When things are investigated, knowledge is extended. When knowledge is extended, the will becomes sincere. When the will is sincere, the mind is correct. When the mind is correct, the self is cultivated. -- Confucius
Politically correct ideals are garbage: true wisdom comes from decades of deep thought and neutral observation. Only a so-called sociopath could ascertain wisdom from this crazy world in a neutral way. Cool thoughts- uncorrupted by modern politics, social norms, or societal ideals- are required for wisdom. Questioning everything, and going against the grain on all universally accepted norms is the path to true intelligence. The Gods notice this.


HAARP Locations and Non-Locations

Awhile back, I was trying to figure out just how many foreign bases the US had, and learned that site after site reposted the same old exaggerated maps over and over. [Russia was labeled on several as having a US military presence, due to US Marines stationed there as embassy gate guards, for example..] I researched it from the ground up, and made a new list, which disproves all of the sorry old outdated maps people are still reposting to this day. IMHO my list and blog article are the most up to date and accurate info on the net regarding how many bases there are, and where...

Now, a similar event has occurred: just how many nations have HAARP-like facilities, and where?, I wondered.

HAARP is an ionospheric heater with a large array of huge antennae. It is supposedly to do research, but what it is really for is anyone's guess: the federal government is involved, as well as DARPA. Many claim that when the ionosphere is heated it rises like a bubble, creating a space the atmosphere and its jet streams flow into. This tampering with jet streams at certain times and places could easily alter weather around the world. Sounds logical, though this blogger fails to see how any of this causes earthquakes, which it is frequently blamed for as well. Whatever its purpose, what countries do have ionospheric heaters? If they are opposing nations could they be using them as weather-weapons upon one another?

It turns out the conspiracists have latched onto this like piranhas after goldfish. There is one map that everyone reposts endlessly, which connects all of their alleged HAARP-like sites with lines, implying they are synced somehow as well. The few remaining maps out there show dozens, some even hundreds of places as being HAARP facilities. How can there be that many, and how do antenna arrays pointed straight up to affect the ionosphere connect like microwave beams on cell towers? They don't.

Exasperated at all of the conspiratorical nonsense some have tied into this, as well as their dot-happy maps which make no sense, I looked into it my own way. The most logical and scarce maps said what? Official sources said what? Logic demanded what? Few nations have the funds nor scientists to build these things on a whim, nor any reasons to. Though India has many brainy scientists and a large budget, they have bigger concerns than the plasmatics of the ionosphere, such as hunger, Pakistani threats, overpopulation, and animal control. So do they really have a string of 24 HAARP-type facilities down their East coast as some maps show?

Any site that even mentions certain words can be considered inaccurate information sources, as their authors are nuts. So if you get onto a website and you see any of the following words, take it all with a grain of salt (if they believe in that garbage they will say anything as the gullible hypesters they are): illuminati, NWO, orgone, FEMA coffins, Mena, real ID, microchip, nibiru, planet x, leer, lazar, and others. I am not one of those so-called 'skeptics' that poo-poos everything with my nose in the air. I do believe UFOs are real, and have an interest in bigfoot and cryptozoology. I also know the government is a secretive corporate funded evil entity that compulsively lies to the public, wastes our money, and does all kinds of stuff to endanger us. But does that mean we all have to go bananas making outlandish accusations without a scintilla of proof? Just like we have 'troops' in Russia, just like we have 'FEMA coffins', just like there are hundreds of HAARP arrays around the world....You gotta use common sense and demand a little evidence at some point.

So there are things like the "Omaha HAARP facility", which many think is in place because of a youtube vid showing a few radio towers with a cornfield under them. They are actually HF or shortwave antennae used by the air force, and are 25 miles from Omaha.

After I combined the info from official sites and the few believable independent sites, it was not too hard to form an accurate, logical picture of the real situation. Which is this:

There is a four-plex facility (see graphic below) in Alaska. There is another array in Puerto Rico via the Arecibo dish. A consortium of five European nations runs another array called EISCAT in Norway. There is another one (Sura Ionospheric Heating Facility) in Russia near Moscow. There is a network of 34 radars (called SuperDARN)  across the globe that keep track of the ionosphere, which may or may not feed info to any one or more of these heating arrays.

So, the USA, Norway as host for Western Europe , and Russia have these facilities. That seems to be it. So much for the mega-dot maps.

©james platt, 2014. do not copy, paste, frame, or repost in any way. links okay.


Ukraine Spells Doom for USA

So I have been watching the world news lately on television. I also happen to read the world news on the internet, directly from several foreign news sites. While the American t.v. news seems thorough and detailed, all narrated matter-of-factly by the dapper newsmen, it is striking what is simply never mentioned: the other side of the stories.

According to American news, this is what is happening in a country called Ukraine:
...Its citizens ousted its corrupt leader, and then the Russians tried to undermine its new democracy with clandestinely funded insurgents. It then agreed to a peace accord which it is not following. Therefore the US and Europeans are showing the Russians they can't just take over other countries and get away with it, so sanctions were invoked. Meanwhile, Russia took over another country called Crimea and annexed it illegally. Their unlawful expansions are being dealt with by the brave Americans and Europeans.

