While I was scouring the web for new and interesting information, I went back to a site I hadn't been to for at least 2 years. I looked at "Fuelless Flight" and pondered as to why nothing more seems to have come of it. You'd think the aircraft industry would be all over something like this, what with the rising costs of jet fuel along with everything else. Imagine it. An aircraft that uses no fuel at all.

The Truth Is Out There

I then decided to look around for topics on alternative energy and found myself, somehow, at "The Disclosure Project". I'm as much a skeptic about UFOs, alien encounters and the like as anyone, yet I felt compelled to download and watch the Windows media file they had available for download.

I sat and watched nearly 2 hours of testimony at a press club conference from 2001, headed by Steven M. Greer, MD, a doctor who left his position at a well-paying hospital job to pursue the truth about extraterrestrials and the worldwide conspiracy to suppress the information from the general public by a "shadow government".

I even took the time to skim the part of Dr. Greer's book available online, "Hidden Truth – Forbidden Knowledge". If there's any truth to the stories, someday we'll be in for a rude awakening.

The Christian Biblical History

In AD 325, the First Council of Nicaea, summoned by Roman Emperor Constantine and held in Nicaea in Bithynia (present-day İznik in Turkey), resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine called the Nicene Creed. It was there that books included in the modern-day Christian bible were considered and chosen as being of divine origin. I wonder if they knew what they were reading.

There are examples of close encounters by people such as Ezekiel and Elijah and there may be more. The authors described the events and objects as best as they could, using the language of the time and comparing them to things they knew of.

My Conclusions

The reason the truth, if it is indeed the truth, hasn't been disclosed to the public and never will be is because of what would happen. Can you imagine the widespread panic and chaos that would ensue? Spiritual faith, for many people, would be completely shattered. For some, it would be strengthened.

Knowledge can be dangerous as well as enlightening. Perhaps the information and technology of alternative energy sources has to be slowly disseminated in order to prevent (or postpone) the imminent collapse of our civilization. I, personally, do not know what to make of all of what I've read and seen over the years.

We do, indeed, live in interesting times.

When I was in high school I was encouraged, rather forced, to read a book called “All Quiet on the Western Front”, by Erich Maria Remarque. The book is a WW I war novel about the truth of war. In the novel the author vividly describes the battlefield that lies between your compadres and the enemy. This area is described in the novel as “no-mans-land”. No mans land is a place where there are no friends and you’re as likely to be shot by your own side as you are by the enemy.

In one of my previous posts, “Honesty”, Matthew Jabs commented “The reason a lot of people lie is to protect someone else’s feelings”.

The simple statement, although obvious, caused me to think.

I try to live my life honorably, treating people as I want to be treated and trying not to misrepresent the truth or tell the truth, leaving out important facts that help define the truth. I also try to learn from history and from experiences I have had. For instance when my wife asks me, “Do these pants make me look fat?” experience has taught me that the answer is ALWAYS a resounding “No”. The answer is nearly as automatic as a reflex now as I’ve learned any, even minor, hesitation will be interpreted as a “Yes” regardless of what I say.

Why hesitate? My mind races, processing more data in a few moments than the newest CPU sitting on Intel’s test bed. I might be thinking; “Wow, I don’t like that color, those are too short or too long to be seen in public, why are the pockets spaced the way they are, who thought it would look good to use orange thread in green cloth, isn’t it great the way those pants make her butt look like an upside down heart, those shoes don’t really go with those pants, I wonder if anyone is reading my latest blog entry, does she like those pants, how does she expect me to answer, am I in the mood for a discussion about her butt, . . . and finally . . . how do those pants make her look?”

I’ve been in this “no-mans-land” before and without hesitation I answer, “They look great honey”. She smiles and slowly walks away knowing that I still love her.

It seems Matthew Jabs was right, we do occasionally lie to protect someone else’s feelings and that’s okay.

History has moved us to the present where still we have not learned to emotionally connect with one another in the way we each need. This is understandable, given our harsh past. As infants we cry until exhausted under the caring and watchful eyes of daycare. We receive our training at cold, mind dulling, schools, and we work in environments where innocently showing affection could lead to sexual harassment charges. We pretend to be 'normal'. The pretending and lies we tell, in an attempt to hide our uniqueness and to ‘fit in’ leave in their path unbearable loneliness. Perhaps after this generation and the next, far into more hundreds of years, we will learn to respect and cherish those things which make us unique, for it is our uniqueness that make us lovable.

Man and woman must join together realizing theirs is not a union if they act unequal as is taught. We must replace inequality with shared dreams and truth. Unequal partners are not partners and can not share anything of value. Mates must know what beliefs they hold close and let these beliefs be known to each. True love is possible today for those who have the energies for truth and prefer its reality to that of games and pretending.

Being truthful to myself and others is important. If I am not then I become enslaved to something outside of love. I learn all that makes me whom I am through honest, sometimes critical, introspection. My thoughts and actions don’t frighten me or cause me guilt because I explore them until I understand who I am.

When still a child, I was told I should not think certain ideas. I thought them anyway. I learned that through contrast truth became evident. I have the ability to apply my energies, both hot and cold, toward evil or good actions. It is my choice to decide how I use these energies and my responsibility to create a harmonization of my personal characteristics.

