Questions for Justin Oldham

I'm willing to share my favorite link on the subject of how to disappear. It's an oldy but a goody, and anyone can find it if they bother to look.

If you're done, then you're done. I don't think you're being genuine with the ATS community, but that's just an opinion. I hope you find something good to put your energies in to. We've all experienced our share of injustices. We all crave validation. If you don't want to make your case to this community, you don't have to.



[edit on 30-5-2007 by Justin Oldham]

What do you find to be the most restricting aspects to living in Alaska?

I'm not sure that I fully understand the extent to how isolated living there can be, much in the same way living in Hawaii can be isolating.

Forgive me if I sound like I'm pre-judging the place, but what many people like myself are taught who are from the East Coast growing up is that Alaska is a beautiful wild place with only a few places where people live. I am sure it is much more than that.

Freethinking is an extension, no doubt, of the vast expanses of land that surround you there. And its also a good thing it has produced a writer of your caliber and been a medium for your growth.

In short, thanks for your contributions here on ATS, from a slightly more than occasional contributor.

Newtron

Hello Justin. As always, your words ring true here. I took the time to read that entire linked page above. Those days of fantasizing about disappearing and starting over are all but no more. What that judge had said at the very bottom really put things into perspective for me. I dont think we are just paranoid anymore. I believe the reality of day to day living can and will be scrutinized by someone somewhere, at all times. I am always leary about the amount of personal information that is asked of us as a condition to conduct a simple transaction. I don't know where this will all lead to, but I can bet that it wont be the America we all once cherished.

Originally posted by newtron25
What do you find to be the most restricting aspects to living in Alaska?

Alaska is one of those places that you have to see to believe. I don't say that so you can ooh and aahh over the trees and wildlife. It's a place that has a genuinely "different" social dynamic.

Low population density isa plus, but I do live in the largest city in the State. Anchorage has a population of 350,000. We've got KFC, Blockbuster, hookers, and eight movie therieaters of varying sizes. Anything you can find in a major city can be found here, to include the crime. We are "civilized."

The rural communities, what we call "the bush" aren't as primitive as many ofthe t.v. documentaries will lead you to believe. Yes, they might ride the dog sleg in winter to get their mail, but they've got all the cell phone and internet you could ever want.

Alaska is not good for me professionally. I can't get an agent for avariety of reason, most of which have to due with my geography. Literary agents are persnickity about some things. If you're not easy to get face time with, they don't want to talk to you. I still try, and I get the letters that say, "Your works sounds fantaastic, but I'm not interested in having a client who lives in Alaska, of all places."

I make my trek tothe post office every other week to mail stuff, and I take my chances like everyone else who submitts to traditional publishers. Eventually, some young publisher risk-taking with a backbone is going to see my stuff and say, "hey..."

California is often called theland of fruits and nuts. Alaska doesn't have that flashy nick-name but we do get a similar bad rap from the national press. I have eaten whale blubber, but it's not a regular part of my diet. I have stayed overnight in an igloo, and they really do beat the heck out of Motel 6. I've learned how to drive a dog team, but I much prefer a Jeep. the Aleut, Inuit, Tlingit, and Athabascan natives of this region are worth knowing, even if they do call me "that fat guy from the big city."

There is a conspiracy community up here, but its not very big. As you may know, Art Bell once worked at KFAR radio station in Fairbanks. Most of them don't know I exhist, but I have been in the room when a few of them have talked about seeing my stuff on ATS. I actually do kinda enjoy the stealth and the chance to be anonymous. Somebody told me (within the last year) "You should learn how to write like that guy on ATS. He's from Alaskan. It might imrpove your chances of getting published."

The time is fast approaching when I'll need to leave Alaska if I want to really make anything of my writer's career. I'll do it if I must, but until that days comes...I'll keep on being insired by what goes on around me in this great State.

Originally posted by shadow watcher
I am always leary about the amount of personal information that is asked of us as a condition to conduct a simple transaction. I don't know where this will all lead to, but I can bet that it wont be the America we all once cherished.

I was willing to answer the question seriously, even though I questioned the poster's motives. I've heard it said that change is always hard. In this case, we are faced with changes that are to us counter-intuitive. We disagree because they are so clearly meant to create a future condition which bears no resemblance to anything we can relate to.

I really do think that what we say now will matter to future generations. I think that our kids and theri grand kids are going to look back for guidance on the issues that trouble them. Yea, sure. We're probably going to lose this fight, if we're smart we'll leave behind enough wisdom to tell the future citizens of this country why we thought as we did.

