Extended 2/28/2016
                      Extended 5/02/2017
                      Extended 8/27/2017
                      Extended 1/15/2018
                      Extended 1/23/2020
                 Copyright 2002 Homer Wilson Smith
      Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes.

     Bar none, the single most important question of the 21st century

     "How much secrecy does a government need or have a right to have?"

     One might say, "Well enough to protect the people."

     So one asks, "To protect the people from what?"

     And the answer of course is "To protect the people from bad guys!"

     But what about protecting the people from the government?

     Is the government free from bad guys?

     Or is the government a filter for concentrating bad guys?

     "How unpatriotic of you to say so, even if its true."

     Is it unpatriotic to speak the truth?

     Do we love and protect America because we are infatuated with its
lies, or are we just trying to save face after the jury has spoken and
Judgement comes.

     "America, love it or leave it!"

     How about America, love it or change it.

     Is changing America so it lives up to its own stated ideals
     Is it unpatriotic to admit there is something wrong that NEEDS
correction, lest America END.

     The feeling is that people of good heart will always speak up
publicly, anyone who wants to have a *PRIVATE* communication is up to no

     If you got nothing to hide, why hide it?
     You know, only bad people have secrets, if you aren't doing
anything bad, you won't mind everyone knowing about it.

     OK, well on the face of it that sounds good, but there ARE bad
people in the world, and it is from THEM that you might want to have a
few secrets lest they use what they find out about you and your loved
ones, against YOU as a good person.


     There are two uses for the communication lines of the world, we use
them for the markets and we use them for the body politic.

     We use the markets to sell what we have sown and reaped, this is
the purpose of a society and what keeps society going, but we use the
body politic to design the society and its markets in the first place.
     The people as the body politic designs the government and the
markets, and the people as producers and consumers then implement the


     So the purpose of the body politic is to design the government and
the markets, and the purpose of government is to police the markets and
enforce a fair trade.

     A fair trade is a fair chosen trade of equal value for equal value,
where each person is fully aware of all details on both sides of the
deal and is willing to engage in the transaction.

     So as the market, we use our comm lines to do our business with
each other, but as the body politic we use our comm lines to design the
way the government and the markets are going to work in the first place.

     Politics is the design process of the government and its markets,
and business is the operation of that design in day to day sow, reap and
trade cycles of transaction and the governing that keeps it working


     The body politic engages in politics, namely political discussion
on the nature of the government and its markets to be.

     For example is the government going to be a democracy, republic,
oligarchy, monarchy or totalitarianism?

     These determine what powers the government has and how it is
allowed to operate them.  Also who gets to rule and how they get there.

     But the body politic also has to determine the nature of the
markets that are governed.

     Are the markets going to be capitalistic, socialistic, facistic,
communistic or a complicated quilt spread of all 4.

     Governments have to do with who gets into power and how.

     Markets have to do with what do we make, how much to we charge for
it, who do we sell it to, and who provides the investment capital and
who reaps the rewards and ownership of production.

     Market capitalism is usually associated with government democracy,
and market communism is usually associated with government

     These are arbitrary associations, one could just as easily have a
democratic communism with elections and elected officials just as easily
as a lifetime despot.

     And even in a market capitalism, most families are communistic, the
father works, and shares what he earns with everyone in his family.  He
might balk though at having to share what he earns with everyone else's
family!  :)


     The far left (communism) tries to enslave the employer to the

     The far right (capitalism) tries to enslave the employee to the

     Socialism tries to enslave everyone to everyone.

     The capitalist tries to get people to earn their way, their worth
to society is not how hard they work and yet produce nothing, but the
value and return on investment a person can make from basic sow and reap
cycles, born of the natural Sun and Earth system.

     To a communist the value of a product is how much time it took you
to make it, how much energy you put into making it.

     To a capitalist the value of a product is how much useful energy
can be gotten out of the product.

     Thus to a communist someone who works all day long planting little
stones in the field, is as worthwhile as someone who spends all day long
planting seeds that will grow into food.

     To the communist people should be paid by the hours they work
regardless of what they do.

     To the capitalist, people should be paid according to the value
returned by what they do measured in useful joules.

     Communism wants to give everyone everything for free.

     Free food, free housing, free education, free health care and a
free job.