It's through these experiences that I learn proper blends of energy (cold and hot) to use so that my actions may be good and hopeful. These are the characteristics I want to nurture and contribute to humanity.

Take one sensationalist headline on a topic that Digg users are interested in. Add a personal experience, some personal beliefs, a few questions and stir. Wait for someone to submit the article to Digg and 9 hours later, front page!

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. I am not a person in a position of authority. I am not a professional anything. I am retired. The country in question is the United States of America.

The headline is not really any more sensationalist than the MPAA message on DVDs that says "Downloading pirated movies is stealing", comparing it the theft of a car or a purse. The difference is that their statement is designed to instill FUD. By stating that it's theft, it paints anyone doing it as a common criminal. Downloading a pirated file of any kind can not be classified as anything greater than a copyright infringement. Copyright infringement is a civil matter (except in cases covered by the NET Act in which it can be a criminal matter). If your act of downloading is not covered by the NET Act, you are not guilty of a crime. For the sake of argument, let's exclude the NET Act. The MPAA called you a thief, a criminal. What do you think about that? Especially since, in the case of a civil matter, you can be sued but not tried for a crime.

That's how simple it is, but the **AAs would have you think otherwise. In my previous article Downloading Pirated Anything Is NOT Illegal, I stated that downloading in itself was not illegal. It should have been "not theft" instead of "not illegal". I was being misleading, but no more so than the **AAs.

Truth be told, that article should never have made it to the front page of Digg, especially after all the bad things I've said about Digg users on this blog. I didn't submit the article and I wouldn't have submitted it. I didn't believe it was worthy and most of my articles on Digg usually get buried or ignored anyway.

The article rose to the front page in 9 hours. That allowed plenty of time for it to get buried. If anyone is angry about the comments following the article, or the comments following the post on Digg, you have no one to blame but yourself and your herd mentality.

Summary: Downloading ANY file can be legal or illegal depending on the situation. The situation dictates the legality, not the actual act. Copyright infringement is not equal to the legal definition of theft.

I had an interesting discussion in an article thread on Plime about downloading pirated music that didn't start out that way. The other person said that he knew that downloading pirated music was illegal and that got me started.

In 2001, I spent hours and hours reading and researching this very topic, but for software. I had copies of the copyright acts and publications mailed to me from the Library of Congress (I couldn't find them on the Internet). I had a software program that I wanted to distribute and I wanted to find out what kind of legal protections I had from someone just taking the software and using it without paying for it.

I read every bit of information I could find, including case law. I studied the DMCA. Since then I have studied the NET Act. I have studied everything I could find. Guess what? I could not find a single line in any act that said that downloading anything was illegal, or even anything that could be construed to mean it.

There are organizations with websites that bluntly state that downloading pirated files is illegal but fail to cite a reference of any kind. I found one this evening and my discussion partner found another. They confuse the issues of file sharing and fair use with downloading as well as uploading.

I submit that there's a legitimate reason there is no law covering the downloads. I believe it's because you cannot know for certain that a file is pirated until it is in your possession. File names mean nothing. Fake music files planted on Kazaa prove it. Fake video files planted on torrent sites prove it. Even non-pirated files get named with titles that could be misconstrued as being pirated. I also believe that intent is insufficient to come to the conclusion that a person is attempting to download a pirated file.

I also submit that the videos preceding certain movies and other texts that state that "downloading pirated movies is stealing" are lies intended to spread FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt). If a lie is repeated enough and in enough places, it can become the truth for a lot of people (or sheeple).

I am not a perfect person and I never claim to be. If you can cite a reference to an actual law that says anything to the effect that downloading a pirated file of any kind is illegal, you will be my blogging buddy for life (or until I don't blog anymore, whichever comes first).

Addendum: I have a few simple questions because everyone knows how sue happy the RIAA is: There are many, many more downloaders of pirated music than there are uploaders. Wouldn't it be more profitable and send a stronger signal if they were suing the downloaders for copyright infringement as well as the uploaders (file sharers)? Have you heard of a case yet? Can you point me to it?

Update: I'm not responding to any more comments. Please read my Followup to the Previous Article.

While I'm not an atheist or agnostic, I really do have an issue with Christian-based religions. The clergy, citing the Holy Bible as an authority, have a moral responsibility to tell nothing but the truth. Why is it then, that when you ask them a question they can't answer, they brush it off without bothering to do the research? What about the followers? Too many that I've known over the years take the words of the church leaders as facts without checking the references for themselves.

I want to use a controversial topic as an example: Polygamy. I heard a national broadcast where a preacher answered the question of why Solomon had so many wives. The preacher said that Solomon married them all to get around the issue of adultery. This is complete and utter hogwash. People actually believe this lie! The reason polygamy existed before the Christian-based churches denounced it was because the definition of adultery in those days was the not same definition we have of it today. If our current definition of adultery IS the same, then why were some specific people in the Old Testament blessed by God despite living in this sin? It doesn't work both ways.

I not only have an issue with the church leaders, but the followers as well. The followers need to crack open the good book and read for themselves instead of asking so many questions. If they can read, they can understand the majority of it. The only help they ever need is interpretation of ambiguous passages.