When a man is asleep he should be left alone. Period!
When a man is asleep he should be left alone. Period!
This is me in the conference room in Bangkok with no smile. I wasn’t feeling like having my photo made on this day.
I guess you have noticed but I have been a bit “lazier” in writing recently. Please consider this posting as a sort of place holder blog posting due to the fact that I have been preparing for an upcoming trip. I have been damned busy lately so I haven’t had enough time to keep up with the blogging that I need to.
I will correct this though.
Keep your eye on this blog space because it will be coming around. It isn’t dead. I just have not had much time to breathe, let alone write my blog.
Thanks for your understanding!
Bernard LaZar Hoffman, known to his followers as “Tony Alamo”, is finally back off to prison again, where he belongs. Hopefully he will be sentenced to the maximum 175 years possible if society is lucky. Anyway, barring appeal it looks Tony Alamo will die in prison, where child molesters of all backgrounds belong.
In many eyes this conviction might have been less of a blow to religious fraudsters than to paedophiles and child molesters, but still a body shot nonetheless. Yet in the case of Tony Alamo’s conviction in Texarkana, it is devastating to both the sex offenders and the religious fraudsters who exist on the fringe of sanity.
Because according to the testimony of the victims Tony Alamo committed his particular evil in the name of God. God said the little girls had to marry Tony Alamo and have sex with him. And Tony Alamo was the mouth of God. That’s obviously been alright with his followers who have gone along with this for quite some time. Sure… It is an acceptable answer for the brainwashed but for us normal folk it’s disgusting, wrong and criminal. And that’s why the Tony Alamos of the world belong in jails and nut houses, not churches.
I know this verdict has to be very disappointing to crackpots like Thomas Richards out there who’d backed Hoffman’s cultish spew until Tony Alamo’s conviction was all but assured. Some of the nuts with the harder shells probably are still backing Tony Alamo. Surely at this point they must well understand that society frowns on cult leaders referring to themselves as “prophets” whose direct line to God allow them carte blanche to take any woman in their cult following. I have to ask the question: Is it a requirement to be psychologically sick to join such a “ministry” or do you just have to be callous toward common sense?
But again, some of these folks already have been counting their losses and licking their wounds in advance. Thomas Richards has even threatened me in blog comments to my last post concerning when I pointed out that Richards had changed his position on his old pal, preacher Tony who reckoned himself a prophet. Feeling obviously threatened by my post as usual Thomas Richards called me a “weasel” and promised to come up with some story “exposing” me as being connected with the Vatican. (Have at it, Tommy! You conspiracy guys eat up everything, crap it out, and expect others to suck down your concoctions, don’t you? Stop drinking the Kool Aid!) Thomas Richards then lashed out like a wounded animal and alluded that I liked little boys, for which he deserves one hell of a swat. After Tommy’s comments, some nut from Tony Alamo’s “ministry” said that God was going to pop my head off like a cork from a champagne bottle. (Wow! How’d this whacko know what God is going to do to my head? I guess God speaks not only to prophets but to nuts as well! These guys are just too much.)
Anyway, once Thomas Richards has proved to the world that the Catholic Church is pulling strings to use me in their grand scheme to rule the world then the rest of his kind will be busy explaining away Tony’s incarceration, putting the blame on the Catholics, mainly Jesuits, who wanted him gone because he was the voice in the wilderness exposing them for their crimes against man and God. I expect the Jews to get mentioned a few times as well. It’s all part of one big conspiracy against the true Christians – yeah, we know the story. Maybe they can get Jack Chick to print up a comic about their persecution?
Anyway, the verdict is cause for sane people who think the Tony Alamos of the world should pay for their crimes against children. While I am celebrating tonight over a beer or two with friends I am going to make sure to raise a toast to Thomas Richards and the rest of Tony Alamo’s sheep, bugle boys and guard dogs.
Oh, damn! I almost forgot… Didn’t that fraud “Dr.” Alberto Rivera get in bed with Tony Alamo some time back as well? Sure he did! You can even hear Alberto Rivera’s pontificating on Thomas Richards’s own YouTube channel. Damn sure proves the adage about water seeking its own level, now doesn’t it?
