Komodo is one of the many islands of the Republic of Indonesia. It is home to about 2,000 people, Komodo National Park, and the Komodo Dragon. The Komodo Dragon is a large species of lizard native to several islands in Indonesia. As the largest living species of lizard on the planet (6 to 10 feet long), it attracts the reverence of the local population, tourists, and environmentalists.

For centuries, the locals of Komodo island have regarded the dragons as reincarnations of former family and community members. This belief led to a reverence, respect, and admiration for the dragons. As a way of honoring their "former kinsfolk" the natives would "leave deer parts for the dragons after a hunt, and often tied goats to a post as sacrifice. Island taboos strictly prohibited hurting the giant reptiles, a possible reason why the dragons have survived in the Komodo area despite becoming extinct everywhere else."[1] As a result, the locals lived with the carnivorous dragons in realative harmony.

The Komodo dragon's preservation, a result of the local policy of reverence, created one of the few remaining places on earth where a dragon can be seen in the wild. This has attracted the attention of tourists, and environmental protection groups. The government of Indonesia, desirous to increase revenue through increased tourism, invited a company called Nature Conservancy, based in the United States, to administer Komodo National Park.

Enter the Government

Nature Conservancy began to enact policies designed to "protect and preserve" the Komodo dragon. Fearing the lizards would become dependent upon human beings for survival, the group abolished the locals traditional deer hunts. All of the villagers dogs were then outlawed, as they were deemed an "alien species" to the island. Previously the dogs had protected the locals by scaring away any dragons that ventured too close to home. With the end of the deer hunts, the locals were no longer able to provide ritual offerings to the dragons. The villagers previous 'goat tied to a stick' offering was also abolished, being deemed inhumane.

So the attempts to preserve the dragon through government intervention has, as usual, produced unitended consequences. The previous harmony between the locals and the dragons has been thrown out of balance. The dragons, bereft of thier previous food supply, have ventured into the local villages. The absence of those pesky cainines which had previoulsy protected the villagers, has resulted in a Komodo dragon invasion!

Locals now report on at least a weekly basis, cases of dragons entering homes, schools, and other buildings with the intent of feeding on humans. There would be few things more terrifying than a 10 foot long, 150lb carnivourous reptile entering your house intent on eating you. In 2007, a local boy, age 9 was brutally attacked and killed by a dragon. Since Nature Conservancy's takeover, there has been an increasing number of Komodo dragon attack incidents.

Despite the dragons apparent revolt against thier human neighbors, the locals do not hold any ill will towards the dragons. "I don't blame the dragons for my boy's death. I blame those who forbade us from following custom and feeding them," said Jamain, the mother of the boy recently killed. "If it weren't for them, my boy would still be alive."

Government intervention into the free market has created numerous unitended consequences with similar results to the Komodo Island example. Government intervention destroys the harmony that can exist within a free market and voluntary exchange between individuals. Let's hope we never have to utter the phrase the young boy's mother exclaimed: "If it weren't for them, my boy would still be alive."

[1] Wall Street Journal article. Click for Link.



Here is a list of some of the natural rights, or unalienable rights each human being has:

The right of self-government.
The right to bear arms for self-defense.
The right to own, develop, and dispose of property.
The right to make personal choices.
The right of free conscience.
The right to choose a profession.
The right to choose a mate.
The right to beget one's kind.
The right to assemble.
The right to petition.
The right to free speech.
The right to a free press.
The right to enjoy the fruits of one's labors.
The right to improve one's position through barter and sale.
The right to contrive and invent.
The right to explore the natural resources of the earth.
The right to privacy.
The right to provide personal security.
The right to provide nature's necessities -- air, food, water, clothing, and shelter.
The right to a fair trial.
The right of free association.
The right to contract.

Sound government can only be built upon sound principles. When people seek to deprive others of their natural rights for personal gain, disaster will result. Is anyone or any government trying to infringe upon your natural rights? Do all human beings on this Earth enjoy their natural rights?



The next time you hear a politician say we need higher taxes to fix budget deficits consider the following. On June 22, a father and his two children were slaughtered in front of the wife and mother of the family by an illegal immigrant, age 21 who had committed two violent offenses previous to this incident. The offender was not deported because of the "sanctuary city" policies of San Francisco.