But the rest of the world knows this side of it:
...Ukraine's leader lived no more opulently than any other head of state, and he was ousted by a known fascist party extremist with CIA backing. The new puppet regime with extensive fascist roots, received a day long visit from the head of the CIA, which was publicly admitted to by the American government. Since then, the new regime has stopped payments on money owed to Russia for natural gas deliveries (3.5 billion), actually cut off the water supply to Crimea, and stopped supplying its own troops (i.e.: no food for days at a time). They also invited American mercenaries in for unknown missions. Now, they are attacking Russian citizens with military helicopters in the city of Slaviansk. Meanwhile, Crimea, a former Soviet state, VOTED to rejoin with Russia and was annexed by internationally legal means. So now Russia's pleas for peace and warnings to not harm Russians in Ukraine are ignored.

light blue areas are ethnic Russians. they are oppressed minority in danger of genocidal acts.

America, and its European proxy army NATO, have placed troops in 4 countries directly bordering Russia (..Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland..). They also have placed naval flotillas in the Black and Baltic seas, on which they are practicing military exercises. NATO has officially declared Russia to be an enemy. Germany's leader Merkel has hinted at wanting a land war with Russia, releasing the statement recently, “Nobody should be deceived. We are willing to act.” Apparently their 'act' is to shoot down airliners and blame it on Russia- see list here of numerous non-Western articles on this.

So the question few are even asking is: can America even win a war with Russia? Even with NATO backing?? Let's think about that...

The Americans can win any war, through air superiority and high tech gadgets, plus worldwide presence. Right? They walked into Iraq and stomped them, right? Iraq's French made antiaircraft guns were fitted with targeting microchips that were hacked and defeated with American HARM missiles, so guess why the American invasion went so well? After ten years of enforcement of a no-fly zone and random bombings before this, how strong were they anyway? And this is the example of their power?..Regardless, how high tech are American weapons, compared to other countries, especially Russia? Who has more military might?

Russia has virtually all of its military in its homeland territory: Russia. The Americans are dispersed across the globe in bases all over the world. So the comparative totals of how many troops or jets or whatever becomes pointless. How many of those troops or tanks can America deliver onto Russian territory, without sacrificing the security of the bases they originated from? While tanks from Ft. Knox could be safely airlifted to Russia in the event of war, would they really want to move the tanks out of South Korea? Or if the equipment or men in Europe were moved on Russia, the French, German, and UK militaries would protect the landmass from invasion, right? If so- it is a distraction to keep them out of the conflict. If not, they would be tied up with NATO maneuvers and leave their home soil wide open. Either way, Europe is screwed. War in Eurasia will go very badly for the NATO puppets.

Can America take on such a large nation with so many frontiers at once? Russia is the largest country in the world. While their main enemy may be highly mobile and attempt to divide and conquer with numerous small fronts, their enormous landmass only aids their breathing room in event of war.

They are used to war and hardship, having suffered far greater than all other allies combined during world war two. If it were not for the Russians, we would probably be living under a nazi flag right now. They fought hard for their homeland before, and would again. Anyone fights harder to protect his home than anywhere else. Will they really just give up like the Iraqi army did? Doubtful. Here is what no Americans understand: they are not afraid of us, we do not intimidate them, and our 'hegemony' is a joke to them. They are also tired of us encircling their country with military bases.

So what would happen if America or its pet NATO were to try and invade them?

First of all, the Russian military is very serious and does not mess around. Unlike several movies, they are not a bunch of bumbling morons with junk weaponry. They are known to be very well trained and disciplined and have very advanced weapons. They also will be fighting for their homeland- not off playing soldier on some imperialistic jaunt on the other side of the world.

What kind of damage could they do to American technology and firepower though? Many of their systems are considered to be at least as advanced, if not much more so, than their American counterparts. Examples:
norad/SDI type base  (use google translate, or just peruse pics to get the idea...)

...'But we have advanced pilots, as shown by the Blue Angels and Thunderbirds'. Yes- and they do too: the Swifts and Russian Knights. ...'But we have exotic weapons to use when needed.' And they have screw drive vehicles, full auto pistols, full auto shotguns, full auto grenade launchers, the 'heavy flamethrower systems', the 'father of all bombs', the S-400 anti-missile systems, self-propelled coastal artillery, and don't forget the Topols.


A Topol is a nuclear missile mounted onto a giant truck. It drives around in the Siberian woods at random, so Americans are unable to target its location. As good as submarine based nukes, and they have them- we don't! All of our land based nukes are in silos...While scattered over large areas, their locations are known and the Russians have more than enough warheads to cover them all many times over.

Regarding the nukes, they have more. At least 300 more. And they also have extensive civil defense shelters. America stopped maintaining their shelters after protests in 1961. The govt. did not want to pay for it anyway- even though the scientific studies show you could survive a nuclear war if prepared properly. Funny how Russia and China have extensive plans/shelters in place, and America has nothing at all. What this means to us is that they know they can survive a nuclear war and while dreading it, fear it less than we do. They know that most of them will survive. Couple that with the fact that Russians would never give up and submit to American invaders, a conventional defeat would trigger the nuclear menace as an obvious next step for them to cut the head off the snake of the imperialists.

What if they joined forces with another country, instead of, or before resorting to, nukes? While they are not military allies with China, they have common interests and a common foe. China knows full well that America is encircling them too with the so-called “pivot to Asia” policy. If Russia were crippled, they would surely be next, and they would want to prevent that. Russia and China are both part of an economic alliance with increasing military ties called the Shanghai Cooperative Organization, which includes them and four other Asian countries as members, six observer states, six dialogue partners, plus two groups of countries as observers. India and Iran are expected to become full members soon. Would this group morph into a true military alliance if America starts invading Asian nations? This blogger posits that it is very likely the SCO will become NATO's counterbalance. 

