We Are Living In A Parallel Universe!

September 18-2009:

We Are Living In A Parallel Universe!

Today, more than ever I am thoroughly convinced that this planet, us humans, and this universe is a twin. Yes, we are in a parallel universe. I have had these suspicions for several years now, triggered by several personal experiences such as meeting someone whom I knew I've met, but could not fathom where. Seeing individuals that look exactly like someone I knew personally some place and time before. They even walked, talked, and behaved like the person or individuals I've known before.

I have had dreams that took me to places that looked exactly like this planet, people of different ethnic groups and complexion, that look just like we do on this earth, people that behaved, spoke, acted, sang, danced, made love, had sex, and did bad things exactly like we do on this planet also. I have had dreams, visions (awake and
asleep) where I met individuals that I knew somehow, we went places, did things together, and parted in a manner that baffled me, to the point where as I was about to leave that person's presence or company. I watched as he/she walked away into the sunset, or into the ground literally, and disappeared from sight too.

Then I realized what was happening, I realized that I was on another planet, another place and time, and that I did not truly belong there. At least not at that time.

Then I awoke, and wondered if that individual realized what was happening also, and if that individual had the same experience that I was having with such an encounter too? I also had experiences on another planet that looked like ours, where I was killed, and as the blade or gunshot struck me, I awoke immediately, and realize that I was still alive, and back on earth, as though nothing happened. Then I realized once more, that a parallel existence MUST be a reality for me to be so convinced, and recognizable.

The Prophets, Seers, Shamans, and Spiritual Leaders Of Yore Realized It Too:

Yes, these people realized it to, but was also like me, unable to comprehend what they too were experiencing back then. They tried to explain these things in the light of their own cultural experiences, background, and interpretation, So many points of view were expressed and shared about them. Some said it was an after lfe, Some said it was re-incarnation of souls, until finally the individual would reach Nirvana, or the completion of the soul's journey to enlightenment. Others call it Heaven. And in recent times, with the advent of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and other faiths, this has become the anticipated end of the human journey.

But all of these peoples and religious philosophies subscribed to some after life, or some other existence that us humans are a part of, and could expect to experience if we behave in certain ways, or believe in certain doctrines prescribed by our Elders of yore. All with the intent to mold our minds to work towards making this perception a reality at some future time. Today, it is referred to as The End Time, or The Coming of The Mufti, or the Advent Of The Christ, or The Return Of The Caliph.

Can Anyone Prove That We Are Indeed In A Parallel Universe?

I don't think with our current scientific technologies that would be possible. And I also don't think humans will ever be able to transcend time and space. Because we as physical beings AGE. And to be able to transcend Time And Space, requires preventing the Aging Process From Taking Place Physically. And we are all aware, that all material things are transformed via the aging stages, in it's development processes.

The invisible essence of all things is yet to be fully comprehended by as humans. At least with our limited and sometimes confused perception, of what we call The Human Reality or Experience.

Derryck S. Griffith.

A Single Globally Recognized-Accepted & Preferred Currency For Exchange Purposes!

September 08-2009:


A Single Globally Recognized-Accepted & Preferred Currency For Exchange Purposes!


Here is another suggestion by some of the world's Influential Financiers, and Caucasian World Leaders, suggesting this concept, with the view that with such currency firmly in place, could prevent another or similar Global Financial Crisis, like the one we are now experiencing.

The upcoming G-20 Summit of political leaders will be discussing this idea to some extent supposedly. And I wonder if those who advocate for a Global Financial Currency for Foreign Exchange Purposes, fail to realize that it was not the foreign currency of any one country that caused this crisis.

It was the GREED, the SCAMS, the Irrational Risks taken by Bankers, Investors, Traders, and Greedy Brokers, who felt they knew how to Scam the works, Make A Killing for themselves and their clients. Until their Calculated Risks went awry.

Now they want to re-invent the wheel, to facilitate themselves once more, in acummulating more wealth, more control of the world's wealth, and more Concentrated Greed in the hands of those like themselves (mostly White men), who never seem to be satisfied with spreading the wealth.

But is bent of acquiring more and more wealth for themselves, their kind, and their communities.

Derryck..
NYC.

My Cold War Years Remembered!

September 05-2009:


My Cold War Years Remembered!

As a child growing up in British Guiana, the Cold War was something of a mystery out of some Novel or Movie. I heard my mother and neighbors mention from time to time, how EVIL The Soviet union was, and how they are planning to use nuclear weapons on the Western hemisphere, because us here in the west are Evil Capitalists, and is a threat to Communism and the ultimate Communist quest for global implementation.

All of those things sounded to me very strange and grave, to say the least. Coupled with that, I would see movies that showed individuals who sought asylum into the USA, and was referred to as DEFECTORS from Communism. And I wondered to myself if that place was really that Evil or Bad, to cause citizens to want to flee from there?