That incident sparked a backlash against said policy and Mayor Gavin Newsom capitulated to reality by announcing "the city would no longer shield young illegal immigrant felony offenders from federal authorities for possible deportation." This new stance created an opposition within the city government in the 15-member Immigrant Rights Commission.

This committee "approved a resolution that ran counter to the mayor's directive, urging the city to let young immigrant offenders stay in the city. The commission advises the Board of Supervisors [read Stupidvisors] and mayor about issues involving immigrants."

Here is where the taxpayer should become outraged. The Immigrants Rights Commission is "urging the city of San Fransisco [i.e. taxpayers] to pay [i.e. redistribute to] nonprofit community groups to screen juvenile offenders [i.e. criminals] to determine whether they should be entitled [gifted] to city-paid [taxpayer paid] immigrations attorneys...it also urged the city to provide [redistribute] adequate resources for placing the youths in "culturally appropriate" [anti-any culture but the offender's] community programs approved by the juvenile court system...and help them pay for their housing, and job placement services."

This is the Immigrants Rights Commission of fairyland. Why any person in San Francisco would support having their tax dollars pay for felon illegal immigrant's housing, food, and job-placement is beyond rational thought! What other nation on earth permits people to enter their country illegally, commit violent acts including murder, and then pay for them to stay in their country and get a job!!!

So when you hear about budget deficits, remember, the government runs programs like these and needs funding for them. You are "greedy" if you don't think your tax dollars should go to great and noble causes such as this. You should foot the bill for people who enter this country illegally, who kill your fellow citizens or commit other violent acts, by paying for their housing, shelter, and opportunities to get a job. After all it's the only decent thing to do.

This is sick.

See the news article at the San Francisco Chronicle's website.



In the summer of 2006, I discovered a candidate by the name of Ron Paul via YouTube videos. After reading the book "The Creature From Jekyll Island", the author recommended this person as a candidate for President of the United States. That book was the one that changed my entire political outlook and view of the government.

After watching speeches given by Ron Paul in congress, I was astonished to hear someone speaking fervently about the things I had recently learned. I voted for Ron Paul in the Republican primary in California recently. I had to register as a Republican to vote for Ron, and then immediately after the election, I changed my political affiliation back to what is was before, nothing.

In my opinion there is almost no difference between the two major political parties which run our nation. In my opinion, the vast majority of the people in the United States of America have a greater allegiance to their political party than to their nation. Our first President warned us of the dangers of political parties and the factions they would create.

When I told people I was voting for Ron Paul, nearly everyone laughed and told me I was wasting my vote. This last primary election however, was the first time in my life I had ever voted FOR someone. Since I turned 18, I have voted in every single election without ever having voted FOR a candidate. How is that possible? Previously I had always voted AGAINST someone. In 2004, I didn't want John Kerry to win, while at the same time I really wasn't happy with President Bush. So I voted against Kerry, not for President Bush.

It is my belief that an overwhelming majority of people in the United States do the same thing. We vote against people, not FOR them. Ron Paul was the first candidate I felt truly inspired by and actively participated in helping him become elected.

I have made a decision in my life: never again will I cast my sacred vote AGAINST a candidate, only FOR a candidate. If everyone else decides to do the same, the candidates we have to choose from might be of a higher caliber. Instead of debating tire pressure or the misspoken words of the candidates, the real issues of monetary policy, foreign policy, and the constitution might be discussed.

By voting AGAINST the other candidate, Americans are left with the lowest common denominator to choose from. I still look back at the 2004 election and thought, is Kerry or Bush really the best the USA has? Please take more time to study constitution, freedom, monetary policy, and foreign policy. Turn off the TV more often and study subjects that will impact the future of our nation. Your children and grandchildren will thank you!