A military alliance between the Russians and Chinese would spell doom for American forces. While either of them could in theory win a war with us, both together almost surely would. America fought two fronts before, such as in WWII, in the Pacific and in Europe, and this time we have NATO and ANZUS and the Philippines and Japan....But this time nukes are a big factor, and extensive sea mining, and enormous armies. Tactical nukes, long range weaponry, and stealth jets and boats are all in the mix this time.

Contrary to popular belief, Americans have no monopoly on stealth technology. Russians and the Chinese have this as well. The Chinese are especially keen on the stealth boats, and are developing stealth choppers. Russia is making stealth fighter jets and bombers. Iran and India also claim to have stealth jets.

What if a war did occur, what could the Russians do- besides run from us as Americans predict? They have several strengths and a few weaknesses:

-their army is very well trained, loyal, and will have no trouble gaining virtually all possible conscripts if war began.
-they have a lot of superb tanks, excellent rifles, more missiles, better anti-missile systems
-their aircraft are superior in most every way
-most of their nukes are mobile.
-they have powerful friends in strategic places: China, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, and others.
-their country is large and hard to patrol all borders. There are too many invasion points to prepare for.
-their navy has only one aircraft carrier so projecting their power is not easy.
-already surrounded by American bases and sea flotillas, they would have many fronts in all directions.

Let us compare a few things directly as well:
America has more (than Russia)- current troops and total population; aircraft, helicopters, airports, major ports, aircraft carriers, subs, frigates, and destroyers; and less coastlines and shared borders to cover.
Russia has more (than America)- active military reserves, tanks, armored fighting vehicles, self propelled guns, towed artillery, multiple rocket launchers, merchant marine strength, corvette class vessels, mine warfare craft, patrol craft; and, less external debt and more foreign exchange currency(more money), and much more oil reserves and production with less consumption.
China has more (than America)- troops, reserves, and population; tanks, towed artillery, multiple rocket launchers, merchant marine strength, total naval vessels, frigates, mine warfare vessels, patrol craft, and possibly more subs; and less debt and more foreign reserves (more money), and more oil reserves and less consumption.

Worthy of special mention here are aircraft carriers. Used to project American imperialism worldwide, they intimidate the smaller countries as they rove the high seas. Russia and China each has only one apiece currently, though both are building more. This means they cannot as easily project their power to other places and their wars will have to be fought at home, on their turf. Unfortunately for the West, defenses have been constructed against them. The Chinese have a ballistic anti-ship missile called the DF-21D. It  can drop straight down onto a carrier from space up to 1200 miles away. The Russians have the Onyx 'Sunburn' anti-ship missile, which is so low flying and fast its sheer kinetic energy can literally capsize a large vessel. Three can sink a carrier. They also have a lot of 130mm coastal artillery guns

A few other factors to consider are not just numbers, but how the battles would be fought...
An American flotilla with its aircraft carrier is very formidable, but so is a Sunburn missile.
High tech ranging devices and other gadgets are pretty handy, but not when you are inside a wall of fire.
The UK and France are powerful friends, but not so much when China and Iran has the enemy's back.
Many vaunted weapons systems of America are really not so great. Prime example is the M1 Abrams tank. Weighing 20 tons more than the Russian T90, it has 125 km less range, much slower reload time, and 1/2 to 1/4 the firing range, depending on types of shells used. Besides the fact that the Houthi rebels are using 1970s Soviet shoulder fired ATGM missiles to destroy Saudi operated M1 tanks- see this video...Other examples abound but are beyond the scope of this piece.

They have been preparing for war with us for decades. Do you really think they are going to roll over and beg for mercy while we blast their infrastructure to bits and kill thousands of their civilians? Just because Iraq did, it doesn't mean the Russians will. Encircling and threatening them is playing with fire, to put it mildly.

One thing Americans very rarely do is empathize: putting themselves in someone else's shoes. Their imperialistic adventures and corporate oil grabs are just a game to them. They haven't experienced war at home and think it is just a news clip that need not be worried about. So let us turn the tables to make people understand a little better. Here is an accurate analogy of what we are doing to them:

The United States of America has a federal govt. breakdown. It reorganizes as a new country, called the Commonwealth of Independent States. Then after a time becomes simply the American Federation with several states choosing to become their own nations. All is well with these states at first, but then Russia decides to use CIA style regime change tactics in say, our new country-former-state of Georgia. The new government has disagreements with the people of say, Savannah. So the Atlantans threaten them. The UN sets up observers to watch. Sure enough, Atlanta attacks Savannah and starts killing hundreds of its civilians despite UN orders. So the American Federation invades just long enough to save the Savannans, then withdraws. During this incident they find entire warehouses full of Russian weapons stockpiled. So the Russians were setting up a base on our border. Hmmm. Now, four years later, the nation-former-state of say, New York has a similar political upset and the KGB is all over it. There are also Cuban mercenaries sneaking around. We plead for peace but the new Communist govt. of New York is killing civilians in Albany with helicopter gunships. The UN orders peace terms, and no one follows them. Next, Russia sends a military flotilla up the Hudson River and has live fire naval exercises in the Great Lakes. They also anchor their aircraft carrier off Staten Island. Apparently, something is up. Especially since they have placed troops in five Caribbean nations and have declared us to be an enemy. What would Americans think, who would they blame; what would they do? New York is a very strategic place to put a base near DC, after all. We aren't stupid, right?

