THE TRUTH ABOUT TRUTH:

All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.



Thursday, April 18, 2013

THE SHROUD SPEAKS TO ME (Or, AN ANTONACCI IN THE COMMENT SECTION IS WORTH TWO IN THE BURNING BUSH)

.
This certainly isn’t the political and (hopefully) humorous blog bit I was intending to post here tonight. That will have to wait a little while longer, because this is too exciting (to me, anyway) to hold back.

On June 29, 2005, I posted a review at BigBitch.com for the book ‘THE RESURRECTION OF THE SHROUD’ by Mark Antonacci. The review was titled Atheists, Be Afraid. Be VERY AFRAID!’

My book review included the following paragraph:

Once you've grasped the complexity of it, you'll understand why John Walsh has written, "The Shroud of Turin is either the most awesome and instructive relic of Jesus Christ in existence... or it is one of the most ingenious, most unbelievably clever products of the human mind and hand on record. It is one or the other; there is no middle ground." And how the respected scientist, John Heller, could claim that, "If you were to give me a budget of ten million dollars and told me to make a replica of [the Shroud]... I would not know how to do it."

The review also featured the chameleon-like Yoey O'Dogherty disguised as an internationally renowned Peruvian poet. And therein lies part of the problem, but, as Waylon sang, “I don’t explain if you don’t understand”.

The only comment that review ever received came in April of 2009 - nearly four years after the review was published. The first sentence of the comment was: "This review was interesting and well written but I have to take strong exception to the title, "Atheists, be afraid. Be very afraid!" (and in caps, no less)."

I have to respectfully disagree with the commenter. But, no, it’s not what you’re thinking. Actually, I still like the review’s title. But I have always disagreed about the review being “well written”. In fact, for years it bothered me because when I am particularly enthused about something, it’s easy for me to write well about it. But I loved Mark Antonacci’s book ‘THE RESURRECTION OF THE SHROUD’ so much that I felt sure it would inspire me to write one of my best, most creative reviews. For years it bothered me that the review I posted was not as good as I thought it could have and should have been. I’m serious: YEARS after writing and posting that review at BigBitch.com, I would periodically think back on it and shake my head at my own failure as a writer. I wanted that review to be so good, but I always felt it fell flat.

That’s the reason why, on Friday, June 15th of last year, after having reread (for perhaps the 3rd time) Antonacci’s ‘THE RESURRECTION OF THE SHROUD’, I decided to rewrite that old review and post it here at ‘Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends’. I was attempting to redeem myself and make right a wrong that was done seven years earlier!

The rewrite was titled ‘SUPERNATURAL PHOTOGRAPHY’. I believe my second attempt was an improvement over the first but it’s still not as good as it should be. God only gave me just so much writing talent and I guess I exhausted what I had.
.
This past Easter (March 31, 2013), ‘The Resurrection Of The Shroud’ and Mark Antonacci were again mentioned on this blog when I posted the blog bit EASTER SUNDAY AND “THE RESURRECTION OF THE SHROUD”.
.
Well, earlier tonight, to my tremendous surprise, I received a comment here at ‘Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends’ from NICK ANTONACCI of the ‘RESURRECTION OF THE SHROUD FOUNDATION’. Naturally I am assuming that Nick is the son or brother of author Mark Antonacci. This is the first time anyone associated with a product I have reviewed has contacted me in connection with my review, so it’s a real thrill for me. The fact that it has to do with subjects so near and dear to my heart (i.e., The Shroud Of Turin and the book ‘The Resurrection Of The Shroud’) makes this an ultra-thrill for me!

I haven’t even had a chance yet to contact Mr. Nick Antonacci – although I surely will – but I couldn’t wait to share this with my (admittedly few) readers. Below is the comment that was submitted to my blog earlier this evening:
.
.

Stephen McCarthy

Thank you for taking the time to type up a sincere and complimentary Amazon review for Resurrection of the Shroud, by Mark Antonacci. Because of you, I'm going to start using the word "Balderdash". Your opinion was quite opinionated, and, I think spot on. Too bad you aren't writing opinions for Amazon anymore.

