President so that he would not be President. Nixon wanted Agnew to resign from being Vice President prior to resigning.) Humphrey had skepticism of Nixon. Johnson was lied to by Hoover and the FBI despite being Commander in Chief. This was to get Johnson to blame Agnew when it was Nixon. Nixon wanted to tarnish Johnson's popularity since he had 60% approval prior to the Vietnam war in 1964. Nixon then probably told Vietnam to open peace talks with the US in 1968 and then sabotaged the peace talks to criticize Johnson's leadership. Nixon then said Johnson was callous for waiting so long until re-election to promote peace talks (this was to make it seem that Johnson was in charge of the Vietnam war and not the marxists like Kissinger and Nixon.) This was to make the 1968 Democratic nominee appear evil and opportunistic while Nixon was "idealistic" and "a pacifist". Humphrey did not speak about this in his campaign because he knew the sabotager was Nixon (but did not have conclusive evidence) and not Agnew who was sabotaging the peace talks. (The establishment wanted to blame Agnew for disrupting the peace talks in 1968 and have moderates fighting against each other.) Johnson was not good but Nixon was a lot worse. 

David Wilman

 David Wilman

David Wilman was a reporter and journalist who wrote for a newspaper describing how Rezulin, a diabetes drug medication, was causing severe health complications. Dr. Abramson described how faulty medications were being marketed as good medications when they were dangerous medications. David Wilman was a journalist who published truth about Rezulin being a not so good medication.

David Wilman was able to cover the story that allowed individuals to remove Rezulin made by Bristol Myers Squibb from the pharmacies. Dr. Gueriguian had spoken out against the faulty medication being an FDA reviewer with 19 years of experience. For speaking out against the faulty medication that caused liver toxicity, he was removed from the FDA board of reviewers for the medication. 

The medication was approved in haste and caused liver toxicity just like Dr. Guerigian had stated. More than 200 people had health complications from taking the faulty medication. (In the 1990s there were bad medications approved in haste that were later recalled after causing health problems including death. The pharmaceutical companies have kept attempting to promote faulty vaccines in the covid experimental "vaccines". We can be skeptical of faulty "vaccines" and medications.)

David Wilman was able to speak and publish truth that allowed the medication to be recalled. Freedom of speech allows us to publish truth and fight against corruption and deceit from socialists and sycophants.

C. H. Spurgeon

C. H. Spurgeon

"The Creator who knows the stars in the skies by name does not forget about his faithful."

"Faith is sure to remain small unless there are trials that allow our faith to grow."

Spurgeon was a Christian writer and commentator that described the importance of keeping fidelity to GOD Almighty despite adversity. Spurgeon has impressive quotes that remind us that we do not define ourselves by the circumstances. Instead, we define ourselves by the worship of GOD Almighty.

Despite opposition, we can keep increasing our faith so that it grows to unchanging fidelity to GOD Almighty. The snake tries to discourage our faith when we should keep increasing our faith. We learn to trust GOD Almighty and not fear adversity nor circumstances. This positive mindset allows us to avoid negativity, negative emotions, and discouragements.

We know that GOD Almighty is aware of our lives and does not forsake us. We can keep preaching and worshiping GOD Almighty above everything of this temporary and imperfect world. We know that the Creator who created the sun, moon, and the stars is aware of our lives.

We know that GOD Almighty even knows how many stars exist in the skies and knows them by name. We know that despite living in the 21st century, no human being knows how many stars exist in the skies. We do not know how many skies exist. We do not know how many galaxies exist. Yet GOD Almighty knows everything. GOD Almighty helps us persevere, and we can keep going to prayer each day trusting in the Eternal and Infinite GOD of gods. GOD Almighty sets us apart from the road of destruction and delivers us from temptation and evil.

Paul Revere

 Paul Revere

Paul Revere was an American Patriot in the 1770s. Revere was part of the American Revolution (a true Revolution and not persecution). Revere is denoted as having bravery and courage to have warned Samuel Adams and John Hancock that the English were seeking to go after rebels including Adams and Hancock for signing the Declaration of Independence in 1776. When Revere learned that the British had incoming ships, he rowed through a river undetected by British ships, galloped through the countryside, and yelled out the indication that the British were in America. Revere went to Lexington and woke up Adams and Hancock. The United States decided to be independent from England because they were self-sufficient and were being taxed without representation. 