In my naivete, I believed most of what was said on the radio/wireless, the television, and at the movies. And there was an enormous volume of movies showing The Soviet Union in a very negative light, socially, politically, and as a military threat to the West.

I was also very happy when I heard of someone who managed to DEFECT to the West successfully. And the local newspapers showed photos of all those that were able to escape the so-called Iron Curtain. That description also sounded very sinister to me too.

The Fall Of The Berlin Wall:

When the fall of that wall was in progress, I was in amazed, and all the while, watching on television how many Germans from the Western side tried to assist those who were hanging from the wall, or trying to scale it, with the help of some Border guards, But mostly German citizens on the Western Side.

And I wondered how much longer will this continue before the East Side guards said enough was enough, and started shooting them, or started preventing anymore from getting across. But the flow continued un-abated, without interference.

Nikita Krustreuv:

When this man shook his fist with a shoe at the podium, that too made me wonder if he was telling his people, that in time there will be a war with the west. And that he was prepared for it too. Yes, a child's imagination running wild at that time.

Also when US president Ronald Reagan visited there, and the
S.A.L.T. treaty was agreed upon. I felt much relief from that experience and knowledge. I believed that with that trip, and agreement between these two powers, the world was a much safer place to be in now.

Is The Cold War Truly Over?

I believe for those of us who lived during the Cold War era, experienced the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the building and stock piling of Nuclear Weapons between the USA and Russia primarily. It is extremely difficult to put that fear on hold. Or to forget that period in time.

But the current generations of world leaders may not have such baggage to deal with psychologically. And may be better equipped mentally and psychologically, to operate more favorably with Russia, and other states, with or without nuclear weapons.

Derryck.
NYC.

TALIBAN Decpetion In Afghanistan Recently!

September 04-2009:


TALIBAN Deception In Afghanistan Recently!

They captured two Gasoline Supply Trucks, but could not cross a stream to safety. So they allowed the locals to syphon off the gas for personal use instead.

US drones mistakenly took them all for the Taliban. Thus causing ninety civilians to be killed in that DRONE STRIKE.

This is yet another one of those scenarios that Afghan civilians have to endure, because of mistaken identity by US and NATO Military Strikes, in both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

How much longer will the Afghans endure this slaughter, before they rise up en-masse, against the occupying forces of The West?

This may eventually lead to a Saigon Scenario effect, like when the US soldiers had to literally run for their lives to the Saigon Airport, during the final days of US occupation of Vietnam.

Derryck.
NYC.

NEW US CYBER SECURITY BILL S.773 Proposal:

September 02-2009:

NEW US CYBER SECURITY BILL S.773!

This bill would allow the president to have the Internet access of any suspect DISCONTINUED in the so-called National Interest.

This to my mind is just another way to control who accesses the Internet by the state. And to further LIMIT Internet or Cyber access to those the STATE feels are terrorists, Anti-American, or want to prevent from so doing for political reasons.

If this is what president Barack Obama intends to do to his supporters and the American people. I say it MUST be RESISTED with URGENCY and fortitude.

This also reminds me about the intention that George W. Bush, and his acolytes had, when they too imposed the Ascroft Bill/Act, which Barack Obama promised to revamp or amend, but has not touched as yet either.

This Bill MUST never be allowed to pass PERIOD!

Derryck S. Griffith.
Educator-Advocate & Blogger

Please go to congress.org to petition your political representatives NOW!

---------------------------------------------
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10320096-38.html
August 28, 2009 12:34 AM PDT
Bill would give president emergency control of Internet
by Declan McCullagh Font size Print E-mail Share 1362 comments Yahoo! Buzz
Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.
They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.

The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.
"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness," said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill."
Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.
A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.
When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs--from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records," Rockefeller said.
The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government's role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.
Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.
The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. "As soon as you're saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it's going to be a really big issue," he says.
Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. ("Cyber" is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)
"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."
Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
The Internet Security Alliance's Clinton adds that his group is "supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective."
Update at 3:14 p.m. PDT: I just talked to Jena Longo, deputy communications director for the Senate Commerce committee, on the phone. She sent me e-mail with this statement:
The president of the United States has always had the constitutional authority, and duty, to protect the American people and direct the national response to any emergency that threatens the security and safety of the United States. The Rockefeller-Snowe Cybersecurity bill makes it clear that the president's authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack.
The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster. This particular legislative language is based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks. To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a "government shutdown or takeover of the Internet" and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false.
The purpose of this language is to clarify how the president directs the public-private response to a crisis, secure our economy and safeguard our financial networks, protect the American people, their privacy and civil liberties, and coordinate the government's response.
-------------------------------------