I appreciate the comment, and so does the Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation (RSF) and one of its founders and the author, Mark Antonacci.

It would be greatly appreciated if I could get you to visit the Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation’s (RSF) site: www.testtheshroud.com. There, you can get a better idea of the Foundation and sign our petition, via a 3rd party site, to the Pope respectfully requesting more testing (http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/petition-pope-francis-to/). The only thing you need to sign the petition is to list your name and email address.

Frankly, we are trying to develop a better web presence for this Foundation, and, of calling for further testing of the Shroud.

Of course we would love for you to share the website (www.testtheshroud.com) on any and all of your social media and blogs you may prefer! I need someone like you (active online presence, articulate, opinionated, etc.) telling others about us. We have a group on Facebook (test the shroud) and should be getting one on Google + and Twitter shortly.

Please feel free to email me testtheshroud@gmail.com and, if you would like to discuss this over the phone, I can give out my, or the Foundation's, phone number as well.

Sincerely,

Nick Antonacci
Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation
 

I hope all of my friends and readers will visit the Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation’s website and sign the petition requesting further scientific testing of The Shroud Of Turin. I am not asking you to do anything that I myself will not do. Please do it for God, do it for me, and do it for 
Yoey O’Dogherty!

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t Amazon.com, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

.

29 comments:

  1. That Antonacci fella knows a good writer when he reads one, eh?

    Seems like a "win-win" to test the shroud. At a glance, to me, the shroud looks like a work of art more than an actual burial cloth. But it doesn't hurt anyone if additional tests are conducted and they prove nothing more than that.

    I think more young people are familiar with movies like "Zeitgeist" which claim that religion is used only to control the masses, and that Jesus is not a historical person, and in fact he never existed. According to the movie, "Jesus is an invention of the biblical authors who painstakingly copied attributes of ancient pagan deities and created a new god to be worshiped. Jesus mirrors various pagan deities in the manner of his birth, life, death, and resurrection."

    It seems like a good idea to re-open the debate over the authenticity of the shroud, and apply new technology if possible, and educate a few people in the process.

    SigII

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SIGSTER II ~

      Got me some old Dire Straits playin' as I type this. ["Even the hero gets a bullet in the chest."] You like any of their stuffs?

      I can still remember the first time I ever heard the song 'Sultans Of Swing'. I did NOT hear it the first time on the radio, nor was the song even released yet. It was at a Preview House in Hollyweird. I remember that I thought the song was just basically OK, and I also assumed it was Bob Dylan.

      Later, when the song hit the airwaves, I discovered that it was NOT Dylan, but a new band called Dire Straits. I also learned that my first impression was wrong, because I came to love that song, and still do.

      Anyway... on to the response:

      Thanks for the compliment, eh?

      Yes, for hundreds of years many people assumed that The Shroud was a forged medieval relic (an artistic hoax), but modern science has discovered about 101 reasons why that is not a reasonable argument anymore. Having studied it in great detail for many years (including reading the book published from the 'Proceedings Of The 1998 Dallas Symposium' which covered The Shroud from multiple scientific angles), I will state categorically that The Shroud is NOT a work of art.

      In fact, I am a solid 98% convinced that it is indeed the Shroud that the crucified body of Christ was wrapped in and from which He rose again. But regardless, my faith in Jesus rests not one whit upon the authenticity of The Shoud.

      I have seen "Zeitgeist" and even have it on DVD here at the house. It's a documentary I wish I could publicly recommend as it does a pretty nice job of covering the 9/11 false flag event and the Federal Reserve scam.

      Unfortunately, "Zeitgeist" went completely to pieces toward the end when it tried to convince its viewers that "Jesus is an invention of the biblical authors who painstakingly copied attributes of ancient pagan deities and created a new god to be worshiped. Jesus mirrors various pagan deities in the manner of his birth, life, death, and resurrection."

      On the surface, it's easy to see why so many people fall for that argument, but serious, in-depth research and analysis shows that this argument is false, being stretched well beyond what is reasonable.