And do you think Russians are stupid???

Couldn't America just fly in and bomb away like they do everywhere else?

Addendum: is the US Air Force unmatched- or outmatched? 

Trying to compare Russian and American military jets is tricky to put it mildly. There are so many specs and uses for each jet. Should one compare size, shape, “generation”, role/s, ranges, types of armaments it carries- or what combinations of these??

America has many more aircraft– in sheer numbers- than Russia. But then Russia does not need to stock 128 foreign bases and 12 aircraft carriers like America does. Where are they, and at what times; how soon can they be transported to the Eurasian theater (where any war with Russia would occur)? Also, how many are used at domestic bases, parked in North America and out of range of Eurasia? Counting off all of these plus the where-are-they-now factor for the carrier based ones and the how-far-away-are-they-without-refueling factor of the ones at foreign bases, I suspect not too many will be able to approach Russia at the outbreak of any hostilities, and more would arrive sporadically. So tallying means little in reality. 
Here is a listing of active military crafts, and their basics:
[includes bombers, fighters, strike craft, gunships, and attack choppers. not included here are ASW, EW, cargo, transport, command, trainers, and miscellaneous crafts.]

America has three long range bombers. There is the old but trusty B52, scheduled to be used until 2045. Then there is the B1 variable swept wing, and the B2 stealth bomber. 

They also have the F22 fighter- an advanced jet that is no longer in production though still in use, the F18 E/F fighter, and several jets which will in time be replaced by the new F35 multirole jet. These include: the A10 ground attack, AC130 gunship, AV8 VSTOL attack(Harrier), and the F15/F16/F18 fighters. The F35 has a marine version with a VTOL horizontal turbofan (the fans are from the failed Avrocar of the 50s). 

The F35 is considered to be a lemon and a boondoggle. It would be wiser to keep the A10 and F16 in foreign bases/carriers, put all of the F18s and F15s on domestic bases, and discontinue the AC130. Then use the AV8 for the marines. 
{ The A10 is perfect for land bases to be available at any front lines. The F16 is small and fits on carriers better than the bulky old F15s, and would serve fine in those duties. The F18, very small and nimble would be ideal for domestic borders, while the F15 would be fine as a backbone craft to defend the home front if invaded. The AC130s are cargo planes with weaponry attached: monstrosities. Useless when A10s are available. The Harriers are fine for use on the marine landing crafts- which are basically small aircraft carriers. Reshuffling these jets to smarter uses in an organized way like this would make more sense and save a fortune by not having to buy the F35 junkers. } 

As far as attack choppers, America has 3: the AH6, AH64, and AH1. The 64 is the Apache. The other two are smaller.

The Russians also have three bombers: the Tu22- similar to the discontinued F111, the Tu95- a massive turboprop similar to the B52 but larger, and the Tu160, which is similar to the B1 but much larger; also a variable swept wing craft. 

They also have the MiG39 interceptor/fighter, the Su33 naval fighter (designed for their carriers), the Su27 fighter, and the multirole fighters Mig29, Su30, and Su35. They also have three strike specific jets- the Su34, the Su25 (also for close air support), and the Su24 (also for recon, and with a naval version). They are developing now a multirole fighter called the PAK-FA or T-50. 

All Russian strike and fighter jets -except the Su24 and Su25- are supermaneuverable. This means they are capable of amazing maneuvers, controlled stalls, and sudden changes in direction and orientation. (Only one American jet can do this to some degree- the F22). 

They have only two types of attack choppers- the Ka-50 and the Ka-52. They have double-stacked top rotors and no tail rotors, which makes them very maneuverable, quiet, and fast.

Overall, if you look up the specs (ranges, firepower, speeds, etc.) it is very clear the Russians have superior air power. Maybe not in sheer numbers of craft, but as far as qualities, capabilities, and ranges- absolutely. Please do look up on Youtube or other sites' videos of both sides' maneuvers and it will be clear.

Moreover, the same can be said for their tanks, subs, missiles, air defense systems, and coastal defenses. They are very significantly advanced in air defense, specialized equipment and weaponry, electronic warfare, special forces organization and training, and arctic climate warfare. Their navy is smaller but is a green water navy- not blue water as America's is- and has more icebreakers, subs, and minelayers. They also have much more experience in actual battle in urban and mountain terrains, from Chechnya, Georgia, and Afghanistan (as opposed to Americans mainly doing air bombings). The Russian armed forces also partake in frequent, massive live fire drills of 100,000 troops or more- in rotating districts, sometimes with China or other nations joining in. America has no exercises on this scale.


This should open the eyes of a few at least, who believe baseless lies repeated by the MSM to make them think America could ever successfully invade Russia. The whole idea is impossible, suicidal, unnecessary, and insane. While America and its toy soldiers from their vassal states (NATO) encircle both Russia and China with bases, insurmountable defenses are already waiting that will simply destroy the modern American (Roman) Empire.

Ukrainian maps

Note: the news in the US is extremely biased and lacking. NBC is the worst, next to fox of course which isn't real news anyway. What they do not say is the most telling.
Please seek out-of-country info for all subjects and current events! You will be amazed at what was simply not being mentioned before.

{map: blackseagrain.net}
sorry map is inaccurate. just an overview of area for now. 

