THE MYSTERIOUS WORLD. THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE. CASE #1. USS CYCLOPS. PT 4.

Virtually the Entire PSEUDOSCIENCE/SUPERNATURAL LEGEND that Surrounds the BERMUDA TRIANGLE was STARTED AND CREATED BY CHARLES BERLITZ IN HIS BOOK THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE, PUBLISHED IN 1973.

By Taking Bits and Pieces of Different "DISAPPEARANCES", "INCIDENTS", AND OTHER "MYSTERIES" from the area, Berlitz attempted to create a Hazardous- Danger Zone in the Atlantic Ocean, that NO SCIENTIFIC BODY, THE U.S. COAST GUARD, OR THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY HAS EVER RECOGNIZED AS AN ACTUAL AREA OF SPECIAL INTEREST. 

In the Future, I will look at some other Incidents, but for the Time Being lets stick with THE CYCLOPS.

Theories to Explain the Loss of the Cyclops, that are Considered to be Lacking in Any Actual Solid Evidence to support the Conclusions being made, come from Several Different Places:

-  POLITICAL\CRIMINAL.

-  SUPERNATURAL.

-  NATURAL EVENTS THAT ARE EXTREMELY RARE.

To be placed in this group means that the QUALITY OF EVIDENCE BEING OFFERED AND ANALYZED IS SO POOR, THAT NO RATIONAL OR REASONABLE CONCLUSION/EXPLANATION CAN BE MADE USING ANY OF IT AS A NECESSARY SOURCE FOR SOLVING THE MYSTERY OF WHAT CAUSED THE LOSS OF THE CYCLOPS.

#1-  POLITICAL\SOCIAL-  These are Mainly Speculations that the LOSS OF THECYCLOPS was due to MUTINY AND TREASON, WITH THE SHIP BEING TURNED OVER TO THE GERMAN NAVY. ( In This Time Period the UNITED STATES was at War with Germany, WORLD WAR 1.) 

#2-  SUPERNATURAL-  These Proposed Explanations are the USUAL TYPE OF PARANORMAL CLAIMS THAT SPRING UP FOR JUST ABOUT EVERY MYSTERIOUS DISAPPEARANCE, ON LAND OR SEA.  UFO ABDUCTION, SEA MONSTERS, ALTERNATE DIMENSIONS, AND LOST CIVILIZATIONS ARE THE MAIN ONES MENTIONED TO EXPLAIN THE LOSS OF THE CYCLOPS.  

#3-  RARE NATURAL EVENTS-  INCLUDES SUCH THINGS AS WATER SPOUTS, UNDERWATER VOLCANOES, WHIRLPOOLS,   

In the Next Post on this Topic, We'll look at these more closely.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. RIGHTS- WHAT THEY ARE, AND WHAT THEY ARE NOT. PT 3.

Can we break down the Hierarchy of which Category of Rights is the most important, and can supersede the others?  Yes, it is possible to do this, and the following is the result of such an analysis.

HUMAN RIGHTS-  Must, by their very nature, rank as #1.  They are the only Category of Rights that is binding on all Countries, States and Governments.  This is the goal of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, to create and enforce Laws that bind the people of all nations to a Universal set of Moral Standards in the proper treatment of every member of the Human race.

Further, that these are Rights that cannot be relinquished, even on a voluntary basis. THE BOTTOM LINE- HUMAN RIGHTS CANNOT BE DENIED, LOST OR GIVEN UP, REGARDLESS OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

CIVIL RIGHTS-  Are a sub-category of CITIZENS RIGHTS, but are placed on a level higher in importance. Citizens Rights may include such things as Freedom of Speech, Religion, Assembly etc., but may not be legally applied in every situation. This is where the Category of Civil Rights can be found.  Consider the following : 

        Example #1-  Freedom of Religion allows you to believe and promote a certain set of Moral Values.  However, the application of such values in the Public Sector may not be considered Legal.

        Example #2-  Freedom of Speech permits you to advocate and relay information to other people.  However, the Legal System may create limits on the How, When and Where such information is disseminated.

        Example #3-  Freedom of Assembly-  Allows you to Come Together and/or Associate with other like minded individuals.  A Legal problem may arise if these meetings are used for planning Criminal Activities, or for the purpose of creating situations that have a detrimental affect on other persons and groups.

These examples have one main goal:  That Government has a Moral duty to its citizens and society at large, to create restrictions on Individual Rights, for the benefit of all.

End of PT 3.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. RIGHTS- WHAT THEY ARE, AND WHAT THEY ARE NOT. PT 2.

Rights, when we are discussing the Public Sector, generally fall into two categories;

1)  HUMAN RIGHTS-  These are Protections, Freedoms and Guarantees that are bestowed upon individuals by virtue of their being part of the Human Race.  To a certain degree some of these may be applied to all living things, but only to a certain extent and varies depending on specific situations.

2) CITIZENS RIGHTS-  Are granted by a governing body with the legal authority over a specified jurisdiction, to individuals identified as part of the recognized civil population.  These Rights can vary greatly, depending on the source of Authority.  i.e (Constitutional Republic, Monarchy, Oligarchy, Dictatorial etc.)

This brings us to the concept of CIVIL RIGHTS, which is basically a sub-category

of CITIZENS RIGHTS. The main difference is;

     -  Rights given to all Citizens may include the ability to chose a System of Morality and/or Faith that is constructed by the individual, and is not interfered with by the State.  Further, that one cannot be held either Criminally or Civilly for Behavior or Speech that others consider offensive.

      -  Civil Rights are guarantees set up by the State/Government, that protect individuals from Malicious, Discriminatory, Arbitrary and Hateful acts that target them specifically as a single person or as part of a group. These Rights apply to both the Public and Private sectors.  Civil Rights are basically set up to"Level the Playing Field", in which no single person or group has an unfair advantage over other parts of society.

However they are applied, not all Rights are created equal.  Some can never be taken away, Some are Valid only in certain cases and others may be given up voluntarily.

There is one main rule that applies to all Rights:  NO ONE CAN EXERCISE A RIGHT, WHICH AT THE SAME TIME VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS.

End of PT 2.

BLAST FROM THE PAST: WHAT PROGRESSIVES MUST LEARN. 2/27/2015.

As we have seen during the Last Week, much of the opposition to President Obamas Immigration plan is Juvenile and Petty.  

Whether or not it's Rudy Giulianis claim that the President "Doesn't Love America,"  or John Boehners and other Republicans refusal to Fund Homeland Security unless they get Their way, it is an Immaturity that Belongs on a School Playground, not the Halls of Congress.

Insults and a Refusal to Compromise, are the Weapons of the Desperate and the Delusional, who can't believe that everyone else Doesn't Follow Their Lead. (Even Members of the same party.)

These are Things Progressives should be Pointing Out on A Regular Basis.  When These Types of Tactics are used, the Response Should Not be Deliberately Provocative or on the Same Intellectual Level, for it Blurs the Actual Reason Behind the Inability to come to a Reasonable Solution.

In other Words, Don't let Them pull you down, because They have already Started to Sink.  If Both Sides Resort to Identical Means in getting Their Point Across and to Gain the Support of the Majority, there is Little to Differentiate One From the Other. So what should the Progressive Response be in such a case? What Could Convince the Voters, ( Both Supporters and Opponents), of Their Sincerity, and Desire to do the Right Thing?

Date-  2/27/2015.