     But it won't be the job you want.

     It won't be the health care you want.

     It won't be the education you want.

     It won't be the housing you want.

     And it won't be the food you want.

     You will survive as basic needs are met (maybe), but you won't be
free to have what you want nor allowed to risk your life getting it.

     You won't be allowed to risk your life, because your life is not
yours to own, but belongs to the hive state.  And THEY will be more than
happy to sacrifice your life to the common good without your approval or

     And your basic job will be working for the military as a farmer,
builder, trainer, doctor and soldier in their endless wars to keep your
mere survival so pressed that you wan't have any time to think your way
out of your own mess.

     So be careful what you wish for as nothing is free in life except
sunshine, and in the end only the worthy survive, those who can produce
more than they consume.

     Sorry to use the W word.
     I once heard a moderate say "Socially I am a liberal, but
financially I am a conservative."

     The capitalist says what you create is yours!

     The communist says what you create is mine!

     The libertarian wants an anarchy.

     The moderate speaks with forked tongue out of boths sides of his

     In the same breath, they say "Yes of course we care about the
little babies, who doesn't?"

     In the next breath they say "But we can't spend what we don't have!"

     So if the producers can't out produce the consumers, babies will


     Profit is not a buy and sell market thing, profit is a sow and reap

     Profit does not arise by marking things up and selling it to
others, profit comes from the Sun/Earth system.  You plant a seed of
corn and get 10,000 back a few months later.  That is profit.

     The capitalist keeps the profits of his own work, and is free to
reinvest where he sees fit regardless of what others think of his folly.
He also suffers the risk of his own failures.

     Welfare safety nets are a kind of insurance for the risk takers.

     Not a way of life.

     The communist takes the profits of everyone else's work, and
invests it in big statues proclaiming the glories of communism.  while
the People starve to death and are buried at the foot of the statues to
honor the system that killed them.

     In a capitalism some get richer and some get poorer, mostly as
result of their own survival skills.  Thus there is a need for charity
to help those that can't produce more than they consume for whatever

     In a communism there is no need for charity, because everyone is
poor and the state has all the money that would go to charity anyhow,
but puts it into statues proclaiming the glories of communism instead.

     The state feeds the people just enough to get them to continue
working out of love for the people, but not enough to vanquish their
exhaustion lest they stand up for themselves and fight back to bring the
state assunder.

     In a capitalism the afflence of everone can get really big, even
most of the poor do better than they otherwise would.

     In a communism the only thing that get's big are the statues.

     In a capitalism a few do very badly with out help, but the median income
across everyone is higher than in a communism.

     In a communism everyone does the same, but the median is lower than
in a capitalism.

     You can always tell where people are doing better on average by the
direction of their foot steps crossing the borders.


     We define the unworthy as those who do not produce as much as they
consume.  This should not be measured only in financial return on sow
and reap cycles, for people can do a lot of good for society that isn't
based on immediate obvious personal production of consumable or tradable
joules (non entropic energy, useful concentrations of energy).

     But in the last analysis, doing good for society must mean
enhancing everyone else's production over consumption, otherwise the
person is a weight around everyone's neck.

     One might ask who could possibly decide who is worthy and who is

     One might venture the answer is God.  God has infinite intelligence
and the computing power to determine who is worthwhile and who isn't.

     So if you got His phone number, ask Him.

     But beyond that, the question becomes answerable only on an
operational basis.

     If a society is over burdened with people who need to be
subsidized, taken care of, because of their inability or unwillingness
to produce more than they consume, NO MATTER WHAT THE REASON, then that
society will absolutely and without question dwindle, die and disappear.

     The only possible definition of morally worthwhile is whether the
society survives better because of that person.
     If a society thrives, prospers and flourishes, then you can be sure
that overall its members are producing more than they consume, by
whatever means or products, even if its just smiles.

     There are 4 broad classes of those who can't or won't produce as
much as they consume.

     1.) The crippled who can not produce and need charity or help.
     This happens to everyone in old age, those who are injured in the
process of work or war defending our freedoms, those injured by natural
processes such as disease or natural catastrophe and the genetically
damaged.  Almost all of these can benefit society in some way to make it
desirable to keep to them around if only because we owe them or love
     Thus most of them remain worthy.