Tommy, when are you going to realize that you keep betting on all the wrong horses?
I can just hear the joyful noise from the crowd outside the court house in Texarkana…
“Bye, bye, Bernie!”
What an odd question, I know…
Some time back a friend asked me this question over a few beers. “Don’t answer it now!” he told me, “Just think about it for a while.” I have to be honest about it. I didn’t think about this question for some time. Until last week that is.
I had some free time to reflect about things for a few days as the family was away visiting more family. I found myself in front of a clean notebook with three pens: one black, one red and one blue. I thought to myself that such a question comparing organized religion to organized crime would be a given – organized religion would win out. So I wrote down on one column all of the positives of organized religion. Then on the other side of the page something quite strange happened. I told myself that I would brainstorm all of the positives of organized crime, and guess what? I came up with as many good points to organized crime as bad points. So then I decided that I would do the opposite and write down all of the bad points of organized crime on one side of the paper and see if I could match the bad points of organized religion on the other side of the paper. And I could.
Before this creates a moral vacuum or a philosophical conundrum I just want to be clear. I am not trying to state that organized religion is bad and that organized crime is good. In fact, I am not saying that I have become neutral on either subject. I am just saying that all the evidence gleaned from this exercise just supported the notion that there is no black and white.
So now I ask you for your own answers. Which is worse (or better)? Organized religion or organized crime? What say you?
“The secret of being a top-notch con man is being able to know what the mark wants, and how to make him think he’s getting it.” Ken Kesey
This is one sentence by Ken Kesey is possibly the best quotation I have ever seen regarding con men and how they operate. This also holds true, I have seen, with the conspiracy theory crowd, whether it be with Alex Jones, David Icke or the likes of the religious conspiracy ilk.
People who are familiar with my any of my blogs or my books will know that I spend considerable effort debunking these bogus myths thrust upon the masses by what I like to call the “Cons-Piracy Mafia“. My first book even dealt directly with all the points that one religious fraudster, Alberto Rivera, claimed in his Vatican Islam Conspiracy. But since the book’s publication in 2006 I have had lots of mail from people condemning me for debunking Rivera and the shots over my bow mainly come from the direction of the very dupes who refuse to even open the book. When I consider who my main critics have been over these years it becomes extremely apparent that Jack Chick and Alberto Rivera are giving their audience what they want to see and hear: That the Roman Catholic Church schemed to create Islam in order to subjugate true Christians.
I can’t but help see the psychological parallels in those who follow these conspiracy theories and the victims who get caught up in the Nigerian 419 advance fee scams (as I am currently reading McMafia by Misha Glenny.)
In each case the victims were drawn closer and closer into the scam until in many cases they have allowed themselves to be fleeced of all their money and then some. Of course, in the case of the Nigerian scams people put this crime down to greed but it goes to a level even beyond. You see, the greed in the 419 scam comes from both sides, from both the perpetrator and the victim as well. And I find that this is exactly the same when we look into conspiracy theories. Both the originator of the theory as well as the follower are both “believers” in conspiracy. The follower, the more they are drawn in, become increasingly self-delusional in their acceptance of the lie. The followers begin to lose their free will to judge in these matters, much like a hypnotized person, like the proverbial zombie.
This is definitely true in the Vatican Islam Conspiracy, though I believe that the roles of Alberto Rivera and Jack Chick were initially quite different. Rivera on one hand, I believe was actually a scoundrel. Rivera found the audience and spun the tales to suit what the audience hungered for. It could be very possible that he suffered the fate of many habitual liars – that Rivera eventually began to believe his own lies. Jack Chick on the other hand, in my opinion, was one of the zombies. Chick was predisposed to the type bullshit that Rivera was selling because it fit in with his theological beliefs that were already in place. Chick was a willing dupe who has in turn become the vehicle of this lie.
