Tuesday, November 29, 2016

COMPUTER HACKING:  Did Foreign Intervention Install a US Government?



COMPUTER HACKING:  Did Foreign Intervention Install a US Government?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By: Ray Oliver New York Metropolitan Area-OliverNewMedia



NPR NEWS ANNOUNCED on November 28th that, computer experts at the University of Michigan have informed the California Election Board that voter returns could have been hacked.  This announcement is welcoming news for different reasons.

First, Michigan is the first public announcement, following my earlier articles, that there might be a connection between the earlier "scanning and probing" cyber attack and a potential cyber attack on our election’s computer voter returns.  The New York Times earlier reported that a cyber attack
NYT cyber attack  was conducted by a foreign government.  The foreign government attacked by “scanning and probing state voter registration rolls,” across the United States prior to the election.   The director of the National Security Agency refused to attribute the attack to the Russian government.  A different government used a Russian company to scan and probe state voter registration rolls across the US prior to the national election.

Secondly, having selected the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor, for the computational analysis was the perfect selection. It is encouraging that some had the intelligence to know where to go for this serious national issue.

There is no better place than Michigan at Ann Arbor to solve this election mystery.
Why is Michigan the perfect place?

The most active and advanced mathematical Supercomputing center is located at the University of Illinois at the Circle Campus.

"Circle" has a longstanding association with our intelligence agencies.  In addition, the university is under significant influence by that foreign government, which will rise to the top of the suspect list for hacking US computer voter returns, if evidence of computer hacking emerges.

That suspected foreign government has influence in the appointment and termination of professors on the Circle campus.  There is a history of that government, acting through local political and religious groups, of creating blacklists on academicians, who are critical of that government and their policies.
Who knows?  We may even discover that the Circle Campus Supercomputer was used in a (potential) cyber attack and distortion of our national election.  Of course, my statement here is speculation.  To use the Circle Campus supercomputing capabilities would require an obliteration of all signatures that the origin of the attack was connected to the CC computer.

This makes use of the Illini Circle supercomputing mathematical center, highly unlikely and improbable.

Michigan at Ann Arbor is the perfect choice, because Michigan's experts are not affected by that potential Circle Campus contamination.

There is another player to watch out for in future developments on the computational analysis playing field of voter returns.

Watch to see if University of Indiana becomes a player in these voter recounts.
Why watch Indiana University?

IU is one of the portals into our intelligence agencies.

Connections are made early at IU for introduction into the Agency (CIA).  Sometimes, these introductions come from University of Illinois at Circle and transfer to IU for further development and assimilation into the intelligence community.

When these voter recounts begin, with the participation of great computational analysts like Michigan at Ann Arbor, we can look forward to a "rockem-sockem" fight on what happened on November 8th.
There is even a potential for an unprecedented constitutional crisis on the legality of an incumbent president, if Swing State votes were distorted.   Additionally, there may be an earth-shaking revelation on just how fool-hearted America has been in its trust of a recidivist hostile agent country, pretending to be our friend.

After all, it was not too long ago that their espionage agent was sentenced to the longest prison term in US modern history, for causing, according to the US Department of Justice and the federal sentencing Judge, "the greatest damage to US national security in history."  This unprecedented foreign government damage to America followed that government's hijacking of a tractor-trailer along Route 80 in Pennsylvania, which carried weapons grade Plutonium.  It is this same foreign government, which smuggled the contraband Plutonium out of the US, callously endangering the lives of millions of Americans along the eastern seaboard.  This rogue government used the US stolen Plutonium to launch an illegal and clandestine nuclear weapons program, manufacturing more than 250 nuclear warheads over the past forty years.

This same government emotionally entrapped a US senior engineer who worked for one of the country's largest chemical companies.  They emotionally forced him to participate in their military top-secret program on Smoke.  It is a recidivist hostile country agent that "handled" their young married, US visiting Research Scientist, to steal academic research information and technology on Ceramics, from a large eastern state university.

It is the same hostile agent country, who during the Nixon administration, continuously stole copies of legislative materials transported for publication, where those materials could not make it across the street from the US Capitol Building to the Government Printing Office, without their embassy in the District secreting copies first.

The list is long.

Flipping a few US computer voter return digits to install a US government that earlier promised to give them their self-perceived Holy Grail, would be no problem for a government with this history.

Are memories so short-lived?