      David Icke makes the same argument about Jesus as is found in "Zeitgeist". It's too bad, because having written one of the best books about the 9/11 False Flag tragedy, I would be more open to taking some of Icke's other (more outrageous) theories seriously. But if he can't even get something as important as the Life, Death, Resurrection, and Atonement of Jesus Christ correct, it casts a lot of doubt in my mind about the value of spending more time researching Icke's research into other matters.

      In my recent 3-part blog bit about Jesus, one book I did not mention but which sits on one of my bookshelves and which I think is well worth reading is 'THE CASE FOR THE REAL JESUS' by Lee Strobel. This one does a pretty good job of illustrating how the assumption that the legend of Jesus was based on previously established pagan myths about deities and saviors is more than just a massive stretching of imagination and "connect-the-dots" picturing.

      Then again, there are other arguments that dismiss the Jesus as "copied attributes of ancient pagan deities" theory but which get into more spiritually discerned information. Hard to explain, but 'The Holy Spirit' has a way of showing and teaching God's people things that they won't find in books and logical analysis of facts, history, science, etc.

      Thanks for commenting on this blog bit, Brother!

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
  2. I’ve been watching this post for a few days now wondering who would go first. You know me…

    Anyway…I went to the suggested website and found it intriguing. I find the ‘Shroud’ an interesting topic for discussion, and yet I agree with you that my faith and testimony of the divinity of Jesus Christ does not rest upon such things. Further testing would be great, as it might convince those who are ‘on the fence’ regarding the authenticity of the shroud and its creation as a divine manifestation of the resurrection itself, to head in a direction that will lead them to draw closer to God and His Son, Jesus Christ.

    As far as the atheists and other nay sayers who prefer to believe that Jesus Christ either never existed or was simply a ‘charismatic’ man able to fool many into believing he was the promised Messiah and through the Power of God, rather than simple magic tricks, able to perform miracles; I don’t think there is much hope of them seeing the Light (pun intended).

    What a nice compliment to you, and your writing/understand/insight into Mr. Antonacci’s book, not to mention you perseverance, regarding this topic, that they would single you out and request you spread the word of their continued efforts.

    Never give up. You have no idea who is watching/listening/learning from your work.

    Thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. FAE ~
      Somebody had to click that button, and your reluctance made Sig Too impatient, so he went first. Sig gets the 'First To Comment' medal.

      >>...Further testing would be great, as it might convince those who are ‘on the fence’ regarding the authenticity of the shroud ... that will lead them to draw closer to God and His Son, Jesus Christ.

      That's correct. As I said to Br'er Marc in the comment section of one of my other Shroud related posts, the book's author, Mark Antonacci, is a lawyer and described himself as "a committed agnostic" until his research into The Shroud turned him into a Christian. So, yes, it does have the capability of completely altering world-views.

      And that is probably one reason God made certain The Shroud remained with us until mankind's modern scientific technology could really test it and discover all of its anomalies that make it impossible to duplicate regardless of budget and access to scientific equipment.

      It actually makes perfect sense that if The Shroud is the residue of a genuine Divine miracle (i.e., the Resurrection of Jesus Christ), no man could ever create another one just like it. How could man's technology and money recreate an artifact that remains as testimony to a Godly miracle? Man isn't in the business of miracle reproduction.

      And I also agree with you that the pseudo-atheists (meaning the vast, vast majority of all self-proclaimed "atheists") will never accept the authenticity of The Shroud, even if Jesus returned and proclaimed it His. It's not that they can't believe; it's that they WON'T believe. Atheism is just willful rebellion against God.

      Thanks for being Commenter #2, FAE.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
  3. Perhaps I'll commenter number 3. Or number Six, at least.

    You said: "And I also agree with you that the pseudo-atheists (meaning the vast, vast majority of all self-proclaimed "atheists") will never accept the authenticity of The Shroud, even if Jesus returned and proclaimed it His. It's not that they can't believe; it's that they WON'T believe. Atheism is just willful rebellion against God."

