Sam Aurelius Milam III
During the Fourth of July celebration, there'll be a lot of hoopla about the "birth of the nation". Except for this article, there won't be much acknowledgment of the fact that the nation wasn't "born" on the Fourth of July.
Prior to July of 1776, various of the English colonies in America terminated their political ties with England, and adopted constitutions. That had the effect of converting them into politically independent states (nations). State constitutions still exist today, vestiges of the previous national character of those states.
On July 4, 1776, the new nations issued a joint declaration, called the Declaration of Independence. In that declaration, the point was well made that the states were, in fact, politically independent nations, among the other nations of the world.
Each new state was described as being politically independent, acknowledging for each of them the same status as Great Britain. Thus, the declaration didn't announce the independence of a single nation. It announced the independence of each state, as a separate nation.
About five years later, on March 1, 1781, those nations entered into a treaty called (its short title) the Articles of Confederation. It wasn't a constitution, in that it didn't define a nation. It was a treaty, an agreement between nations. The United States of America, back then, was a league of nations, not a single nation. As such, it had a certain resemblance to the United Nations, of today. The Articles of Confederation might reasonably be compared to the UN Charter, as being a treaty between politically independent nations. The Continental Congress might be viewed as similar in principle to the United Nations General Assembly. With that in mind, and thinking in terms of learning from past mistakes, it's advisable to be cautious about revisions to the UN charter. If the United Nations General Assembly was to authorize a convention like the Continental Congress did in February of 1787, then a one-world-constitution might be an unintended result, as the present U.S. constitution was an unintended result of the 1787 convention. See In Search of the Supreme Flaw of the Land: Perpetual Union, in Pharos.
Be that as it may, the Fourth of July doesn't mark the beginning of the present government. The present government didn't begin until March 4, 1789, when the present U.S. constitution went into force. It's ironic that the centralized, nationalistic, monolithic, U.S. government of today celebrates, on the Fourth of July, the creation of American states that were, in fact, politically independent nations. When we celebrate the Fourth of July, that's what we celebrate, not the beginning of the present state, but the beginning of the several politically independent states that preceded it.
About 70 years after the creation of the new constitution that was the unintended result of the 1787 convention, various southern states terminated their political ties with that single, centralized government. They intended, as had the English colonies before them, to become politically independent. The main difference between the secession of the southern states and the similar previous actions of the English colonies is that the English colonies won their war of secession, but the southern states lost theirs. I suggest that secession should be tried again, peacefully this time, if possible.
Either way, viva Independence Day!
Sam Aurelius Milam III
When I was young, sometime during the late 1950's or early 1960's, Poppa told me a joke about an imagined feature of the latest Cadillac model. He said that the ash tray in the dash board had a level sensor. When the ash tray was full, he said, the level sensor would cause two things to happen. A message would light up on the dash board saying "Sell Car", and a For Sale sign would pop up in the rear window. Joke or not, it was an effective lesson about planned obsolescence.
A few years ago, my brother-in-law and I installed an air conditioner in my current place of residence. Early this spring, as usual, I turned it on to test it for the upcoming cooling season. This time, not as usual, it made a loud, nasal buzzing noise. At that point, most people would have sent it to the dump and bought a new one. Indeed, a family member who works on that kind of equipment commented that the machine was probably at the end of its useful life.
In Crazy Eddie Tech, in the August 2017 issue, I passed along a comment that was made to me by a refrigerator service technician. He'd been receiving some training at one of the refrigerator manufacturers and had overheard a conversation at a staff meeting. The engineers present at the meeting had claimed that they could design the company's refrigerators to last 60 years. The manager in charge instructed them to go back to work and design the refrigerators to last seven years.
When my air conditioner made that noise, I turned it off and unplugged it. I went outside, cut a hole in the side of the unit, and looked in. The problem was obvious. Most of its structure is made of aluminum. The fan shroud, which exists in a wet environment, is made of cheap iron. It had rotted and pieces of it were sticking into the fan. I removed the rusted pieces and built a little screen to cover the hole. That will keep the birds out.
The fan shroud was the "seven year lifetime" design feature, intended to manipulate people into unnecessarily buying new air conditioners. I seem to have solved that problem. Forced obsolescence can sometimes be resisted but you have to defy the manipulations of the marketing persuaders. See Rethinking Television, on pages 2-4 of the June issue. The air conditioner is presently working well. It might keep working for a while yet. I can hope.
In closing, here are some thoughts to ponder. The more complicated a machine is, the more different ways there are for it to fail. The simpler it is, the more likely it is that it can be repaired. Unnecessary "features" don't necessarily make a machine better but they do make it more complicated. In general, a machine should never be more complicated than is necessary to do the intended job. When we select a machine, we should choose the simplest one that will satisfy our needs, and the brand that has had the fewest changes throughout its history. In machines, as in most things, simplicity is a great virtue.
