Wahrheit oder Fiktion?

"And Jesus said unto them, Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's," says Mark 12:17. The Gospel of Mark is considered almost universally to be the oldest of the New Testament gospels, the source of the rest of the synoptic gospels. It's also one of the most willfully misquoted and misunderstood (if not overlooked out of convenience) outside of the parable of the chances of a rich man getting into heaven and a camel passing through the eye of a needle. When you look at the majority of statements attributed to Jesus in the NT, most of them address that the priority is to care for the poor, the vulnerable--you can't miss it, yet many do because they're hatefully bonkers.

This is not a debate over whether Jesus was the son of God--I don't believe that and never have. That's irrelevant to me, unimportant like whether Paul Bunyan's Ox babe was blue or not, that's about mythology and missing the point because you're an asshole.

What did Jesus mean by the "render" comment? We've had the answer for almost two millennia now, right in front of our faces, just like the Nazarene's stupid disciples who almost never understood what he was going on about. God would have chosen a better lot than those dummies. When you look at orthodox Christianity's many flaws and horrific mistakes, look no further than these small-minded, patriarchal idiots. This was the best God could do? It had to be the Demiurge, but that's a bedtime story for another time. What did he mean? Common sense should be a guide here by posing a few questions: What did Caesar want? What did the Roman emperors want? First, they wanted taxes, but most of all, fundamentally, obedience to their rule and its proscribed laws. For the Jews, this was a tall order, because they had their own set or religious ones, hence why there were money changers in Herod's temple, for example, one of many, and frankly, not an especially big deal, more neurosis that became codified tradition. 

I think what Jesus said was pretty simple. Tell the Romans what they want to hear, go through the motions, but never give them your heart, never yield your soul. That's not a very difficult prescription for living under the occupation of another culture. To be sure, the Romans were brutal occupiers, we don't need to retread over that ground, it's settled. However, when it came to tolerance of indigenous cultures and religions, they weren't all that bad--better than what came after them in most cases in fact. There was a rub for the Jews: like all Roman subjects, they were supposed to acknowledge the divinity of the Emperor. After that, they could worship pretty much as they wished. Just as there's always some asshole heckling at a concert, this wasn't good enough for some people, and like the Christian martyrs that would come decades later, what they were about to engage in was pretty pointless: fighting an uphill battle nobody wanted over abstract concepts that weren't and aren't rooted in reality. When you're a fanatic, you do these things. Politics and religion were inextricably-linked in those days, and this is how one should read the synoptic gospels as well as the esoteric sects of Judaism and the region in that day in general.

Jesus wasn't telling anyone to take up arms here, quite the opposite. He was suggesting the power of ideas and how they cannot be killed, how people can basically lie to their oppressors and keep the lamp lit in their hearts and minds. Yet, so often, this quote is used as an excuse by authoritarian-minded fools calling themselves Christians (they aren't by a long shot) to obey authority under all circumstances, one more divine cop-out exhortation to blindly serve evil.

The last time I checked, Jesus never said, "Give the boss man a blowjob," only to tell the asshole what he wants to hear and to go on doing what you would anyway out of view. But hey, that's must just be me. I must have missed that after I got kicked out of Sunday school for asking too many questions...

"Dear asshole..." (Harassment over DC Madam articles/book)

Ed.--I've gotten some harassing comments on here over the last couple of weeks over the book and articles on this blog that are related to the DC Madam case. Apparently, I'm doing something right (or write) here. This was attempted four years ago in the same manner: a fake attempt to give the impression of a "cease and desist" notice, which cannot be done in any binding sense by posting it as a comment. In fact, you cannot currently serve someone in any way that's binding this way. It will not be acknowledged by a court of law in the United States.

Unless you also serve someone with hard copy papers in person, or through the mail, it's not going to stick, yo, so step off, bitch. This all has to be done through the legal system. Sending fake threatening comments doesn't do this, it's acting outside of it to affect the same results without revealing one's identity. This tells me they do know a little about the law, at least, maybe more than they're letting on. None of this has occurred here--there has been no serving--and that's why none of this is worth an ounce of sweat. This is one more laughable, pathetic attempt to get someone to take down information about someone else by taking down the entire blog, and that wouldn't hold up in court either, all a sorry bluff. You have to specify what lines, what statements, in an article, essay, book, etc., were libelous or slanderous, and establishing that either occurred is very difficult in American jurisprudence. I know this because I've taken paralegal courses, but really, any drooling asshole should know this. I can assure you that even repeat offenders do.