In the same way that The Federalist Papers were meant to speak to future generations, we must find the time in ourown way to write, publish, post, or otherwise engrave our message so that it will survive and be found. If you want to fight a conspiracy with a conspiracy of your own, this would be your best bet. Why? The folks in power will never suspect you of taking the time to show your work and make yoru case in such a way that future generations can understand what you said...and act on it in their own way.

I follow your posts closely as I feel there is a lot that we can learn from what you are sharing with us.

Now for my question:

Of all the government conspiracies and activities you have posted on, Which concerns you the most in terms of its possible affects and why?

Originally posted by Ghost01
Of all the government conspiracies and activities you have posted on, Which concerns you the most in terms of its possible affects and why?

Everything you see in this forum is inter-connected. Each individual factor contributes to a larger problem. Because I've been a Federal civil servant, I've seen this beast from the inside. It says a lot that I could be a small minor insignificant nobody and still run in to it on a regular basis.

The most genuine and real cosnpriacy that I know of from first-hand experience in this country today is the threat of centralized power. Most of the people in government will contribute to it without ever knowing that they do so. The smallest minority of top brass know what they're doing, and they choose not to put the brakes on so that they can benefit from it.

Even if you take away the conspirators, we'd still be faced with the growth trend that's commonly found in all bureaucracies. In a better world, your civic duty would be to serve the greater good without growing the bureacuracy that employs you. A zero-growth paradigm may not be possible in governmetn, but slow-er growth is definitely possible.

The conspirators are not stupid. They really do know that most of you are unaware of them or what they intend to do. When a President goes on t.v. to explain why he's enacting a policy that takes a bite out of your civil literties, he or she actively engaged in that conspiracy to grow government. As much as that makes you mad, you've got to realize that what people like Bush43 do amounts to less than a third of that growth in Federal power.

As you read this, the Federal work force numbers just over two million persons. In round numbers, twenty percent of that would be managers and people with power over policy and money. That's roughly four hundred thousand souls. Half of those will do as they're told and nothing more. The other half will carve out their own little feifdoms. Some of that 'reward' comes in the form of stolen money. For most, its all about position authority and promotions.

Before you grab that keyboard, stop and think about this. Private sector businesses grow only when the money is there for them to grow. If I start a coffee stand and it thrives, I can think about opening another. If it fails, I've got to find another job. government has no profit motive. The people who have power over money in government have no real incentive to be fiscally responsible. There's an old joke in civil service that says "We will print more money if we need it."

The people at the top used to be the people at the bottom. They know what goes on. They earn the title of "conspirator" when they willingly participate in this corruption. Yes, I do know that corruption exists in the private sector, but I'm talking to you in the context of what I have seen with my own eyes.

There is no one single fix for this problem. Yes, I know what I wrote in my novel, and if you were paying attention you'd know that what I suggested came in the form of a multi-part proposition. We're either going to do what the Europeans have done and learn to live with this, or...

One last thing before I take off to barbacue on this Saturday night. I'm just one struggling writer with one book in limited release. Yes, I know that will all change soon enough, but here's my point. If I can do this...so can you. The only difference between me and is that I've been at this long enough to gain some traction. My traction thus far has landed me on ATS. If you speak up long enough about the things that you care about, you can eventually reach a position where you will be heard. If that's not enough incentive, I don't know what could be.

I'm pleased to report that my personal web site is finally in development. You can see it HERE. I'd like to thank the person who made this possible, but he doesn't want his name mentioned. "I prefer to remain anonnymous," he says.

Most of what you'll see on that page relates to the profesional side of me, but...there are a few surprises tucked away for those who are willing to look. We have plans to add more material, but that will come slowly because we're trying to do this on the cheap and in our spare time. It's a full time job to be a struggling writer and self-promoter.

Thanks again to all of you who asked for this. I'm sorry that it has taken more than a year, but hey. Good things come to those who wait. I hope that this site will answer some of your questions. Please feel free to drop me a note if you want to talk about anything you see on my page.

[edit on 20-7-2007 by Justin Oldham]

OK my questions concern your views on the Vietnam War.
Do you think think that the Vietnam War war was lost due to the decisions made by US civilian and military leaders or by the people who opposed ?

Do you think that the illogical claims that the wars opponents were the cause the failure of the US and its allies in Vietnam is just away of distracting from the fact that the political leaders they supported errored ?

I ask these questions for two reasons. The first is that I have only ever heard such fraudulent logic from Americans. I have never heard it from Vietnam veterans that come outside of the US including my Dad.
The second reason is that we appear to be facing such logic again when it comes to Iraq it looks like we be hearing the same thing from the people who are trapped in there own little worlds which are removed from reality.

