Use Some discernment

If you've searched my name you've seen that I have some detractors who have put out some hit pieces online to try and smear my good name and professional image. If you react emotionally to every headline you read without asking any questions, this might disturb you.  If you are a critical thinker you'll see right through the veneer and find that there's no meaningful substance to them.  Let me put things into proper perspective.  

There are certain labels that would apply to me are:  Constitutionalist, Patriot, Christian, Truth seeker, Freedom Fighter and others similar as you can verify for yourself with information which is self evident on other pages of this website.  If you know anything about what's happening to the values and 'official' narrative in America you will know that people like me are a pariah in today's woke world.   Being a teacher, an educator and an influencer online I become a natural target for the ideologues who are trying so hard to destroy the traditions that made America Great. 

If you've read any of my books or even just seen the content of  the pages here 'As a truth Seeker' and 'As a Rights Activist',  you know that I've stood up to political and institutional corruption and jammed up the works for certain parties or cabals who are trying to control us on more than one occasion.  You might say, "I'm bad for business as usual' for 'some' people. 

Here are just a couple of many samples for you to support that comment. 

This short trailer video on my first book:  

My second Book:  HOW I BEAT SATAN AND THE IRS...Have a quick look

I founded THE LIGHTHOUSE LAW CLUB teaching people how to stand on truth and law to protect themselves from tyrants, liars and thieves in government and elsewhere. 

And I founded the NATIONAL ACTION TASK FORCE to get after the crooks!   

Yes.  I have people that don't like me and will try to discredit me at any opportunity that they can find or make for themselves.  You should be able to see why.  When an uncomfortable truth hits you in the face and you don't have the facts or the law on your side, what do you do?  You try to discredit the messenger as much as you can.  You see it happening every day in the news.  You know the story. 

Yes, I've been in jail... almost 30 years ago.  It's no secret.  I wrote about it in my first book published in 2015. Victimless, contrived 'crimes against the state'.  Go figure.  Read my book for details.  Again, that's my badge of honor.  All they wanted was to shut me up.  They offered a plea deal, no jail time if I just plead guilty and shut up.  I responded, "Up yours, see you in trial!"  I beat 'em the first trial and they tried me a second time (double jeopardy) where they tied my hands behind my back and got the pre-fabricated result they wanted. 

If any of the hit pieces out there bother you here's a quick way to evaluate any article you read and I encourage you to read them again with these points in mind. 

1. Check for any shred of objectivity.  Has the author searched the matter out and found any other 'reliable sources' with first hand knowledge or experience to back up their allegations or is it merely a one sided diatribe?  Where are the links or references in support of the smears?
2. Has the author tried to get 'the other side of the story' by trying to interview the subject of the article?  Everyone knows there are two sides of any story. 
3. Check the language.  Is it highly charged, acerbic, harsh, volatile language with the obvious intent to prejudice the reader?  Or is it level headed, moderate, intelligent language being used?
4. Has the author provided any context for his claims?  Facts are easily misinterpreted or misconstrued without proper context. 
5. Has the author made any specific accusations supported by factual independently verified references, or has he merely included my name or the name of my business in a hodge-podge of other names and events in an effort to smear by innuendo and inference?  This is a common tactic to avoid slander and defamation charges.

As a truth seeker and Human Rights Activist in search of the rule of law, be assured that I will continue to make enemies just doing what I do and we can expect more hit pieces to come along as time goes on.  So you should expect those. 

Some people only need a headline to form an opinion and run the other way.  This too is a blessing.  For those dolts who don't have the critical thinking ability to do their own research, ask some questions and think for themselves, they simply don't qualify to be in my circle and they filter themselves out so I don't have to be bothered with such people in the first place.  I'm thankful for that.  So the hit pieces actually do me some good. 

Heck, if you're not hated by somebody, chances are you're not doing anything worthwhile to begin with!  

Am I at risk now?  Highly unlikely.  The height of my activism was years ago.  My books have blended into the landscape and haven't circulated enough to cause any real alarm.  I am slowly easing into a lower profile and the crooks have much bigger problems to deal with right now than little ol' me.  

To form an opinion about me in the face of the hit pieces you have only one question to answer for yourself: 

"Is he a 'Giver' or a 'Taker'?