Part of the art of spinning these conspiratorial tales is the ability of throwing out facts, quasi-facts and disinformation in a way that is either very difficult to check, beyond the education and background knowledge of the audience or preferably both. The well spun conspiracy yarn is certain to leave their heads in a spin. A general feeling of doubt is created from which distrust of the truth in general is created and the Cons-Piracy Mafia feeds on this scenario. For example, think about the last time you watched a movie such as JFK. For the casual viewer so many facts were thrown out to the viewer as “true” that even a clear headed person would be likely to leave the cinema with no idea of what really happened in the assassination of John Kennedy, but he would be fairly convinced that there was indeed a government cover up.
And the people who went into the movie already expecting a government cover up? Well, the got what they paid for!
I believe in free speech and free self expression. People have a right to believe in what they want to believe in. But at the same time, in a libertarian way of looking at things, it is always wrong to try to force your beliefs on someone else. You don’t have too far to look to see that the world is full of this today.
My first book, Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness, was written not to achieve any kind of best seller status and to make me famous. It was written basically because there are scoundrels out there who create false histories all of the time and try to pass this off as a “hidden” truth. A truth that the “powers that be” want suppressed. They decorate their story in so many “facts” that there is no way you can sort through it all unless of course you do what I did and sit down and hash out the story line by line. Then you see it is all a big lie. But these window dressing stories tend to be far too big for average people to investigate. We aren’t all history professors and most of us don’t have the time to go into all of the assertions and assumptions that these scoundrels make. When the scoundrels are secular figures like David Icke with his reptilian theories then it is easier to brush this off and get on back to work.
But this isn’t always the case.
In many of these cases the purpetrators are non other than the ministers in churches. Most of these guys pass on this bunk because it’s been passed on to them by people they have trusted. They are like the rest of the community. Not social scientists and not history professors. But where these stories start are almost always in the imaginations of people who’s intent is not so good. They tend to be megalomaniacal and use these stories to pull their flocks in further. In the case of Alberto Rivera he was just on to the next gig. Then you get the likes of the empire builders like Tony Alamo. And these guys have a lot to answer for with the trash they put out, trying to mix it with religion to lead people off track. As their tenticles spread out they surround themselves with apologists and dissiminators such as Jack Chick and Thomas Richards who act more like attack dogs and in my opinion are just as dishonest, even though they have been dupted themselves.
I have been working on a report on how to spot these guys. I may post it on my website or I may make it into and e-book or e-mag. It won’t be near long enough to be another book project as it doesn’t need to be but it will be an easy enough document to follow so that it will be simple to spot who the crazies are out there. It will be out soon. And I promise to make this as informative as possible.
I was recently interviewed by myUsearch.com regarding the value of online degrees (I am quoted under the section “Opinion Four”) and the author, Elizabeth Kudner, got a thing or two wrong on the final write up of the blog. First of all, my name is down as “Gary Dale” and not “Gary Dale Cearley”, which makes it look like Dale is my family name. I have to deal with this mistake all the time. And secondly she mentioned that I graduated with an online degree, which is also a misunderstanding.
Just to clear the air on it, my associate’s degree and bachelor’s degree both come from what used to be known as the University of the State of New York but is now known as Excelsior College. I received my Master of Public Administration from the University of Oklahoma in their Department of Political Science. A good overview of my professional résumé can be seen on my LinkedIn profile.
These degrees which I earned did pretty well come in non-traditional ways. For my undergraduate degrees I transferred credit from the Defense Language Institute where I studied their 47 week course in the Vietnamese Language, other credit came from challenge exams and also I received credit from courses taken directly from UCLA and West Coast University. With the Oklahoma degree I studied the entire degree program in Seoul, Republic of Korea, at the Yongsan Garrison where the university sent professors to give classes abroad to military and government personnel and their dependents. Although I was not in the military at the time I was allowed to study in the OU program to help make up the numbers for the school.
So with this kind of background I do feel like a bit of an expert on non-traditional education but none of my degrees came from online programs. Anyway, I won’t make much of a stink about it because it won’t change the price of tea in China. I can live with it and sleep well tonight on top of it all.
My good friend Thomas Richards is at it again! I have recently learned that he has labeled me on his website as a “Jesuit Coadjutor”. If you’d like to see for yourself have a glance down the lists on the left hand side of this page.