     2.) The criminal, slave master or war monger who wants you to
produce so they can consume what you produce giving nothing in return,
often at the point of a gun, or under duress of force or deceit during
the transaction of trade leading to an unwilling, unwanted, and unfair
trade between producer and consumer.

     The criminal doesn't want you to stop producing, because they love
consuming what you produce, they just want to own you, use you, abuse
you and throw you away.

     These are unworthy as they suck the life blood from everyone who is
able and willing to work properly.

     They are the cheaters in the game of life.

     3.) The insane who can not think clearly enough to sow and reap
properly at all.

     4.) The terminally stupid who can't manage to figure out how to
produce anything of worth even though their heart is in it.

     5.) The ignorant, who simply don't know how to produce but can be

     6.) The evil, who hate food and who hate those that like food.
They neither want you to produce nor do they want to consume what you do
produce, they just want to consume YOU, or for you to not exist at all

     These are the game destroyers.


     People also confuse politics with governing.

     Politics DESIGNS how the government works, the government then
works as oversight of the operation of the markets.

     So called politicians have very little to do with politics and more
with messing around with the government after it has been designed.

     Very little is designed into the government except the mandate to
create laws and enforce them, and how the officials get into power.

     But governments are free to offer many different kinds of things to
the markets, in the way of services, entitlements etc, which for example
can be left or right leaning.
     This trying to gather votes by giving people what they want, has
everything to do with politicians running for office, but nothing
whatsoever to do with politics in the sense of political design by the
body politic.


     The communication lines of the world by which people communicate
with each other are used by the body politic to design the government
and its markets, but are also used by the government and the market
players to go about their business!

     Both the political and market comm lines are the SAME PHYSICAL COMM
LINES, speech, phone, mail, e-mail, newspaper, magazines, radio, books,
TV etc.

     But the needs for privacy and transparency of the body politic and
the markets are very different from each other, almost diametrically

     The body politic needs to be able to talk safely both among
themselves and the public at large, nothing should be suppressed, and
nothing is illegal as there are no laws yet!
     But governments also need to have their secrets to carry out their
wars of guardian ship over the markets, and transparency over the people
to monitor their actions and deal with criminality.

     And worse, markets need their secrets to carry out their trade and
market plans.
     Thus tremendous conflicts arise when the markets want secure and
private communication lines to sell their wares, and the government
wants everything tappable so they can catch the market criminals trying
to rip off the markets.

     But the good people in the markets need to have privacy to protect
themselves from criminals IN THE GOVERNMENT who wish to do everyone in
who doesn't agree with them.

     It might be quite all right to allow a benign government to have
access to all our market based communications as an objective
disinterested referee to keep the playing field fair and square amongst
all players.
     That is what we designed a government for, to enforce a fair trade
amongst buyers and sellers, to keep the criminals at bay.

     But do you really want the government to know who you are going to
vote for before you vote for them?
     If you don't mind existing or competing governments knowing where
your allegiances lie, then of course you won't mind them reading your
e-mail in the name of catching the bad guys who won't be using e-mail

     If however you feel that people in government might be worried what
the people think of them and are planning to do about them, and you
would like to discuss this stuff in e-mail with your friends PRIVATELY,
to keep you and your's safe from retribution from that government, then
you certainly don't want the government to be reading your e-mail or
listening in on any of your other communications.


     Did you know that in some places on earth merely criticizing a
government is considered capital treason?

     Or God forbid should you ever crack an ethnic joke or write a
sarcastic piece about someone in power.

     Not in America of course where we are free to criticize and crack
jokes about Home Land Security, the Patriot Act, and our government's
various ill considered wars of self aggrandizement.

     Did you know that in some places on earth criticizing a government
for an ongoing war is also considered treason as it destroys the morale
of the soldiers and boosts the morale of the enemy?

     The idea that the best way to support our men on the front is to
bring them home is foreign to a government that is only interested in
its own personal survival, war time profiteering or grandiose plans for
a one world, one people government.

     What you get back from criticizing a government looking after its
own survival at the expense of the people, is "If you aren't with us,
you are against us."

     Unfortunately there is no way to tell the government "Hey you can
listen in on my market communications, but my political communications
are private!"