Do your research and You be the judge. 

Thanks for reading this to the end.   You must be a 'Critical Thinker'!   Yay!  

=========== 

For those who would like a direct response to one example here you go... 

Eric Jackson's 2006 hit piece now reposted on the Scarlet Pimpernel.  I won't give this the dignity of tearing it apart point for point because it is fraught with sloppy factual errors and I'm not going to give it the time.  What do radical leftists care about errors/truth?   Anyway, here are a few clues for you; 

1.  The banner at the top of the page is the first big clue.  "A Radical Leftist Political, Historical and Economic Blog."  What do radical leftists do best?  Twist the truth and lie to form their own narrative.  Who do radical leftists consider their enemies?  Conservative Christians and those on the 'Right' (that would be me) What is the bible for radical leftists?  Saul Alinski's 'Rules for Radicals'

2.  Just for an example, what is one of the 'Rules' that Alinksi proposes in his book?  #13 “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off  the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after  people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions."  Jackson did this routinely with others as well which is one reason Don Winner was at odds with him.  Jackson's M.O. was to fabricate a 'Monster' who was a direct threat to the people with it's misdeeds (all imaginary) and then 'expose' that monster in his rag with a hit piece so as to be the hero to 'save' the people from being unsuspecting victims.  This is Eric Jackson. 

3.  The photo is me with Don Winner who was a competitor of Jackson with his own news page.  Winner exposed the fact that before Jackson was doing his own thing, he was a reporter for the Panama newspaper 'La Estrella' and that Jackson was fired from that job for writing false information in his articles.  When Don met me he was thrilled because he knew of Jackson's bent for me and he took the picture and published it on his page just get under Jackson's skin.   These two had a running feud  and despised each other.  Don was fair and gave me a platform to counter all of Jackson's crap.  Sadly that website is gone now. 

4.  The tone was set from the 'get go' when Jackson tried to set me up on false premises and claims and I responded in an email which he even published in his article if you can stand to read it that far down.  This pretty much says it all and I took this right out of the article that Jackson wrote: 

"Re: Your Questions
From: “Strategic Management” <businessfinance@hushmail.com>
Date: Wed, August 2, 2006 6:01 pm
To: editor@thepanamanews.com 

Hi Eric,

I’m in receipt of your email and your questions.

By the slant of your questioning, it appears to me that you are not looking to write an objective article based on the facts.

Rather  than ask about our legal registration with regulatory authorities, why  don’t you ask about the nature of our activities to understand us enough  in order to know if that is even appropriate? Maybe you don’t care  about that.

Rather  than ask if we are an (illegal) pyramid ‘scheme’ why don’t you define  that for us first with specificity as the law defines it and then  compare the actual characteristics of our program to such a scheme?  Maybe you don’t care about those facts.

Rather  than create an adversarial environment with pointed questions coming  from ‘left field’ and without introduction or establishing any premise  for a dialog, why don’t you ask for an interview with full disclosure of  your purposes and intentions from the beginning? Maybe that’s not  important to your ‘objective’.

It  is clear to me that with your clumsy and unprofessional approach that  you are not interested in the facts, but rather are looking for  justification to go on a witch hunt.

I  have plenty of experience with editors like you and under those  circumstances you will write what you like to suit your agenda,  regardless of the facts.

Therefore, there is no need for any interaction with me. 

If  you wish to have a meaningful and honest dialog and operate in good  faith with clean hands, I am happy to accommodate. That’s the only way I  operate.

However,  that is not what I see from you so far and thus, I’m not interested in  what The Panama News has to say. Our market is not in Panama.

Be  careful to stand on the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the  truth. Your activities are very public and anything less than the truth  always causes problems.

Best Wishes,

Rex*

==================  

* I do a lot of writing and 'Rex' was my pen name which I used for quite some time.  In fact 'Rex Freeman' was the main character in my first book. 

For anyone who wants at least my side of the story you'll find it and a whole lot more in my Book:  ONE FREEMANS' WAR - IN THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION. 

You can find other hit pieces, mostly coming from that era in time and the comments above will suffice for those.  

The truth speaks for itself and the crap and vitriol is self identifying if you have a critical eye. 

Follow your spirit.