Here is a short 3 minute video of some of the issues eroding our personal liberty:



I am nearly complete with my Sketchup model of the Tabernacle. All that is left to complete is some component organization within the file itself. This will make the file more user friendly and understandable. As soon as it is finished I will make it available to download. Here is a preview of the model with all the colors. Every single detail of the structure has been researched and meticulously documented. I cannot describe the amount of gospel insight "building" this structure has yielded. Upon completion of the model I have decided to create a website specifically for the tabernacle with all of my research and details of the model. I'll let you know when I have it up and running.Here is the sanctuary itself with only the inner covering shown. There are four coverings over the tabernacle as described in the Old Testament. The inner covering shown here had cherubic embroidery.
This is the sanctuary without any of the coverings. The bottom foundation which you can see was made of pure silver. The "boards" or walls were made of wood overlaid with pure gold. You can also see the bars which helped hold the structure together on the side of the wall. The number of pillars, side bars, ect. is the exact number dictated in the Old Testament. It is an exact scale model, based on the recognized theory of one cubit equalling 18".



The holy vessels of the tabernacle are described in intricate detail in the Old Testament. The physical placement of the those vessels is at times not as clear. As the ordinances of the tabernacle are based upon the Law of Moses, then the purpose of the tabernacle was to point to Jesus Christ.

"And behold, this is the whole meaning of the law [of Moses], every whit pointing to that great and last sacrifice; and that great and last sacrifice will be the Son of God, yea, infinite and eternal." (Alma 34: 14).

Every single component of the tabernacle was described by the Lord to Moses. It is not presumptuous to believe that the very placement of the holy vessels within the tabernacle had some purpose, meaning, or symbol. It is not presumptuous to believe that the placement or physical layout of the tabernacle was meant to point to Jesus Christ.

There is however, no single consensus among scholars regarding the physical placement of the holy vessels. In regards to physical placement, the following assumptions will be made:
  1. The physical arrangement of the tabernacle points to or teaches of Jesus Christ.

  2. Since the tabernacle was portable, the physical arrangement would be easy to recreate.

  3. The physical arrangement would be functional (i.e. not prohibit human passage).

In attempting to recreate my own scale model of the tabernacle, the physical placement of the altar of sacrifice, laver, table, menorah, altar of incense, and the ark came into question. One theory of arrangement is depicted here in the diagram to the right. Click on the diagram for greater resolution.

The author of the diagram uses scriptural references to determine the arrangement. It should be pointed out that the general placement of the ark, laver, and altar of burnt offerings is generally accepted (the exact placement is debatable.) What is the least clear in terms of placement is the three vessels of the Holy Place. Based on scripture, the author concludes the articles are not specifically stated to be in a straight line, but since it does not state otherwise, the assumption can be made.

The author takes further leeway in using books from the Apocrapha to assert the three vessels should be in a straight line, which happens to fit the notion that the arrangement forms a cross, in reference to the crucifixion of Jesus.

Based on a scale model of the tabernacle and all the vessels therein, the arrangement as asserted by the author will be recreated in the following diagram to the left.

It is apparent that this arrangement would severely hinder any person from passing by these vessels and into the Holy of Holies. Given the sacred nature of these articles, and the fact two of them had burning contents, it would be unwise to have them placed in such a way were they could be bumped and possibly knocked over. The table of shew bread had large jars of wine which if bumped into might cause the contents to spill. This arrangement has a cluttered feel not in keeping with the order, symmetry, simplicity, and harmony apparent in the works of the Lord.

Since the exact location of the holy vessels is not mentioned in scripture, there can be no definitive answer. The aforementioned diagram is the most exhaustive attempt to provide proof for a theory of placement. The author used sound logic and reasoning, however I do not believe any attempt was made to place a scale model of the vessels in the arrangement described as I have done. Based on the inefficient placement this theory suggests, I must reject it.

In researching the placement of the holy vessels, I came across the following diagram here on the right. Unfortunately, the resolution is not very good and the writing is in Hebrew. This is however, the most reasonable and logical method of placement that I have been able to find. As you can see the outer pillars (60 total) were used as guides and reference points. As the first pillar was set, the other 59 could be placed with great accuracy given the physical components. As you can see in the diagram, as one looked across from one pillar to the appropriate pillar on the opposing side of the tabernacle, a line would be formed. This line would be crossed by another lining providing the exact spot upon which a holy vessel would be placed. This method would provide the same results each time. Exactness is a characteristic of the Lord.

You will note in this diagram however, that the placement of the holy vessels within the Holy Place have no reference guides, and hence no exact point upon which to place them. Taking this diagrams methodology one step further, I have created the following diagram.