(c)oliver2016
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

NATURAL LAW AND THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE

NATURAL LAW AND THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


LET ME ANSWER (again) a question that some have asked me regarding the Electoral College.

Briefly:
The Electoral College was created out of the philosophy studied by the Founding Fathers and their strong belief in the Natural Law.

The Natural Law is the law of morality and ethics. Its most fundamental expression of principle is that "All men ought to act according to their true conscience." This is the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas in his work, Summa Theologica and earlier expressed by Plato in his works on "Metaphysics." The term Meta means "beyond." The term Physics means "the physical world."

Metaphysics is the study beyond the physical world that we live in.

The Founding Fathers believed that an essential function of a democracy is to express the will of an "informed" majority in the interest of the Public Good.

The Founding Fathers foresaw that their might arise a situation where the will of the majority contravenes the public good or may be an expression of an act against Ethics.

An example might be where the majority (plurality) of voters have voted to abolish their democracy and vote in a tyrannical government.

To address that potential dysfunction of a democracy, the Founding Fathers created an Electoral College that casts the votes to elect the President and Vice President.

Members of the Electoral College are equal in number to each state's members of the House of Representatives and their two Senators.

It is tradition for them to cast their votes for the winner of the plurality of votes in their states.

HOWEVER, as instilled by the Founding Fathers, these members of the Electoral College are NOT mandated to cast their votes for the majority winner of their state.  Some states have enacted party rules or state statutes which attempt to mandate loyal voting or disqualify disloyal voting.  These statutes or rules are of no consequence when contemplating the historical backdrop to the formation of the Electoral College and their ethical duty to act according to true conscience. 

The members of the Electoral College are dictated by their conscience to cast their votes on behalf of their state's constituency.

IF A MEMBER of the Electoral College's true conscience does not allow them to cast their vote for the majority winner of their state, then they OUGHT to act only according to their true conscience and cast their vote accordingly.

THEREFORE, a member of the Electoral College is NOT obligated to cast their votes, except according to their true conscience.

Theoretically, the members of the Electoral College may cast their votes for Hillary Clinton or even for a third party candidate, without regard to the majority vote winner in their state.

Whether these electoral college members will cast their votes for a candidate other than their state's winning candidate is extremely unlikely. The members will vote for their state's winner, unless a catastrophic event occurs which allows them to be guided by their conscience when casting their votes.

There is no chance of the electoral college viewing the election of Donald Trump as a conscience shaking event. There is no chance that Hillary Clinton will be given the electoral votes from the states where she lost the plurality of the votes.

The Natural Law, which supercedes any conventional laws made by man, does not apply to or favor Hillary Clinton when the Electoral College casts their votes.
(c)oliver2016
-----------------------------
UPDATED: See comment below in answer to point raised on Trump's "fitness to serve."

*** [ An unfit person, is only one potential event, which can lead the EC to elect a candidate, other than the plurality winner of their state.

As I explained above, the EC is based on Natural Law principles studied by Thomas Jefferson and others. (Because we were only permitted to study primary sources, I was required to read the same original, rare text book on Natural and Politic Law, by J.J. Burlamaqui, that Jefferson studied from, in addition to studying the Letters of Thomas Jefferson.)

Any time a member of EC votes, they are duty-bound to vote their true conscience. The reality is that the EC will cast their votes for the plurality winner of their state. There is nothing in this past election that would change the minds of enough EC college members to vote otherwise. ...

BUT, a person  raised a valid point.
The  issue of whether Trump is the type of candidate that should not receive the EC vote, is problematic.

In Ethics, Trump could be deemed to be unfit to serve as president. The statement of Pope Francis that Trump "lacks the moral qualifications to lead a country," raises an ethical dilemma for the EC. Although Ethics does not arise from religious principles, the Pope clearly is an authority on ethics and morality.

In Ethics, the Pope's assessment of Trump is conclusive in recognizing that ethics dictates that  in order to act morally, "one ought not to vote for Trump." This moral dictate applies to the members of the electoral college.

Therefore, it is correct, that in Ethics, members of the EC "ought" not to vote for Trump, in order to act morally.]
(c)oliver2016
-----------------:
Note: For further study, SEE: Fagothy, Austin. "Right & Reason."
Austin Fagothy was a modern day, world-renowned philosopher who taught at the University of Santa Clara. Prof. Fagothy's text is highly recommended. It is a concise statement of argument of the pros and cons on major ethical issues, written with incomparable clarity