    I'll take it even further. I don't believe that there ARE atheists. I think that there are only people who worship other gods, like Darwin, Marx, Obama, money, self. They all worship something, just willfully worshiping something other than God.

    I think it is really cool that you got that email!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, SIXBOY. You got Number 3, which doubled is 6. Coincidence? I don't think so!

      Yeah, you make a good point: Darwin, Marx, Obama, money, self, Mother Earth... everyone seems to worship something.

      Me... I think I'll have another glass of wine while I try to figure out what I worship.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
  4. Signed and signed.

    I know I already mentioned that the authenticity of the Shroud doesn't affect my overall belief, but it's funny to hear some of the things that people say about Jesus, ala Zeitgeist, of never existing and just being a mishmash of old Pagan deities.

    "Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[1][3][4][9][10][11] In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity.[33][34]"

    I guess it's sad that you might otherwise recommend Zeitgeist. After hearing what they had to say about Jesus being a "rip off" of other gods (which is completely inaccurate and easily disproved), I just figured the other stuff they had to say was garbage as well. Garbage begets garbage, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. BEER BOY BRYAN ~
      Dipping into the Wikipedia waters, eh? Well, they got it right that time. Who woulda guessed it?

      I know you're a Christian, but I don't know how you got that way. (That sounds like a shot at you, doesn't it? It would be if I weren't also a follower of Jesus.)

      What I mean is, I don't know how much you've studied "the historicity of Jesus", or whether your faith is mostly a byproduct of your upbringing. (It sounds like you've done some research though.) When a person decides to objectively analyze the evidence for a Creator and a Christ, they find an astounding amount of good reasons to believe.

      Yeah, when it comes to 'Zeitgeist', I just can't wholeheartedly recommend it, but one of my oft used expressions is "don't throw the baby out with the bath water". Also, "truth is where you find it". In my life, I have occasionally stumbled upon some real gems of information from sources that I would otherwise castigate.

      Sometimes you really gotta "separate the wheat from the chaff" because it's all mixed up together.

      I can still remember watching 'Zeitgeist' and thinking it was really good... until it got to the atheistic bullshit section. What a disappointment.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
    2. OH! And also a sincere THANK YOU for signing the petition. You're a good man, Charlie Brown!

      ~ D-FensDogg, Jr.

      Delete
    3. I was hoping you'd notice that. I don't often use Wikipedia, but I was amused at the fact that it had so many references. Most times I go to that site, and there's one sketchy reference or my favorite - "Citation needed?". Let's just say I don't get a lot of world history from Wikipedia, but I do check it for a good laugh.

      I was not born a Christian. I was raised as a Catholic. My parents still follow it, but with a lot more of an open mind than they did back then. I don't push them because they're older and mean well. As for myself, I've always been a big researcher, and part of that meant wanting to learn about the historical Jesus, not just the Jesus that was presented by the Bible or the one that was presented by my old church (you know, blonde haired, blue eyed, 6-pack abs of steel Jesus). Like you, I'm a big fan of objective research. I'm amazed how many people are scared of it, thinking if they do this kind of research they'll no longer believe. That just shows how weak and thin their "belief" is to begin with.

      Also, I know exactly what you mean about truth being where you find it, and yet it's hard not to throw out the baby with the bathwater when you read something really good, only to read something really stupid. As an example, I had been browsing a site recently that had a lot of great information about false flags, and in particular some stuff they dug up on the Boston Marathon that was quite an interesting read... This, followed by a posting about how Adolf Hitler was a misunderstood hero and the greatest man of the 20th century. I think I X'd out on the spot. It's hard to listen to someone's argument about ANYTHING after they show themselves to be racists (strongly in favor of ethnic cleansing and mass murder on behalf of a 'white America') and probably another great reason why conspiracy theorists are often seen as nutjobs. I mean, who's going to listen to someone's piece on the banking system or government coverups after they've just presented their argument for why brown people must die? (My wife's not gonna be happy about that!)

      Oh, and whenever you post it, I'm looking forward to being on your SH#T list. Banned books sell better than not-banned books, so who am I to complain how it's presented?