     Now in times of great stress where the desire for safety surpasses
the desire for freedom, and the government is trusted more then our
enemies, many will be willing to give up the freedoms to have their
     "Hey we designed the government to protect us, we don't need to
change or correct it, let it deliver already!"

     When criminals use personal freedoms to harm good people, personal
freedoms are then outlawed to stifle the criminals, but the good people
lose them too.

     Its called collateral damage of personal freedom.

     We suffer searches at airports, we suffer the government to tap our
phones, and perhaps we suffer them also to tap our e-mail, all in the
name of catching the bad guys.

     During acute moments of panic and trouble, this could be seen to be
a good idea.
     But never to sunset it?

     Democracy, if it is to mean anything, must stand on its own two
feet, it must stand on its own principles, particularly during times of
stress, otherwise it's just another has been.

     Democracy is about more than the right to VOTE, it is also about
the right to SPEAK safely, in particular about the government and its
actions and intentions, particularly in order to change, correct or
redesign the government.

     The left wants to enslave the employer to the employee, and the
right wants to enslave the employee to the employer.

     Now is not the time to vote, don't you see, its time to SPEAK.

     Democracy is not ONLY about the ability to engage in markets
freely, but the ability to engage in the body politic freely.

     It's OK to want to course correct a government in mid stride.

     People like to claim how proud they are to be an American and they
like to spout all the great things that America stands for, but then
they fold up like a morning glory when touched by the darkness of
     Particularly terror fabricated by the government to keep the
populace enthralled by the government's "performance".

     "Oops," says the government, "We let (fostered) one through, but
never again!  Give us guns, money, lawyers and police and we will take
care of you like we had oughta!".

     The end result of that is one day there will be more police than
people.  And the people who aren't police will all be in jail.


     The morning glory democracy attracts yet another kind of person,
they aren't the terrorists themselves who commit all these horrific
acts, but they will sell you a subscription for a pretty penny that
tells you how dangerous it all is and how it will continue to be so,
     We call these people the Merchants of Fear, as they profit from
violating the Constitution in the name of protecting the Constitution.
     They don't just sell you the bad news and warnings, they lobby to
take away your rights in order to protect you from that danger and fill
the coffers of the military and police installed to enforce your new
state rights to peace and security through your duties of silence and compliance.

     "Peace and security through silence and compliance."

     And the Merchants of Fear take their cut off the top.
     "If you speak the terrorists will get you, so shut up already!"
     That's fine when the terrorists are real perhaps, but when the
terrorists of first resort are the government itself, then being silent
is not the ideal path.

     Sheesh, it used to be that the purpose of the police was to protect
your rights, now its purpose is to protect the rights of the government
against YOU.

     What are the rights of the government?

     To survive inspite of the people it serves or doesn't as the case
may be.

     "Don't criticize the government, your government is perfect."

     And God given.

     Criticizing the government means criticizing *AMERICA*.

     Criticizing the government means criticizing *GOD*.

     Criticizing the PEOPLE in the government means criticizing the holy
principles for which America stands.

     Even though the people in government don't know the meaning of the
word 'holy' and don't stand for a single word that America stands for.

     Is it even possible to protect the constitution long term by
violating the constitution short term?

     Merchants of Fear however, profit from the morning glory closing up
and staying closed as they get paid one way or another to keep you
silent and in fear.
     Who now are the terrorists?


     By far and way, hands down, the best way to make a living on Earth
at this time is to start a war and sell arms to both sides, throw the
whole place into martial law and make everyone work for YOUR living
rather than for their own.

     And you get to use the guns you make to keep everyone in line
with the program.

     So you end up in this hypocrisy where America is the greatest
country on Earth and we stand for all these wonderful things, but we are
always at war, so we can't enjoy any of them!
     And God save you if you should speak openly or even privately about

     "You have freedom of speech, so tell everyone loudly to shut up and
be quiet!"
     Speaking openly is called treason.

     Speaking privately is called conspiracy.

     Speaking there before becomes 100 percent thought crime, unless one
is speaking the party line.

     "Peace and security through silence and compliance."

     If certain people know that a democracy will fold up at the
slightest hint of trouble, then they will go out of their way to make
trouble to make sure that it does.
     That is absolute, its called evil, and you can always tell evil
when someone is saying that something is for you own good, when it fact
it is for their good at your expense, usually fatal, AND THEY KNOW IT.