England had decided to exact taxes arbitrarily on the Americans due to the manner that they were industrious. The American Revolutionaries did not want to be taxed arbitrarily and decided to declare their independence from tyrannical England. The English were looking to arrest and remove Hancock and other individuals who supported the American call for freedom.

Once Paul Revere learned that the British were in America, he warned the American Revolutionaries that the "regulars were out!" and that the British were about. To this, Revere had courage despite knowing that if he was captured, he would have been charged with treason. Despite that, Revere warned the American militia and Revolutionaries describing the real American Patriotism that cares about their land and their bretheren. Revere risked his life to warn his American bretheren of opposition and is regarded in history as a real hero. 

Revere after warning his fellow bretheren was almost captured by British troops on almost reaching the town of Concord. When the British had surrounded Revere, shots fired out from American militia muskets and the British took off leaving Revere unharmed and uncaptured. Revere knew that the shots fired were from American militia members. The American militia defended Revere and also repelled the British at Concord. Despite not having an army and not being the world power at that time, the American militia was able to beat the British troops and obtain freedom. Paul Revere is considered an example of American bravery and true fraternity who allowed fellow Americans to persevere despite opposition. (We can persevere reminding ourselves of amazing individuals who were brave and persevere with integrity. We can persevere trusting in GOD Almighty and avoiding socialism.)

Paul Revere's Story is Amazing While Benedict Arnold's Was Not

Paul Revere was an amazing individual who was able to tell John Hancock and Samuel Adams that the British were attempting to go against the Americans who were for independence. While Paul Revere was an American hero, Benedict Arnold was a treacherous rat snake. Benedict Arnold betrayed his country in order to help the British. Arnold was a capable soldier who was resentful and felt that he needed to have more importance. Arnold decided to help the British by taking a £20,000 bribe and offering to give information on West Point so that the British could attack the American forces. Arnold was found out by the Americans and left for England. 

Arnold then lived in England where the British also did not trust him. Arnold was a rat snake who became bitter and resentful. The American Revolution succeeded in obtaining independence from England and with amazing stories from Paul Revere, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Alexander Hamilton. The story of treacherous Benedict Arnold was not so impressive. Arnold betrayed his country because his wife was British and needed to support her lavish lifestyle. (We can be far apart from treacherous rat snake socialists who are very similar to Benedict Arnold. We know that socialists do not care about loyalty, independence, honor, and valor. We can avoid such rat snakes. For all intensive purposes, Benedict Arnold was a socialist.)

Figures of History and Individualism is meant to remind us that there are good people despite the lies of the snake. While the snake says that "everyone sins and is evil," the reality is that there have been and there are individuals who are good, positive, practice integrity, and hate evil. We can persevere practicing civil disobedience, pacifism, and worshiping GOD Almighty above everything of this temporary and imperfect world. We can persist acknowledging that GOD Almighty is everything to us and deny the lies of the snake.

George Washington

 George Washington

George Washington was an amazing commander of the American Revolutionary forces. The American Revolution in 1776 taught us that it is possible to have bravery and fight against tyranny and oppression. While the English attempted to prevent the American Revolution, George Washington and revolutionaries were able to persevere fighting for true freedom from taxation without representation.

Paul Revere was able to be impressive helping his bretheren escape from capture. Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence that called for American Independence. John Hancock signed the document along with other patriots who fought against tyranny. Franklin also decided to fight against oppression and tyranny by discussing the importance of autonomy.

Once the British tried to quash the calls for liberty of the Americans with violence, the Americans fought back. The American Militia was not organized and was not the military power at that time, yet it defeated the British in major battles. Washington led the American forces and allowed for America to obtain freedom. America became an independent and sovereign nation.