File:Baltic Sea map.png

{map: normaneinstein}

©james platt 2014


Recalculating the Intelligence Quotient

What is intelligence?
Several methods of measuring it have been devised, though few are all-encompassing of the human mind's capabilities. We all like to think we are "smart" to some degree or another. How people base this assumption is varied. Many base it upon the grades they got or get in school. Since most people go to public schools, this is highly inaccurate. While teachers attempt to educate us with information about their assigned subjects, the fact is that public schools are a complete and utter joke. Attendance, bullying, detentions, favoritism, home life, money for tutoring, and numerous other factors contribute greatly to the grades a public school student receives. Kids of wealthier families can afford all the fees associated with band, sports, and clubs, and hence have more chances to learn as well as receive preferential treatment by the teachers. Kids who can't afford the current fad of clothes are picked on more, have trouble concentrating, and do worse on tests. Similar anecdotes abound.
Once the kids are college age, they may enter that path if they are even told of the ACT and SAT tests beforehand, (I was not), and then once enrolled take remedial courses for what they didn't learn in high school. After years of general courses and partying, they cram all they can into their heads about their chosen specialty. Most degrees are generalized and the students expect all these vague office careers out of them. The percentage of college graduates that get jobs from their degrees is laughably low. Not to mention the yoke of student loans. So much for 'higher learning'.
While book smarts are an important factor in intelligence, it is certainly not the only thing that creates it. Knowing the facts in books is a good base of information to draw from, but how we utilize that trivia is even more important. Scientists are notoriously closed-minded and will vehemently argue against any new info they hear of. Teachers aren't nearly as bad, so would you trust a mathematics professor to do your taxes? Probably, but would you trust him to spay your cat?? You must know alot of information to work as a computer programmer. You also need to know a lot of info to weld properly, or to process credit cards at a store, or to run plumbing lines effectively. All types of knowledge may vary but their commonality is that they all must be learned in depth for our assigned societal tasks to be completed successfully. So learning is required to be successful, but who is to say that the drive through girl is any less intelligent than a mechanic or a science teacher? Figuring out what you need to know and utilizing it is all-important.
Applying information is key to so many things. Learning all about the funeral practices of the Golden Horde may be fascinating, but it applies very little- if at all- in the modern world. No matter how book smart someone is, they are not necessarily smart people overall- just trivia hogs. The contestants on Jeopardy are not only good examples, but also are very similar in flavor to college professors- spouting factoids on all manner of subjects- most of which no one needs to know about for any reason- while knowing a lot about one or two subjects, the facts of which are important only in their field and not to the general populace in everyday life. A contestant today who was winning is an actuary with a mathematics degree. On the final question, he answered "50 Shades", betting 401 dollars on it. The correct answer was "Silent Spring". He clearly had to know his answer was wrong, as it asked about a non-fiction book from 1962. So why did he bet any money on his joke-answer, much less enough money to make him lose the game?? Answer: What is "no common sense"?...
Common sense is something many bookworms just do not have. The much-espoused logic that teachers claim to admire is usually lacking in their everyday thoughts. Logic permeates common-sense, which encapsulates so-called street-smarts.
More important yet is what I call awareness. Awareness is the all-encompassing logic backed by common sense and underwritten with the book smarts. It is what ties it all together. Many people feel that they have this ability but actually do not. Good examples are the conspiracy theorists. While some conspiracies are true and provable, or at least highly plausible with some significant evidence, most are utter nonsense. They rely upon rumors and circular logic combined with myths and flawed science to "prove" their claims. Then the spouting off of the complex yet hair-brained scenarios is repeated over and over again, until it becomes fact in the minds of the weak. Reading these claims may make you open-minded, which is good, but believing them hook, line, and sinker with no attempt to verify them is just stupidity. It is the farthest thing from intelligence, much less awareness in itself.
What is the difference then? What is true awareness; aware of what exactly? I know someone who believes everything he reads and rattles on about conspiracy theories incessantly- kinda like Mel Gibson's character did in the beginning of the movie called Conspiracy Theory. He says the internet is not real- it is a US Govt. falsification. But then he gets much of his info from websites. He says the news is not real, it is a fabrication of the govt. censors- every story, every bit of footage. And he knows it because, um, well he's just sure of it that's why. So while he thinks he is so extremely smart and self-aware that he is privy to some presumed 'special knowledge' the "sheeple" do not realize, he also has no evidence whatsoever for his claims and his sources are no more than rumors from outlets he says are lying anyway. Get the fruit loop yet? And these are the majority of the supposed aware people--conspiracy theorists and paranoid mental cases that feed into their malarkey. Awareness is not just proclaiming your views are right, but knowing on a much deeper level that you are aware of all possibilities and that your views have been filtered through the tests of open-mindedness and all other opinions. This makes you aware of the bottom line on the subjects you ponder, making you privy to numerous alternative viewpoints- some of which turn out to have merit.
Once you trust a source to fill out all sides of a subject, blindly believing its pronouncements is still not wise. Every article should be believable in itself, for its own reasons. Just because a certain site or writer says something, it shouldn't mean to you that its words are automatically true. A lot of bloggers and other web authors depend upon this to build and maintain a following. Knowing this, they tend to write what their target audience wants to hear. Right wing sites spout off scary stories about commie troop movements; left wing ones chide bush and his foibles. The fans lap it up and everyone's happy, except the free thinkers that is. People that think for themselves, instead of letting others tell them what or how to think, are free thinkers. And these are generally not the ones that lap up political scrawlings day in and day out. Indeed, most people who consider themselves to be intelligent and making up their own minds are actually entirely the opposite. They already have their minds made up, and utilize the sites or other media they know will back up their predetermined ideals. Then any new ideas that the media spouts off become their beliefs as well. Simultaneously, they dismiss out of hand anything the other side says, and use that dismissive attitude to hold up as an example of how they think they are deciding something and 'wisely' poo-poohing the alleged idiocy of them morons.
Them and they are vague concepts of whomever the bad guy is, and is one of the most common terms that conspiracists use. It is a catch-all term that means 'the scapegoat of the day'. Usually the government, frequently the left wing; always the other side. Being smarter, wiser, and better informed than the vague they/them ghosts is not very challenging, and makes the short sighted feel more powerful. Asking a conspiracist to define or name 'them' generally gets an answer of stammering, or at times a list of evildoers will be rattled off. How those tie in can lead to a fruit-loop lecture of great duration. Then blind belief is exposed quite clearly.
At the other end of the spectrum is creativity. Creative people think up ideas on their own and create ways to solve problems. Have you ever just sat there for an hour or so, and planned in your mind how to fabricate a new tool or car part, and then thrown in a wild card such as without welding apparatus? Or have you figured out how to convert a car into a camper lately? Or better yet, questioned precepts of science and thought up alternative possibilities? These are the brain-games of the creative folk. Finding unique solutions to life's dilemmas is creative. Most people are awed when such an idea is suggested; many reject it though. If they would tune in to a motivational show on their televisions once in a while, they may learn to stop rejecting new ideas.
Self-help people sometimes speak of a condition labeled "self-actualized". A self-actualized person has self acceptance and a democratic worldview; they maintain a realistic outlook; are problem-centered, as in trying to solve all things at their root causes; they maintain 'peak experiences', essentially living in the moment at all times; maintain autonomy from others, having their own unique views of what happiness and contentment are; maintain times of solitude and privacy more than others, which they enjoy; have a philosophical outlook and sense of humor; and lastly act spontaneously in all things. While these are all common traits of the intelligent, they together can be labeled as "self-actualization" but do not encompass all things attached to higher thinking.
Intelligence is a combination of all of these factors. Having just one or two is compartmentalized intelligence. Possessing all of these qualities to some degree or another makes for a smooth path to awareness, and true intelligence. Sure, some scientists and professors are truly intelligent, but most are far from it. And a few conspiracies have merit, but most do not. Every person needs to evaluate their own thought processes and determine if they are compartmentalized or not and to what degree.