     Expose, eschew and eradicate these people from your life and you
will feel better in the morning when you wake up.

     On the other hand if people know a democracy will stand its ground
no matter what, there will be less incentive ti cause trouble for those
who would see the democracy not survive.
     Especially if they know they won't get paid for trying.

     So one has to ask what happens when the government BECOMES the bad

     One has to have a certain level of trust in the government, the
police and the military, to allow a cop in every bedroom and a spy in
every computer to verify the 'goodness' of our every desire, thought and

     When the cops come to save you from the bad guys, they are the good
guys, but when the cops come to save the government from you, they are
the bad guys.

     Police are like fat, once you put them on, you can never take them

     That's because the police depend for their jobs on the absence of
peace and security, once they notice that there is too much peace and
security they will sense their jobs are in danger.

     Then a few of them will take covert action to CREATE threats to
peace and security so that their JOBS are secure even if you aren't.

     They WANT you secure in your insecurity.

     They want you to know FOR SURE that you will ALWAYS BE IN DANGER,
and thus will always need them to protect you.

     They also get a lot of money and toys from a state of constant war,
let alone a carte blanche license to violence, barbarism and thuggery.

     They have a hard on for war.

     The government is their whore.

     Their mothers are so proud of them!

     Many cops are addicted to power.

     They aren't addicted to peace and security, but they are addicted
to OBEDIENCE through silence and compliance.

     That's why no matter what a cop is doing to you or another, you
must NEVER put your hands on a cop as that is an immediate charge of
assault of the cop by you, get it?

     The end result of this is that eventually every one will
be a cop, and those that aren't will be in jail.


     Surely if the government were a Divine Oligarchy made of perfect
people, assigned directly by God, then perhaps omni present oversight of
the people by the government and its assigns would be a good thing.

     But we are trying to create and run a Democracy in an arena of
human life filled to the brim with covert evil intention, whose sole
purpose is to squash freedoms and enslave the good to evil ends.

     Their intent is to enslave, imprison, immobilize or destroy.

     Do you trust your government to act divinely?
     Do you even trust your own parents to act that way?


     There is a problem with too much trust in a government and here it

     When law makers outlaw criminals, criminals become law makers.
     When a bad guy knows he can't "get away with murder" amongst the
people, he will get himself elected into power where he will then
legislate his kind of "murder" into law so he can get away with it, and
use the police force or military to help him or even enforce it.

     Thus any hierarchy of power is a place where bad people bubble up
to the top as they are cornered out of the lower ranks of the civilian
masses by the laws against criminality.

     Its not that absolute power corrupts absolutely, its that absolute
power attracts rats.

     It is much easier to skim off the top of society as a Senator or
Chief of Police than it is as a civilian, ESPECIALLY IF YOU HAVE THE LAW
and ITS POLICE FORCE BEHIND YOU with their mandate towards total secrecy
and zero oversight of the government to protect you and cover themselves
     Yes there may be more criminals on the street than in government,
but one criminal in government or a position of power can do much more
damage to the people with a signel stroke of the pen, than some crook on
the street.

     Pretty soon the police state that people elected into power to
protect themselves from bad guys is itself made of bad guys making sure
the good guys stay imprisoned in their cell of protection.

     And that prison cell of protection is paid for by your taxes!

     Talk about Sweet Justice.

     Remember when a good person builds a cell of protection that NO bad
person can get into, not even good people can get into it to let him
     This is why certain things that look awfully tempting during times
of stress, namely eradication of privacy or giving government oversight
over all communications, are generally a bad idea because it opens the
doors for the criminals, who have bubbled up into positions of power, to
consolidate their power and do more bad things to the people they were
elected to protect.

     Especially if the bad guys are CREATING AND FUNDING the stress they
are claiming to protect you from.

     Never in America, right?

     The strongest force we have today for freedom of speech is the
internet, but the internet is but a one way pablum push without strong
anonymity and encryption.

     These make speech SAFE.
     Without SAFETY of speech, there is no protection of speech and that
isn't what people have in mind when they talk about freedom to speak.

     They mean freedom to speak safely.

     This is really very simple.