George Washington became the first American President of the United States who was voted unanimously after helping America obtain independence. George Washington was impressive and necessary for independence. George Washington also made the statement that the presidency was only for two terms allowing for democracy to abound. This requirement allowed for true democracy to occur by preventing dictatorships. There is also the understanding that it allowed for peaceful transitions to occur between different parties without the need of war. (Something that is actually revolutionary and impressive. Democracy thrived based on these requirements along with the Constitution, Bill of Rights, checks and balances (Judicial, Executive, Legislative branches), and no illegal and deceitful rat snake bureaucrats like Nixon and the FBI racists who opposed civil rights and equality for all.) We can still persevere acknowledging the importance of Democracy despite rat snake gangstalkers who illegally surveil. We do not attack nor harm the gangstalkers, yet we do conquer by accepting and preaching King Jesus Christ Eternal LORD and Savior and keeping fidelity to GOD Almighty. We leave the vengeance to the Eternal and Infinite King of kings.We do not need a gun, yet the Constitution allows for the right to bear arms for self-defense.

Figures of History and Individualism is meant to remind us that there are good people despite the lies of the snake. While the snake says that "everyone sins and is evil," the reality is that there have been and there are individuals who are good, positive, practice integrity, and hate evil. We can persevere practicing civil disobedience, pacifism, and worshiping GOD Almighty above everything of this temporary and imperfect world. We can persist acknowledging that GOD Almighty is everything to us and deny the lies of the snake.

The Documentary of Medical Doctors Who Became Doctors Yet Some Left Clinical Practice

 The Documentary of Medical Doctors Who Became Doctors Yet Some Left Clinical Practice

In the 2000s, there was a documentary on PBS that described the life of medical students who became practicing doctors and left clinical practice. The documentary followed a group of about 8-10 medical students who were accepted to medical school, graduated, passed residency exams, and went into medical practice. Most of the doctors were practicing doctors in their own medical practice or working in a hospital. The interesting point was that most of the 8-10 doctors had decided to leave practice and intead went on to help their communities by instructing preventative medicine. About 7 doctors left clinical practice to instruct preventative medicine in the 1990s or 2000s.

Since the 1980s, experienced primary care physicians have also written about how medicine was changing and not for the better. On Kevin, MD (a medical blog that had expert doctors and exposed corruption prior to covid) in the 2010s, physicians exposed the incongruencies and bureaucracy encroachment on medicine described in insurance companies attempting to take authority and independence from physicians. Since the 1980s, insurance companies were attempting to prevent doctors from ordering needed treatment and diagnostic materials when the insurance companies decided. Physicians since the 1980s described that the golden days of medicine were past in the 1970s. Some experienced primary care physicians left practice in the 1980s preferring autonomy and independence.

The physicians of the documentary were some of the brightest of that generation in the 1990s or 2000s attending one of the top med schools (prior to covid and without non-compete). The physicians graduated and practiced medicine. However 7 out of the 10 had left clinical practice. Initially, there was the question of how could physicians have left clinical practice in the 2000s. It may be that the physicians saw that there was decreased autonomy and independence in medicine. It may be that insurance bureaucracies were attempting to take autonomy from physicians. It may be that medical practice had changed. It may be that physicians were supposed to spend less time with each patient (especially in primary care and psychiatry). It may be that they saw preventative medicine as a better manner to decrease disease through exercise and diet counseling instead. 