      Delete
    4. 3-B ~
      Great, great comment, my Brother! I will reply mo' better after work tonight. (You raise an issue that I definitely want to yak a wee bit about!)

      Also, I am hoping to get 'MY SH#T LIST' posted tonight before I pass out. I rarely make my timeline goals, but I'm-a try hard this time.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
    5. Part 1:
      BEER BOY BRYAN ~

      I realize - and to no great surprise - that I will not get 'MY SH#T LIST' posted tonight, as I had hoped. It wasn't for lack of effort, but I've spent hours on it already tonight and recognize that I need a few hours more to complete it. Unfortunately though, I have a soul-draining day-job I need to make it to in the morning, so I have ceased crapping out 'MY SH#T LIST' for now and will complete it (I think I'm certain) tomorrow night.

      So I'm-a reply to you here instead of continuing to work on 'MY SH#T LIST'. (Incidentally though, I have already worked in my plug for your new novella and I think it works pretty well. There is no question that I am promoting your book, but there is also no question that your book is NOT a part of 'MY SH#T LIST'. Where I come from, that's called "success"... or "whateverdude".)

      >>...I was hoping you'd notice that. I don't often use Wikipedia, but I was amused at the fact that it had so many references.

      Yeah, well, I'm uncommonly sharp... for a drunk.

      In my opinion, Wikipedia is primarily useful only for obtaining "correct spellings" and "correct dates". Beyond those two things, I have no faith in Wikipedia. Like most other mainstream information sources, Wikipedia is just another Brainwashing Site University (B.S.U.).

      >>...I've always been a big researcher, and part of that meant wanting to learn about the historical Jesus, not just the Jesus that was presented by the Bible or the one that was presented by my old church (you know, blonde haired, blue eyed, 6-pack abs of steel Jesus).

      Well, I had noticed that for a 26-year-old (?) you seem to be aware of a number of details from the past, and that has impressed me. Most people your age don't know nuttin' about nuttin' that happened before 1994.

      By the way, I too have always hated the "SurferBoy Jesus" illustrations that seem so prevalent. I grew up in the Santa Monica/Venice area of Southern California (i.e., "Dogtown") during the 1970s, and we knew and went to school with those Z-Boys - surfers/skateboarders - who have since become like MTV cult heroes or something. I'm sure you know who I'm talking about, maybe you've seen some of the movies.

      Anyway, it bugs me that so many painters make Jesus look like Jay Adams and his buddies. I always figured Jesus looked... well... Jewish... Middle Eastern. Why not, eh?

      Continued Below...

      Delete
    6. Part 2:
      My favorite painting of Jesus is 'Christ At Thirty-Three' by Heinrich Hofmann. But I am almost fully convinced that The Shroud Of Turin shows us EXACTLY what He REALLY looked like.

      >>...Like you, I'm a big fan of objective research. I'm amazed how many people are scared of it, thinking if they do this kind of research they'll no longer believe. That just shows how weak and thin their "belief" is to begin with.

      Well, I TOTALLY agree, man! One of my most frequently used lines (and also one of my originals) is: I WOULD RATHER KNOW AN UNPLEASANT TRUTH THAN BELIEVE A PLEASANT LIE. And I have always meant that sincerely! Why would anyone want to go through life clinging to some belief that might be false? I have NEVER wanted to be deceived, which explains my deep research into topics that interest me, and the reason why no one who disagrees with me (e.g., atheists and liberals) has ever beaten me in debate. I know my opponent’s arguments as well as I know my own, because I have genuinely researched BOTH sides of the argument BEFORE selecting the side I should believe in, based on the evidence.

      I don’t understand why everyone doesn’t feel a similar commitment to truth. Have I ever gotten it wrong? Has additional, previously unknown evidence ever changed my mind about something? Hell yeah! Several times! And on very important subjects, too!

      >>...As an example, I had been browsing a site recently that had a lot of great information about false flags, and in particular some stuff they dug up on the Boston Marathon that was quite an interesting read... This, followed by a posting about how Adolf Hitler was a misunderstood hero and the greatest man of the 20th century. I think I X'd out on the spot.