Here's what the goober wrote first, and granted that they might be from Texas since they can't spell of do addition:

 I look forward to fourth coming litigation, marathon deposition sessions of every blogger that had made a post regarding Jack Burkman and the loves of his life! Win,Lose it doesn't matter! Its going to be very expensive for all parties involved! Or, you can shut this site down as soon as possible!

Dennis G. Brewer Sr. And Associates, P.C.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:27:00 AM EDT 

Whoever they are, they got pissed and created a fake Google profile shortly after reading something on this blog, the wimp. This is so I don't who they are related to the case, or simply to avoid me suing their asses off for criminal harassment, which I would, and will, if I discover their sorry identity. "Forthcoming" is one word, stupid.

"I look forward to"--look forward to kissing my ass, fuck you very much. You're this law firm in Irving, Texas? Bullshit you are. Either way, you've made a serious error if I discover who you are, so keep your pointed head down. Also, you write like a spastic dork. Like? Asshole went on FOUR days later: "Matt Janovic: you fucking coward! I gave you a week to pull this site down. You are going to wish you took me seriously! Hope you have money to burn!" Right, use someone's identity, then a fake one that hides your actual identity, good move there, not obvious at all. Idiot. Clown.

I responded on March 22nd (multiple ones, I've bunched them):

Hey Dennis, where have you been, asshole? This shit has been up for over two years, shithead. You have to SERVE ME, asshole, email AND snail mail, US Post. A little law school 101, fucker. Who are you, really? This has been up for years. This is all alleged, and I have a RIGHT under the First Amendment to my opinions, asshole. ... "Dhar," who's the coward? Tell me and everyone your REAL FUCKING NAME, ASSHOLE. YOU are the coward. Blow me, fuckface.

They tried to make it seem like they wanted something specific taken down by mentioning Burkman. Could it be Mark Capansky? Possibly, maybe.

Finally, I had to kick them in their hollow head one last time, yesterday:

PS to the tard: Not only can't you spell ("fourth") you're unable to do simple mathematics: "I gave you a week to pull this site down." You posted your first harassing comment on March 13th, then followed up with the one that contained the above quote on the 17th--four days, asshole.

Are you even a real person or a Defense Dept. AI bot? Either way, you're a lying idiot and a fool to think that an anonymous threat (harassment) is going to make me pull anything, fuck you very much. … If you serve me, I GET TO KNOW WHO YOU ARE. Threats coming from the shadows are admissible in court unless it's me suing your ass off for harassment.

Ever heard of "prior restraint"? I have ever right to publish my book and to keep these posts up because they're my opinions, asshole.

Cowards throw around fake threats from the shadows, I post my real name at all times online with a few exceptions. Guess what? There's nothing you can do about any of this. In my opinion, most of these women who have contacted me are TELLING THE TRUTH.

"Dahr"(the sound retards make when they do the chicken-wing motion) has grown silent after all of this. I'd hide my identity too if I made as much of an ass of myself as they have. 

What I believe is at play here is that someone wants to remove primary materials I've posted on the case--this includes anything about Mr. Burkman--maybe to be able to say down the road, maybe even in court, "these materials in the book have never been published," when the emails, comments, and everything else related to the DC Madam case have been online for years without any real complaints coming from anyone identifying themselves through the legal system--not that anyone would be able to under the law, this speech is protected, I can and have successfully published, finito. None of it violates anyone's rights, nor any agreements. That aside, Palfrey is dead, estate aside. That part of the narrative is closed. Who's next? Bring it on, bitch.

Gimp of the perverse: The loves of Jack Burkman, Part I

Postscript: DUCK YOU SUCKER... 

Postscript, 3-27-2012: You have to love my typos in the original responses. The good side is that you can at least tell I can spell the words properly. "Fourth coming." Sam Eardth II? Is English their first language? Man,  I sure hope so for their--our--sake (not rice wine). I rest my case, your honor...

The burning question of this socio-cultural-political moment...

Was the Vatican aware that Michael Jackson was a pedophile?

I know, I was floored by all the surprise surrounding the incontrovertible evidence that there are priests that molest children!! "What was the world coming to?" I thunk. Americans might want to face the fact that most mainstream journalism is barely different from the National Enquirer, and that's even unfair to them since they sometimes actually report something accurately for yucks.

Never mind that I had heard about pedophile priests almost my entire life and that even in predominantly Catholic South Bend (Notre Dame University is located adjacent to the city) it was considered a cliché. In this historical moment, "surprise" that the Vatican has been covering-up acts of molestation by clerics for decades is everywhere. Why is this? Surely, some of this is cry of the siren, but abusers need willing enablers and they've gotten plenty of enabling over generations. The point is a distraction for those who want the cover-ups and the lies to continue. Some of them are doing it because they can't bear what's going to come out of all of this. The public, as in all the other things that we're supposed to be "protected" from knowing, can take it, the culprits and enablers cannot.