To summarize, true intelligence requires all of the following at once from a person:
-common sense- includes logic and 'street smarts';
-book smarts and general knowledge;
-awareness and free thinking;
-creativity and being innovative;
-ability to learn, and the application of book smarts and logic.
No matter how little the public schools taught you, anyone can work on these factors and greatly increase their intelligence for a better day to day life. 


(C) James Platt 2014



FREE real sites you can use, how they rate, and how to pick up the ladies on them...

I find it a little sad to see guides for sale offering online dating tips. Do people really need to pay for this information? Someone with a lot of experience should just spill it and declassify all of the supposed secrets of how to 'get some' from online searches. There are obviously a lot more single men than women, and obviously, women have a much easier time than men at finding sex online or otherwise. There seems to be a throng of men looking for it and the women can be as picky as they want. How do you get on top of the crowd and be the chosen one when a hot gal wants a date?? This blogger has done it many times, and I am going to tell you how...free of charge no less. (And don't get me wrong, gals, I am genuinely looking for the right long term partner, or at least any real gf I can start again with. The info below is what I have learned along the way, posted here for others to learn from...)

First, get a friend to take flattering pics of you. If you are obese, do not use head shots only- women are on to this trick. You are better off making it known that you are obese to start with. Do you really want to go through a lot to get a gal to meet you, then have her see how big you are? She will almost surely not put out, bud. I know one woman who experienced this. He traveled six hours to see her, and was huge. She said he could stay overnight before driving back, but could not touch her. He asked why not and she said "you didn't tell me you were a hippo!". Do you want this to happen to you?? If you are big, do not hide it. A lot of women are too, and they accept it. So if you meet up, she will know and expect you to be whatever you are. This works both ways, of course: be very leery of gals with only face pics.

Second, write the truth on profiles- to an extent. I am not telling you to lie, but will tell you this: if you admit any of the following a gal will not meet you: you do not have a job or a car, you are on parole or probation, you use drugs, etc. Be logical when filling in the blanks.

Third, learn to write and spell. Virtually every woman I've met and/or written to from dating sites has told me the same thing: they all get swamped with hundreds upon hundreds of messages, the vast majority of which are from guys who can barely write a coherent sentence. They all ask crudely for sex or nude pics. So if you can write a decent paragraph, you will be noticed right away. Then avoid mentioning sex or nudity and you'll be very interesting to them. Further, if you say you have a job, a car, and your own place to live; and, that you do not use drugs and are not a parolee, then you will do very well indeed. Aside from that, talk to them about your hobbies and interests, and what you like to do on a date. Tell them why you are alone and seeking a long term partner (whether true or not...). Then ask them to consider replying. They will.

Fourth, use the sites that work. Free sites are best of course. The only free dating sites I have ever found are : meetme, plentyoffish or POF, mingle2 (fka mingles), fetlife, and datehookup or DHU. I have seen articles about these sites "investigating" their reality. Let me assure you, they are all real, and I have met numerous, real people from each of them and had sex resulting from these meetings with actual women, from four of the five sites listed. And all for free.