Iraq and Vietnam have a lot in common. Chief among their similiaries would be the fact that U.S. civilian leaders made bad decisions which doomed their military campaigns to failure. Then as now, our troops have gone in to battle with their hands tied. Inspite of that, they have still done remarkable things. The blame for failure rests with our civilian leaders.

Hi Justin.. here are some thoughts that a friend of mine have been working on..

How do you think the Republicans can overcome their handicaps?

I'm not sure that everyone would agree on just what the Republicans'
handicaps are.

It appears from the media, and from talking to many of my own acquaintances, that primary among those handicaps are the Iraq war and
the various intelligence-gathering initiatives of the Bush administration
that are perceived as dangerous erosions of personal liberties.

The Republicans' ties to the religious right may also be perceived as a
liability. There are others, of course, as perceived by various nterest
groups.

The question at hand evidently relates to issues, positions, and
personalities that are unpopular enough as to make it difficult for the Republicans to regain seats in Congress and the presidency in the next
election. If so, there would seem to be four basic ways to overcome such
handicaps or liabilities, although the first one may not count.

I will address them each in turn, even though they are not mutually exclusive.

First, and perhaps most obvious to some, the Republicans could change
their positions on the issues that the undecided voters believe are
important, adopting more popular positions. But is it really fair to answer the question in this way?

If the Republicans change or morph into something different than they are today, then doesn't the question become moot? Isn't eliminating handicaps different from overcoming them?

Second, the Republicans could try to convince more people that their
positions are the right ones. It must be remembered that many of the
perceived liabilities of the Republicans are only liabilities election-wise if the majority of the populace disagree with them.

Each party has a devoted base that is not likely to change no matter what. There is a much smaller group of people that are not devoted but swing back and forth, depending on what's hot and what's not. It's those people that both parties have to deal with (after the primaries, at least).

Unfortunately, we know that with enough money smartly devoted to media, you can convince many people of almost anything. It might be conjectured that the people not strongly affiliated with the two parties are generally less interested in politics, less educated about public affairs, and therefore easier to sway than party devotees.

The third would be to turn the elections into contests of competing
liabilities; that is, into choices of the lesser evils. By this I mean,
using the media to convince people that the Democrats have even worse
problems. This has certainly worked in the past and seems to be
becoming more popular. This approach works particularly well regarding tax increases.

Fourth, the Republicans could come up with new issues or develop new
positions or solutions to problems. In other words, you turn the focus
of the voters to new issues and away from the problem issues.

This may be almost the same as the first approach above (which in my view is an illegitimate answer to the question), but I think it is different
enough to be considered. There are many problems in the country that many people believe need to be addressed, but neither party has proposed much in the way of real solutions. Decaying infrastructure (e.g., bridges) is one.


Healthcare is arguably another. For another, I submit that the rise of
supermonopolies and oligopolies in so many industries has become a huge
problem. Whatever happened to enforcement of the antitrust laws?

I have never understood why Republicans think big government is so bad, but unregulated big business is so good. (Well, on some level, perhaps I do understand why.)

The Democrats, on the other hand, just want to tax the
hell out big business, which doesn't accomplich much in the long run.

Originally posted by zysin5
Hi Justin.. here are some thoughts that a friend of mine have been working on. How do you think the Republicans can overcome their handicaps?

There is no one quick fix for the Republican party. If you have had a chance to read the things I've posted in this forum, you'll already know that I think the big picture solution can be found in better civics. The trends in government, as I've defined them, make up the most real conspiracy that I know of. Our poliitcal and social elties are battling for total control, and they might just get if it we're not careful.

Originally posted by zysin5
I'm not sure that everyone would agree on just what the Republicans'
handicaps are. It appears from the media, and from talking to many of my own acquaintances, that primary among those handicaps are the Iraq war and the various intelligence-gathering initiatives of the Bush administration that are perceived as dangerous erosions of personal liberties.

Democrats and Republicans alike suffer from too much power, and too much access to every temptiaton. In the past, civil propriety was enough to curb the appetites of politicians. As long as they did the peole's business, they could pretty much get away with anything they cared to do. Their flagrant attitudes have gone unsanctioned for nearly two centuries. The simple fact of the matter is that hey really do suffer from too much elitism.

Originally posted by zysin5
The Republicans' ties to the religious right may also be perceived as a
liability. There are others, of course, as perceived by various interest
groups.