     Strong anonymity allows people to speak publicly to everyone on
Earth without moderation, trackability, censorship, reprimand or
     That's called the right to secure public congregation.

     It may not be physical congregation but it is congregation of the
mind, congreation in fact of the body, heart, mind and soul.
     Strong encryption allows people to speak privately to those of
their own choice, and no one else.
     That's called the right of secure private congregation.

     Strong encryption also allows people to sign their own works so
that others can not post falsely in the writer's name or claim he didn't
write it.

     Strong encryption also prevents the writer from denying he wrote it
himself later.

     That's called the right of non repudiation or secure copyright

     And lastly strong encryption or related cryto technology allows
verification of the integrity of the communication line, namely that
what was received got there exactly as it was said without alteration,
either accidental or intentional.

     That's called the right of proof of integrity.

     Strong anonymity and encryption form a necessary and sufficient
mathematical BASIS for freedom to speak safely.

     A basis is a set of vectors that together completely span a
particular space, in this case the space of freedom of speech.


     This is all quite aside from the very real possibility that the
government or its handlers itself may be covertly creating those times
of stress just so they can come to your aid by putting you in a jail
cell of solitary confinement where you aren't even free to talk to
yourself any more, because of the video cameras and microphones all over
the place.

     And once they have microphones that can pick up your thoughts
directly, now you can't even think to yourself, what are you going to

     When the criminal knows your every thought and your every friend
ahead of time, what chance do you have?

     They will take BOTH of you out just to make sure your friend hasn't
been infected by your politically incorrect thought.

     And make no mistake about it, when the criminals want to control
YOU, they WILL go after your family and friends, even your jobs and

     No criminal in his right mind would waste his time trying to hurt
YOU, he's going to go after your loved ones right away.
     Worse, one of the first things criminals do when using power to
consolidate power, is to let more criminals into positions of power!
     So the more power you give a criminal, the more criminals in power
there will be.

     Now I am not into conspiracy theories, but certain facts are

     Fear creates a festering wound where corruption, temptation and
seduction can grow like a virus without control.

     Corruption is the chinks in the armor of a person's personal

     Temptation is where the light of the Devil shines through those

     Seduction is giving into the light of temptation and crushing one's
integrity under foot like a cigarette butt.

     Once the government and the people get into the idea that its OK to
trade freedoms for security, the door is opened for the government to
engage in Merchant of Fearism itself.

     You know, the endless siren song of 'you are in danger, but we are
here to help you.'
     Or worse the government starts to pray for and even CREATE threats
to security in order to further justify taking away freedoms, in order
to further consolidate their own power and personal wealth, through
taxes, slavery, imprisonment, and arms sales.

     Yeah I know, maybe this is the way somebody in some foreign
sleazeball government 'over there' might act, but surely no one standing
under the American Flag would ever do such a thing.

     Thus governments come to take on a life of its own, with
a desire to survive at the expense of and in spite of the people
who created to protect the people.

     The goverment gets the idea that it must protect ITSELF,
or it won't exist to protect the people, and then what?

     The goverment will have failed the popular mandate to protect
the people and die in shame.

     So the goverment comes to believe it must protect itself at all
costs, even if that cost is the people.

     But truth is after a while the government simply likes its own life
and comes to not give a damn about the people, except as food for its
many war games.

     Remember the guy who doles out the money to people in a welfare
state is a non producer and would lose his job if there were no
welfare state.  
     So who is he going to vote for?


     So, pardon me while I wax religious here for a moment.

     The following is critically important to a sane, prosperous and
flourishing society, so governments of course hate it.

     This is a quote from the various catechisms of ADORE, A Divine
Operating Religion of Excellence, parts of which you can find here


     The paths of lovers cross in the line of duty.

     For every duty there is a right, and for every right there is a

     Rights are fair chosen exchange for fair chosen duties.

     You choose and are responsible for both.

     You have a right to have duties and a duty to have rights.

     No one ever told it to you that way before.
     Justice is a fair chosen operating balance of duties and rights.

     If you want equal rights, seek equal duties.

     The fundamental duty is honor.

     The fundamental right is dignity.

     Honor is the ability to make, keep and trade fair chosen promises.

     Basic promise is to adore operation.