Pay sites are not so good. First, you have to pay them about 20 a month. Then, you may or may not get something for it. The most well known pay site is AFF, or adult friend finder, and its numerous spinoff sites and fake blogs which are just disguised ads for them (about any dating site with the term 'finder' or 'friend' in it is likely affiliated with them. They also run the info-mining site alt dot com.). They charge for anything you do on there- even sending a 'wink'. But they are very large, and if you are willing to pay, it could be worth it. I have also met real people in person off of this site. However, watch for their 'auto-renew' thing regarding your credit card info. Most pay sites are similar to this, and you pay for any communication whatsoever with other members.

Fifth, seek dates locally. There are single women everywhere. You do not need to seek out women an hour's drive away when they are in your neighborhood. If you live in a small town, start locally and slowly spread your net. Look for women in the next nearest town, your county, and so on until you hit the nearest metro area. If you have to search beyond that, you are definitely doing something wrong.

By the same token, other sites to avoid, including pay sites, are any mentioning foreign brides or Russians. Filipinos, Russians, and others are not using the net to see American men. And you do not need to send them money for a plane ticket to come see you...If you are that ignorant then offer to go see them...see what they say. Russia is a very big and populous nation, and the Philippines is full of very strict Catholics who will not have sex before marriage. And you are about to send them money why- because they are too desperate to find a guy where they live? Give me a break! Trust me--there are plenty of single, lonely, American women to choose from!!! For free even.

Russian women are just bad news. Yes, there are lots of beautiful Russian women that are single. But the Russian men are already there, guys- so why would they want you? Russian women are just white women, usually, that are no different than single white women in Poland or England. So why pursue them specifically? It makes no sense. Especially if you are American and living here in America with the thousands if not millions of single women around to pursue. Despite what the movies portray, Russians are not obsessed with America nor do they all know English. To avoid all the scamming, just stick to local gals.

One 'Russian' gal I was writing once sent me pics that were clearly professionally taken. 'She' also sent me a poem I found on other Russian scammer sites. Then she said it was a sunny day. I looked up weather in her supposed town and found it was cold and rainy...INVESTIGATE all things foreign!!! Better yet, just forget them altogether: foreigners do not know you, need you, nor want you...and you should never ever need to send them moolah for any reason whatsoever! If they were real and wanted to see you that badly, they'd come to you or better yet tell you where to meet them in their town, instead of begging you for 'plane fare'. Anything involving Nigeria, Africa in general, or any foreign country is a scam! Just do not!

So what do you want to look for in an online profile? I have noticed a lot of gals post that they like "hunting, fishing, camping, mudding" etc...Ya I bet! They just want to impress guys is all. Which means they are desperate. So message them. If a gal has no profile pic, she is doing one of three things: she is attached and cheating, trying to stay incognito; she is a slut that is on there to ask for sex only and breaking the site's rules most likely; or, she is afraid people will think she is fat/ugly and wants to talk to guys first to woo them a little before revealing her appearance. Any of these three are gold. Profiles without pics are therefore to be sought out. If they say they are seeking long term relationships only, do not let that scare you away. Many use that status to deter the morons that fill their inboxes with lewd requests. Even the ones that mean it are still horny women that will get close to a good guy quickly. Don't want long-term? If you want to get laid- keep that a secret! Always claim to want long term unless she says otherwise first. The ones that claim to want 'casual dating' or 'no commitment' actually are looking for the right guy they can keep. So let them try you out as a possible candidate: most likely you'll get a good time out of it; maybe you'll click with her...

Most women that are 30ish or more have kids and make sure you know it. They like to say "they are my world" so as to warn you that the kids come first before any boyfriends. This announcement is belabored logorrheically on all dating sites. A similar scenario exists with occasional gals who proclaim that family is very important to them. This really means that they would rather hang out at family barbecues and spend all their holidays with their distant cousins than be with their boyfriend/date. Beware these women. They usually have secret crushes on their cousins and other 'relatives' by marriage, step-, or foster- whatevers. It is precisely these type of women that allow their relatives to meddle in their relationships, which of course dooms them. Trust me: just don't.

Aside from these guidelines, explore. You never know what may await you. One profile I accidentally clicked on as 'want to meet' had an unflattering profile pic and a generic 'just ask me any questions you have' type of description. She turned out to be a very kinky nympho and made an excellent new year's eve date. Another one, on the now-defunct Yahoo Personals, had no profile pic and checked that she was 'a few extra pounds'. I thought, oh boy...But once I met her she was very pretty and quite slim. Never forget: all women think they are fat- even the anorexic ones! She also turned out well as a wonderful fling partner.

The ones that end up being just too ugly or morbidly obese, or what-have-you, are easy enough to ditch if you prepare properly. Meet them in a public place the first time, such as a store or mall. Then they are at ease and not worried about serial killers etc., and you get to bow out if needed by saying you'll call them when you have more time. Actually, they can and will do the same to you from time to time. But it's not a big deal- start messaging the next one or three.

The reality is that most people do not have much free time these days and have little to do outside of work. They wish they had all these hobbies, but really do not have time. So whatever your claimed hobbies or interests are, become theirs. Women are lonely, and will be glad to fish or whatever if it means getting what they really want from a man.