What about protecting children? The Vatican seems to be the last institution on earth willing to do that besides the Republican Party or any other number of faceless, self-perpetuating institutions. That's a culture in very serious denial about itself and a real exorcism is order. An exorcism is, in fact, what's occurring in a scandal of international scope. The Church will continue to insist that they can take care of the problem, but since when have they illustrated an ability to? Centuries ago, the Church once had their own parallel legal system alongside that of the Monarch. Did it produce justice? It did not.

Their reluctance to be held accountable by civil law and authorities speaks volumes that they haven't changed very much at the Vatican, and Pope Benedict XVI is hardly a maverick for change as his own personal handling of past cases illustrates plainly. Like the American Republican Party, they're just going to keep blowing their toes off because they don't know any better and because they don't know what else to do. All they seem capable of is blaming the victim, the pedagogy of the abuser. That's not going to make it go away anytime soon.

CREW files a prostitution complaint against Louisiana Sen. David Vitter

Louisiana--Do I think this is going to go anywhere? Probably not, but I assume the intended result is to remind Louisiana voters he's a piece-of-shit and a liar who can't keep his dick in his pants until the 2010 elections.

What's interesting is that they're going for Davey's law license as well as punitive measures for--I don't know, nothing much--breaking the law on several occasions when he went to see prostitutes, and probably in more than one state. The FBI probably caught him in some wiretaps down in the big NO, frequenting the Canal Street Madam's brothel, but that's a story for another time.

The director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) said it is time for Vitter to step up to the plate and answer for accusations stemming from the "D.C. Madam Scandal." In 2007, Vitter's name appeared on the client list of D.C. Madam Deborah Jeane Palfrey. According to CREW, Vitter's law license should be revoked for allegedly violating the state's rules of professional conduct for lawyers.
"Since that's a crime and Louisiana rules provide that committing any crime is a subject matter appropriate for discipline, we thought it was time for the Louisiana bar to take a look at Mr. Vitter's conduct," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW. ("Prostitution complaint filed against Vitter," WAFB Channel 9, Baton Rouge, 09.29/30.2009)

This is actually impressive, going for his law license. It could hamper his ability to make a living after his sordid and unfortunate time in public office. Louisiana should be ashamed, but then, so should Indiana with Dan Burton and his own issues with illicit sex, possibly treason.
But never underestimate the greed, shallowness, and stupidity of Louisianans, they could just as easily reelect him. Vitter's office issued a pathetic statement in response to CREW's move that utilizes that old tactic that "when the truth isn't on your side, you attack the credibility of the messenger." This week, Vitter and his cronies are taking this adage to heart and acting on it. Never mind the bullshit about Vitter wearing diapers--Jeane never confirmed this, and she probably wouldn't have known anyway, she was more concerned about making money.
The real issue is: should the rich and their employees like Vitter be above the law? For the rich, rednecks and the religiously insane, the answer is an unqualified "yes." We might just have that second American Civil War yet. You contributed to driving a disturbed woman to her death. How does that feel Senator Vitter? Do you know how weird and depraved that is and how it looks? To say that you're a pathetic asshole would be an understatement.

http://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=11227708

On my DC Madam account and the human condition

WWW--They say that when you get older, you get wiser. This is true, but how does a lot of this knowledge profit the wise? It just depends. I have descended into the bowels of hell in this story, it has been an eye-opener, even with my own jaundiced view of humanity. When you look at a story like this, one can only marvel at how many countless times it's played-out behind the scenes. But Jeane was a fighter and she wouldn't go quietly, leaving an unparalleled record of the circus going on in D.C. that would make a sociologist drool.

This is what makes the late Ms. Palfrey's saga so unique.

Jeane was hardly a saint, and I would dissuade anyone from looking at her as one. Sometimes, we're both victims and abusers, slaves and exploiters, but the more I learn about her and her life, the more I simply pity her and hate the well-heeled men who used her service and the woman who worked for it. All of these women were used, and used again, until they were no longer of any use. The disgusting prosecution team dragged these women before a court--not their powerful customers, something that's partly Jeane's fault--and made them recount gynecological experiences they had, the coarseness of the sex, and just went about humiliating all of them to protect morons like Sen. David Vitter. Rest assured that I will be getting very loud indeed next year when Davey comes up for reelection, you can bank on it.