     Adoration IS operation.  If you adore something, operate it.
     Dignity is being the sole operator of yourself.

     Reputation is for those who excel in this field.

     In Excelsis Deo."
     From Adore, A Divine Operating Religion of Excellence


     A politician once said that the purpose of the government was to
protect the rights and freedoms of the people.

     He then said "the greatest right is to be free from fear."

     Oh, by what document pray tell?

     And at what cost?

     Silence and compliance?

     And whose duty is it to provide that right of freedom from fear?

     Freedom of speech can be provided and maintained, but can freedom
from fear even be offered?

     It might be said that no matter how much fear scares us silly, we
have a duty to maintain our freedom of speech and we do NOT have a right
to freedom from fear.

     These two, freedom of speech and freedom from fear, are mutually
     Those promising the right to freedom from fear can not provide it,
and they must first remove freedom to speak safely in order to even try.

     That's why its 'peace and security through *SILENCE* and

     Silence means no complaints.

     Does how they are providing you a fearless future scare you?
     Well keep quiet about it, because loose lips sink ships, namely
theirs, the SHIP OF STATE.


     Basically once the majority of people are NO LONGER ABLE to take
out the government should it ever become corrupt, either by force or by
vote, you have, by definition, a police state.

     At the point of a gun you pay your taxes so you can continue to pay
for the gun pointing at you and the mother's son pointing it.

     That's called a political feedback loop.

     Eventually feedback loops like this go screaming out of control.

     A total self perpetuating lock down of freedom, so tight no one can
move, not even the cops.

     Another feed back loop is when a government organization only
accepts employees of low intelligence on purpose, thus one would not
expect intelligent solutions to problems to issue from such an

     Further, stupid people hate smart people, so once an organization
becomes stupid heavy, it quickly becomes stupid heavier as the stupid
persecute and push out the smart.

     Just what exactly is the average IQ of the people in your
government?  In your police department?  In the administrators of your
college or military?


     But probably the most deadly feedback loop of all, is when a
government seeks only people who will obey any order regardless of their
own personal conscience in the matter and keep it to themselves.

     Personal conscience is the final arbiter of any decision.

     This is kind of a no brainer, for if not your conscience, then

     God gave us all a conscience so you could use someone else's to
base your decisions on?
     Someone who has abdicated control of their conscience to another
has abdicated himself as a son of God to the Devil.
     And if there is such a thing as the Devil, THIS is what he waits

     As internal oversight within the government begins to fail and
those with intelligence and a conscience are destroyed, pushed out or
filtered before they are employed, the entire government collapses into
a black hole state of self glorifying criminality that would make even
the Devil blink.

     Devil: "Whoa, now that's EVIL!  It's *DARK* in there!"

     The mathematically inevitable result is the government becomes
saturated with people who are stupid and conscience free, and so a
monster is created with total power and control that not all the guns in
the world can kill.

     A monster with a hard on for war, total continuous war forever for

     You won't be able to sunset it.

     Or Snowdenize it.

     To Snowdenize means to bring necessary and sufficient public
oversight over governments and their secrets and secret agendas to
ensure that control of the government and its directions remains in the
hands of the people.
     And guess who the endless soldiers of misfortune are?

     You and yours.

     Omni good work, and omni amen.

     Thus the protections written into the constitution are there to
guarantee that such a state of affairs can never happen, and that power
will always belong to the majority of people once they wake up, and not
to a government that might have slithered its way into power during the
dream time.


     Notice that the best approach to an aborning police state is not
force and violent revolution, but exposure.

     Violence and revolution just create more cops who can never be
sunsetted after they are installed.

     However the light of day, of civilian oversight, shining into the
dark conclaves of corruption, temptation and seduction, busts the viral
wound wide open.
     Thus the festering sore of a self serving government gone infected
by acting as a filter for people without conscience, intelligence or the
courage to speak out, can not long survive.


     A good definition of evil is when someone tells you that something
is good for you, when really it is good for them at your expense,
usually fatal, and they know it.

     If you get close to politicians when they are talking, you will
smell the bad breath of evil coming out of them.

     It smells like death on wheels.

     Be careful though, it's easy to confuse mere criminality with
true evil.

     Criminality likes food but just doesn't want to work for it.

     Evil hates food and anything to do with food.