      I understand, Brother. But at the same time – after nearly 20 years of researching this sort of thing – I can tell you that VERY OFTEN you will find excellent, verifiable truth mixed with outrageous lies. Learn to discern the truth, like a miner will pan the gold and discard the waste and the “fool’s gold”.

      Part 2:

      Here’s some truth, Bryan: Uncle Sam has been and still is in the business of fooling the “Americonned” People. There are always active disinformation campaigns, Psyop and Cointelpro operations ongoing to deceive the people, to keep them confused, bickering, “divided and conquered”.

      The devil could NEVER tell 100% lies – that’s too easy to dismiss. The best lies are those that mix some really good, verifiable truths with the lies. What happens? The person ingests the truths WITH the lies!

      Or, as is often the case with our Shadow Government, a government agent will mix great truths (e.g., about the Boston Marathon bombing) with totally distasteful and even evil untruths (e.g., that Hitler was a great but misunderstood man). What happens? Many people mistakenly associate the truth with the lie – and recognizing the lie for what it is, they dismiss ALL OF IT TOGETHER, as if it is all somehow interrelated.

      Find THE BABY and save its life, while tossing out the BATH WATER!

      Believe me, 3-B, this stuffs is Standard Operating Procedure for the government. The idea is to create artificial links in the minds of most Americans, such as: “Patriotic Militias” means “groups that blow up federal buildings in Oklahoma City”. “Conspiracy Theory Believers” means that “the people who believe that Uncle Sam allowed the Boston Marathon bombing to occur ALSO believe that Hitler was a good man”. And the list goes on...

      Continued Below...

      Delete
    7. Part 3:
      Bryan, it took me years to find this out, but I want you to benefit IMMEDIATELY from my long years of research. In fact, I’m even curious about the website you referred to. Will you post the URL for me to explore?

      Go to any YouTube site that is telling the truth about ‘Sandy Hook’ and you will find a few individuals who seem to spend all day and all night, 7-days a week, arguing with the “conspiracy believers”, calling them “idiots”, and “whackos”, and “tinfoil hat-wearers”. They’ll have a lot of epithets in their arsenal, but they will have no good, verifiable facts that would give them the victory in a formal debate. Most of these “trolls” are being paid by Uncle Sam to discredit the truth and paint anyone who begins to “wonder” about any “official government story” as a “nutjob”. Few Americans today have the courage to stand up for the truth in the face of large scale smear and slander. (But those who know they have Christ Yeshua on their side have no fear.)

      But our evil Uncle Sam, long before either of us was born, figured out that the best way to suppress the truth was to lie, to stall, and to deceive (and “deceive” has often meant artificially associating the truth with something evil, and thereby misleading the masses, who are really “asses” with an “m” in front).

      >>...I mean, who's going to listen to someone's piece on the banking system or government coverups after they've just presented their argument for why brown people must die? (My wife's not gonna be happy about that!)

      EXACTLY! And that tactic has been pretty damned effective for them, hasn’t it?

      And, for the record, I have ALWAYS thought – like, before you were even born, niño – that Hispanic women were the sexist of all. And for some odd reason, Latinas have always thought I was el gato’s meow. To Hispanic women, I am “the most interesting man in the world”. I have three little black books just for women named Juanita. (I even wrote about this on my old ‘Stuffs’ blog). So, if you ain’t careful, this 53-year-old, grey-haired man will steal your wife from you. You can just cry in your beer, boy, for all I care!

      >>...Oh, and whenever you post it, I'm looking forward to being on your SH#T list. Banned books sell better than not-banned books, so who am I to complain how it's presented?