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary lists two definitions of this word:
1) One who works together with another: assistant
2) A bishop assisting a diocesan bishop and often having the right of succession
The word comes from the Middle English coadjutour. And before that from the Anglo-French which in turn is from Late Latin coadjutor (Latin co- + adjutor helper, from adjuvare to help).
So obviously, since Thomas Richards says it this must be true! The simple fact that this guy would write such a thing has me baffled, but again, it proves my point. These conspiracy theory folks, the people who actually listen to the likes of Alberto Rivera and his fraudulent ilk, will themselves say and believe anything.
Both I and an acquaintance of mine have contacted Thomas Richards about these asinine statements he is making regarding me and my book yet the poor devil doesn’t see fit to respond – only to claim that I work together with Jesuits, which couldn’t be further from the truth, or that I am even a bishop who is assisting a diocesan bishop – depending upon which definition Thomas meant to apply to the accusation.
He might as well call me the anti-Christ. There would be just about as much validity to that statement as to Thomas Richards claiming I am any sort of Jesuit coadjutor.
Sorry, Thomas Richards! The more I see of you the more I get the feeling that you were educated far beyond your intelligence but unfortunately not highly educated as well. Such a shame, your efforts could have been better served with a little more honesty.
How are you? I hope well!
I just saw the below message from you which his reply to a post from a viewer in Melbourne, Australia:
tlthe5th (1 month ago) Yes, I read through some of it. Some of it’s highlights. It’s trash. And i mean it. i was so happy to see that actually. What sources he used were very weak and most of it wasn’t sourced at all. The man is a total Vatican shill as well.
For your reference, this was from this YouTube page.
I am writing this to you because a friend of mine in the United States just sent me this exchange between you and the viewer that concerned me directly. I saw the link from her and at first I thought that I would just leave it but then I listened to your diatribe about “lying” in the beginning of this video. As such I feel compelled to reply.
I am the author of the book in question, “Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness: The Truth about the Vatican and the Birth of Islam”, and after reading your comments I have to say that I really do not believe that you have actually even seen my book. I personally think that you are lying. I wrote a reply to the post which I hope will be posted.
Where do I start?
Besides calling the book “trash”, which I could be taken as a qualitative opinion on any aspect of the book (cover, artwork, writing style, etc.), I have problems with a few of your assertions. You are free to call the book trash if you want. I certainly don’t share this view but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
What set off alarms in my head was when you said that my sources “were very weak” and “most of it wasn’t sourced at all.” You went on to say that I am “a total Vatican shill as well.”
First of all, I spent two years on the research of this book and there are multiple sources on almost every page. I am very adamant that the sources are open and in order. I hereby request you to point out exactly which sources were weak. I ask you in the process to point out exactly what segments of the book were not sourced at all. I think the onus is on you here due to your unwarranted comments though I seriously doubt that you will take up the challenge. Case in point, in your own video you don’t source your own assertions about Leo Ryan, the CIA, Jim Jones, Gary Metz, etc.
As for me being a “Vatican shill”, I am not a Catholic, have never been a Catholic and on top of that I am highly critical of the Pope and the Catholic Church on almost all of their positions. I was raised in an Evangelical church. My book had nothing to do with defending the Catholic Church at all. It was solely about taking all of Alberto Rivera’s claims regarding the Vatican and the birth of Islam and looking at them one by one and examining them for the historical truth. If you have indeed seen the book, which I doubt, you will note that include Rivera’s entire testimony word by word broken down by chapter. In fact the opening of every one of my chapters that discusses Rivera’s testimony in the book are Alberto Rivera’s own words, as published by Jack Chick, laid out for examination by the entire world.
Personally I do not believe from reading your comments about my book that you have even been in the same room with my book. (If so can you tell me where you saw this book?) I recommend that you have a look at the book yourself. Once you have actually seen and examined the book (and hopefully you will even read it as well!), compare it to your comments. I think then you will see who is a bullshit artist and who has done their homework.
Gary Dale Cearley
This open letter is directed to Thomas Richards.