Why Didn't the Media Mention That? ADD OTHER ITEMS, too…

Ah! Now I see it

This story brings out my charitable side. I would like to assume the burden of storing these pieces free of charge to all parties involved. I would be willing to provide safe storage of these pieces indefinitely. If need be I would even cover the financial cost, of having the proper documentation drawn up, to tranfer ownership to me. In his advanced years the owner shouldn’t have to deal with the strain of fighting the government. My charitable act would also save the German tax payers money.

@Imperious:

That guy who owns that site is crazy. He is always on Art Bell’s radio show and late Night coast to coast.

He inferred that it was “the death star”…waiting for the right time to head to earth and blow it up. Rediculious

That’s the issue with pseudo-science. Peoples need to make outrageous and never eared announcements to get attention and eventually money.

This guy puts a lot of interesting facts on his site but when it put them together,
he is like Richard Castle telling a murder story to Lt Becket who’s trying to figure the puzzle out of a bunch of facts.
Castle’s story remains false but it provides new hints to get further in the investigation of the case.

In the first video, at 55 minutes and 00 second, Hoagland talk about this Saturn’s moon (Iapetus) and about artificial moon.
http://www.enterprisemission.com/videos.html

This moon was in the book of Arthur C. Clark, as the goal while it was change in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey for a Jupiter’s moon:

In the background to the story in the book, an ancient and unseen alien race uses a device with the appearance of a large crystalline monolith to investigate worlds all across the galaxy and, if possible, to encourage the development of intelligent life. The book shows one such monolith appearing in ancient Africa, 3 million years B.C. (in the movie, 4 million years), where it inspires a starving group of hominids to develop tools. The ape-men use their tools to kill animals and eat meat, ending their starvation. They then use the tools to kill a leopard preying on them; the next day, the main ape character, Moon-Watcher, uses a club to kill the leader of a rival tribe. The book suggests that the monolith was instrumental in awakening intelligence.

The book then shows the year C.E. 1999, detailing Dr. Heywood Floyd’s travel to Clavius Base on the Moon. Upon his arrival, Floyd attends a meeting, where a lead scientist explains that they have found a magnetic disturbance in Tycho, one of the Moon’s craters, designated Tycho Magnetic Anomaly One, or TMA-1. An excavation of the area has revealed a large black slab, precisely fashioned to a ratio of exactly 1:4:9, or 1�:2�:3�, and therefore believed the work of intelligence. Floyd and a team of scientists travel across the Moon to view TMA-1, and arrive as sunlight falls upon it for the first time in three million years. It then sends a piercing radio transmission to one of the moons of Saturn, Japetus (Iapetus),[2] where an expedition is then planned to investigate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:A_Space_Odyssey%28novel%29

@General:

And another side note civilians lose wars not the American military.

Agreed, terrible policy has been the bane of the US fighting man for over half a century. (or longer even)

We give the people all the battle wins, and spineless leadership and ineptitude takes those victories and squanders them.

From one trooper to another “Brave Rifles!” and thank you for your service!

I am not sure Napoleon was ever really himself after the Russian campaign. What he expected after his victory at Borodino and what really turned out was very different. Expecting the Russians to surrender only having them chase him all the way back to France may have put some doubt in his mind. Maybe that doubt is what affected his decisions at a place like Waterloo. I know in sports that if you loose your confidence it can be hard to get back. I imagine the same could be said about war generals. Just a thought. Enjoyed the post.

Yes and no, Stuka.  It would only make vetoing a budget a thing of the past, in other words, it would streamline the budget process.  But ONLY if the Congress decides to spend MORE then they get in taxes.  Bear in mind, if Congress decides to actually, don’t faint now, spend ONLY what it has without a deficit, then it only needs a simple majority and a signature instead of a super majority AND a signature.  Likewise, if the budget has no deficit, then a veto can still be over-ridden by a super majority.

The whole idea is to make it SOO hard to go into debt that most times the country will operate above board.

In fact, I’d like to see legislation that states that 10% of all taxes MUST be invested in local government or domestic corporate bonds. (Relatively secure, helps the country or countrymen.)  Eventually, the feds should have enough invested throughout the land that they will never need to tax the people again.

Furthermore, that’s not so outlandish an idea.  Many governments domestically and abroad are buying mutual funds to supplement their income so they can ease the tax burden.  Why can’t the feds?

And you don’t think we oppose them too? But so far, no hate crimes have been committed or buildings exploded. I say that would be Democracy at work.