Then, you have media turd and crooked lobbyist Jack Burkman Jr. who somehow managed to slip through the wire altogether. How did that happen? A compliant mainstream media, of course. From my own findings and materials, I can tell you without a hint of humor, sarcasm, or exaggeration, that Jack Burkman is making factually incorrect statements very consciously that he's not in the phone records of Pamela Martin & Associates. There's no question of this, and I would have no problem proving it was so in a court of law if seriously challenged. Challengers might recall that while the rules of evidence in Ms. Palfrey's RICO case were more relaxed in favor of the prosecution, there would be an advantage in that area on my end in a civil hearing, and I would win since the truth's on my side. After that, I would countersue whomever was foolish enough to challenge my assertion.

It's sounds strange to say this, but I'm becoming more and more convinced that much of the business going on in Washington D.C. is based around illegal gifting and blackmail. I believe that Jeane was part of this nexus of crime done under the color of authority and that it's all-but-institutionalized. The recent developments (also generally unreported by the mainstream media) in the Sibel Edmonds case and her August 8, 2009 statements under oath before a congressional committee underscore Palfrey's contention that she was being used in some kind of a "honey pot" operation.

At one point I thought I'd introduced the concept to Jeane and her counsel at the time (summer 2007), but after having read Sibley's own account--Why Just Her--and other materials that I've come across over the months, I can see they were already considering this factor in their defense. There had to be a very real reason for this beyond expediency and there are many things still under seal in the case, including ex parte meetings and filings by what I have to assume was the intelligence community, even the White House itself. Jeane and I had an interesting exchange on the phone once: I lamented the eternal quality of corruption. Her response was both profound and almost Buddhist when she stated, "Matt, there will always be corruption. New generations will be born and it will continue." That's true, but it had a tinge of nihilism to it that was confirmed by her suicide. All the more reason for eternal vigilance.

I enjoin all my readers who are interested in this case to buy counselor Sibley's account, do their own research for themselves, and ponder what really makes this system run the way it does. Yes, it's about patriarchy, and much, much worse. You don't even know the half of it. There could be a very good chance that the upcoming inquiries into the CIA, lobbying, the torture and warrantless wiretapping programs, and several other scandals under the Bush II administration, will elicit more information in the Palfrey/Hookergate scandal.

Expect my account spring/summer 2010.

Happy Holidays! Have hope!

Folks,

I'm not going to lie: it's not going to be a better year in 2009. Things are going to get much, much worse. But there is a light at the end of the tunnel, and that's all of us. It's not the ruling class that's going to do it, it's not Congress, and it's not Obama. We can fix the mess that Wall Street and the politicians in Washington D.C. made for all of us, and we can even turn the tide in a direction that benefits us, the average people in America.

But that means dropping the greed and selfishness. It means accepting that the market model is done and must be radically reformed. It's going to mean a very pointed return to progressive taxation of the rich. Consumerism is ending, jobs are evaporating everywhere, at all levels of society, and it boggles the mind. It doesn't matter. What matters is each individual recognizing what they can contribute to helping others and pressuring for change.

How will you know what to do and when? You'll know when it comes, but hear me out--the average person has, and always will be, the real "corrector" when the powerful have wrecked civilization. We're the people who clean-up their messes, yes, but out of that must come demands. Demand a better life. Resolve yourself that nothing comes from power without demands, and our lives will improve.

This doesn't mean going unprovoked out and beating-the-crap out of cops, although it will mean defending ourselves when we're met by illegal violence from the private sector and her allies within the State. Americans are going to learn what the term "togetherness" means once again, because we're all going to be hitting the streets soon enough, and the confrontations are coming. Discipline and a wariness for violence will be crucial.

Creativity in civil disobedience will be one of the keys.

We must hold to the law just as the Republic Windows and Doors folks did. President-elect Barack Obama endorsed the validity and legality of the sit-in at Republic, which is a good sign for his administration. Other signs aren't so reassuring, which is why we must all demand, and demand loudly that the system meet our basic human needs when things inevitably become worse.

There will be riots. There will be general strikes, and there will be the natural response of repression. History is back and the stagnation is ending.

Demands get results, but patience and wisdom are going to be necessary as well, and we must show lawful restraint. Let the protectors of this failed system do the law-breaking, then we can take care of them in the courts. Right now, there are more important things: Spend time with your loved ones. Make a real friend. Treasure what's valuable, which is the warmth and kindness of friends (real ones) and family. Demand peace, and demand justice where there is none. Demand investigations into the Bush II administration until we finally know everything that they did so we can really clean up this mess he's left us. He didn't do it alone. Congress enabled, encouraged, and defended him. So did the mainstream media. Their time is coming as well.

Happy Holidays, Matt Janovic