What do women really want then? They want snuggling more than anything, so assure them they will be held and snuggled during scary movies and other times. They also want security and stability, instead of a mooch that would live off of them. They want self-sufficient hunks who will lay them nightly and make them feel special somehow. They want guys who can write and drive and stay out of jail. They just want a partner to help deal with life. Present yourself that way and you will get some, for sure.

A few footnotes about the sites mentioned:

MeetMe used to be excellent, and this blogger has met several women with it. Also doubled as a chat page. BUT they are the only site I've ever come across that actually uses the permission to 'modify/delete SD card contents'. Do not use their app; just make a shortcut to their site unless you want video ads placed onto your SD card weekly. Their tampering with mine scared me so I removed the app and do not recommend it. It also has lately become a thicket of fake profiles- fake meaning clickbait non-real profiles which mine people for contact info and pics to use for ads and spamming of the porn sites they emanate from. You can usually tell these by them being very new profiles; with zero, one, or very few pics; no live feed; and ongoing suggestive statuses. Between them and the ever increasing use of the pages as classifieds for potheads wanting to buy and sell their dope, I left the site. Tried it again later on, and found they had redesigned their site. It is now usable but goes overboard with noticications. 
They also run. A pointless spinoff site called skout. It is useless. 

PlentyofFish is also very good and makes it easy to find/meet people. You can select what you are seeking, such as dating, marriage, or intimate encounter. You can also filter out people that seek marriage for example, as well as people who list that they use drugs, etc. It works well for the picky ones. Finding people who actually put intimate encounter status works great if you seek sluts. I have also had good luck with this site, and their app is fine. If you consider how many gals stood me up and/or ditched me on dates from this site though, it's a little telling. Maybe POF girls are all skittish?? But- if you ever want to quit the site and delete your profile, you will have to pay them money! You must "upgrade" to do that. Therefore your only option to leave the site freely is to delete your pics and change your profile info accordingly. You cannot leave the fields blank, nor post a few short words. You must write a few sentences per field. On mine I ended up putting a string of random letters until it was long enough for them.

DateHookup used to be very good as well. Their app works well and they make it easy to search for nearby people. It seems to be a little lesser known but still has lots of members. When you use the 'want to meet' feature on there, you will find that most people do not actually want to make the effort to meet. You are better off just writing to the ones you like. One gal I met on this site drove 100 miles to meet me at a McDonald's. We talked, she seemed to think I was weird, we parted ways. I never heard from her again- and I skipped a Coal Chamber concert for her! So it goes sometimes...However I've met several other great women from here, including one that introduced her whole group of friends to me. Unfortunately, recently scammers have been overtaking the site with fake profiles. Look out for beautiful women with only one picture, who do not accept winks, live 800 to 1,000 miles from you, and seek men 18-82 or so. These are fake and becoming ubiquitous on there. Most importantly is the fact that every time you get onto the site, you are required to reset your password through your email. I complained about this bug for 2 years. They said they were working on it, but never fixed it. 

Mingle2, while free and functional, just never got me anything from anyone. It could work, but also does have more than its share of Russian phonies on it. The only messages I've ever received on there were from profiles in Asian countries. They constantly want you to pay to see who 'wants to meet you'...It's worth a try, though trying the others first will likely work out for you anyway. I quit the site eventually.
Fetlife is also free and is facebook-style in organization. Though it is supposed to be for all fetish lovers, many fetishes are not listed or mentioned at all. (It is mainly, though not entirely, folks of the BDSM crowd. It also is seemingly overrun with women wanting to peg men. If you do not know what pegging is, then you don't want to know.) They also have large groups like chatrooms, which in several instances were exceedingly rude to me. Still worth a try- many, many locations, groups, and members are on it. 

Philanderers.com is frequently mentioned in articles on the net as some kind of paragon of websites for cheaters. Actually though, it does not exist anymore. Other well known sites, such as AFF, cheaters.com, match.com, lavalife, cupid, and zoosk- all are pay only sites. Sure you can join for free and on some sites even send a wink, but communication with another member will require cash. 

Singles/dating pages and groups on Facebook are all useless. I have met one person on one once, which did not end well. Most of the groups are run by foreigners that barely know English, and allow lots of spammers on the page. Then a lot of desperate guys try to talk to the fake girls, and that is the sum of their activity. Some pages are more populated with real people, though they are hard to find and every one invariably is dominated by a few obsessive posters and/or megalomaniacal moderators on power trips. I have been lambasted many times in different groups, including by the mods, for ridiculous things. If you can get a word in edgewise, you will be talking to people across the country or world anyway almost always. Such a waste of time...

As far as using the personals sections on Craigslist, I do not recommend it. This is an area that this blogger has a lot of experience in. It will become a separate post later, but in general, 90% of the ads on there are posted by scamming/spamming sex sites, and 9% are just gay men trying to talk straight guys into first-time blowjobs. The remaining 1% are real women seeking men. How to spot them is another post. Basically, it's a huge waste of time that will fill your mailbox with spam for years. I have only met one person off of Craigslist, ever, and that is an amazing feat.

Occasional searches over the years for other truly free sites have been fruitless. If anyone knows of any, please inform me. By free I mean no fee to pay for anything at all, and ability to contact other members, view their profiles, and write what you want to them without deletion or cost.

Good luck!






Beware liars/troublemakers/instigators, etc. Record at least the audio of every sexual encounter you have. False accusations can be dismantled quickly this way.

(C)james platt2014