      Well, I think you will enjoy ‘MY SH#T LIST’; it includes a couple of winks ‘n’ nods to you, along with a brief paragraph promoting your novella - while distancing it from the “SH#T” - and I also spend considerable text boxing in the ears of one of our least favorite religious xtremists. In other words, I believe you’ll think it’s a winner to some degree. If not, I’ll eat my... boxing gloves.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      ‘Loyal American Underground’

      POSTSCRIPT: I hope you saw my comment on the other blog bit about why the ‘Family Guy’ bit was not a “hoax”. I’d hate for you to think I am easily deceived. The ‘New World Order’ conspiracy is a FACT, but I still do my homework before I post anything on my blog pertaining to details related to that conspiracy.

      Delete
    8. I'm actually going to be 30 this year, but if I can pull off 25-26, that's great for my impending "movie career", right?

      Here you go, here's the link to that site: http://www.bestgore.com/brain-fart/the-most-disturbing-video-related-to-the-boston-bombings/
      I found it through a recommendation on a forum, and even though the rest of it is a shock site (and Hitler propaganda, aka this piece of garbage post, made around the same day - http://www.bestgore.com/brain-fart/the-greatest-man-of-the-20th-century/), the evidence they presented was pretty interesting, even if a bit angry at times. Gore doesn't interest me, so I haven't been back to filter through all the crap and see if there's anything else worth reading, but sadly, I bet there might be. I understand there'll always be sites with good and bad, but I don't want to have to weed through pictures of dead children and videos of Mexican cartel members decapitating each other to find a few nuggets of good information.

      Every guy's got his limits, right? The site advertises itself as not being a shock site but showing "the world we live in," but I don't need to see these gruesome pictures to know that the world isn't all butterflies and rainbows, and that death can stare me in the face at any time. I've read all about it. I know how screwed up the world can be (and is).

      On a brighter note, you don't have to tell me about the glory that is the Latina woman. As for mine, she's fiery, she's feisty, she won't take my crap, and through it all she's the one willing to go to work 9-5 so I can chase this dream of being a writer/movie producer. All of this packaged in a smoking hot, trendy, stylish, 23 year old that gets looks everywhere she goes. I still wake up most days and wonder why the hell she loves me so much.

      Oh, and lastly, I did see your Family Guy comment, I just forgot to reply. I had read that it was two separate clips and not the same instance (which I knew to be true, having seen that episode), so I thought that's what was meant by it being a hoax. I didn't actually realize it was from the same episode, which definitely changes things.

      It does not, however, change the fact that I gave the show another try since people always rave about it, and Seth MacFarlane still just doesn't do it for me.

      Delete
    9. 3-B ~
      Thanks for the URL, Buddy! I will have to check it out (as soon as I can figure out why my computer speakers have suddenly stopped working).

      I am in complete agreement with you about "gore". I've seen it before and I don't need to see it anymore. Like you, I know fully well what sort of world this is and I don't need to see graphic images to reinforce what I already know too well.

      Whoah! A nearly 30-year-old White dude married to a hot 23-year-old Hispanic woman? Whatever you did in your last life, it garnered you some amazingly good karma!

      I have never seen a single episode of 'Family Guy', but based on the short promos I've seen for it on TV, I am certain I would hate it.

      After all the years I have been researching this 'New World Order' stuffs, I have developed a pretty good sixth sense about information, misinformation, and disinformation, so I rarely get burned.

      I can't explain it, but very often I'll come across some info and some still, small itch in my mind will say: "Research that before you repeat it."

      Whenever I get that feeling or sense, it invariably turns out that I would have damaged my credibility had I repeated it uninvestigated.

      Hopefully that sixth sense will never abandon me, because one false blog bit could undo whatever trust I have earned after posting factual info about The Conspiracy for years and years.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
  5. Please stop leaving opinionated opinions when leaving your opinion.

    If you said I missed it-what prompted the comment to your blog after all these years?

    LC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Huh?

      I thinks I missed it (but I felt it fly by!) Pour me a shot of what yer havin'!

      You mean what prompted an Antonacci to comment on my blog after all these years? I guess it's because they just started up their own website and are hoping to gather names for their petition. (Didja sign?)

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'loyal American Underground'

      Delete
  6. How totally cool that Antonacci's son sent you an email. (And you though nobody was paying attention to your reviews...)