Most physicians go into medical school because they want to help others. There is also the mental stimulation of needing to learn everyday. There is the reward of being able to use talents for good. There is the curiosity of discovery in research or science. All these are good reasons for wanting to go into medicine. Those who left clinical practice describe how helping others was more important to them than other things. (There were also amazing doctors who kept practicing. There was an amazing ophtalmologist who gave free eye exams and glasses to children in countries that did not have a medical infrastructure nor ophtalmologists.) Yet it is interesting how most of the doctors from that documentary left practice to be health promoters or instruct preventative medicine in the 1990s or 2000s. The documentary along with articles of physicians who described the reality of medicine since the 1980s have allowed for the truth to be understood. This is with the understanding of how the big pharma monopoly has also encroached into medicine described in Dr. Abramson's book, Overdo$ed America, since the 2000s. Dr. Abramson also left practice to devote himself to writing truth about how pharmaceutical companies have compromised medical practice in primary care through dishonesty and promoting newer expensive (and even dangerous) non-generic medication (i.e. Pravachol) based on compromised medical journal articles instead of exercise and diet counseling. Big pharma and the insurance bureacracy has also attempted to prevent the doctor-patient relationship from helping the patient improve through honesty, empathy, and encouragement by decreasing patient visit times in primary care. This would explain why physicians have left medicine since the 1980s and is described in the documentary. (With covid experimental "vaccines", there was the need to be vaccinated in order to compete for residency slots and even experienced practicing physicians were prevented from working if they were not covid "vaccinated". There is a shortage of physicians and experienced physicians are not common (there are the stats of how there is maybe 1 physician per 500 people in some states), yet there was the need to prevent experienced physicians from working if they did not have covid "vaccines". Why would non-"vaccinated" physicians not be allowed to work if they had multiple years of experience practicing medicine? (The same applied to nurses who were not "vaccinated" and there were also shortages of nursing staff throughout the US in 2020. If experienced nurses were not "vaccinated", they were not allowed to work. Courageous nurses wanted to work and help patients, yet were not allowed to unless they were covid "compliant".) This describes another discrepancy of the covid narrative.

No Regrets Concerning Not Returning to Med School

Despite not being able to return to medical school, I was able to gain perspective from other physicians who decided to leave clinical practice despite having passed medical school exams, USMLE boards, rotations, residency, and even practiced for multiple years. There are multiple stories of physicians who left clinical practice to start over in another profession. The stories are not few since the 1980s. There are multiple physicians that decided to leave busy clinical practices in order to have autonomy far from the medical system that has attempted to decrease the autonomy and authority of physicians in Primary Care. Dr. Abramson left practice to write books and articles on the corrupt pharmaceutical companies attempts to diminish autonomy to Primary Care Physicians.

There were multiple physicians on Kevin, MD (prior to covid) who described that medicine was not what it once was. Primary Care Physicians with decades of experience described that insurance companies were attempting to diminish the autonomy of Primary Care Physicians in the practice of medicine. Primary Care Physicians were told that they had to treat based on the recommendations of the insurance companies and not on their clinical acumen since the 1980s when insurance companies cared more about profits than clinical care. Even HMOs that initially looked to suppress the cost of rising medical costs were opposed and attacked by the media and socialists. Effective and efficient HMOs in the 80s provided great and inexpensive medical care that socialists did not want. Socialists wanted medical costs to balloon to double digit percentages (medical costs inflated 2% each year initially but reached 10% increases in the 80s) each year so that money would go to pharmaceutical companies. The patient visits were reduced to 15 minutes to maximize prescription of medication instead of counseling. The socialists probably wanted to minimize the doctor-patient relationship in order to favor expensive medication. Physicians that spent more than 15 minutes on a patient visit were penalized like the Psychiatrist who was removed from her position as Pediatric Psychiatrist for spending too much time with her patients. It is a well known fact that empathy, reciprocity, and both physician and patient working together to improve the patient's health is great medicine. It is also a well known fact that diet and exercise counseling can be more beneficial than non-generic, newer, and expensive medication that were approved in haste (i.e. Pravachol, Vioxx, Celebrex, Quinaglute, Norpace, Rezulin, Fossamax, and Actonel to name a few dangerous medications). Socialists despised the doctor-patient relationship in Primary Care since good Primary Care can prevent chronic diseases and improve patient care. I can be grateful that I did not need to get vaccinated with an experimental "vaccine" designed by socialists (that last 6 months yet was made in 9 months) and also not have to speak lies promoting an experimental "vaccine". I am grateful that there were Primary Care Physicians who spoke out against the lies of the media and told the truth despite being envied by socialist sycophants who wanted to prevent the doctor patient relationship, discourage the use of cost saving HMOs, promote bad medication, and increase medical costs artificially. Socialism is the reason medicine has also declined significantly since the 1980s.