The religious right and the religious left each have ridden the social pendulum. At different points in our history, each has had more power. At this point in time, the religous right is in decline. Eventually, the religouos left will take things to oo far and they too will fall from everyone's good graces.

Originally posted by zysin5
The question at hand evidently relates to issues, positions, and
personalities that are unpopular enough as to make it difficult for the Republicans to regain seats in Congress and the presidency in the next
election.

You're stating the obvious, and you've answered your own questions.

Originally posted by zysin5
Each party has a devoted base that is not likely to change no matter what. There is a much smaller group of people that are not devoted but swing back and forth, depending on what's hot and what's not. It's those people that both parties have to deal with (after the primaries, at least).

I think you might be a little over-generalized. "The middle" as you're defining it is largeer than you suggest. It's worth noting that Libs and conservatives alike are unhappy about many of the Bush administration's initiatives. You CAN be a conservative and still vote against your fellow Republicans because they've done something you don't like. As a purely practical matter, you will see a lot of registered Republicans voting to turn out GOP encumbents as a way of showing their displeasure with the war in Iraq. The voting patterns we see in the '08 primaries may turn out as you suggest, the November election will be a different matter.

Originally posted by zysin5
Unfortunately, we know that with enough money smartly devoted to media, you can convince many people of almost anything. It might be conjectured that the people not strongly affiliated with the two parties are generally less interested in politics, less educated about public affairs, and therefore easier to sway than party devotees.

I recently had the opportunity to be a guest speaker for a room full of undecided voters. It's true that many of them didn't have college doplomas, but hourly pay is no barometer for intelligence or political awareness. It's been my experience that these people are actually harder to convince when it comes to politics. Why? Arguments don't mean much to them. The proof they want comes in the form of what impacts them.

Originally posted by zysin5
The third would be to turn the elections into contests of competing
liabilities; that is, into choices of the lesser evils. By this I mean,
using the media to convince people that the Democrats have even worse
problems. This has certainly worked in the past and seems to be
becoming more popular. This approach works particularly well regarding tax increases.

In a class room, you are correct. However, the real world fact in this case is that the GOP candidates are just as flawed as their Democrat counterparts. In some case, they are more flawed. Hre is an old sayingthat people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. It's worth noting that Mitt Romney is the only Republican front-runner who has NOT been divorced two or more times. He may very well be the "cleanest" of the GOP contenders at this time.

Originally posted by zysin5
Fourth, the Republicans could come up with new issues or develop new
positions or solutions to problems. In other words, you turn the focus
of the voters to new issues and away from the problem issues.

I agree. Ultimately, this is the one thing they will have to do. During their time out of power, they will have to re-invent themselves. That's going to mean encouraging the involvement of people like YOU who can help them shed their old skin in favor of new ideas and new points of view.

Originally posted by zysin5
I have never understood why Republicans think big government is so bad, but unregulated big business is so good. (Well, on some level, perhaps I do understand why.) The Democrats, on the other hand, just want to tax the hell out big business, which doesn't accomplich much in the long run.

Both parties have said a lot about big business, and both have continued to rake in billions through their corporate associations. Old-school paleo-conservatives want smaller government in that they want lean and streamlined bureaucracies that get the biggest bang out of every tax dollar they spend. Today's GOP has lost its way. It no longer champions the case for small nimble government. The simple truth is that both parties want the same thing. They both want total power and the wealth that comes with it.

You've seen that argument made here on ATS and on other sites. The only real difference between these two parties any more is the route the intend to take. The GOP favors big business for a faster payout. The Dems favor increased government because they're thinking long term. It's that whole high-road, low-road thing.

I don't like it any more than you do. I do think that we're fast approaching that moment where the machinery breaks. When that happens, I am hopeful for the future. I think we've got what it takes to survive the storm and make the fixes. It'll be messy, and it'll certainly take a lot of people by surprise. That's why people like you and me are here, talking about these things. Some day, when the stunned masses, look back for some guidance, they'll have a look at conversations like this. Who knows? You may be the one to influence somebody to do some good when it is needed the most.

Hello, folks. A lot of things are changing in my life just now. Some new business opportunities are opening up for me, and I'm getting ready to go back to college for a Master's Degree. At some point, I expect this to mean my departure from ATS. It's all about time management. Only so much time in the day, and all that. 2007 has been a very good year for me, and I'm looking forward to 2008 with all the excitement I can stand.