     You don't want to kill with prejudice someone who merely belongs in


     "The slow creep towards political correctness in all social
consource, is the slow creep towards a grave for freedom of thought"
     From What is Patriotism?

     Watch it, the garden path is covered with black ice.

     Politically correct facades, such as the idea that all people are
of equal worth to society and their fellow man, or that need bestows
right, are created by some at the expense of others, and are maintained
at the point of a gun, because natural truth would dispel such facades

     Forbidden disagreement is a good sign of a politically correct
facade being created or maintained at the point of a gun.

     Evil: "We can all speak freely here!"

     Citizen: "Uh, no we can't."


     However the more a politically correct facade is enforced at the
point of a gun on people who would disagree with it, the more of a
FACADE it becomes, because the people upon whom it is being enforced at
the point of gun begin to resent the facade and thus come to resent even
more the various OTHER people the facade was created the 'protect'.

     Thus someone may feel smug that everyone smiles at them, but if the
smile is maintained and guaranteed at the point of a gun, the smug might
want to consider the ultimate long term consequences to themselves of
living in the protective bubble of a lie.

     At some point it becomes better to know the truth than to live the


     There is the law of the land, and there is the law of the sky.

     The law of the land defines what is legal and illegal.

     The government is constrained by the law of the land, not the
sovereign citizen.

     The law of the land was created by the sovereign citizen as the
body politic when it designed the government, to tell the government
what it may or may not do when a soveign citizen breaks the law of the

     The law of the land is based on force.
     The sovereign citizen has no moral mandate to follow the law of the

     The law of the sky defines what is right and wrong.

     The law of the sky is based on conscience.
     The sovereign citizen is constrained by the law of the sky.

     "When you get to the Pearly Gates, St.  Peter will not be asking if
you did what was legal, he will be asking if you did what was right."

     The law of the land is supposed to mimic the law of the sky, but
sometimes they come into conflict through stupidity, ignorance and the
criminality of lawmakers.

     In that case civil disobedience becomes morally mandatory.

     The civil servant has sworn to uphold the law of the land right or
     The sovereign citizen has sworn no such oath and has a moral
mandate to uphold the law of the sky first and the law of the land

     To do what is right first, and what is legal second.
     Oh boy, do they hate that!

     The civil servant however can always turn in his badge and become a
sovereign citizen again even if only for a while.

     Then he is free to operate on his conscience again.

     Never give your sovereignty away permanently in a promise, always
maintain a sunset clause.

     This is important.

     Transparency belongs to the sovereign citizen, not to the sworn
civil servant.

     Transparency means being able to see into, to know what's going on
inside the group, and every skeleton in every closet.

     Who gets to know what about who.

     Dig it and don't leave it.

     If everyone were good, we might not need our freedoms so bad, but
since half the world is bad, we do need our freedoms to protect
ourselves against the bad, even if the bad can use them too against the


     The government goes on and on about bad people, but never about the

     When bad people use our freedoms to do bad things to good people,
those freedoms are then taken away from everyone including the good
people 'for their own good', namely to protect the good people from the
bad people.

     Thus if freedom of speech, anonymity and privacy are used by bad
people to harm good people, you can be sure that in a while freedom of
speech, anonymity and privacy will be outlawed BY GOOD PEOPLE to protect
themselves against those bad people.

     This is the morning glory affect, good people respond to fear by
closing up and imprisoning themselves!

     Since bad people KNOW THIS, they will tend to create incidents of
abuse of various freedoms to hurry the process along, because bad people
hate freedoms, particularly if they have bubbled up into positions of
power in the government and police forces, where they get to keep and
benefit from these same freedoms anyhow even though they are now

     Thus never forget that the hypocricy on Earth is so thick it is
like a wall.  You can hammer nails into it, and hang pictures of smiling
faces from them.  - From Adore.


     There is something worse than crime, drugs, copyright theft,
terrorism, child pornography and politically incorrect thought.

     And that is a police state.

     A police state at total peace with itself.

     Peace and security through silence and compliance.

     Everyone agreed to be a brick in the wall.

     At the point of a gun, paid for by your taxes, and every mother's
son to point it, to keep you working to produce more guns pointed at you
to keep you working to produce more guns.

     And if that ain't a feed back loop...