    I've been intrigued by the shroud ever since I read Ian Wilson's "The Shroud of Turin- The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?" back in '78. (At that time, he was chairman of the British Society for the Turin Shroud, which I imagine is very similar to Antonacci's current foundation.)

    Thanks for the info. I'll definitely sign the petition. Not that I need "scientific proof".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SUSAN ~
      Yeah, pretty cool and out of the blue. I'm glad to know you signed the petition. Thanks!

      I have read and still own 'THE TURIN SHROUD: The Illustrated Evidence' by Ian Wilson & Barrie Schwortz. It's a really nice book (although I could have done without the photos of Ian Wilson's naked body).

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
  7. This was a very interesting post. Thanks for sharing!

    www.modernworld4.blogspot.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GINA ~
      Thanks for reading and commenting.

      I left comments on two of your own recent blog posts.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
  8. That's interesting that you got the email. Since I can be the cynic I'm thinking they are just sifting through every possible source to sign the petition. I signed but exited when it came to the donate money part. I wonder if my signature still gets entered on the list if I don't donate?

    I recall the previous posts you did about the shroud. It is fascinating stuff. I'm pretty convinced about it.

    Lee
    An A to Z Co-Host
    Tossing It Out

    ReplyDelete
  9. Oops! I found the list of signatures and there's mine 3 times. I guess they'll clean the dupes out since mine's not the only one. They got a long, long, long way to go before that list even begins to look mildly impressive.

    Now I want to think up something to start a petition about. I see where anyone can apparently do it. How about it McCarthy? What shall we petition for?

    Lee
    An A to Z Co-Host
    Tossing It Out

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PROFESSOR BOIDMAN ~
      Yeah, being every bit as cynical as you are, I also suspected that they found my old review by searching for possible recruits to the cause. But that's OK, because it was still a thrill to have an Antonacci acknowledge something I'd written pertaining to The Shroud.

      Yeah, I kinda gulped when I saw how few signatures have been acquired on the petition so far. (I was expecting 1.5 to 2 thousand.)

      How about we start up a petition that requests the United States government begin obeying exactly what the Founding Fathers meant by their words in the U.S. Constitution?

      A little too ambitious, maybe? Maybe too radical?

      ~ D-FensDogg
      'Loyal American Underground'

      Delete
    2. I'm sure the Obama Administration could help. For petition info, see link below. You will have to set up an account so that they know where to aim the drones.

      We The People Petition

      SigII

      Delete
    3. McSIGGY DOS ~

      Hey, great to have you drop in again, my friend!

      I wantcha to know that I keep up with your Mensa Monkey posts regularly. In fact, I read every one you post, usually within about 8 hours. (You probably already knew that, being all high-tech like you are.) I love your posts... even the ones I don’t understand.

      But, man, speaking of “the cynical”, how’s this?...

      >>...You will have to set up an account so that they know where to aim the drones.

      Ha!-Ha! Well, I don’t at all doubt it. That’s probably EXACTLY what the Obama administration (on that webpage) means when it speaks of issuing “an official response.”

      Death by drone attack is about as official a response from this administration that one can get!

      ~ D-FensDogg
      ‘Loyal American Underground... WAY Underground!’

      Delete
  10. Would it be constitutional to start a petition like that?

    Lee
    An A to Z Co-Host
    Tossing It Out

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, sure it would be. In fact, that’s probably the most “Constitutional” thing we could do!

      But getting all pre-Constitutional, I also like Jefferson’s suggestion:

      “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

      I have no doubt that if Jefferson were alive today, he would say:

      “WHAT Constitution? Fu#k the Constitution! It’s well past time that manly men took up arms! Raise your Glock, raise your AK-47 to the new revolution!”

      That’s what Jefferson would say... if he were alive today.

      ~ D-FensDogg
      ‘Loyal American Underground’

      Delete

>>***NOTE: COMMENT MODERATION IS ACTIVATED.***<<
All submitted comments that do not transgress "Ye Olde Comment Policy" will be posted and responded to as soon as possible. Thanks for taking the time to comment.