The Creators of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy Films

 The Creators of The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

The films, the Lord of the Rings, were amazing because they were based on the books of J.R.R. Tolkien. Tolkien made amazing books in the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings. The films were impressive because they kept to the books and were made in the 1990s or 2000s prior to the LGBT trying to limit and prevent free speech and the telling of amazing stories (prior to the 2010s). While the Lord of the Rings is fiction, it is an impressive story of bravery and goodness. 

The story describes a battle between good and evil. We learn that an evil individual, Sauron, decided to create rings that contained power. The evil individual wanted to have unlimited power over the whole world. The different rings were combined into one ring that could rule everything. The evil ring gets lost and is found by a hobbit named Bilbo Baggins. Despite Bilbo not being strong, he is able to defeat a dragon and take its treasures. Among the treasures, was the evil ring.

Baggins wears the ring and notices that he becomes invisible. Despite the supposed superpower that the ring provides, Baggins is able to be wise and does not depend on the ring. Baggins lives independent of the ring's seduction for invisibility and power. Baggins has dominion over the ring and lives his life normally. It is until there is war that Baggins understands that the ring is evil and must be destroyed. Since he was advanced in age, he gives the task to Frodo to take the ring and destroy it. Frodo is innocent, positive, good, and brave. Frodo and the Hobbits lived in harmony until the wicked decided to wage war and wanted complete control over everything.

Frodo along with a few other Hobbits do not fear and decide to take the ring to Mordor to destroy it. Frodo is courageous and decides to embark on a journey to rid the Middle Earth of the dreaded evil ring. Frodo has opposition from the wicked, yet decides to persevere with high courage and unwavering determination. The three films are superb and impressive. The ratings were also positive with the original film being given 9 out of 10 stars (the other films also were given great reviews). The films are a cinema masterpiece. The Lord of the Rings describes the beauty of harmony and serenity contrasted to war. Despite the coveting and envy that resulted in war, there were brave individual that fought against tyranny by choosing to practice integrity and goodness. The films and books describe that it is possible to persevere with bravery and courage despite the existence of envy and coveting that is of evil.

The Evil Ring Symbolizes Sin

The evil ring represents sin and placing on the ring means practicing sin. When individuals are in close distance from the ring, they begin to hear tempting voices about how putting on the ring can lead to an increase in power. Individuals are tempted to place on the evil ring. The evil ring instead of empowering individuals leads to diminishment, weakening, and maddening of the individual. 

Most individuals have difficulty resisting the evil ring, yet Frodo is able to resist the temporary lies of the ring. Frodo similar to Bilbo is able to resist the allure and lies of the ring. That is why Frodo is tasked to destroy the ring because he has dominion over the ring. Frodo is righteous and pure and is able to persist with discipline and goodness. Gollum had used the ring and became maddened by its effects that it consumed him. Gollum deteriorated for his evil. Gollum was called Smeagol prior to his descent into madness.

 

The Lord of the Rings Describes That There is Power in Self-Restraint and Discipline

While most movies and series attempt to say that might is in muscles and height, the Lord of the Rings describes that there is power in self-control. Frodo is not tall nor muscular yet is powerful because he is able to deny the allure of the evil ring. While most individuals were tempted to wear the ring and thought that the ring gave power, in reality, it was diminishing individuals. The ring gave the ability to be invisible, yet was diminishing the wearer of the ring. Frodo similar to Baggins is able to have self-restraint and is weary of the ring. Frodo is given the mission to reach Mordor that is the territory of Sauron and destroy the ring. Instead of being fearful, Frodo accepts the mission and has healthy skepticism about the temptation of wearing the ring. Frodo is amazing because while he fights different enemies and opposition, he does not get discouraged. Frodo is opposed by Sauron, Sauron's personal army, orcs, giant spiders, and a fake hobbit in Gollum. (Even Frodo had a fake peer.)