By adding the guides from 1 to 7 and 5 to 11 (not in the the aforementioned diagram) we find they intersect the 5 to 10 line and the 2 to 7 line inside the holy place. I have also added the lines 3 to 8 and 4 to 9. The intersection of these lines is also within the Holy Place. In this manner the Levites could take down and set up the tabernacle knowing the precise location of each of the vessels. It is interesting to note the placement of the vessels within the Holy Place form a triangle pointing to the Holy of Holies.

So here are the facts. The arrangement I have created is based on scripture. While the precise location is not given, the general arrangement is. The use of guide lines between pillars (similar to surveying) is based on the diagram of which I could not find the source. So this is a theory. The best evidence I can provide to support my theory is based on harmony with other scripture.

If you look at the diagram I created, you will note that only a certain number of the pillars around the courtyard are used as guides. The absolute minimum number of posts a person would need to establish the location of all the holy vessels is 12 of the 60 posts. To me this in not a coincidence and is in fact alluded to in Eph. 2: 19-21 which reads:

"Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord..."

I feel it necessary to emphasize the significance of the number 12 in the scale model. Upon creating the tabernacle in Sketchup, I started with the size of the courtyard, 100 x 50 cubits. I then drew in the guides as depicted in the Hebrew diagram based on sub divisions not pillar locations. At that point in time I had not yet created the pillars. In the Sketchup program I created the prototype pillar and placed it at one corner of the courtyard. I then replicated the prototype and placed the replica at another corner. Based on scripture, I inputted the appropriate number of pillars along a single side. The program would then place 19 pillars spaced equally between the prototype and the replica. It was after I had nearly finished the model that I realized the guide lines matched up directly with the posts, and that the minimum number of posts needed to place all vessels was twelve.

Based on the aforementioned scripture in Ephesians, it is clear the Courtyard pillars are not the foundation of the structure in the commonly held definition of the word. However, the 1828 Webster dictionary defines foundation additionally as basis or groundwork of something. In this case the pillars (Apostles) are to serve as the (basis, foundation) upon which the gospel of Jesus Christ would be administered.

There is an incredible amount of symbolism this idea provides. The apostasy came about as a result of the death of the Apostles. The direct revelation between the Lord and His church, and the Priesthood were cutoff from the earth. Without the guides provided by the Apostles (pillars) it would be impossible to determine the leadership, guidance, and authority of the church as a whole. It would be impossible to administer the church under the guidance of the Lord. In relation to the tabernacle, it would be impossible to set up the exact location of the vessels without guides. A person attempting to set up the tabernacle by not looking at the pillars (Apostles) would get close, but it would not be in the precise spot the Lord had dictated.

For example, attempting to set up the Laver without the guides might get you within a couple of inches at best of the precise location. Attempting to perform a baptism without Priesthood keys, witnesses, proper methodology, and preparation might get you close, but it is not the manner which the Lord had prescribed. Hence it would not be a valid baptism.


Become a Jr. IRS Agent!

Most everyone these days is looking to earn a little money wherever they can. Here is a great "ethical" way to make some money on the side, become a Junior IRS Agent and help the IRS continue to violate the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.

With no experience or moral values needed, you can make some money and help the government. The IRS recently published form 733 which helps you make money by snitching out your employer, friends, acquaintances, and even close relatives for suspected tax evasion!

The day I turn anyone in for income tax evasion is the day pigs fly!

Here is a little snippet from the recruiting document put out by the IRS.



Read the following quote and decide what year it was written:

"In our own time the whole of [our nation] has been subject to a low birth rate and a general decrease of the population, owing to which cities have become deserted and the land has ceased to yield fruit, although there have neither been continuous wars or epidemics....For as men had fallen into such a state of pretentiousness, avarice, and indolence that they did not wish to marry, or if they married to rear the children born to them, or at most as a rule but one or two of them, so as to leave these in affluence and bring them up to waste their substance, the evil rapidly and insensibly grew."

Would it surprise you to learn this was written by Polybius, a Greek historian about 150 BC? When a culture decides to stop having children, they die out, literally. The total fertility rate of a population is the average number of children that would be born to a woman over her lifetime. In order for a population to replace itself, the total fertility rate must be slightly higher than 2.1 births per woman over the course of her lifetime. If Sam and Jenny get together and have two children, they have in essence only replaced themselves in the world. If they had three children, they contributed +1 to the world population. The replacement rate is above 2.0 due to such factors as childhood mortality and mortality in the female population before the end of childbearing years.