Letters to the Editor
It's good to see you, every now and then, bring up the 9/11 story [June issue, The Difference, page 1]. It's weird how quickly and easily the government and media swept that all under the rug. You are a conspiracy theorist and I'm glad for it, and I mean that in a good way. To me, it means our government commits these heinous crimes against us, and a great many other conspiracies and then, like we are idiots, they feed us stories that are in no way based in reality or science. So, people like me and you pose alternate theories, and we use common sense and cold, hard, verifiable facts to disprove the "gov-ment's" explanation and, like you said, we are called crackpots or treasonous. Like you said, both sides are "conspiracy theorists". The government theories are bullshit though, because they "piss" on your back and call you un-American when you don't agree that it's rain. You and I have spoken at length about the 9/11 conspiracy, and there isn't even any doubt in my mind on if the entire thing was set up. The real question is who and why. Who? We know our gov't played a part, but I'd like to know names and known associates.
Now, in regards to your article "The Thing" [June issue, page 1]. Wow. What you suggest is 100% true. I have never thought about it that way....
In your next article "Rethinking Television" [June issue, pages 2-4], you say ... you aren't being monitored. How do you know?
When I was pre-diabetic, they gave me a
|glucose meter to test my blood sugar levels with.
I didn't know it, but the unit had wireless capabilities and the Dr. could
see my results without my consent. And that means it could be hacked
Your antenna is no longer a "passive device" when it requires you to run "channel set-up", it records and possibly keeps track of what you watch, and should it send that info wirelessly, the person could track your location by G.P.S. and know where to send junk mail.
S. H., a prisoner
A good starting point for a study of 9/11 is my essay Pentagon Anomalies. It's available in The Sovereign's Library.
The channel setup procedure isn't required by my antenna. It's required by my video machine, and required whether I use a cable or an antenna. The antenna can't transmit a signal unless a transmitter sends it a signal to transmit. Unless somebody snuck in, covertly tampered with my video machine, and reconfigured it as a transmitter, I'm confident that the antenna isn't sending out any detectable signal.
... reason I am writing is to say great article on digital vs. analog TV broadcasting [Rethinking Television, June issue, pages 2-4]!!
I've asked my pod-mate to have his friend...to log on to your "Frontiersman" website & ask you to email the 84 pg no-name agency, 911 photos & thermite paint article to him & he will copy it & send it into him here. My copy got donated to the C-Yard Law Library 4 years ago!! Anyway, I wanted my pod-mate to read it & a lot of other good/great articles on your website.
E. E., a prisoner
The 9/11 articles are in The Sovereign's Library. They're downloadable, for free, as PDF files.
Sam Aurelius Milam III
Radio Bikini is a documentary account of the nuclear weapons tests that were conducted at the Bikini Atoll, in 1946. A copy of the documentary is presently available in The Sovereign's Library. So far, I haven't received any copyright threats so maybe it'll remain there for a while.
I've watched the documentary from time to time, over the years. A while back, I noticed something in the documentary that I hadn't noticed before. The first test, Operation Able, took place on July 1, 1946, about three months before I was born. As part of the various preparations for that test, some animals were strapped into metal constraints on the decks of some of the target ships. Very shortly after the blast, naval personnel were back at the scene, removing the animals, for study.
Some of the test animals were killed by the blast. One video clip, at about 37 minutes into the documentary, showed a dead sheep being removed from its metal constraint. Here's what I noticed. On the dead sheep, there were live flies.
My thanks to the following: El Dorado Bob; Betty; and Eric, of Ione, California.
You Know You're Getting Older When....
He's a Hillbilly If....
Availability Assuming the availability of sufficient funds, subscriptions to this newsletter in print, copies of past issues in print, and copies of the website on CDs are available upon request. Funding for this newsletter is from sources over which I don't have any control, so it might become necessary for me to terminate these offers or to cancel one or more subscriptions at any time, without notice. All past issues are presently available for free download at the internet address shown below. Contributions are welcome.
Cancellations If you don't want to keep receiving printed copies of this newsletter, then return your copy unopened. When I receive it, I'll terminate your subscription.
Reprint Policy Permission is hereby given to reproduce this newsletter in its entirety or to reproduce material from it, provided that the reproduction is accurate and that proper credit is given. I do not have the authority to give permission to reprint material that I have reprinted from other sources. For that permission, you must apply to the original source. I would appreciate receiving a courtesy copy of any document or publication in which you reprint my material.
Submissions I consider letters, articles, and cartoons for the newsletter, but I don't pay for them. Short items are more likely to be printed. I suggest that letters and articles be shorter than 500 words but that's flexible depending on space available and the content of the piece.
Payment This newsletter isn't for sale. If you want to make a voluntary contribution, then I prefer cash or U.S. postage stamps. For checks or money orders, please inquire. You can use email@example.com for PayPal payments. In case anybody's curious, I also accept gold, silver, platinum, etc. I don't accept anything that requires me to provide ID to receive it.
Sam Aurelius Milam III, editor