Despite the opposition, Frodo persists. While he is tempted to wear the ring, Frodo fights temptation and perseveres with integrity. The ring also lies and tells its wearers that they can become powerful beyond imagination if they only wear the ring. Frodo decides to deny temptation and keeps on his journey. The books and films describe that a human being is far more powerful when he decides to remove sin and perseveres with bravery and integrity. We saw how Gollum was devastated by years of using the ring and believing the lies. Gollum looked withered, bluish purple or gray (almost hypoxic), and paranoic for wearing the evil ring. Frodo persevered without diminishment because he had dominion over the ring. We can persevere denying sin, denying lying temptations, and acknowledge that we do not believe lying propaganda from marxist socialists. We can persevere trusting in GOD Almighty and paying attention to helpful and positive information instead of discouraging and unhelpful infomation that wants to lead to sin. (We can set aside time in the day to read positive information seen in Scripture, Positive Psychology, and amazing individuas who persevered with integrity so that we encourage ourselves. We also must exercise each day minimum 30 minutes each day except Shabbath to boost our immune system. Our immune system gets better with age and is to be trusted over an experimental "vaccine" created in haste and approved in 9 months that lasts 6 months. We can remove any socialist propaganda and distrust socialists since marxists wanted individuals to vaccinate their children including their 6 month olds. Also there is the need to not believe any revilings and insults from marxists who hate Christianity, Democracy, capitalism, discipline, happiness, competition, bravery, goodness, integrity, themselves, their country, and others.)

The Value of Bravery and Courage

The Lord of the Rings describes the importance of bravery and courage despite adversity and opposition. The Lord of the Rings describes how having courage can make a big difference and that cowardice is to be shunned and repudiated. Post-modern media and marxism have tried to make cowardice and vanity seem "cool" yet we know that it is to deceive and lead people to idolatry and negative emotions. The Lord of the Rings described that despite Frodo not being the strongest or tallest, he was courageous. We learn that despite discouragements from the snake, we can keep fighting against corruption, negative emotions, and temporary lies. 

Frodo had stability, bravery, and was able to dominate the negative emotions that Gollum tried to evoke and also did not place on the ring. Frodo was able to keep persevering with determination and discipline. The marxist critics also hate Lord of the Rings because it describes how individuals can make a significant difference by eliminating sin and envy. We learn that Gollum represents intemperance and lack of self-dominion. Even Psychologists have written articles of how addiction and intemperance can be described through Gollum. Gollum was hypocritical, envious, without self-control, consumed by the coveting of the evil ring, deceitful, schizophrenic, and maniacal. Bipolarity can also be explained through Gollum. Gollum was cowardly, unstable, hateful, and bitter. We can learn to be far apart from sin and idol worship and persevere with integrity and discipline. 

The Importance of Equality

The Lord of the Rings similar to Star Wars described the importance of equality and pacifism. We learned that initially there was no war until Sauron wanted complete control of everything. We learn that Sauron like Palpatine hated pacifism, empathy, goodness, and equality. Sauron hated equality and pacifism and looked to cause unneeded warfare. The Hobbits, Elves, Dwarves, and Humans all worked together to destroy the evil ring and also fight off Sauron's envy.

Lord of the Rings described that individuals can live in harmony with one another despite differences in appearances. The orcs also hated everything without reason. Sauron and the orcs were probably racists or symbolize racism and foolishness. We learn that genuine empathy and filial love are greater than hate and envy. We can learn from Lord of the Rings about removing hate, envy, corruption, and racism from our lives. This is another reason that Lord of the Rings is an impressive motion picture and one of the most amazing trilogies of modern cinema.

The Lord of the Rings Sountrack is Also Amazing

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy also has an amazing sound track with symphony music. The books are amazing, the motion pictures for the Fellowship of the Ring, the Two Towers, and the Return of the King are amazing, and also the soundtrack for the movies. The songs of the Shire are positive and relaxing while the songs for the Two Towers that includes the Battle of Middle Earth are intense. The Return of the King also has an amazing selection of songs. 

There is good symphonic music from amazing films, and we can appreciate good music. There have been great sountracks to movies, and the Lord of the Rings has great and amazing symphonic songs that are elaborate and complex.