Developed countries tend to have a much lower fertility rate than less developed nations. Click here to see fertility rates by nation. It seems that affluence kills societies due to a number of factors. As countries become more developed, the cost of living increases, making child rearing an expensive proposition. This leads to what is called the demographic-economic paradox. Developed countries have more wealth, and would logically suggest they would be able to have more children. Yet this never happens, in fact the more affluent societies around the world become, the less children they have. As socialism creeps further and further into developed nations, radical changes will occur in the near future. Secular societies with socialized economic models are built upon the high birth rates found in religious beliefs. In other words by promoting an increased secular, affluent, and selfish ideology, the secular state will always kill itself. People stop having children, and then there is no one left to pay for fat government pensions. Look at the fertility rate of the European Union, 1.50! Remember your population shrinks if you fall below 2.1 births per woman.

This topic is discussed extensively in a book written by Mark Steyn called America Alone. It will change the way you look at demographics.



Corruption is the impairment of integrity, virtue or moral principle. It is associated with bribery, which is the inducement to acts against one's moral will for personal gain. No doubt you have looked upon the government and thought of corruption. It is unfortunate that moral integrity, and virtue are not taught or upheld on the same level as pleasure, instant gratification, or vice. Nearly everyone will respect a person who is consistently sticking to time honored principles, but in today's media, such a person is boring. People who abandon traditional values are lauded as brave individuals. People who practice free love are viewed as those with the most liberated minds. The end consequence of such actions are never portrayed.

It is easy to point out corruption in others, but much harder to identify corruption within yourself. What is your moral compass? What is the limit of actions you will take? Why do you view some things as evil or bad, while you view other things as being good? What is the source of that discernment? Many people are quick to dismiss the Bible as being old, outdated, archaic and perhaps even barbaric. Take the following examples from the Old Testament. Here are several verses or counsel that Judges and individuals were to follow in their judgments and relationships with other people.

"...Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him. Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it." Deut 1:16,17

"Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour." Lev. 19:15

For people who consider themselves Christians, if you have respect of persons, you are not living your religion. Does society judge people to be inferior because of their educational status, or their income class? Do you give people of wealth, prestige, and power a pass, yet pounce on a person of more humble circumstances? Great evil creeps into a society that shows partiality to men. "The gospel calls for equity, justice and fairness in dealing with all. Favoritism and bias are not part of the divine standard."[1] Who thinks this is a bad idea? When people, or a government treats people with partiality, it opens the floodgates of corruption. Instead of providing equal justice under law, the government now administers law based on wealth, assets and income.

Take two human beings, Jones makes $20,000 a year, and Smith makes $200,000 a year. Jones would be required to pay $1,256 or 6.2% of his earnings as Federal Income Tax. Smith would be required to pay $48,928 or 24.46% of his earnings as Federal Income Tax. Both individuals have 24 hours a day to earn money, one just happens to make more than the other.

Setting aside the injustice of taking money earned by both of these people, there is further injustice that one is required to pay an even greater percentage of his earnings just because he happens to make more. This is the definition of the progressive income tax. The more you make the greater percentage you pay. If the flat tax was enacted, at a 10% rate, all people would contribute 10% of their income regardless of how much they made. While I am not an advocate of the flat tax, such a law in principle is more just than a progressive tax. It is important to remember the second plank of the Communist Manifesto is the progressive income tax. In other words, Marx's plan to destroy free market economies included this type of taxation. In other words, progressive income taxation is communistic. It supports the path to socialism and communism.

The government's corrupt policies of progressive income taxation, and disregard for the higher concept of impartiality, has created an envious nation of the United States. Instead of looking upon a person of wealth as a human being, they are considered despicable creatures that must have their property stolen from and distributed to the poor. The wealthy look upon the poor as nothing more than jackals eager to fight for a kill they have not earned. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. A true believer in that statement should shun all laws that do not treat all persons equally under the law.

[1] Bruce R. McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3 vols. [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965-1973], 3: 256.