As of today, I start work on a very large research project. That'll be the first thing that eats in to my time. You know how it is with certain kinds of research. Back-tracking often leads to junk. No fun, but its got to be done. I know, and now you know.

reply to post by Justin Oldham


Thats great Justin!! Best of luck to you!! I know you will be missed on here Just concentrait on the prize that lies before you..
You are given the gift of words, I only forsee the best for you JO
Take care, and when you have some extra time stop by and see us here.

Peace friend.
zysin5

PS- Thanks for letting me know that you know.. Now we all know
And knowing is half the battle!! The other half, is the actions of the man!
And I must say Justin, you have been a great inspiration to me on here!!
I know you will rise to do great things!

I look forward to hearing about your progress, please keep us informed when you have some free time.






[edit on 24-9-2007 by zysin5]

I have heard it said that good citizenship is hard. Some times, it can mean questioning things that make you uncomfortable. It's never easy to speak up, even if you do have the gift of words. My hope is that you'll see what I've done here, and set out do more. If I can do this, so can you.

In our own ways, we should all be Conspiracy Masters. We don't have to wear the tinfoil hats, although they are stylish. We don't have to spin wild theories. All we have to do is ask the harder questions. that's what I've tried to do here. Have I been wrong? Yes. Have I been right? Sadly, I have. When it comes to the threat we face from our own government, I always want to be wrong.

If the time should come and you are fortunate enough to find yourself in the position to be an advocate for something, bear in mind that you're not a slave to it. You don't have to do it for the rest of your life. Once you've said your piece, move on. Over time, you'll see new faces on ATS. They too will come and go. They'll say what's on their minds, and they'll move on. That may not sound like anything big, but it is. Why? Because its never easy to make your case in an arena where others can question you.

The idea of going back to school is a little daunting. Even so, we all need to re-invent from time to time. Now, its my turn.

It's now looking like Monday (October 1st) will be my last day here on ATS. I've got some final commentary to put in certain threads, and then a little house cleaning to do. Then, it'll be time to go.

Hi Justin,

Congrats! Hope 2008 is just as good for you as 2007!

I'm new to ATS and I've just read through your site. I'm not aware of your work, but you seem to know about government info, etc.

Do you know if Dr. Jose Delgado was part of Project Monarch rather than MKULTRA since I believe them to be separate. The info I've read on Delgado is very sketchy, yet there are a lot of years of secrecy between his time at Yale University until he "stopped the bull" that was charging him in 1969(?). I don't believe that he would have faced a charging bull until he was 100% sure his device would stop the animal. So, in my opinion he had lots of years of implanting devices not just in monkeys and cats, but predominantly in human beings. I'm also surmising that Delgado's work is part of the CIA documents which have not been declassified as of yet.

Would appreciate your feedback about Delgado, if you can before you leave ATS!

Best of Luck to You..........

Rubyteacup

Hello Rubyteacup:

Mr. Delgado's work is outside my are of expertise. You will find a lot of information on ATS about implants, and I do encourage you to look it up. In the upper right-hand corner of your computer screen, you'll see the ATS search engine. Type in "implants" or even "Delgado" and you will most likely have hours worth of reading to do.

The implants featured in my work were not associated with Mr. Delgado's research. Although I have portrayed the use of some behavior modification in my fiction, I can't speak to the matter of implants as well as other ATS members can.

If anyone can send a u2 to Rubyteacup with ATS links relating to implants, I would be grateful.

My plans for grad school haven't worked out as I'd hoped. I will be making a slow and gradual comeback to ATS in 2008. I hope to start new threads and esays in this forum by early January. I'd like to thank the many who have stayed in touch with me for their encouragement. 2008 promises to be a busy year for all of us.

hey thanks for all your hardwork!!!!

now my question is----what happened to all the secret spies, covert agents, and hitmen of the 60's???? it seems we now send in big troop numbers and major enforcements

what happened to these covert spies and undercover ops

or maybe this does still go on??? i just don't know.

we should have sent a sniper after saddam not 170,000 troops

iran too!!! or if we see a nuclear facilty send a u-2 or b-1 over and blow it up and deny, deny,deny

although this might not totally solve problems, it will slow them down and set them back a bit---just buy time--------besides the iraq war isn't solved and probably won't be---- what would a sniper have cost compared to our current bill???

i could be totally wrong here---but in my head it seems like a good idea and as successful as full blown wars and actual declared strikes

of course i forget we didn't go to iraq to win a war or solve anything---it was all about dollars----and i forget that sometimes

but i would like your opinion on this----

i just bought a couple spy books so i got thinking about this

like today that lady buttin????being assasinated---it will set that party and their goals back quite a bit--they have to regroup now--just an example although she wasn't a terrorist or anything